ds Reuse Program EnviroStor database provides the
According to the DTSC EnviroStor database, the
Proposed Project would be located on a 62-acre Voluntary Cleanup site known as the Riverside Agricultural Park (Site), located at 7020 Crest Avenue in Riverside, California. The Project would require the installation and use of four TSPs along the northern boundary of the Site property. Contaminants of concern associated with the Site have included polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and dioxins.
The U.S. Army first developed the Site as a sewage treatment plant in 1942. The sewage treatment plant accepted waste from industrial, commercial, and residential customers and was decommissioned in 1965. From 1962 through May 1, 2006, the Site was continuously owned by the City of Riverside, and the Friends of the Riverside Airport (FRA) currently own the Site.
Various activities (e.g., livestock shows, motocross use) have been conducted at the Site since 1965, even though the Site has remained undeveloped.
Between April and July 2009, FRA completed the first phase of implementation of a DTSC- approved Revised Response Plan (RsP), which included the excavation, removal, and proper disposal of soils containing PCB concentrations in excess of 50 mg/kg from locations determined by previous Site investigation efforts. Other items removed from the Site include brush debris (green waste), PCB contaminated concrete, sewer pipe, and wooden utility poles. In addition, several soil samples were collected from select locations and analyzed for dioxins, furans and metals. The soil sample results and subsequent report confirmed the presence of dioxin/furan congeners in excess of the health-based screening level for the planned residential land use (TRC, 2010).
remediation of the Site and prepare the Site for single-family residential development (DTSC letter, 2010). During the second phase, any remaining debris will be hauled off-site and surface sampling will be conducted under PCB-impacted stockpiles after removal. Confirmation soil samples for PCBs will be collected according to the RsP. Soils containing dioxins and furans will be removed from the Site to a level that is determined by the DTSC to be acceptable for City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-210
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 residential development (Phase I Response Plan Implementation Report Former Agricultural Park, 2010).
Construction of the Proposed Project (69 kV subtransmission line component) would begin in 2012 (see Chapter 2, Project Description). Following implementation of the planned second phase of Site remediation in 2011, contaminant residuals would be removed from the Site and no impacts related to the excavation and mobilization of known hazardous materials at the Proposed Project site are anticipated to occur. However, EPE HAZ-02 (Soil Management Plan) would be included as part of the Proposed Project design, and implementation of mitigation measures HAZ-01 and HAZ-02 is recommended to ensure proper interpretation, documentation, and reporting of laboratory data results by qualified individuals, in the event that hazardous materials are encountered. With implementation of these measures, hazards to the public or environment from exposure to such materials would be less than significant.
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 for people residing or working in the project area.
The Proposed Project would occur within the Airport Influence Area of the Riverside Municipal Airport and could potentially impact airport operations.
Less than Significant Impact. At its nearest point, the Proposed Project (230 kV transmission line component) lies approximately 2.5 miles southwest of Flabob Airport and would not traverse the Airport Influence Area for Flabob Airport.
The Proposed Project (230 kV transmission and 69 kV subtransmission line components) would occur within two miles of the Riverside Municipal Airport and would be located within the Airport Influence Area for the Riverside Municipal Airport. Table 3.2.7-3 summarizes the Riverside Municipal Airport Compatibility Zones crossed by the Proposed Project, height ranges for the Proposed Project structures in these zones, and the structure height for proposed development that would be subject to ALUC review within designated Airport Compatibility Zones. As proposed, the placement of 90- to 175-foot tall SCE 230 kV transmission line structures (TSPs and LSTs) would occur in the following Airport Compatibility Zones for Riverside Municipal Airport: Zone B1 (Inner Approach/Departure Zone; proposed structures taller than 35 feet may require review), Zone C (Extended Approach/Departure Zone; proposed structures taller than 70 feet may require review), and Zone D (Primary Traffic Patterns and Runway Buffer Area; proposed structures taller than 150 feet may require review). Similarly, the placement of 65- to 90-foot tall RPU 69 kV subtransmission structures (wood poles) would occur in the following Airport Compatibility Zones for Riverside Municipal Airport: Zone A (height of any proposed structure requires review), Zone B1, Zone B2 (proposed structures taller than 35 feet may require review), Zone C (proposed structures taller than 70 feet may require review), Zone D, and Zone E (proposed structures taller than 150 feet may require review).
The Proposed Project would comply with applicable FAA regulations. SCE will submit a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration (Form 7460-1) of the 230 kV transmission line component of the Proposed Project for review to the FAA electronically, in accordance with FAA procedures and as far in advance of construction as possible. RPU will electronically submit a separate Form 7460-1 for FAA review of the 69 kV subtransmission line components of the Proposed Project. Submittal of these notices would occur when final design of the Proposed City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-211
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Project is completed and the precise location of all Proposed Project structures are known. The FAA review process would consider final structure locations and structure heights, including transmission and subtransmission lines, as well as construction related equipment that might impact air navigation (i.e., cranes, helicopters used for wire-stringing activities). Following the completion of consultation, and the determination of the FAA, SCE will reviewincorporate any recommendations of the FAA regardinginto the design, construction, and operation the 230 kV transmission line components of the Proposed Project, and will submit documentation of this consultation to RPU. Helicopters used during construction of the RTRP for wire stringing activities would not require ALUC review, but would adhere to applicable FAA regulations with regards to flight restrictions in designated areas and would not impact airport operations. Of the 77 structures that are part of the 230 kV transmission line, 23 would require FAA filing due to the proximity to the Riverside Municipal Airport. One catenary span exceeds 200 feet above ground level and requires filing with the FAA. Due to Visual Departure Flight Procedures, the FAA may require lighting structures within two nautical miles of runways. The catenary is over 200 feet above ground level and will also require marking. No current Visual or Instrument procedures would be impacted.
The 69 kV subtransmission line structures as currentlypreviously designed within the vicinity of the airport would likely have exceed the allowable heights in Zones A, B1, B2, and C. These structures would be an incompatible land use if the heights of the structures were to pose a hazard to air navigation near the airport. As such, the Proposed Project as previously designed would not behave been consistent with the adopted RCALUC.Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. This inconsistency would therefore resulthave resulted in a significant impact. As a result, RPU modified the proposed 69 kV subtransmission line route so that it would travel underground in the vicinity of the airport land use zones along Doolittle Avenue, between Jurupa Avenue and Morris Street. Also, as a result of review by the Federal Aviation Administration, new poles along Wilderness Avenue, north of Jurupa Avenue, would be equipped with obstruction lighting.
Although undergrounding may reduce this impact to a less than significant level, the overall environmental impacts caused by undergrounding would be greater and, as such, it is not considered a feasible mitigation measure for the Proposed Project. Specifically, undergrounding would potentially cause greater traffic impacts from the placement of the transmission line within the public street right-of-way, and would also require substantially more excavation than overhead structures. This level of ground disturbance would require several times more heavy equipment than overhead construction. Further, during future repairs of an underground line, entire sections between vaults, approximately 2,000 feet apart, may require re-excavation.
Outages would also be prolonged on the underground line, due to poor accessibility and time required in identifying the failure location, excavating the underground line, and correcting any outage. Economic considerations associated with undergrounding show that undergrounding is infeasible as a mitigation measure, even for more limited sections of the Project, as further discussed in more detail within Chapter 6. Impacts to the RCALUC would be significant.
On April 12, 2012, the ALUC conducted a public hearing and determined that the proposal to establish 69 kV subtransmission lines within the Riverside Municipal Airport Influence Area, as revised to place all portions within Airport Compatibility Zone A underground, is consistent with the 2005 Riverside Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. The ALUC made its consistency determination subject to the following conditions:
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-212
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
1. The following uses shall be prohibited:
(a) Any use which would direct a steady light or flashing light of red, white, green or amber colors associated with airport operations toward an aircraft engaged in an initial straight climb following take off or toward an aircraft engaged in a straight final approach toward a landing at an airport, other than an FAA-approved navigational signal light or visual approach slope indicator or FAA-approved obstruction lighting. (b) Any use which would cause sunlight to be reflected towards an aircraft engaged in an initial straight climb following takeoff or towards an aircraft engaged in a straight final approach towards a landing at an airport.
(c) Any use which would generate smoke or water vapor or which would attract large concentrations of birds, or which may otherwise affect safe air navigation within the area.
(d) Any use which would generate electrical interference that may be detrimental to the operation of aircraft and/or aircraft instrumentation.
2. Any outdoor lighting installed shall be hooded and shielded to prevent either the spillage of lumens or reflection into the sky.
3. In the event that any incidence of electrical interference affecting the safety of air navigation occurs as a result of project operation, the permittee shall be required to take all measures necessary to eliminate such interference.
The following conditions would apply to all 159 pole locations within the Airport Influence Area:
4. Prior to final inspection and within five (5) days after construction reaches its greatest height, Riverside Public Utilities or its designated representative shall submit Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, to the Federal Aviation Administration in accordance with the requirements of the Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation issued for that structure. The requirement for submittal is also applicable in the event the project is abandoned.
5. The specific coordinates, height, top point elevation, power and frequencies of the proposed pole structure shall not be amended without further review by the Airport Land Use Commission and the Federal Aviation Administration; provided, however, that reduction in building height or elevation shall not require further review by the Airport land Use Commission.
6. Temporary construction equipment used during actual construction of the structure shall not exceed the height of the proposed structure, unless separate notice is provided to the Federal Aviation Administration through the Form 7460-1 process.
7. Temporary construction equipment exceeding 15 feet in height shall not be erected or stored within the boundaries of Airport Compatibility zone A. Riverside Public Utilities shall utilize all feasible means to minimize storage of equipment not exceeding 15 feet in height within the boundaries of Airport Compatibility Zone A.
8. The maximum height of the proposed structure, including all mounted appliances and obstruction or aviation safety lighting (if any), shall not exceed the height above ground -A, and the
maximum elevation at the top of structure shall not exceed the elevation above mean sea -A.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-213
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 The following additional conditions apply to the pole locations identified as E5, E6, E7, E8, E9, E10, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10 and F11, generally located along Wilderness Avenue, northerly of Jurupa Avenue:
9. The structure shall be marked/lighted in accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 70/7460- 1 K change 2, Obstruction Marking and Lighting, red lights Chapters 4, 5 (Red) & 12.
10. In addition to complying with the requirements of Condition No. 4 above, Riverside Public Utilities or its designated representative shall submit Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) at least 10 days prior to the start of construction (emphasis added), so as to provide for the addition of a -
in the U.S. Terminal Procedures publication.
11. Any failure or malfunction that lasts more than thirty (30) minutes and affects a top light or flashing obstruction light, regardless of its position, shall be reported immediately to (877) 487-6867 so a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) can be issued. As soon as the normal operation is restored, notify the same number.
The following additional condition applies to the remaining pole locations within the Airport Influence Area:
12. The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted aeronautical studies of this proposal and has determined that neither marking nor lighting of the proposed pole structures (Other than RPU Structure ID Numbers E5 through E10 and F4 through F11 as specified above) is necessary for aviation safety. However, if marking and/or lighting are accomplished on a voluntary basis, such marking and /or lighting (if any) shall be installed in accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 70/7460-1 K Change 2 and shall be maintained in accordance therewith for the life of the project.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area.
No Impact. No known private airstrips were identified within two miles of the Proposed Project area; therefore, no Proposed Project-related safety hazards would result for residents living or working within the Proposed Project vicinity.
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
Less than Significant Impact. Much of the proposed RTRP would require the installation of transmission and subtransmission lines across and/or adjacent to existing road rights-of-way.
Many of these roadways exist within heavily travelled urban areas that could be used for emergency vehicle passage (i.e., fire, ambulance, paramedic), or by people during an emergency evacuation. The Proposed Project may require temporary closure or single-lane closure of these roadways during the following construction activities: transport of oversized equipment, stringing of the conducting wires, and installation of overhead or underground fiber optic cables.
To avoid interference with emergency response and evacuation pathways, SCE and RPU would implement EPE TRANS-03, which includes the preparation and use of a Proposed Project- specific Traffic Control Plan (TCP) (see Section 3.2.15, Traffic and Transportation). Provisions City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-214
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 in the TCP would define the locations of all roads scheduled for temporary closure due to Proposed Project traffic, and would also define the use of flag persons, warning signs, cones, barricades, lights, and other measures necessary to conduct closure. Road closures and the placement of safety barriers along roadways would be coordinated with the local police, fire, ambulance, and paramedic services at least one month prior to closure activities, and would be scheduled to take place during off-peak commute hours. In the event of an emergency, construction crews would also be required to immediately cease work and accommodate emergency vehicles passing through the area.
Consequently, Proposed Project construction would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an emergency response or evacuation plan route. Impacts would be less than significant.
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands.
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. The proposed RTRP area comprises a predominantly urban environment containing industrial, commercial, and residential uses; however, a small portion of the proposed 230 kV transmission line route crosses abundant vegetation that may pose conditions conducive to wildfires near the banks of the Santa Ana River. In the unlikely event that sparks generated by idling construction vehicles or equipment accidentally ignite vegetation located in or adjacent to Proposed Project rights-of-way or staging areas, fire suppression services may be required during Proposed Project construction.
In addition, transmission infrastructure could present a potential fire risk in this area during Proposed Project operation, requiring the need for fire suppression services. Incidences of fire could occur if tree limbs or structures were to interface with a live phase conductor. The likelihood of this occurring would be reduced by the periodic clearing of vegetation and tree limbs within Proposed Project rights-of-way, in conformance with CPUC General Order 95, and Public Resources Code Section 4293. Similarly, structures that may present a fire hazard and danger to the public would be restricted from the rights-of-way.
SCE would implement EPE NOI-02 (see Section 3.2.11, Noise), which requires that construction crews avoid the idling of vehicles and power equipment when not in use, which would also minimize the potential for fire. To further reduce the likelihood of fire incidences in the proposed RTRP area, RPU and SCE would implement MM HAZ-03, which would require development and enforcement of a Proposed Project-specific Fire Management Plan. Fire safety standards established in the RTRP Fire Management Plan would be followed relative to Proposed Project construction, and construction personnel would be trained to use proper fire prevention and management techniques. As a standard precautionary measure, power would be automatically removed from the line if conductor failure were to occur. Lightning protection would also be provided by overhead groundwires along the line. Prior to construction, SCE would also coordinate with the Riverside County Fire Department to ensure that construction activities and associated lane closures would not hinder firefighting response pathways or delay response time.
Implementation of MM HAZ-03 would reduce potential fire impacts to less than significant levels.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-215
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Significant Unavoidable Impacts
The 69 kV subtransmission line structures as currently designed within the vicinity of the airport would likely exceed the allowable heights in Zones A, B1, B2, and C. These structures would be an incompatible land use if the heights of the structures were to pose a hazard to air navigation near the airport. As such, the Proposed Project would not be consistent with the adopted RCALUC. This inconsistency would therefore result in a significant impact.
With the implementation of EPEs and MMs, the Proposed Project will not result in any significant unavoidable impacts related to hazards or hazardous materials within the Proposed Project area.
References
California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Available at http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/Cortese_List.cfm.
Accessed June, 2010.
_____. 2010. March 2010 Fact Sheet. Progress Update for the Stringfellow Site Zone 4 Perchlorate Cleanup.
_____. 2010a. Approval of the Draft Removal Documentation Report (Phase I Implementation of the Revised Response Plan) for the Riverside Agricultural Park. June 3, 2010.
Available at
http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/regulators/deliverable_documents/3319808781/phase %201%20rsp%20imp%20apprvl%20ltr%206310.pdf.
City of Riverside. GIS data for the Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
Personal correspondence with Matt Keeling (GIS Analyst, Information Technology Department) on June 2009.
_____. 1999. Airport Master Plan Final Technical Report for Riverside Airport, approved by City on November 16, 1999.
_____. 2004. General Plans and Supporting Documents, Environmental Impact Report.
November.
_____. 2005. General Plan 2025 Final Program Environmental Impact Report. Available at http://www.riversideca.gov/planning/genplan2025-2.htm.
_____. 2007. Riverside General Plan 2025. November.
County of Riverside. RCIP General Plan Land Use Designations Zoning Consistency Guidelines. Available at http://www.rctlma.org/planning/indes.html. Accessed December 21, 2006.
_____. 2003. General Plan. Jurupa Area Plan. October 7, 2003. _____. 2003. Riverside County Integrated Project General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 20022051143), March 2003. Available at http://www.rctlma.org/genplan/default.aspx.
_____. 2003. Riverside County Integrated Project, General Plan. Adopted October 7, 2003.
Available at http://www.rctlma.org/generalplan/index.html. _____. 2009. Riverside County Zoning Ordinance.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-216
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Draft Environmental Impact Report. June.
Guerin, John. 2011. Riverside County, Transportation and Land Management Agency. Personal communication on February 17, 2011.
Jurupa Unified School District. District Facilities Map.
Michael Brandman Associates (MBA). 2008. Silverlakes Equestrian Sports Park Draft Environmental Impact Report. October 16, 2008.
Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). 2004. Riverside County Airport Compatibility Plan Policy Document. October. Available at http://www.rcaluc.org/plan_new.asp.
_____. 2005. Flabob Compatibility Plan. June 28, 2005.
_____. 2010. Riverside Airport Land Use Commission Website Homepage. Available at http://www.rcaluc.org/default.asp. Accessed: February 15, 2010. _____. 2010a. Riverside County ALUC County wide Policies. Available at http://www.rcaluc.org/filemanager/plan/new/04-
%20Vol.%201%20County%20wide%20Policies.pdf. Accessed February 16, 2010.
Riverside County Integrated Project. 2003. General Plan Final Program, Environmental Impact Report, Volume I. Riverside County, California.
State of California. 2008. The California Code of Regulations.
TRC Companies, Inc. (TRC). 2010. Phase I Response Plan Implementation Report, Former Agricultural Park. Prepared for Friends of the Riverside Airport, LLC. June.
Available at
http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/final_documents2.asp?global_id=33490087&do c_id=60194161.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-217
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
3.2.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Methodology for Resource Inventory and Other Data Collection Water resources within the Proposed Project study area were inventoried and evaluated using GIS data obtained from government agencies, review of relevant studies and agency programs, agency consultation, and inspection of resources in the field (February 2007).
Wetlands were identified within the Proposed Project area primarily using the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Proposed Project area comprises a total of four quadrangle maps: Corona North, Fontana, Riverside West, and Guasti. NWI maps were available for all quadrangles except Fontana. Wetlands associated with the Santa Ana River that were not available from NWI were photo-interpreted using aerial imagery and reference NWI classifications. The NWI provides approximate locations of wetlands one acre or larger and may or may not be jurisdictional based on the 1987 United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Environmental Setting
The proposed 230 kV transmission line and 69 kV subtransmission line routes, new substations, and substation upgrade sites are located within the Santa Ana River watershed (Hydrologic Unit Code 18070203) in Riverside County, California. The Santa Ana River is the largest stream system in southern California, extending from its headwaters in the San Bernardino Mountains and flowing over 100 miles in a southwesterly direction to its mouth at the Pacific Ocean between Newport Beach and Huntington Beach in Orange County. The Prado Dam and Reservoir is located downstream of the Proposed Project area, approximately two miles west of the City of Corona, and provides flood control and water storage for Orange County.
The climate of the Santa Ana Region is classified as Mediterranean: hot, dry summers, and cool, wet winters. Average annual precipitation ranges from 10 inches per year in the coastal plain to 40 inches per year in the San Bernardino Mountains (WRCC 2009). Within the inland alluvial valleys of the Proposed Project area, precipitation averages 10 inches per year with most of the precipitation occurring between November and April. High surface water flows occur in the spring and low flows occur in the summer. Winter and spring floods commonly result from storms during wet years. Similarly, during the dry season, infrequent summer storms can cause floods in local streams.
230 kV Transmission Line
Surface Water
The Santa Ana River is the dominant water feature within the proposed 230 kV Proposed Project area. The upper reach receives seasonal flow from three tributaries and receives discharge from the Rialto Waste Water Treatment Plant and the Rapid Infiltration and Extraction Facility. The lower reach of the Santa Ana River has perennial flow, low gradient, and slow velocity. There are two tributaries in the lower reach, which consists of flow from the Riverside Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP) and runoff from Hole Lake. These tributaries merge and flow parallel to the river and discharge to the Hidden Valley Wildlife Area and Wetlands Enhancement Area.
These wetlands provide tertiary treatment of the effluent from the Riverside WQCP by removing nitrogen. Downstream, three additional intermittent tributaries also contribute flow to the Hidden City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-218
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Valley wetlands. The drainage running parallel to Bain Street is a concrete-lined channel. Under base-flow conditions, a substantial percentage of the Santa Ana River consists of treated wastewater (Mendez and Belitz 2002).
One man-made water body, Hole Lake, is located on the south side of the river, west of Van Buren Boulevard. Hole Lake is a wide, partially vegetated channel that receives flow through runoff and drains into the Hidden Valley Wildlife Area and Wetlands Enhancement Area. The 1,500-acre Hidden Valley Wildlife Area and Wetlands Enhancement Area is located downstream of the Van Buren Boulevard bridge in the southwestern portion of the Proposed Project area. The wetlands were constructed by the City of Riverside to provide additional nitrogen removal for effluent from the Riverside WQCP (RWQCB 2004).
Floodplain
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) maps 100-year flood hazard areas (floodplains) for communities in the United States. The 100-year floodplain of the Santa Ana River has been significantly modified for flood control and development. Portions of the river within the Proposed Project area have been channelized with levees and other flood control structures constricting the natural floodplain. Where the river has not been channelized, the floodplain broadens, encompassing such low-lying areas as golf courses and park areas.
Within the Proposed Project area, 100-year floodplains have been mapped along several tributaries to the Santa Ana River and several of its tributaries. In the community of Mira Loma, a floodplain associated with the channelized Day Creek fans out south of Limonite Avenue and crosses the Goose Creek Golf Club before merging with the floodplain of the Santa Ana River.
Another floodplain, associated with a drainage ditch, roughly parallels I-15 from SR-60 to 68th Street. Pedley and Glen Avon are crossed by the 100-year floodplains of the Pyrite Channel and Bly Channel, as well as that of an unnamed drainage originating in the Pedley Hills, northeast of the Indian Hills Golf Club.
Wetlands
The NWI analyzes high-altitude imagery to identify wetlands based on vegetation, visible hydrology, and geography. In the Proposed Project area, NWI wetlands are primarily associated with the Santa Ana River and its tributaries. Two NWI wetland types have been identified in the Proposed Project area: riverine and palustrine.
The palustrine system includes all non-tidal wetlands dominated by vegetation and small, shallow, permanent or intermittent ponds. The palustrine wetlands include forested (PFO), scrub- shrub (PSS), emergent (PEM), and open water (POW) wetlands primarily associated with the Santa Ana River, Hole Lake, and intermittent drainages. The PFO wetlands are dominated by trees such as cottonwoods (Populus fremontii) and willows (Salix exigua, S. lasiolepis, and S. laevigata). The PSS wetlands are dominated by shrubs such as mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia), arrowweed (Pluchea sericea), and cottonwood and willow saplings. Water regimes of the palustrine wetlands are characterized as intermittently flooded/temporary and saturated/semi- permanent/seasonal. The PFO and PSS wetlands within the Santa Ana River corridor provide valuable riparian habitat for fish and wildlife, habitat connectivity, pollutant removal, sediment transport and storage, water temperature control, riverbank stability, flood water retention, groundwater recharge, and energy and nutrient cycling.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-219
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
The riverine system includes all wetlands and deepwater habitats contained within a channel.
The upper and lower reaches of the Santa Ana River are classified by NWI as intermittent s are
classified as R4. The water regimes of the riverine wetlands are characterized as intermittently flooded/temporary, intermittently exposed/permanent, and saturated/semi-permanent/seasonal.
Ground Water
As precipitation and snowmelt flow into creeks, streams, and rivers, much of the water percolates into the ground. These alluvial groundwater basins cover nearly 40 percent of the State of California. Approximately 43 percent of Californians obtain drinking water from groundwater, through both municipal and privately owned wells. The proposed 230 kV route crosses three groundwater sub-basins within the Upper Santa Ana Valley Groundwater Basin:
the Riverside-Arlington Sub-basin, the Temescal Sub-basin, and a portion of the Chino Sub- basin. These sub-basi
Well data was obtained from the Western Municipal Water District (WMWD) and analyzed to estimate local water table depths within the study area. North of the Santa Ana River, available depth-to-water measurements range from an average of 14.7 feet along the Santa Ana River to
53.5 feet just south of SR-60. South of the river, available depth-to-water measurements range from 10.6 feet near the intersection of Arlington Avenue and Tyler Street to 37.3 feet near Crestlawn Cemetery (WMWD 2008).
Water Quality
Water quality is the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of water, when assessed according to standards related to ecosystem health, the safety of drinking water, and the safety of human contact. The State of California Water Resources Control Board and the nine Regional Boards are responsible for setting policies and developing regulations for the implementation of water quality control programs mandated by federal and state water quality statutes and regulations. Water Quality Control Plans (Basin Plans), developed and implemented by the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs), consider regional beneficial uses, water quality characteristics, and water quality problems (RWQCB 1995).
Surface and groundwater quality objectives in the area of the proposed 230 kV transmission line route are described in the Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the Santa Ana Region.
Additional groundwater quality objectives are described in 118. Water quality objectives were established to protect the existing and potential beneficial uses of surface and groundwater.
Beneficial uses are goals or desired uses of a water body as specified in the Basin Plan, and may include existing, proposed or, in some cases, historic uses. Beneficial uses for Reach 3 of the Santa Ana River are Agricultural Supply, Ground Water Recharge, Water Contact Recreation, Non-contact Water Recreation, Warm Freshwater Habitat, Wildlife Habitat, Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species, and Spawning, Reproduction, and/or Early Development.
While none of the smaller drainages within the area of the proposed 230 kV route have been listed in the basin plan, waters that have not been specifically listed are assigned the same City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-220
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 beneficial uses as the waters to which they are tributary; thus, tributaries to the Santa Ana River have the same beneficial uses described above (RWQCB 1995).
The reach of the Santa Ana River (Reach 3) within the Proposed Project area lies within the Middle Santa Ana River Watershed Management Area (WMA), which is managed by the RWQCB. The Middle Santa Ana River WMA extends from Prado Dam south of the Proposed Project area to the foothills of the San Bernardino and San Gabriel Mountains.
Non-point source (NPS) pollution is the leading cause of water quality impairment in the region.
The Middle Santa Ana River WMA is impaired from NPS pollutants including nutrients, pathogens, sediment, and dissolved minerals/salinity/chloride from agriculture, urban, and hydromodification sources. The RWQCB has identified construction-related erosion and sedimentation as a significant NPS problem in the WMA (RWQCB 2004).
Twenty-six miles of the Santa Ana River (Reach 3) are listed on the 2002 Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 303(d) list of water quality impaired segments. The list was approved by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in July 2003. The cause of impairment is pathogens (fecal coliform and E. coli) from dairies (confined animal feeding operations) in the Chino Basin, which is downstream of the study area. In June 2007, the Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was placed in the Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed category of the Section 303(d) list because a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) has been approved by the EPA and an implementation plan has been approved (SWRCB 2007).
The Arlington-Riverside, Temescal, and Chino Groundwater Sub-basins each have the beneficial uses of Municipal and Domestic Supply, Agricultural Supply, Industrial Service Supply, and Industrial Process Supply.
69 kV Subtransmission Lines
Surface Water
The proposed 69 kV routes are located within mostly developed urban areas south of the Santa Ana River corridor, where most natural drainages have been engineered for flood control and are lined with concrete. The proposed 69 kV routes also cross the Arlington Valley Channel, Riverside Canal, and Gage Canal, which supply water to communities in the Riverside area.
Floodplain
Due to urbanization and associated flood control engineering of natural drainages, the 100-year floodplain of the Santa Ana River is the only such floodplain present in the area of the proposed 69 kV routes (FEMA 2009). Where the proposed 69 kV route leaves the proposed Wildlife Substation, it is located adjacent to but above the floodplain of the Santa Ana River.
Wetlands
Wetlands along the proposed 69 kV routes are associated with Hole Lake, and occur at the southern end of Hole Lake. As previously described, this wetland is dominated by trees such as cottonwoods and willows and, while it receives water from runoff, may be visibly saturated only during the rainy season.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-221
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Groundwater
The proposed 69 kV routes are located within the Riverside-Arlington Sub-basin, in the Upper Santa Ana Valley Groundwater Basin. These sub-
Groundwater Bulletin 118.
Well data was obtained from the WMWD and analyzed to estimate local water table depths within the study area. Within the 69 kV area, WMWD has two wells for which information was available. The first well, near the intersection of Arlington Avenue and Tyler Street, recorded a depth-to-water measurement of 10.6 feet; the second well, near the proposed Wilderness/Wildlife substations, recorded an average depth-to-water measurement of 41.3 feet (WMWD 2008). Well data was not available for the southern portion of the proposed 69 kV routes.
Water Quality
Surface and groundwater quality objectives in the area of the proposed 69 kV subtransmission lines are described in the Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the Santa Ana Region. 118. Water quality objectives were established to protect the existing and potential beneficial uses of surface and groundwater.
While none of the drainages within the area of the proposed 69 kV routes have been listed in the basin plan, waters that have not been specifically listed are assigned the same beneficial uses as the waters to which they are tributary; i.e., the Santa Ana River (RWQCB 1995). Accordingly, drainages in the vicinity of the proposed 69 kV routes have the beneficial uses of Agricultural Supply, Ground Water Recharge, Water Contact Recreation, Non-contact Water Recreation, Warm Freshwater Habitat, Wildlife Habitat, Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species, and Spawning, Reproduction, and/or Early Development.
The Arlington-Riverside Groundwater Sub-basin has the beneficial use of Municipal and Domestic Supply, Agricultural Supply, Industrial Service Supply, and Industrial Process Supply.
Wildlife/Wilderness 230 kV Substations
There are no water resources within the proposed footprint of the Wildlife/Wilderness n an industrial area on an upland bench of the Santa
Ana River above the floodplain. The land cover of the site comprises manicured lawn, ruderal/disturbed field, and non-native grassland.
69 kV and 230 kV Substation Upgrades
RERC
There are no water resources within the existing footprint of the RERC.
Mountain View, Harvey Lynn, and Freeman Substations
There are no water resources within the existing footprints of the Harvey Lynn, Mountain View, RERC, and Freeman substations.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-222
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Mira Loma and Vista 230 kV Substations
There are no water resources within the existing footprint of the 230 kV substations that would be upgraded as part of the Proposed Project.
Regulatory Setting
Federal
Section 404 Clean Water Act (CWA). Waters of the U.S. including wetlands are subject to USACE jurisdiction under Section 404 of the CWA. A Section 404 permit is required for the discharge of dredged or fill material into Waters of the U.S. The Los Angeles District of the USACE would provide review and permitting services for this Proposed Project.
Section 401 CWA. Pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA, a water quality certification is required from the Santa Ana RWQCB for Section 404 permit activities. The Santa Ana RWQCB certifies that the discharge complies with state water quality standards and ensures that there is no net loss of wetlands through impact avoidance, minimization, and mitigation.
Section 303(d) Clean Water Act. Section 303(d) unites the water quality management strategies of the CWA. Section 303(d) requires that states make a list of waters that exceed the minimum level of pollutants put in place by the CWA. For waters on this list, the states must develop TMDLs, which account for all sources of the pollutants that caused the water to be listed. The TMDLs must account for contributions from both point sources and nonpoint sources, as defined by Section 502 of the CWA. In California, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has interpreted state law (see Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act below) to require that implementation of TMDLs be addressed when incorporated into Basin Plans (water quality control plans).
Construction Stormwater Program. The State Water Resources Control Board and the nine RWQCBs implement water quality regulations under the federal CWA and the California Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Existing water quality regulations require compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) for discharges of stormwater runoff associated with construction activity.
Dischargers are required to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Construction General Permit, 2009-2009-DWQ). Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground, such as stockpiling or excavation, but does not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore the original line, grade, or capacity of the facility.
The Construction General Permit requires the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP should contain a site map(s) which shows the construction site perimeter, existing and proposed structures, lots, roadways, stormwater collection and discharge points, general topography both before and after construction, and drainage patterns across the project. The SWPPP must list Best Management Practices (BMPs) the discharger will use to protect stormwater runoff and the placement of those BMPs. Additionally, the SWPPP must contain a monitoring program for visible and non-visible pollutants, and to changes in water quality such as substantial alteration in measures of the acidity or basicity of a solution (pH). When construction of the project is completed, the project City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-223
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 would submit a Notice of Termination as required by the Permit upon reaching stabilization of the project area.
State
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act or characteristics which are established for the reasonable protection of beneficial uses of water ves are intended
to protect the public health and welfare, and to maintain or enhance water quality in relation to the existing and/or potential beneficial uses of the water. Water quality objectives apply to both Waters of the United States and Waters of the State.
Basin Plans.The SWRCB requires individual RWQCBs to develop Basin Plans (water quality control plans) designed to preserve and enhance water quality and protect the beneficial uses of all Regional waters. Specifically, Basin Plans designate beneficial uses for surface waters and groundwater, set narrative and numerical objectives that must be attainted or maintained to describe implementation programs to protect all waters in the Regions. In addition, Basin Plans incorporate by reference all applicable State and Regional Board plans and policies, and other pertinent water quality policies and regulations. The RTRP is under the jurisdiction of the Basin Plan of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement.Sections 1601-1603 of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Code protect the natural flow, bed, channel, and bank of any river, stream, or lake designated by the CDFG, in which there is at any time an existing fish or wildlife resource, or from which these resources derive benefit. General project plans must be submitted to CDFG in sufficient detail to indicate the nature of a project for construction, if the project would:
Divert, obstruct, or change a streambed, bank, or riparian zone Use material from the streambeds
Result in the disposal or deposition of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it can pass into a stream The Inland Deserts Region of the CDFG serves Riverside and San Bernardino Counties.
Regional and Local
The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is located in the western portion of Riverside County and regulates floodplain and drainage development. The District -of-way, which include the
Santa Ana River floodplain. The permit application must include a copy of the approved and filed CEQA document (e.g., Environmental Impact Report), proof of compliance with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), NPDES requirements, and compliance with all applicable regulatory permits.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-224
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Impact Assessment
Significance Threshold Criteria
Water resources impact determinations are based on significance criteria derived from CEQA Guidelines. Water resources impacts are considered significant if the project:
a) Violates any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, creates new sources of polluted runoff, or otherwise substantially degrades water quality. b) Substantially depletes groundwater supplies or interferes substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted).
c) Substantially alters the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site.
d) Substantially alters the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increases the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site. e) Creates or contributes runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provides substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.
f) Has a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, and coastal) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. g) Places housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map. h) Places within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows.
i) Exposes people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. j) Results in or is subject to damage from inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.
the Proposed Project would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local regulatory requirements that protect surface water and groundwater.
In accordance with the CWA, RPU and SCE would prepare and implement a SWPPP that would include BMPs to minimize impacts to surface water and ground water quality. The SWPPP would be prepared when the Proposed Project is approved, and after Proposed Project facilities and structures are designed and sited. The SWPPP must be submitted to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board as part of the Construction General Permit.
Potential environmental effects on water resources were initially evaluated in the Initial Study prepared for the Proposed Project in January 2007, and re-evaluated in 2009.
Environmental Protection Elements
Following best management and design practices throughout conception, construction, and City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-225
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 implementation of the Proposed Project ensures that potential environmental impacts are minimized through avoidance. Table 3.2.8-1 outlines the proposed SCE and RPU Environmental Protection Elements (EPEs) related to hydrology and water quality. As discussed above in Section 3.1.2, the EPEs have been included as part of the Proposed Project; therefore, the impact analysis section that follows includes the implementation of the EPEs listed below. Any impact resulting from the implementation of the Proposed Project (including the EPEs) is identified below. Where mitigation measures would reduce these impacts, the measures and their effectiveness have been included in the impact discussion.
TABLE 3.2.8-1. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ELEMENTS WATER RESOURCES Environmental
Protection
Element
Description
HYDRO-01
Jurisdictional Waters: Infrastructure associated with the Proposed Project would be situated outside jurisdictional waters, as defined by the Clean Water Act (e.g., wetlands, stream channels and banks). The Proposed Project has been designed to span and avoid wetlands and riparian areas. Work limits for tower construction, tower footprints, and pull and tension sites would be in upland locations. There is no dredge or fill action expected from construction of the Proposed Project. If jurisdictional waters cannot be avoided, a Section 404 Nationwide 12 Permit will be obtained from the USACE and impacts to jurisdictional waters will be restricted to a total area of no more than 0.5 acre, as mandated by Permit requirements. All permit conditions will be followed to ensure that impacts remain less than significant.
HYDRO-02 Transmission Operations & Maintenance: Areas that do not offer perpetual access to transmission structures for routine operations and maintenance shall be avoided.
HYDRO-03
Dewatering Operations. If groundwater is encountered during construction as indicated by geologic borings, dewatering operations, as described in the construction SWPPP, shall be implemented.
Groundwater shall not be discharged to storm drains or to Waters of the U.S., and shall be contained within the work area, using standard stormwater BMPs (e.g., straw wattles) and allowed to percolate back to the ground.
HYDRO-04 Maintaining Natural Drainage Patterns. The substations and poles shall be designed and engineered to facilitate natural drainage patterns to minimize or avoid any potential impacts to erosion and siltation.
HYDRO-05
New Impervious Areas Returned to Existing Conditions. New impervious areas associated with temporary construction would be returned to preconstruction conditions after the completion of project construction.
Environmental Impacts
This environmental impacts section evaluates potential effects of the Proposed Project based upon the CEQA significance criteria previously discussed. To supplement the analysis below, detailed evaluation of the water resources impacts resulting from construction and operation of the Proposed Project is provided in the Water Resources Technical Report in the Appendices of this DEIR.
230 kV Transmission Line
Construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed 230 kV transmission line could potentially degrade water quality from stormwater runoff and accidental spills of petroleum, oil, and lubricant (POL); degrade and cause the loss of Waters of the U.S. including wetlands; and alter drainage patterns and floodplains. However, the Proposed Project would be constructed with implementation of EPEs as listed in Table 3.2.8-1, which would result in impacts as described below.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-226
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 69 kV Subtransmission Lines
The proposed 69 kV subtransmission lines would be located in industrial, commercial, and suburban areas with few natural waterways or wetland areas. Construction and operation of the proposed 69 kV subtransmission lines would potentially degrade water quality from stormwater runoff and accidental spills of POL; construction could potentially degrade and cause the loss of Waters of the U.S. including wetlands; and alter drainage patterns. These potential impacts are similar to potential impacts resulting from construction of the proposed 230 kV transmission line.
Wildlife/Wilderness 230 kV Substations
Construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed Wildlife/Wilderness substations would potentially degrade water quality of the Santa Ana River from increased stormwater runoff and accidental oil spills, alter drainage patterns of the site, and decrease groundwater recharge. These potential impacts are discussed below. No other impacts would occur.
69 kV Substation Upgrades
Upgrades to the four existing 69 kV substations would occur within the existing footprints of each substation, with the exception of minor pole re-alignments to accommodate the substation modifications. The substations are in urbanized areas, and ground disturbance would be minimal.
Impacts to water resources resulting from the substation upgrades would be through stormwater runoff.
a) Violates any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, creates new sources of polluted runoff, or otherwise substantially degrades water quality.
Less than Significant Impact.
230 kV Transmission Line
Indirect, short-term impacts to water quality could result from stormwater runoff during construction of the proposed 230 kV transmission line. Overhead transmission line construction requires ground-disturbing activities, including clearing and grading for structure installation and work areas, and access road construction. Disturbed soils accelerate erosion and increase sediment in stormwater runoff to receiving waters (i.e., Santa Ana River and its tributaries), causing increased turbidity and channel sedimentation.
The Santa Ana RWQCB has identified construction-related erosion and sedimentation as a significant non-point source (NPS) pollution problem in the WMA; however, the Santa Ana River and its tributaries within the Proposed Project area are not 303(d) listed as sediment- impaired water bodies. Additional short-term discharges of sediment would not significantly contribute to the exceedance of the water quality standard for turbidity, which the RWQCB
In addition to compliance with federal and state regulations, implementation of EPE HYDRO-4 would minimize impacts from ground-disturbing activities to less-than-significant levels. No mitigation is required.
Indirect, short-term impacts to water quality could result from accidental spills and leaks of POL City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-227
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 from equipment and vehicles used during construction of the Proposed Project. Concrete spills can also occur during concrete preparation and pouring of structure foundations. Such spills could run off-site into receiving waters and degrade water quality. With implementation of Non- stormwater Management, Material Management, and Materials Pollution Control BMPs, as specified in the required Proposed Project SWPPP, impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
Indirect, short-term impacts to water quality could result from accidental spills and leaks of POL from equipment and vehicles used during operation and maintenance of the Proposed Project.
Such spills could run off-site into receiving waters and degrade water quality. Operation and maintenance of the transmission line and associated access roads would involve periodic inspections, and maintenance visits would be conducted on an as-needed basis. However, Best Available Control Measures (BACMs), such as oil spill kits, would be utilized by SCE maintenance crews to reduce or eliminate such spills and/or leaks; as such, operational impacts to water quality would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
69 kV Subtransmission Lines
Indirect, short-term impacts to water quality could result from stormwater runoff during construction of the 69 kV subtransmission lines. Overhead subtransmission line construction requires ground-disturbing activities, including clearing and grading for structure installation and work areas, and access road construction. Disturbed soils accelerate erosion and increase sediment in stormwater runoff to receiving waters (i.e., Santa Ana River and its tributaries), causing increased turbidity and channel sedimentation.
The Santa Ana RWQCB has identified construction-related erosion and sedimentation as a significant NPS pollution problem in the WMA; however, the Santa Ana River and its tributaries within the Proposed Project area are not 303(d) listed as sediment-impaired water bodies.
Additional short-term discharges of sediment would not significantly contribute to the exceedance of the water quality standard for sediment or turbidity.
In addition to compliance with federal and state regulations, the Proposed Project would implement EPE HYDRO-04, and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
Indirect, short-term impacts to water quality could result from accidental spills and leaks of POL from equipment and vehicles used during construction of the Proposed Project. Concrete spills can also occur during concrete preparation and pouring of structure foundations. Such spills could run off-site into receiving waters and degrade water quality. However, non-stormwater Management, Material Management, and Materials Pollution Control BMPs (e.g., off-site vehicle and equipment cleaning, fueling, and maintenance, spill prevention and control measures, and hazardous waste management practices), as specified in the required Proposed Project SWPPP, would be implemented, and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
Indirect, short-term impacts to water quality could result from accidental spills and leaks of POL from equipment and vehicles used during operation and maintenance of the Proposed Project.
Such spills could run off-site into receiving waters and degrade water quality. Operation and maintenance of the proposed subtransmission line and associated access roads would involve City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-228
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 periodic inspections, and maintenance visits would be conducted on an as-needed basis.
However, BACMs, such as oil spill kits, would be utilized by RPU maintenance crews to reduce or eliminate such spills and/or leaks; as such, operational impacts to water quality would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
Wildlife/Wilderness 230 kV Substations
Removal of vegetation and grading activities at the proposed substations site would temporarily result in increased erosion and sediment runoff from the sites during construction.
Implementation of the required SWPPP would protect receiving waters from stormwater runoff during and after construction. The Proposed Project would implement BMPs, including stabilization measures (e.g., preservation of existing vegetation, geotextiles, non-vegetative stabilization methods), for disturbed areas as well as runoff and sediment controls, and the impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
Water quality of the Santa Ana River could be degraded by accidental spills from oil-filled electrical equipment (i.e., circuit breakers, transformers, regulators, and capacitors) and storage facilities at the proposed Wildlife/Wilderness substations site. Spills could potentially migrate off-
part 112) requires Spill Prevention, Countermeasure and Control (SPCC) plans for facilities with a total above-ground oil storage capacity of greater than 1,320 gallons to prevent oil spills from reaching Waters of the U.S.
As required by the EPA, the Proposed Project would prepare SPCC plans for the proposed substations site. The SPCC plans would include engineered and operational methods for preventing, containing, and controlling potential releases and provisions for a quick and safe cleanup. In general, the proposed substations site would be surfaced with gravel to reduce the migration of oil spills, and additional engineered methods (e.g., concrete berms, Petro-Barriers) would prevent any spills from leaving the substation site. The proposed substations would also be gated with a combination of block walls and chain link fencing to prevent access to equipment by unauthorized persons. The plan would be certified by a professional engineer and a complete copy would be maintained on-site. With implementation of the SPCC plans for operation of the proposed substations there would be no impact to Waters of the U.S. from oil-related spills, and no mitigation is required.
69 kV Substation Upgrades
Excavation to accommodate re-alignment of poles would temporarily result in increased erosion and sediment runoff from the sites during construction. Implementation of the required SWPPP would protect receiving waters from stormwater runoff during and after construction. The Proposed Project would implement BMPs (e.g., straw wattles, silt fencing) for runoff and sediment controls, and the impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
Water quality of the Santa Ana River could be degraded by accidental spills from oil-filled electrical equipment (i.e., circuit breakers, transformers, regulators, and capacitors) and storage facilities at the proposed substation site. Spills could migrate off-site and reach the Santa Ana rt 112)
requires SPCC plans for facilities with a total above-ground oil storage capacity of greater than 1,320 gallons to prevent oil spills from reaching Waters of the U.S.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-229
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
As required by the EPA, the Proposed Project would prepare SPCC plans for the proposed substations site. The SPCC plans would include engineered and operational methods for preventing, containing, and controlling potential releases and provisions for a quick and safe cleanup. In general, the proposed substations site would be surfaced with gravel to reduce the migration of oil spills, and additional engineered methods (e.g., concrete berms, Petro-Barriers) would prevent any spills from leaving the substation site. The proposed substations would also be gated with a combination of block walls and chain link fencing to prevent access to equipment by unauthorized persons. The plan would be certified by a professional engineer and a complete copy would be maintained on-site. With implementation of the SPCC plans for operation of the proposed substations there would be no impact to Waters of the U.S. from oil-related spills, and no mitigation is required.
b) Substantially depletes groundwater supplies or interferes substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted).
Less than Significant Impact.
230 kV Transmission Line
Construction of the proposed 230 kV transmission line would potentially encounter groundwater along the Santa Ana River corridor. Boring for installation of the proposed transmission line structures would not occur to depths such that they would be likely to deplete the local groundwater table. An average 120-foot TSP would have a foundation of approximately 40 feet deep and approximately 6 feet in diameter, requiring excavation of approximately 1,130 cubic feet of soil. Should the bore hole fill completely with water and require dewatering, the volume of groundwater removed for foundation construction would be approximately 0.03 acre-feet (af).
Groundwater storage capacity for the groundwater basins in the Proposed Project area ranges from 207,000 af to 5,325,000 af, and would not be significantly reduced by installation of transmission structures. Implementation of EPE HYDRO-03 would ensure that groundwater pumped from structure foundation excavations would be allowed to percolate into the soil within the work area. Correspondingly, installation of the proposed transmission line structures would not, individually or collectively, create impervious surfaces great enough to interfere with groundwater recharge resulting in a net deficit in aquifer volume. Installation of transmission structures would not interfere with nearby wells. Municipal and private well locations were obtained from WMWD; no wells are located within the Proposed Project ROW or within work areas, and the relatively small volume of water that would potentially be pumped from structure foundations would be too small to create a drawdown that would interfere with the activity of local municipal or private wells. Impacts to groundwater and wells would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.
Should groundwater be encountered during construction of the proposed RTRP, implementation of EPE HYDRO-03 would minimize impacts to groundwater to a less-than-significant level. No mitigation is required.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-230
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 69 kV Subtransmission Lines
Construction of the proposed 69 kV subtransmission lines would potentially encounter groundwater along the Santa Ana River corridor. Poles would range from 65 to 90 feet in height, and the bottoms would vary in diameter from 1.5 to 3.0 feet for tangent and angle poles, and from 4.0 to 6.0 feet in diameter frofor dead-end poles. Installation depths would vary depending on local soil, geological conditions, and structural requirements. Bore holes for the subtransmission poles would be smaller and shallower than those required for installation of the 230 kV structures; if groundwater is encountered and dewatering is required, the volume of water removed would likewise be smaller. Groundwater storage capacity for the groundwater basins in the Proposed Project area ranges from 207,000 af to 5,325,000 af, and would not be significantly reduced by installation of transmission structures.
Implementation of EPE HYDRO-03 would ensure that groundwater pumped from structure foundation excavations would be allowed to percolate into the soil within the work area.
Correspondingly, installation of the proposed transmission line structures would not, individually or collectively, create impervious surfaces great enough to interfere with groundwater recharge resulting in a net deficit in aquifer volume. Installation of transmission structures would not interfere with nearby wells. Municipal and private well locations were obtained from WMWD; no wells are located within the Proposed Project ROW or within work areas, and the relatively small volume of water that would potentially be pumped from structure foundations would be too small to create a drawdown that would interfere with the activity of local municipal or private wells. Impacts to groundwater and wells would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.
Wildlife/Wilderness 230 kV Substations
The proposed substations would cover an area of approximately 9.5 acres, and would reduce stormwater infiltration capacity of the natural ground surface. Reduction of infiltration capacity would potentially interfere with groundwater recharge; however, implementation of EPE HYDRO-04 would require the proposed substations to be engineered to facilitate natural drainage patterns around the substation. As stated previously, groundwater storage capacity for the groundwater basins in the Proposed Project area ranges from 207,000 af to 5,325,000 af, and would not be significantly reduced by construction of the proposed substations. Groundwater levels in the vicinity of the proposed substations ranges from approximately 35 feet to 50 feet, and it is unlikely that groundwater would be encountered during construction of the proposed substations. Should groundwater be encountered, however, groundwater storage capacity would not be significantly reduced by installation of substation components, as explained previously.
Implementation of EPE HYDRO-03 would ensure that any groundwater pumped from substation excavations would be allowed to percolate into the soil within the work area. Likewise, the relatively small volume of water that would potentially be pumped from structure foundations would be too small to create a drawdown that would interfere with the activity of local municipal or private wells. Impacts to groundwater and wells would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.
69 kV Substation Upgrades
Upgrades to the substations do not involve the use of groundwater. In addition, upgrades would occur within the existing footprints of the substations, and would not reduce stormwater infiltration capacity of the natural ground surface.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-231
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
c) Substantially alters the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site.
Less than Significant Impact.
230 kV Transmission Line
Direct, temporary impacts to existing drainage patterns may result from construction of the temporary access roads used to access the transmission line ROW during construction. Minor drainage diversions may result from grading; however, stream and river courses would not be altered. Temporary roads would be removed when construction is completed, and the ground would be restored to its original contours.
Permanent access roads would be constructed as all-weather/all-season. With use of pervious materials for access road construction, the volume and rate of stormwater runoff is not expected to increase substantially from pre-construction levels in a manner that would result in off-site erosion and flooding.
Any work within the Santa Ana River watershed in areas that are under the jurisdiction of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District would require an encroachment permit. The required SWPPP would also address stormwater management.
Implementation of EPEs HYDRO-04 and HYDRO-05 and stormwater management BMPs specified in the required SWPPP would minimize erosion or siltation on- or off-site and maintain natural drainage patterns and restore temporary impervious areas (e.g., work areas) to preconstruction conditions. The Proposed Project would not result in new impervious areas that would result in stormwater discharges which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. Impacts related to temporary alteration of drainage patterns would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
69 kV Subtransmission Lines
Direct, temporary impacts to existing drainage patterns may result from undergrounding of the 69 kV line down Doolittle Street, as well as from construction of the temporary roads used to access the proposed transmission line ROW during construction; however, the majority of the proposed 69 kV line would be located in previously disturbed areas or along City streets, limiting the number of temporary roads required for construction. Temporary roads would be removed When construction is completed, temporary roads would be removed, and the groundall temporarily disturbed areas would be restored to itstheir original contours.
Given the siting of the proposed 69 kV subtransmission lines within developed areas, permanent access roads would not be required. The volume and rate of stormwater runoff is not expected to increase substantially from pre-construction levels in a manner that would result in off-site erosion and flooding.
Any work within the Santa Ana River watershed under the jurisdiction of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District would require an encroachment permit. The required SWPPP would also address stormwater management.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-232
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
The Proposed Project would implement EPE HYDRO-04 and HYDRO-05, which would minimize runoff that could result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site, or exceedance of the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. Implementation of EPE HYDRO-05 would also minimize potential impacts related to temporary alteration of drainage patterns. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.
Wildlife/Wilderness 230 kV Substations
Direct, permanent impacts to existing stormwater drainage and indirect, temporary impacts to water quality could potentially result from the construction of the proposed substations. The footprint of the proposed substations would be approximately twelve acres. The site will require substantial clearing and grading (cut and fill) to achieve the designed grade for the site. The proposed Wilderness/Wildlife substations would be surfaced with crushed rock, and a paved asphalt road for access to the proposed Wildlife substation would be built. Concrete foundations would be constructed to support electrical equipment and structures.
Development of the proposed substations would reduce the stormwater infiltration capacity of the ground surface, resulting in increased stormwater runoff flows from pre-construction levels.
As part of the required SWPPP, the Proposed Project would implement drainage facilities to manage increased stormwater flows to existing and planned stormwater drainage systems, and would implement stormwater management controls (e.g., retention/detention ponds, infiltration measures) as part of substation design. Impacts resulting from increased stormwater runoff and alteration of drainage patterns would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
69 kV Substation Upgrades
The substations are located in urbanized areas, and upgrades to the substations would occur within the existing footprints of each substation, and do not involve ground-disturbing activities that would result in alteration of drainage patterns, drainage patterns that would result in flooding on- or off-site or in erosion or siltation on- or off-site.
Implementation of the required SWPPP would protect receiving waters from stormwater runoff during and after construction. The Proposed Project would implement BMPs for runoff and sediment controls, and the impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
Water quality of the Santa Ana River could be degraded by accidental spills from oil-filled electrical equipment (i.e., circuit breakers, transformers, regulators, and capacitors) and storage facilities at the proposed substation site. Spills could migrate off-site and reach the Santa Ana requires SPCC plans for facilities with a total above-ground oil storage capacity of greater than 1,320 gallons to prevent oil spills from reaching Waters of the U.S.
As required by the EPA, the Proposed Project would prepare SPCC plans for the proposed substations site. The SPCC plans would include engineered and operational methods for preventing, containing, and controlling potential releases and provisions for a quick and safe cleanup. In general, the proposed substations site would be surfaced with gravel to reduce the migration of oil spills, and additional engineered methods (e.g., concrete berms, Petro-Barriers) would prevent any spills from leaving the substation site. The proposed substations would also City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-233
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 be gated with a combination of block walls and chain link fencing to prevent access to equipment by unauthorized persons. The plan would be certified by a professional engineer and a complete copy would be maintained on-site. With implementation of the SPCC plans for operation of the proposed substations there would be no impact to Waters of the U.S. from oil-related spills, and no mitigation is required.
d) Substantially alters the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increases the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; Less than Significant Impact.
See discussion above under criterion c) for a discussion of the less than significant impacts for each component of the Proposed Project.
e) Creates or contributes runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provides substantial additional sources of polluted runoff;
Less than Significant Impact.
See discussion above under criterion c) for a discussion of the less than significant impacts for each component of the Proposed Project.
f) Has a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, and coastal) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.
Less than Significant Impact.
230 kV Transmission Line
Based on design level data and as a worst case analysis, direct impact to Waters of the U.S. could result from ground disturbance related to the installation of tower and pole structure foundations, and pulling and tensioning sites. Assembly areasOne proposed assembly area for twoa lattice structures and one TSP havestructure has potential to temporarily impact approximately 0.42 acre of NWI wetlands, based on NWI data (please note that this impact is not the same impact regarding riparian vegetation identified in the biological resources section. Riparian vegetation is considered a general biological term in comparison to a specific NWI wetland. In general terms, riparian vegetation may or may not be considered an actual wetland.). Field reconnaissance revealed that one of the wetlands in question, located in a drainage northeast of LongHole Lake, is separated from these disturbance areas by elevational differences. The second wetland, located adjacent to the City of Riverside Water Treatment Plant, and has been filled in and is currently used as a parking lot. Because of these existing conditions, neither wetland would no potential to be affected by construction or operation of the Proposed Project. Additional mapped wetlands adjacent to the Proposed 230 kV ROW are separated from the Proposed Project by steep bluffs along the Santa Ana River.
Direct, short- to long-term impacts to wetland vegetation, hydrology, and soils could result from temporary work areas (e.g., pulling and tensioning) associated with construction of the proposed City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-234
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 transmission line. Pulling and tensioning sites with potential to impact wetlands would be located north of the RERC Substation and northwest of the Riverside Agricultural Park. Work areas would be cleared to some extent for the safe operation of construction equipment, which would adversely impact wetland vegetation. Operation of heavy equipment has the potential to cause soil compaction and rutting, which could in turn alter wetland hydrology. However, as stated above, these temporary work areas are on high ground above the wetlands, and there would be no impact.
The Jurupa Area Plan of the MSHCP requires conservation of existing wetlands in the Jurupa Area Plan portion of the Santa Ana River, with a focus on conserving existing habitats in the river. Potential disturbance areas adjacent to Hole Lake would be located within Criteria Cell 617, where conservation is focused on lands connecting existing connected wetland habitat along the Santa Ana River.
The Proposed 230 kV transmission line would entirely span the Santa Ana River corridor at the proposed crossing point and not affect any riverine wetlands.
69 kV Subtransmission Lines
Based on design level data and as a worst case analysis, direct impact to the NWI wetland at Hole Lake could result from vegetation clearing for construction of the proposed transmission line ROW. These impacts could include direct, short- to long-term impacts to wetland vegetation, hydrology, and soils could result from vegetation clearing within temporary work areas (e.g., pulling and tensioning and guard structure sites) associated with construction of the proposed subtransmission lines in the vicinity of Hole Lake. Work areas would be cleared to some extent for the safe operation of construction equipment, which could have a potential adverse impact to approximately 0.1 acre of NWI wetland vegetation. Operation of heavy equipment has the potential to cause soil compaction and rutting, which could in turn alter wetland hydrology.
Due to the linear nature of this NWI wetland, temporary work areas would be located outside of the wetland area and above the bed and banks of the stream, and potential impacts to wetland hydrology and soils resulting from soil compaction and rutting would be avoided. High vegetation, such as palm trees, within the wetland may require trimming to allow for safe crossing by the new subtransmission line; however, clearing of native riparian or wetland vegetation within this wetland would not be necessary, and no impact would occur.
The 69 kV portion of the Proposed Project is located within the Santa Ana River South Subunit of the Cities of Riverside and Norco Area Plan of the MSHCP. This Subunit requires conservation of existing wetlands along the Santa Ana River, with a focus on conserving existing Habitats in the river. Potential disturbance areas adjacent to the NWI wetland adjacent to Hole Lake would not be located within any criteria cell. A portion of the 69 kV line from the Wilderness/Wildlife Substations would cross through Criteria Cell 621, where conservation is focused on expanding existing conserved wetlands along the Santa Ana River; however, the Proposed Project would be located in a developed industrial area on high ground above the river, and would not affect wetland habitat along the Santa Ana River.
Wetland boundaries within both portions of the Proposed Project would be field-verified through jurisdictional wetland delineation during the permitting phase of the Proposed Project, prior to City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-235
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 construction. Section 404 of the CWA regulates discharge of dredged or fill material into Waters of the U.S., including wetlands. Based on the general available design data, the Proposed Project would require a Section 404 Nationwide 12 Permit, which allows construction of utility line projects provided the Proposed Project does not result in the loss of greater than 0.5 acre of Waters of the U.S., including wetlands. However, it is expected that impacts to wetlands can be avoided during construction through adjusting field work limits, construction practices, and use of Best Management Practices for erosion control. Therefore, the Proposed Project is determined to not affect wetland habitat; should field conditions require temporary impact to this resource, then discretionary permitting would be required. Impacts would be mitigated per the regulatory agency permit and consistent with requirements of the MSHCP and Determination of Biological Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) review process for Riparian / Riverine habitat that, for the Proposed Project area, would include potential Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands of the U.Swetlands and other jurisdictional waters.
To maintain compliance with federal and local regulations, including the requirements of the Section 404 Nationwide 12 Permit, EPE HYDRO-01 would require the Proposed Project to avoid impacts to delineated wetlands and Waters of the U.S., and EPEs HYDRO-04 and HYDRO-05 would preserve or return surface hydrology and vegetation to preconstruction conditions. Additionally, Erosion Control BMPs as defined in the required SWPPP and applicable permit conditions of the Nationwide 12 Permit would minimize impacts to wetlands and Waters of the U.S. due to the discharge of fill material, including sediment-laden stormwater discharges. Impacts to Waters of the U.S., including wetlands, would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.
Wildlife/Wilderness 230 kV Substations
The proposed substations would be located on an upland site, where no wetlands occur.
69 kV Substation Upgrades
The substations are located in urbanized areas, and upgrades to the substations would occur within the existing footprints of each substation. No wetlands would be impacted.
No marshes, vernal pools or coastal wetlands are located in the Proposed Project ROWs, in areas likely to experience ground disturbance, or near any project elements. None of these types of wetlands would be impacted.
g) Places housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map.
No Impact.
230 kV Transmission Line
The Proposed Project does not involve placement of housing within a flood hazard zone.
69 kV Subtransmission Lines
The Proposed Project does not involve placement of housing within a flood hazard zone.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-236
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Wildlife/Wilderness 230 kV Substations
The Proposed Project does not involve placement of housing within a flood hazard zone.
69 kV Substation Upgrades
The Proposed Project does not involve placement of housing within a flood hazard zone.
h) Places within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows.
Less than Significant Impact.
230 kV Transmission Line
As required by final engineering design, the proposed transmission line structures and associated infrastructure would be placed within the 100-year floodplains of the Santa Ana River and other drainages. Specifically, seven TSPs and five lattice structures would be placed within 100-year floodplain of the Santa Ana River. Foundations for these structures would have average areas of
63.6 square feet for TSPs and 50.3 square feet for lattice structures, with height of each base varying from 0 to 4 feet above ground level. The Proposed Project parallels the river for approximately 5 miles; along that expanse, the 100-year floodplain varies in width from approximately 0.15 mile to 1 mile and the base flood elevation decreases from 718 feet above structure bases, would be small relative to the greater area of the floodplain, and would not displace floodwater sufficient to increase base flood elevation.
The Proposed Project would comply with regional and federal regulations restricting construction that would increase base flood elevation, and would implement EPEs HYDRO-02 and HYDRO-05. Potential for the transmission structures or their bases to impede or redirect flood flows or raise the flood elevation is less than significant, and impacts resulting from placement of structures in a floodplain would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
69 kV Subtransmission Lines
As required by final engineering design, the proposed transmission line structures would not be placed within the 100-year floodplain of the Santa Ana River and other drainages; therefore, these structures would be unlikely to impede or redirect flood flows and would not raise the flood elevation.
The Proposed Project would comply with regional and federal regulations, and would implement EPEs HYDRO-02 and HYDRO-05 to minimize impacts to less-than-significant levels. No mitigation is required.
Wildlife/Wilderness 230 kV Substations
The proposed substations would not be placed within a flood hazard zone.
69 kV Substation Upgrades
Upgrades to the substations would occur within the existing footprints of each substation, which are not within a flood hazard zone.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-237
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
i) Exposes people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam.
No Impact.
230 kV Transmission Line
The Proposed Project would not alter floodways, increase human presence in flood-prone areas, or encroach upon levees or dams.
69 kV Subtransmission Lines
The Proposed Project would not alter floodways, increase human presence in flood-prone areas, or encroach upon levees or dams.
Wildlife/Wilderness 230 kV Substations
The Proposed Project would not alter floodways, increase human presence in flood-prone areas, or encroach upon levees or dams.
69 kV Substation Upgrades
The Proposed Project would not alter floodways, increase human presence in flood-prone areas, or encroach upon levees or dams.
j) Results in or is subject to damage from inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.
Less than Significant Impact.
230 kV Transmission Line
The Proposed Project would not be located in an area subject to damage by seiche or tsunami, it is located in an area subject to inundation by mudflow. Although the majority of the Proposed Project is located on relatively high ground, transmission structures located within the 100-year floodplain could potentially be subject to mudflow, but the area of potential impact would be limited, and generally defined by the 100-year floodplain. By definition, the 100-year floodplains are subject to inundation by the one percent annual chance flood event (i.e., by a storm event that has a one percent chance of occurring during any given year), and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
69 kV Subtransmission Lines
Although the Proposed Project is located in an area subject to inundation by mudflow, the Proposed Project is located on relatively high ground, and would not be subject to damage from inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.
Wildlife/Wilderness 230 kV Substations
The Proposed Project is not located in an area subject to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-238
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 69 kV Substation Upgrades
The Proposed Project is not located in an area subject to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.
Summary of Impact Determinations
With implementation of Proposed Project EPEs, BMPs as required by the SWPPP, and conformance to the standard Best Available Control Measures of both SCE and RPU, impact levels to water resources would be less than significant. No mitigations are required.
Significant Unavoidable Impacts
With the implementation of EPEs, the Proposed Project will not result in any significant unavoidable impacts to water resources within the Proposed Project area.
References
_____. Water Data Library. Available at http://www.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary/. Accessed January 2009.
California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region (RWQCB). 2008. Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region.
_____. 2004. Resolution emending the Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin to incorporate an updated total dissolved solids (TDS) and nitrogen management plan for the Santa Ana Region (Resolution No. R8-2004-0001).
California Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2007. 2006 CWA section 303(d) list of water quality limited segments.
CDM. 2008. Middle Santa Ana River bacterial indicator TMDL urban source evaluation plan.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Flood Insurance Rate Map, Riverside County, California. Available at
http://msc.fema.gov/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay. Accessed February, 2009.
_____. Q3 Flood Data, Riverside County, California. Available at http://msc.fema.gov/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/StoreCatalogDisplay?storeId=10001&cat alogId=10001&langId=-1&userType=G.
Mendez, Gregory O., and Kenneth Belitz. 2002. Identifying sources of baseflow in the Santa Ana River, California: Pages 567-575 in J.F. Kenny, editor. Proceedings American Water Resources Association 2002 (July 1-3) summer specialty conference--Ground water/surface water interaction, Keystone, CO, TPS-02-2.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1974, 1975. National Wetlands Inventory website.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Available at http://www.fws.gov/wetlands.
U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS). 1981. Corona North, California [map]. 1:24,000 7.5 Minute Series. Reston, Virginia.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-239
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 _____. 1980. Fontana, California [map]. 1:24,000 7.5 Minute Series. Reston, Virginia. _____. 1981. Guasti, California [map]. 1:24,000 7.5 Minute Series. Reston, Virginia. _____. 1980. Riverside West, California [map]. 1:24,000 7.5 Minute Series. Reston, Virginia.
Western Municipal Water District (WMWD). 2008. Cooperative well measuring program for Spring 2008. Downloaded from http://www.wmwd.com/wellinfo.htm. Accessed January 2009.
Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC). 2009. Western U.S. Climatological Data Summaries. Available at http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/climsum.html. Accessed March 2009.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-240
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
3.2.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
This section addresses potential impacts to land uses in the Proposed Project area. The analysis considers potential impacts resulting from the construction, operation, and maintenance of the Proposed Project. Land use issues include compatibility of the Proposed Project with adjacent land uses, and potential conflicts with applicable plans and policies. This evaluation is based on a review of local land use plans and policies.
Environmental Setting
Proposed Project components are located within threefour governmental jurisdictions: the City of Riverside, the City of Jurupa Valley, and the City of Norco., along with unincorporated areas of Riverside County. The City of Jurupa Valley was recently incorporated in July 2011. The newly formed city is adopting the current will use Riverside County General Plan elements that would be applicable to the City of Jurupa Valley;implement planning policies and regulations until they adopt their own (Lehotsky 2011). Therefore, the analysis within this DEIR includes Riverside County Zoning Ordinance and General Plan designations and /consistency reviews for impact analysis purposes. The Proposed Project area is characterized by rural, urban and suburban development intermixed with agriculture and undeveloped lands. Rapid population growth in the Proposed Project area has resulted in increased development with accompanying changes in land use. The natural topography of the Proposed Project area is generally valley lowland intersected by rolling hills. The Santa Ana River represents an important recreational, habitat, and visual resource. The Santa Ana River watershed is the focus of extensive habitat conservation and restoration efforts. Figures 3.2.9-1 and 3.2.9-2 show the General Plan Land Use Designations in the Proposed Project area.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-243
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Existing Land Uses
The Riverside County General Plan divides the county into eastern and western sections based on the geographical division formed by the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains. The Proposed Project falls within the western section of Riverside County, where approximately 82 percent of the area is designated for Agricultural, Rural, Rural Community, or Open Space uses, as presented in Table 3.2.9-1.
TABLE 3.2.9-1. UNINCORPORATED RIVERSIDE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN LAND USE General Plan
Foundation Component
Western Riverside
County Acreage
Percent of Western
Riverside County
Total Riverside
County Acreage
Percent of Total
Riverside County
Agriculture 22,603 2 percent 180,178 4 percent
Rural 278,913 22 percent 326,294 8 percent
Rural Community 73,147 6 percent 77,167 2 percent
Open Space 657,979 52 percent 3,297,992 78 percent
Community Development 137,807 11 percent 200,304 5 percent Other 87,253 7 percent 119,387 3 percent
Total 1,257,702 100 percent 4,201,322 100 percent
NOTES: The General Plan Foundation Components describe the overall nature and intent of each of the five General Plan land uses:
Agriculture, Rural, Rural Community, Open Space, and Community Development. It includes the March Inland Port, Indian Lands, and Major Roadways, but does not include cities within Riverside County. Source: Riverside County, 2008a (Table LU-1)
The County has 2428
incorporated cities, and 28 percent reside in the unincorporated areas (Riverside County General Plan, 2003). Riverside County had a population of 1,949,419 in 2005 (Census Bureau, 2007).
Riverside County has recently experienced rapid population growth, which is expected to continue.
230 kV Transmission Line
Collectively, the Proposed Project routes and study corridors traverse threefour jurisdictions:
unincorporated Riverside County, the City of Jurupa Valley to the north, the City of Riverside to the south, and the City of Norco to the west. The Santa Ana River generally bisects the unincorporated and incorporated areas.
City of Jurupa Valley and Unincorporated Riverside County (Incorporated City of Jurupa Valley as of July 2011)
The Jurupa Valley geographic area includes a mix of high- and low-density residential, rural farming and other agricultural activities, and a mix of commercial, public, and industrial uses.
Two primary transportation corridors traverse the area: Interstate 15 (I-15), which runs north and south, and State Route 60 (SR-60), which runs east and west. In recent years, residential development and economic activity have increased, in particular in the areas adjacent to I-15 and SR-60. Flabob Airport, a privately owned airport open to the public, is located north of the Santa Ana River in the unincorporated community of Rubidoux.
The largely low-density community of Glen Avon is located in the central portion of the area, just south of SR-60. The rural community area southerly of Jurupa Road also provides equestrian opportunities. In addition, Van Buren Boulevard accommodates scattered commercial, industrial, and higher-intensity residential development. Pedley contains a variety of rural and suburban- style residential neighborhoods and a commercial district along Limonite Avenue. Industrial uses City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-244
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 are located along the banks of the Santa Ana River. A Metrolink station is located near Limonite Avenue and Van Buren Boulevard. The Mira Loma community is largely rural with several equestrian trails. A large area of land in northwest Mira Loma near the I-15/SR-60 intersection is converting from dairy to industrial, warehousing, and truck distribution land uses.
Agricultural activities, including dairies, field crops, and ranches, have been the primary land use in the area, though these activities have been giving way to more urban types of development, particularly residential and commercial. The conversion from predominantly agricultural to urban land uses will likely continue for the foreseeable future. Development on both sides of I-15 north of Bellegrave Avenue is intermittent; parcels identified as light industrial and/or commercial are interspersed with undeveloped land.
City of Riverside
The Proposed Project crosses the northwestern portion of the City. Land uses in the area include residential, commercial, office, industrial/manufacturing, and open spaces associated with the The Riverside Municipal
Airport is also located in the area. The airport is classified as a Reliever General Aviation Airport and is owned and operated by the City. The City of Riverside Airport Commission acts as an advisory board and oversees airport operation. Airport development is programmed in the Riverside Airport Master Plan, which was last updated in 2009. Two heliports are located at the Riverside Municipal Airport and one at a trauma center (Riverside Community Hospital).
City of Norco
The Proposed Project traverses a small portion of northeastern Norco. Land uses crossed are designated by the City of Norco General Plan as agricultural and residential agricultural.
Existing land uses (improvements) traversed by the Proposed Project are presented in the Land Use Technical Report included in the Technical Appendices to this DEIR.
City of Jurupa Valley
The Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) received an application requesting incorporation of the Jurupa Valley community and related minor organizational changes. Riverside LAFCO approved the request in July 2010. Voting for incorporation was approved on March 8, 2011; incorporation occurred on July 1, 2011.
Section 57376 of the California Government Code requires that, once incorporation takes place, a newly formed city must immediately adopt all existing County zoning ordinances for a period of 120 days or until superseding ordinances are enacted, whichever occurs first. The City of Jurupa Valley would use the Riverside County General Plan and Zoning Code as its foundation until the newly formed City develops its own general plan and zoning code.
The City of Jurupa Valley would likely adopt the policies and goals delineated in the County of Riverside General Plan and Jurupa Area Land Use Plan, including those related to land use, until the City develops its own General Plan. Therefore, the newly incorporated city would continue to Element. The policies have been designed to address many levels of issues and policies (i.e., land use administration, efficient use of land, community design, project design, provision for infrastructure and public facilities and services, land use compatibility, economic development, and open space, habitat and natural resource preservation).
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-245
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
69 kV Subtransmission Lines
The proposed 69 kV subtransmission lines traverse land within the City of Riverside. For the most part, the 69 kV subtransmission lines would be constructed within City of Riverside public streets. City of Riverside neighborhoods located within the study corridors are presented below along with a brief summary of their characteristics.
Grand
commercial uses are primarily concentrated along Jurupa Avenue.
Airport
The Airport neighborhood abuts the Santa Ana River, with Arlington Avenue forming the southern boundary and Van Buren Boulevard and Central and Jurupa avenues representing the major roadways traversing the area. Van Buren Boulevard serves as a northern gateway into Riverside across the Santa Ana River.
dominant feature. The Airport provides private general aviation services, houses the Riverside
Arlanza
-rural homesites to high-density apartments. The
neighborhood also has significant industrial development along Arlington Avenue, as well as commercial development along the western edge of Van Buren Boulevard. The Santa Ana River uated by rolling
hillsides.
La Sierra Acres
The neighborhood contains a number of large-lot properties, which afford a rural lifestyle. Land use policy supports maintaining this semi-rural character. The far north of the neighborhood slopes up to the La S
River basin. This area, known as Rancho La Sierra or the River Ranch, was specifically mentioned in Measure C, passed by Riverside voters in 1987. Measure C stipulated that any new hou
wildlife refuge, the agricultural land along the river bluffs and the open-space character of the
La Sierra Hills
Located between the La Sierra Hills to the west and the semi-rural La Sierra Acres to the east, the neighborhood retains a rural-like character.
La Sierra
complex neighborhood that forms the western gateway to the City. Major features include La Sierra University, the Galleria at Tyler, Kaiser Hospital, and the Five Points area.
La Sierra also includes industrial areas, particularly along State Route 91 (SR-91), as well as City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-246
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 residential neighborhoods. La S
medium-high density along Magnolia Avenue and near La Sierra University.
Arlington
ial areas lie north of the Village.
Ramona
-
Arlington and Magnolia Center. Along Magnolia Avenue, the neighborhood includes two of utions: the Sherman Indian School and California Baptist Avenue.
La Sierra South
Similar to the La Sierra neighborhood to the north, La Sierra South has access to the SR-91 and residential, commercial and industrial uses.
Arlington South
Arlington South includes a range of land uses between SR-91 and Victoria Avenue. At its northern end, the neighborhood contains extensive commercial and industrial development along the freeway and in the vicinity of the Van Buren Boulevard/Indiana Avenue intersection.
Existing land uses traversed by the 69 kV subtransmission lines are presented in the Land Use Technical Report included in the Technical Appendices to this DEIR.
Wildlife and Wilderness 230 kV Substations
The proposed Wildlife and Wilderness Substation sites are located along the south side of the Santa Ana River in the City of Riverside. The proposed sites are adjacent to each other and located on land owned by the City of Riverside. The sites are located in a light industrial/manufacturing area and are currently being leased by the Toro Company for turf irrigation/cutting uses.
Existing land uses in the vicinity of the substation sites, by direction, include:
North: Santa Ana River corridor, including the Santa Ana River Wetlands Mitigation Bank area, and unincorporated Riverside County land;
South: Union Pacific Railroad, Riverside Municipal Airport, industrial and commercial uses, and a pet adoption facility;
East: Union Pacific Railroad, industrial and commercial uses, and single-family residences; and
West: Storage yards, commercial businesses, City of Riverside Wastewater Treatment Plant, small generation plant, and residences.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-247
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 69 kV Substation Upgrades (RERC, Mountain View, Harvey Lynn, Freeman) The existing 69 kV substations are located in an urban setting within the City of Riverside.
Upgrades would require the installation, operation, and maintenance of new electrical equipment.
Brief descriptions of the substations are provided below:
RERC Substation: This substation is located in a commercial and industrial area. The Santa Ana River Trail is located approximately 1,100 feet to the north.
Mountain View Substation: This substation is located in a primarily residential neighborhood.
Harvey Lynn Substation: This substation is located at the interface of a commercial and residential area on La Sierra Avenue. Residences are located to the south and southwest on Greenhurst Drive, Schuyler Ave., and Riverpoint Drive.
Freeman Substation: This substation is located in a primarily commercial area with some residences located to the southeast and northwest.
Fiber Optic Telecommunications System
The fiber optic cable would be installed on existing overhead distribution poles, on new 230 kV transmission structures, or in new underground conduit. New underground fiber cable ROWs along the existing distribution pole line would be required for installation of the underground fiber optic cable.
Planned Land Uses
Jurisdiction, general plan land use designations, and zoning associated with the Proposed Project are presented in the Land Use Technical Report included in the Technical Appendices to this DEIR. Much of the 69 kV subtransmission lines would be installed within existing public road ROWs.
Planned land use associated with land developments and/or entitlements traversed by the Proposed Project are presented in the Land Use Technical Report included in the Technical Appendices to this DEIR. Such actions may include the eventual processing of development- level land use proposals (e.g., specific plans), as well as project-level review and approval of land use maps, such as tract and parcel maps, plot plans, conditional use permits, and other discretionary actions related to land use implementation. Changes to zoning may also occur.
The Proposed Project also traverses Riverside County (Jurupa Valley geographic area) and City of Riverside (Riverside Airport, La Sierra/Arlanza, Arlington) Redevelopment Areas.
Regulatory Setting
The following section defines regulations, plans, and standards that are relevant to the Proposed Project and considers whether the Proposed Project would be consistent with those plans.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-248
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Federal
Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Aviation Regulation Title 14, Part 77 The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issues and enforces regulations related to air traffic control and the assignment a
Aviation Regulations (FAR). FAR Title 14, Part 77, establishes the standards for determining obstructions in navigable airspace, including height limitations on structures taller than 200 feet or within 20,000 feet (approximately 3.8 miles) of an airport.
The standards and notification requirements of FAR Title 14 Part 77 are intended to: 1) evaluate the effect of the construction or alteration of structures on airport operating procedures; 2) determine if the construction or alteration would result in a potential hazard to air navigation; and 3) identify measures to enhance safety. The FAA requires notification through the filing of the two part FAA Form 7460 (7460-1 Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration, and 7460-2 Supplemental Notice), if any of the following criteria are met due to implementation of a proposed action (Title 14 Part 77.13) (FAA, 2007):
Any construction or alteration [of a structure or object] of more than 200 feet in height above the ground level at its site
Any construction or alteration [of a structure or object] of greater height than an imaginary surface extending outward and upward at one of the following slopes:
o 100 to 1 for a horizontal distance of 20,000 feet from the nearest point of the nearest runway of each airport with at least one runway more than 3,200 feet in actual length, excluding heliports
o 50 to 1 for a horizontal distance of 10,000 feet from the nearest point of the nearest runway of each airport specified with its longest runway no more than 3,200 feet in actual length, excluding heliports
o 25 to 1 for a horizontal distance of 5,000 feet from the nearest point of the nearest landing and takeoff area of each heliport
Any proposed highway, railroad, or other traverse way for mobile objects, with a height which would exceed the standards of Part 77.13 (a) (1). (2) or (3) When requested by the FAA, any construction or alteration [of a structure or object] that would be in an instrument approach area (defined in the FAA standards governing instrument approach procedures) and available information indicates it might exceed a standard of subpart C of this Part [Part 77]
Any construction or alteration of a structure or object located on a public use airport or heliport that meets the criteria of Part 77.13 (a) (5)
The Proposed Project would comply with applicable regulations of the FAA, and Form 7460-1 would be submitted pursuant to FAA Regulations, Part 77. Final locations, structures, and structure heights, including transmission and subtransmission lines, as well as construction related equipment that might impact air navigation (i.e., cranes), would be submitted to the FAA for review.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-249
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 State
California Public Utilities Commission
Pursuant to Article XII of the Constitution of the State of California, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is charged with the regulation of investor-owned public utilities -D, Section XIV B states
electric power line projects, distribution lines, substations, or electric facilities constructed by tion. However, in locating such
Local
The proposed 230 kV transmission line and Wildlife Substation are located in unincorporated Riverside County and/or the cities of Riverside, Jurupa Valley, and Norco. As such, the County and cities would not have jurisdiction over these Proposed Project components, and the proposed 230 kV transmission line and Wildlife Substation would therefore be exempt from local land use and zoning regulations and discretionary permitting. However, SCE would still be required to obtain all ministerial building and encroachment permits from local (Riverside County and the cities of Riverside, Jurupa Valley, and Norco) jurisdictions, and the CPUC will ensure that the Proposed Project complies with local regulations to the greatest degree feasible to minimize Proposed Project conflicts with local conditions, in accordance with GO Number 131-D.
Local land use plans have been evaluated to determine whether the Proposed Project would be consistent with locally adopted land use plans, goals, and policies. An inconsistency between a proposed project and an applicable plan is a legal determination, not a physical impact on the environment. There is no agreed objective standard by which to judge the degree of inconsistency or the significance
objectives enumerated in adopted plans. Inconsistency with a plan alone does not mandate a finding of a significant impact under CEQA. Inconsistencies may, however, may be a factor in determining the significance of an underlying physical impact.
In addition to General Plans, the State requires cities and counties to adopt local zoning ordinances (Government Code Section 65800 et seq.) to implement their adopted General Plan through development standards and regulations. The following discussion summarizes the local plans, policies, and ordinances that are applicable to the Proposed Project.
Riverside County General Plan
Riverside County has completed an integrated planning effort that resulted in a General Plan and 19 Area Plans. The General Plan and associated Area Plans direct the location and amount of different land uses in the unincorporated areas of the county through 2020, including agricultural, urban, and recreational uses. The Riverside County General Plan consists of seven elements: Land Use, Circulation, Multipurpose Open Space, Safety, Noise, Housing, and Air Quality. The most recent General Plan2 and Area Plans were adopted in 2003.
2 Note: The County of Riverside is commencing its first 5-year General Plan review cycle, since the County adopted the current plan in 2003. ress and issues related to its implementation.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-250
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 The Riverside County General Plan consists of two levels of policies that direct land use and development in the County: policies that apply countywide and those that are unique to a specific region. Countywide policies that are applicable to the entire unincorporated area are contained in the General Plan and reflected on the Riverside County General Plan Land Use Map. More focused policies that address specific regional or local issues are found in the individual area plans. The Proposed Project area is located within the Jurupa and Eastvale AreaPlans.
The Land Use Element of the Riverside County General Plan designates the general distribution, location, and extent of land uses, such as housing, business, industry, open space, agriculture, natural resources, recreation, and public/quasi-public uses, within the County. The Land Use Element and General Plan Land Use Map are intended to help guide Riverside County to achieve an integrated and coordinated land use, open space, and transportation system. As indicated in the General Plan, the preferred pattern is to focus growth into strategically located centers or into existing developed areas in order to minimize development pressures on rural, agricultural, and open space areas. The Land Use Element acknowledges the importance of infrastructure and public facilities in supporting an increase in population but does not directly address regional infrastructure facilities.
The General Plan Land Use Map depicts the general pattern of the future land use in unincorporated Riverside County. The General Plan Land Use Map consists of five broad Foundation Component land uses: Agriculture, Rural, Rural Community, Open Space, and Community Development. Each of these is subdivided into more detailed land use designations at the area plan level. The uses allowed within each of these basic categories are detailed in the land use designations and are directed by policies contained within the Land Use Element.
Policies of the Riverside County General Plan applicable to the Proposed Project and the consistency with these policies are described below.
Countywide Policies
Land Use Compatibility Policy LU 6.2.
Notwithstanding the Public Facilities designation, public facilities shall also be allowed in any other land use designation except for the Open Space-Conservation and Open Space-Habitat land use designations. For purposes of this policy, a public facility shall include all facilities operated by the federal government, the State of California, the County of Riverside, any special district governed by the County of Riverside or any city, all facilities operated by any combination of these agencies and all facilities operated by a private person for the benefit of any of these agencies. o Open Space-Conservation Habitat (OS-CH) Designation. The Open Space- Conservation Habitat land use designation applies to public and private lands conserved and managed in accordance with adopted MSHCPs. Ancillary structures or uses may be permitted for the purpose of preserving or enjoying open space. Actual building or structure size, siting, and design will be determined on a case-by-case basis.
o Multipurpose Open Space Element Policy OS 20.2. Prevent unnecessary extension of public facilities, services, and utilities, for urban areas, into Open Space- Conservation designated areas.
Consistency: With the exception of where the proposed 230 kV transmission line is located in City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-251
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 the OS-CH general plan designation (Hidden Valley Wildlife Area), the proposed 230 kV transmission line would traverse lands that fall into the Community Development, Rural Community, and Open Space-Water designations. Consequently, the 230 kV transmission line in these areas would be consistent with Policy LU 6.2. As stated above, this Proposed Project component also traverses areas (9.7 acres) designated as OS-CH. The proposed 230 kV transmission line would not be consistent with the OS-CH designation. Avoidance of these OS- CH lands is not possible since they abut existing residential subdivisions to the south.
RPU and SCE will comply will all regulations and policies outlined in the MSHCP and as promulgated by the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA). These include, but are not limited to:
a. The payment of Local Development Mitigation Fees and other relevant fees as set forth in the MSHCP;
b. Compliance with the policies for the Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP; c. Compliance with the policies for the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species set forth in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP;
d. Compliance with survey requirements as set forth in Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP; e. Compliance with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP; and
f. Compliance with the BMPs and the siting and design criteria as set forth in Section 7.0 and Appendix C of the MSHCP.
Through compliance with the RCA, along with going through the process with the RCA to ensure there will be no conflict with the provisions of the MSHCP, impacts to local, regional, or State habitat conservation plans will be less than significant.
Land Use Compatibility Policy LU 6.4. Retain and enhance the integrity of existing residential, employment, agricultural, and open space areas by protecting them from encroachment of land uses that would result in impacts from noise, noxious fumes, glare, shadowing, and traffic.
Consistency: The Proposed Project would not introduce substantial new sources of noise, fumes, glare, or traffic. The shadowing that could result would be minor and would not impact land uses. Refer to the Noise and Transportation and Traffic sections of the DEIR (3.2.11 and 3.2.15) for applicable impacts. The Proposed Project is consistent with Policy LU 6.4.
Land Use Compatibility Policy LU 16.1. Encourage retaining agriculturally designated lands where agricultural activity can be sustained at an operational scale, where it accommodates lifestyle choice, and in locations where impacts to and from potentially incompatible uses, such as residential uses, are minimized through incentives such as tax credits.
Land Use Compatibility Policy LU 16.2. Protect agricultural uses, including those with industrial characteristics (dairies, poultry, hog farms, etc.) by discouraging inappropriate land division in the immediate proximity and allowing only uses and intensities that are compatible with agricultural uses.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-252
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Land Use Compatibility Policy LU 16.4. Encourage conservation of productive agricultural lands. Preserve prime agricultural lands for high-value crop production.
Multipurpose Open Space Element Policy OS 7.5. Encourage the combination of Agriculture with other compatible open space uses in order to provide an economic advantage to Agriculture.
Allow by right, in areas designated as Agriculture, activities related to the production of food and fiber, and support uses incidental and secondary to on-site agricultural operation.
Consistency: The Proposed Project would not preclude the retention of agriculturally designated lands at an operational scale or introduce an incompatible use. As such the Proposed Project is consistent with policies LU 16.2, LU 16.4, and OS 7.5. Impacts to prime agricultural lands are discussed in Section 3.2.2.
Area Plans
Proposed Project components located within unincorporated Riverside County associated with the proposed 230 kV transmission line fall under the Jurupa and Eastvale Area Plans.
Jurupa Area Plan
Policies
JURAP 7.13: Discourage utility lines within the river corridor. If approved, lines shall be placed underground where feasible and shall be located in a manner to harmonize with the natural environment and amenity of the river.
Consistency: The proposed 230 kV transmission line crosses the Santa Ana River corridor and cannot avoid it. In those limited areas where impacts are potentially significant, immitigable, and undergrounded. However, as discussed in detail in Chapter 6 (Alternatives), undergrounding even limited sections of the Project as a means of potential mitigation is infeasible. While overall environmental impacts caused by undergrounding would be greater and, as such, it is not considered a feasible mitigation measure for the Proposed Project. Specifically, undergrounding requires substantially more excavation than overhead structures. This level of ground disturbance would require several times more heavy equipment than overhead construction. Complete ground disturbance along the line (or sections) would make it difficult or impossible to avoid sensitive areas, such as wetlands and stream crossingsparticularly in the area where the Project crosses the Santa Ana River. In addition, vegetation restoration options are much more limited for undergrounding as opposed to the currently proposed Project. This is because vegetation growing over an underground line would need to support heat dissipation and prevent root intrusion into the lines. Further, during future repairs of an underground line, entire sections between vaults, approximately 2,000 feet apart, may require re-excavation. Undergrounded portions within the Santa Ana River corridor would be prone to washouts during a flood event, requiring re-installation. These considerations equate to increased environmental impacts to air quality, agricultural resources, biological resources, cultural resources, and geologic and water resources, as impacts would be inflicted again and again during any future repairs or wash-out incidents. Further, outages would be prolonged on the underground line, due to poor accessibility and time required in identifying the failure location, excavating the underground line, and correcting any outage. Also, economic considerations associated with undergrounding show that undergrounding is infeasible as a mitigation measure, even for more limited sections of the City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-253
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Project, as discussed in Chapter 6. In all, then, undergrounding even a limited portion of the Project as a means of potential mitigation is both infeasible and environmentally more damaging Therefore, the Project is consistent with Policy JURAP 7.13, given that there is no feasible alternative alignment that could avoid the river corridor and given that undergrounding is infeasible.
Eastvale Area Plan
The incorporated City of Eastvale, effective October 1, 2010, defines I-15 as its eastern boundary. The City of Eastvale is outside the Proposed Project area.
Policies
None identified.
EAP: 1.13 Discourage utility lines within the river corridor. If approved, lines shall be placed underground where feasible and shall be located in a manner to harmonize with the natural environment and amenity of the river.
Consistency:See consistency determination for Jurupa Area PlanPolicy JURAP 7.13, above.
Specific Plans
Specific Plans are highly customized policy or regulatory tools that provide a bridge between the General Plan and individual development projects in a more area-specific manner than is possible with community-wide zoning ordinances. The specific plan is a tool that provides land use and development standards that are tailored to respond to special conditions and aspirations unique to the area being proposed for development and conservation. These tools are a means of addressing detailed concerns that conventional zoning cannot do. Specific Plans may be implemented through a variety of approval steps (e.g., zoning, site plans, parcel and tentative tract maps).
The following Riverside County adopted specific plans were identified within the Proposed Project study corridors:
Mission De Anza 123 (residential, commercial, and industrial) Sky Country 125 (primarily residential)
Interstate 15 Corridor 266 (primarily residential and commercial uses) Note: With the incorporation of the City of Jurupa Valley, these adopted specific plans are currently located in that city.
A proposed Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 376 - Thoroughbred Farm IDI) is also located in the Proposed Project study corridor (Mira Loma area). It proposes to establish a 108.2-acre Specific Plan of land uses including 42.6 acres of light industrial uses, 36.5 acres of business park uses,
7.6 acres of commercial/tourist, 11.5 acres of commercial/retail uses, and 10.0 acres of potential roads. County-specific plan policies were reviewed, and no policies applicable to the Proposed Project were not identified. Note that with the incorporation of the City of Jurupa Valley, the adopted specific plans indicated above are within the boundaries of the new city.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-254
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
Although the City of Riverside contains the Riverside Municipal Airport within its boundaries, development within the vicinity of an airport. Such policies and procedures are found within the Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan(RCALUC).. TheALUC is responsible for reviewing major land use projects subject to city, county, school district, or special purpose hether these
projects are consistent with the Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan adopted by the CommissionALUC
which current or future airport-related noise, overflight, safety, or airspace protection factors may significantly affect land uses or necessitate restrictions on those uses. An Airport Influence Area is defined by the ALUC as the outer boundary created by overlaying the Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR)FARPart 77 surfaces, the 60 dB CNEL noise contour and the airport safety zones. The Riverside Municipal Airport is located within a RCALUC an ALUC-designated Airport Influence Area,which includes properties within an approximate two-mile radius of the airport.
According to the RCALUC Map (Map RI-1), the proposed 230 kV transmission line traverses land in Compatibility Zones B1 (Inner Approach/Departure zone), C (Extended Approach/Departure zone), and D (Primary Traffic Patterns and Runway Buffer area). The proposed 69 kV subtransmission lines would traverse land in the following Compatibility Zones:
Wilderness Substation to Mountain View Substation: Compatibility Zones C and D; Wilderness/Wildlife Substation to Jurupa Avenue: Compatibility Zones B1, C, D, and ED; and RERC to Harvey Lynn Substation and Freeman Substation: Compatibility ZonesA, B1,B2 (Adjacent to Runway), C, D, and E.
The following air space protection policies of the RCALUC would be relevant to the Proposed Project:
Countywide Policies
Policy 1.5.3.Major Land Use Actions: The scope or character of certain major land use actions, as listed below, is such that their compatibility with airport activity is a potential concern. Even though these actions may be basically consistent with the local general plan or specific plan, sufficient detail may not be known to enable a full airport compatibility evaluation at the time that the general plan or specific plan is reviewed. To enable better assessment of compliance with the compatibility criteria set forth herein, ALUC review of these actions is warranted. (a) Actions affecting land uses within any compatibility zone. (9) Proposals for new development (including buildings, antennas, and other structures) having a height of more than:
35 feet within Compatibility Zone B1, B2, or a Height Review Overlay Zone; 70 feet within Compatibility Zone C; or
150 feet within Compatibility Zone D or E.
(11) Any project having the potential to create electrical or visual hazards to aircraft in flight, City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-255
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 including:
Electrical interference with radio communications or navigational signals; Lighting which could be mistaken for airport lighting;
Glare in the eyes of pilots of aircraft using the airport; and Impaired visibility near the airport.
Policy 4.3.1.Policy Objective: Tall structures, trees, and other objects, particularly when located near airports or on high terrain, may constitute hazards to aircraft in flight. Federal regulations establish the criteria for evaluating potential obstructions. These regulations also require that the Federal Aviation Administration be notified of proposals for creation of certain such objects. The hazards, but it does not have the authority to prevent their creation. The purpose of ALUC airspace protection policies, together with regulations established by local land use jurisdictions and the state government, is to ensure that hazardous obstructions to the navigable airspace do not occur.
Policy 4.3.3.ALUC Review of Height of Proposed Objects: Based upon FAA criteria, proposed objects that would exceed the heights indicated below for the respective compatibility zones potentially represent airspace obstructions issues. Development proposals that include any such objects shall be reviewed by the ALUC. Objects of lesser height normally would not have a potential for being airspace obstructions and therefore do not require ALUC review with respect to airspace protection criteria (noise, safety, and overflight concerns may still be present).
Caution should be exercised, however, with regard to any object more than 50 feet high proposed to be located on a site that is substantially higher than surrounding terrain. (a) Within Compatibility Zone A, the height of any proposed development, including vegetation, requires review.
(b) Within Compatibility Zone B1, ALUC review is required for any proposed object taller than 35 feet unless the airport controls an easement on the land on which the object is to be located and grants a waiver to height restrictions.
(c) Within Compatibility Zone B2, ALUC review is required for any proposed object taller than 35 feet.
(d) Within Compatibility Zones C and D, ALUC review is required for any proposed object taller than 70 feet.
(e) Within Compatibility Zone E, ALUC review is required for any proposed object taller than 100 feet.
(f) Within the Height Review Overlay Zone, ALUC review is required for any proposed object taller than 35 feet above the ground. The approximate extent of the Height Review Overlay Zone is indicated on the respective Compatibility Map included for each airport in Chapter 3.
Policy 4.3.4.Height Restriction Criteria: The height of objects within the influence area of each City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-256
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 airport shall be reviewed, and restricted if necessary, according to the following criteria. The locations of these zones are depicted on the respective Compatibility Map for each airport.
(a) Within Compatibility Zone A, the height of all objects shall be limited in accordance with applicable Federal Aviation Administration criteria including FAR Part 77, [Terminal Instrument Procedures] TERPS, and/or airport design standards.
(b) Within Compatibility Zones B1, B2, or Height Review Overlay Zone:
(1) Objects up to 35 feet tall are acceptable and do not require ALUC review for the purposes of height factors.
(2) ALUC review is required for any proposed object taller than 35 feet.
(3) Federal Aviation Administration review may be necessary for proposed objects adjacent to the runway edges and the FAA may require marking and lighting of certain objects (the affected areas are generally on airport property).
(c) Within Compatibility Zones C and D, generally, there is no concern with regard to any object up to 70 feet tall unless it is located on high ground or it is a solitary object (e.g., an antenna) more than 35 feet taller than other nearby objects.
(d) Within Compatibility Zone E, generally, there is no concern with regard to any object up to 100 feet tall unless it is located on high ground or it is a solitary object (e.g., an antenna) more than 35 feet above the ground.
The Proposed Project (230 kV transmission and 69 kV subtransmission line components) would occur within the Airport Influence Area for the Riverside Municipal Airport. Table 3.2.9-2 summarizes the Riverside Municipal Airport Compatibility Zones crossed by the 230 kV transmission line, height ranges for structures in these zones, and the structure height for proposed development that would be subject to RCALUC review within the zones. The proposed 230 kV transmission line would be located within Compatibility Zones B1, C, and D of the Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Transmission structures that would be installed include tubular steel poles and lattice steel towers with a height range of 90 to 180 feet. kV subtransmission lines (height range between 65 and 90 feet) would be located within the following Compatibility Zones: Wilderness Substation to Mountain View Substation (Compatibility Zones C and D); Wilderness/Wildlife Substation to Jurupa Avenue (Compatibility Zones B1, C, D, and ED); and RERC to Harvey Lynn Substation and Freeman Substation (Compatibility Zones A, B1, B2, C, D, and E). Per Policy 1.5.3, actions within these zones that may warrant review by the RCALUC include proposals for new development (including buildings, antennas, and other structures) having a height of more than 35 feet (Zones B1 and B2), 70 feet (Zone C), and 150 feet (Zones D and E). Table 3.2.9-2 summarizes the Riverside Municipal Airport Compatibility Zones crossed by the 230 kV transmission line and 69 kV subtransmission lines, height ranges for structures in these zones, and the structure height for proposed development that may be subject to RCALUC review within the zones.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-257
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 TABLE 3.2.9-2. RIVERSIDE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT COMPATIBILITY ZONES CROSSED BY THE
PROPOSED PROJECT AND VAN BUREN OFFSET ALTERNATIVE
RTRP COMPONENT RIVERSIDE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT COMPATIBILITY ZONES Riverside Municipal Airport Compatibility Zone Name
ZONE A ZONE B1 ZONE B2 ZONE C ZONE D ZONE E
Location
Runway
Protection
Zone within
Building
Restriction
Line
Inner
Approach /
Departure
Zone
Adjacent to
Runway
Extended
Approach /
Departure
Zone
Primary
Traffic
Patterns and
Runway
Buffer Area
Other
Airport
Environs
Structure Height for Proposed Development Subject to ALUC Review within Designated Airport Compatibility Zones
any proposed
development >35 feet >35 feet >70 feet >150 feet >150 feet 230kV Transmission Line Steel Lattice Towers and Tubular Steel Poles (structure height range: 90-175 feet) Proposed Project
(I-15 Route) x x x
69kV Subtransmission Line Wood Poles (structure height range: 65-90 feet) Wilderness Substation to
Mountain View Substation x x
Wilderness/Wildlife
Substation to Jurupa
Avenue
X x x x
RERC to Harvey Lynn
Substation and Freeman
Substation
x x x x x x
Consistency: SCE will submit a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration (Form 7460-1) of the 230 kV transmission line Proposed Project component for review to the FAA electronically, in accordance with FAA procedures and as far in advance of construction as possible. Submittal of the notice would occur when final design of the 230 kV transmission line is completed and the precise location of transmission structures within the proposed ROW is known. Applicable 69 kV subtransmission line components requiring review will be submitted by RPU to the FAA and ALUC. Some of these components as currently designed, however, would likely exceed the allowable heights in Zones A, B1, B2, and C. As a result, these structures would be an incompatible land use if the heights of the structures were to pose a hazard to air navigation near the airport. The Proposed Project would not be consistent with the adopted RCALUC. This inconsistency would, therefore, result in a significant impact.
Applicable 69 kV subtransmission line components requiring review were submitted by RPU to the FAA and ALUC. Some of these components as previously designed would have likely exceed the allowable heights in Zones A, B1, B2, and C. As a result, these structures would have been an incompatible land use if the heights of the structures were to pose a hazard to air navigation near the airport, and the Proposed Project would not have been consistent with the adopted Riverside Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. As a result, RPU modified the proposed 69 kV subtransmission line route so that it would travel underground in the vicinity of the airport land use zones along Doolittle Avenue, between Jurupa Avenue and Morris Street. Also, as a City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-258
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 result of review by the Federal Aviation Administration, new poles along Wilderness Avenue, north of Jurupa Avenue, would be equipped with obstruction lighting.
On April 12, 2012, the ALUC conducted a public hearing and provided a determination that the proposal to establish 69 kV subtransmission lines within the Riverside Municipal Airport Influence Area, as revised to place all portions within Airport Compatibility Zone A underground, is consistent with the 2005 Riverside Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUC 2012).
The Flabob Airport is not located within a RCALUC an ALUC-designated Airport Influence Area. Aircraft, however, have utilized the Santa Ana River at low altitudes to access the Flabob Airport (Leo Doiron, Flabob Airport Manager, March 2006).
County of Riverside Zoning Ordinance
The County of Riverside Land Use Zoning Ordinance (Ord. No. 348) contains the regulatory framework that specifies allowable uses for real property and development intensities; the technical standards such as site layout, building setbacks, heights, lot coverage, parking, etc.; aesthetics related to physical appearance, landscaping, and lighting; a program that implements policies of the General Plan; and the procedural standards for amending or establishing new zoning regulations. According to Riverside County Zoning Ordinance (ORD.348), Section
18.29. Public Use Permits:
, public utilities may be
permitted in any zone classification provided that a public use permit is granted pursuant to the provisions of this section. A public hearing shall be held on the application for a public use permit in accordance with the provisions of Section 18.26 of this ordinance. A public use permit shall not be granted unless the applicant demonstrates that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community. Any permit that is granted shall be subject to such conditions as shall be necessary to protect the health, safety or general welfare of the
Ordinance 348 was also recently amended (Ordinance No. 348.4690).New language was added to the list of uses permitted under a public use permit:
preempted by law from exercising jurisdiction. This subsection shall take precedence over and supercede any conflicting provision in any zone classification. Facilities for the storage or transmission of electrical energy shall not be subject to the development
While SCE, in accordance with General Order 131-D, would obtain input from Riverside County regarding land use matters related to siting (i.e., the exact location of proposed facilities), a use permit is a discretionary land use instrument, and SCE would not be required to obtain a public use permit from Riverside County prior to Proposed Project approval.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-259
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 City of Riverside General Plan 2025
The City of Riverside General Plan 2025 is the core policy and land use planning document for the City, and provides basic guidance to community decision-makers within the City. General Plan 2025 contain
on how to achieve that vision. The General Plan 2025 was adopted in November 2007.
Pursuant to California statutes, the General Plan 2025 is divided into twelve elements, seven of which are mandatory, including Land Use and Urban Design; Circulation and Community Mobility; Housing; Arts and Culture; Education; Public Safety; Noise; Open Space and Conservation; Air Quality; Public Facilities and Infrastructure; Parks and Recreation; and Historic Preservation.
The Land Use Element of the General Plan 2025 also designates the various locations in which certain types of development should be located. The Land Use Element is designed to plan that sufficient land is available for commercial, industrial, residential, and public uses to meet the needs of the growing community; enhance community character; preserve important natural resources; and ensure provision of adequate public services. Applicable policies of the City of Riverside General Plan 2025 and the consistency of the Proposed Project with these policies are described below.
Public Facilities and Infrastructure Element
Objective PF-6: Provide affordable, reliable and, to the extent practical, environmentally sensitive energy resources to residents and businesses.
Policy PF-6.2: Ensure that adequate back-up facilities are available to meet critical electric power needs in the event of shortages or temporary outages.
Consistency: The proposed 69 kV subtransmission lines and Wilderness Substation are consistent with the objectives and policies specified in the Public Facilities and Infrastructure Element of the City of Riverside General Plan 2025 (see above).
Specific Plans
City of Riverside specific plans within the 69 kV subtransmission line study corridors are identified in Table 3.2.9-3. A summary of each is also provided below.
TABLE 3.2.9-3. CITY OF RIVERSIDE SPECIFIC PLANS WITHIN THE 69 KV STUDY CORRIDORS Specific Plan Applicable
Neighborhood(s)
Date of Specific Plan
Adoption
Adoption Resolution
Number
La Sierra University La Sierra March 1997 19057
Rancho La Sierra La Sierra Acres January 1996 18846
Magnolia Avenue --- November 2009 21931
La Sierra University Specific Plan: Encompassing 531 acres in the western portion of the City of Riverside, the overall plan concept for the La Sierra University Specific Plan envisions a -
cated east and south of the existing
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-260
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Rancho La Sierra Specific Plan: The intent of the Rancho La Sierra Specific Plan is to ter and
protecting the Santa Ana River corridor. The Plan provides for recreational and open space uses, community facilities, single family residential development, and agriculture.
Magnolia Avenue Specific Plan (MASP): Magnolia Avenue is one of the primary east/west streets in the City of Riverside. It extends from Downtown at Market Street to the east, to the western City boundary at Buchanan Street to the west. It continues into the City of Corona and ends at Ontario Avenue. This plan is focusing on the portion of Magnolia Avenue from the western City limits to Ramona Drive at the southern edge of Downtown. The Market Street portion of the corridor is not included in this Plan because it is within the boundaries of the Downtown Specific Plan and is addressed therein. The MASP promotes revitalization to Magnolia Avenue between Ramona Drive and Buchanan Street. Implementation of the MASP promotes enhancement and maintenance of existing land uses along Magnolia Avenue.
City specific plan policies applicable to the Proposed Project were not identified.
Neighborhood Plans
Neighborhood Plans were not identified within the proposed 69 kV subtransmission line study corridors.
City of Riverside Zoning Code
The City of Riverside Zoning Code is Title 19 of the C
establishes the basic regulations under which land is developed and provides guidance for permitted uses and development standards. Similar to the General Plan 2025, the Zoning Code identifies specific land use categories for properties within the City. Among other things, these regulations define allowable uses, setback requirements, and development standards. Zoning designations exist for various densities of residential development, commercial areas, specific plan developments, and open space.
While SCE would obtain input from the City of Riverside regarding land use matters related to siting (proposed 230 kV transmission line and Wildlife Substation), a use permit is a discretionary land use instrument, and SCE would not be required to obtain a use permit from the City of Riverside prior to Proposed Project approval in accordance with General Order 131-D.
Since the proposed 69 kV subtransmission lines and Wilderness Substation are exempt from Title 19 of the City of
conditional use permit.
City of Norco General Plan
The City of Norco General Plan was adopted in 1969. The Land Use Element, adopted in 2001, serves as the regulatory document that sets forth the general distribution and intensity of land uses throughout the city and its Sphere of Influence (SOI). All land uses must be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Land Use Element. The Land Use Element does not contain any goals or policies regarding the siting of electrical transmission lines.
Consistency: Per General Order No. 131-D, SCE would obtain input from the City of Norco City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-261
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 regarding land use matters related to the exact siting of the proposed 230 kV transmission line prior to Proposed Project construction.
City of Norco Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance
The Ordinance regulates the following aspects of land development: (1) the use of land, buildings, or other structures for residences, commerce, industry and other purposes; (2) the design, location, height and size of buildings or structures, yards, courts and other open spaces, the intensity of development, and the amount of building coverage permitted in each zone, among other things; (3) the division of the City of Norco into zones of such shape, size, and number best suited to carry out these purposes, and to provide for their enforcement. According to the City of Norco Zoning Map (City Council Resolution No. 2007-23/Date May 2, 2007), a portion of the Proposed Project is located in the A-E Zone Agricultural Zone.
While SCE would obtain input from the City of Norco regarding land use matters related to siting (proposed 230 kV transmission line), a use permit is a discretionary land use instrument, and SCE would not be required to obtain a use permit from the City of Norco prior to Proposed Project approval in accordance with General Order 131-D.
Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan The Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) involves the assembly and management of a 500,000-acre Conservation Area for the conservation of natural habitats and their constituent wildlife populations. The approval of the MSHCP and the Implementing Agreement (IA) by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California 146 species covered by t
de
Riverside County, 14 cities in western Riverside County, Caltrans, and the California Department of Parks and Recreation.
covered by the MSHCP through their local land use planning and development review processes.
The permittees have the authority to grant Third Party Authorization to private developers, provided the terms of the MSHCP are satisfied. A project that complies with the MSHCP meets federal and State endangered species requirements and meets CEQA criteria for less than significant impacts to the covered species and their habitats.
Impact Assessment
Significance Threshold Criteria
The significance criteria for this analysis were developed from criteria presented in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and previous environmental impact assessments. The Proposed Project would result in a significant impact to land use if it would:
a) Physically divide an established community;
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-262
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect; or
c) Directly or indirectly disrupt an established or recently approved land use; or d) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan.
Environmental Impacts
Construction-related activities that could affect adjacent land uses are discussed in Sections
3.2.1, Aesthetics; 3.2.3, Air Quality; 3.2.11, Noise; and 3.2.15, Transportation and Traffic.
Construction-related impacts would be relatively short-term in nature (approximately 14-18 months) and would not continue after the Proposed Project begins full operation.
As discussed previously, the Proposed Project would include installation, operation, and maintenance of new electrical equipment at the existing RERC, Mountain View, Harvey Lynn, and Freeman Substations. The proposed upgrades at these existing substations would consist of electrical system and safety upgrades. All necessary upgrades to the existing 69 kV substations would be conducted within the fenced area of the facilities. The associated construction, operation, and maintenance activities would constitute a continuation of current land use conditions at these sites. Proposed upgrades to these existing substations would not result in significant land use impacts; therefore, potential impacts relat not be discussed further in this section.
a) Physically divide an established community.
Less than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project (230 kV transmission line and 69 kV subtransmission lines) are primarily located along, or adjacent to, existing roadways in urban areas, or traverse open space. As such, they would not divide existing communities because they would not constitute a barrier that could limit access.
These proposed routes would traverse or adjoin land used predominantly for residential, commercial, and industrial uses, public facilities, parks and recreation and open space. The proposed routes would not establish a permanent barrier or obstacle between these uses such that a perceived physical division would occur. While proposed transmission structures and lines would be present, movement between and around these facilities would be possible, and they would not block or impede travel or connections within a community.
The proposed Wildlife and Wilderness substation sites would not physically divide an existing community. No new physical barriers would be created by the proposed substations and no existing roadways or pathways would be blocked. The proposed substation sites are also near the RERC and are compatible with other industrial uses in the area.
The fiber optic cable would be installed on existing overhead distribution poles, on new 230 kV transmission structures, or in new underground conduit. New underground fiber cable ROWs along the existing distribution pole line would be required for installation of the underground fiber optic cable.
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-263
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 jurisdiction ofover the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or local zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
Less than Significant Impact.
policies, as well as zoning ordinances, areis discussed above in the Regulatory Setting within this Section 3.2.9. As discussed above, with the exception of Riverside County General Plan Policy LU 6.2, and the RCALUCRiverside Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, the Proposed Project would be consistent with applicable plans, policies, and zoning ordinances. With regard to consistency with Policy LU 6.2, however, mitigation measures BIO-01 and BIO-03, through compliance with the Western Riverside County MSHCP, would keep impacts to less than significant levels as discussed under threshold (d) below.
With regard to consistency with the RCALUC, review of the Proposed Project by the ALUC has not been completed. As such, a consistency determination cannot be made. The Proposed
Based upon ALUC comments on the DEIR, a portion of Segment A (RERC to Harvey Lynn Substation and Freeman Substation) will be placed underground. The location of this activity would be along Doolittle Avenue between Jurupa Avenue and Morris Street. On April 12, 2012, the ALUC conducted a public hearing and provided a determination that the proposal to establish 69 kV subtransmission lines within the Riverside Municipal Airport Influence Area, as revised to place all portions within Airport Compatibility Zone A underground, is consistent with the 2005 Riverside Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUC 2012).
c) Directly or indirectly disrupt an established or recently approved land use.
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed 230 kV transmission line would require new ROW. Direct impacts on four structures (agricultural ancillary structures) could result from incompatibility with or removal from the ROW. The location of the ROW within existing and planned developments could result in direct impacts where operation would preclude or impair future development activities (e.g., development-level land uses [e.g., specific plans], as well as approved tract and parcel maps and plot plans). Preclusion would also occur as a result of the proposed 230 kV transmission line traversing the Vernola Marketplace community shopping center parking lot. The placement of the 230 kV transmission line in the parking lot would result in the reduction of approximately six designated parking spaces and require approval of a Substantial Conformance from Riverside County. A Substantial Conformance is a request for a non-substantial modification of an approved permit that does not change the original approval for the effect of the approval on surrounding property.
However, while SCE, in accordance with General Order 131-D, would obtain input from Riverside County regarding land use matters related to siting (i.e., the exact location of proposed facilities), approval of a Substantial Conformance request is a discretionary action, and SCE would not be required to obtain approval of this action from Riverside County prior to approval of the Proposed Project. Undergrounding of the transmission line could potentially mitigate the reduction of parking spaces associated with the Vernola Marketplace. In those limited areas where impacts are potentially significant, immitigable, and unavoidable, some impacts could be reduced to less than significant if the Pr
in detail in Chapter 6 (Alternatives), undergrounding even limited sections of the Project as a City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-264
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 means of potential mitigation is infeasible. While undergrounding may reduce some of the tially significant land use impacts, the overall environmental impacts caused by undergrounding would be greater and, as such, it is not considered a feasible mitigation measure for the Proposed Project. Specifically, undergrounding requires substantially more excavation than overhead structures. This level of ground disturbance would require several times more heavy equipment than overhead construction. Complete ground disturbance along the line (or sections) would make it difficult or impossible to avoid sensitive areas, such as wetlands and stream crossingsparticularly in the area where the Project crosses the Santa Ana River. In addition, vegetation restoration options are much more limited for undergrounding as opposed to the currently proposed Project. This is because vegetation growing over an underground line would need to support heat dissipation and prevent root intrusion into the lines. Further, during future repairs of an underground line, entire sections between vaults, approximately 2,000 feet apart, may require re-excavation. Undergrounded portions within the Santa Ana River corridor would be prone to washouts during a flood event, requiring re-installation. These considerations equate to increased environmental impacts to air quality, agricultural resources, biological resources, cultural resources, and geologic and water resources, as impacts would be inflicted again and again during any future repairs or wash-out incidents. Further, outages would be prolonged on the underground line, due to poor accessibility and time required in identifying the failure location, excavating the underground line, and correcting any outage. Also, economic considerations associated with undergrounding show that undergrounding is infeasible as a mitigation measure, even for more limited sections of the Project, as discussed in Chapter 6. In all, then, undergrounding even a limited portion of the Project as a means of potential mitigation is both infeasible and environmentally more damaging than the currently propos overhead lines.
Existing and planned land uses traversed by the proposed 230 kV transmission line include commercial/industrial properties, agricultural ancillary structures, and approved undeveloped or planned residential developments (refer to the Land Use Technical Report in Appendix B of this DEIR).
SCE would obtain input from Riverside County and the cities of Norco and Jurupa Valley regarding land use matters related to the exact siting of the proposed 230 kV transmission line prior to Proposed Project construction in accordance with General Order 131-D.
The proposed 69 kV subtransmission lines are primarily located within, or adjacent to, existing public road ROWs ways in urban areas of the City of Riverside.
The proposed 69 kV subtransmission lines are primarily located within, or adjacent to, existing public road ROWs ways in urban areas of the City of Riverside.
The proposed Wildlife and Wilderness Substation sites are located on land owned by the City of Riverside in a light industrial/manufacturing area.
Since a use permit is a
discretionary land use instrument, construction of the Wildlife Substation would not require a conditional use permit from the City of Riverside prior to Proposed Project approval in accordance with General Order 131-D. The Wilderness Substation would be exempt from Title equired to obtain a
conditional use permit.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-265
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
The fiber optic cable would be installed on existing overhead distribution poles, on new 230 kV transmission structures, or in new underground conduit. New underground fiber cable ROWs along the existing distribution pole line would be required for installation of the underground fiber optic cable.
d) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan.
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. Portions of the Proposed Project (230 kV transmission line component) would be located within the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) boundary. The overall goal of the MSHCP is to maintain biological diversity within a rapid compliance with the Western Riverside County MSHCP would mitigate any impacts to natural vegetation communities covered by the MSHCP to less than significant levels. Refer to Section
3.2.4, Biological Resources. Mitigation Measure BIO-01 requires RPU and SCE to comply with the Western Riverside County MSHCP.
Significant Unavoidable Impacts
With the application of MMs, the Proposed
Airport Land Use Compatibility PlanProject would be a not result in significant impactunavoidable impacts.
References
Airport Land Use Commission of Riverside County. 2012. Airport Land Use Commission Development Review and Determination on the RTRP. April 12, 2012.
Alvord Unified School District. 2007. School Facilities Needs Analysis, March 2, 2007.
Badarak, Gary W. Ph.D. 2006. Riverside Unified School District, Electronic Communication regarding CBEDS for 2003/04, November 29, 2006.
Barstad, David. 2006. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District.
Personal communication on March 29, 2006.
Baxter, Ronald J. 2006. Riverside County, Regional Park and Open Space District, Hidden Valley Wildlife Area. Personal communication on May 8, 2006.
Bonterra Consulting. 2009. Negative Declaration, Jurupa Valley Incorporation. Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission. November.
Calhoun, Sheryl. 2006. Alvord Unified School District, Facilities Planning. Personal communication on March 28, 2006.
California Code of Regulations, Fish and Game Code, Section 3000-3012. Available at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html. Accessed March 4, 2008.
California Department of Finance (DOF). 2006. Summary of California County Agricultural Commissioners -2005, Gross Values by Commodity Groups. October.
Available at http://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/FS_DATA/Fs_home.asp.
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). Summary of Hunting Regulations & Laws.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-266
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Available at
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/licensing/pdffiles/2007HuntingDigest-BigGamePages48-54.pdf.
Accessed May 25, 2007.
California Department of Transportation (CalTrans), Division of Aeronautics, M.S. #40.
February 2006. California Public Utilities Code, Sections 21001 et seq. relating to the State Aeronautics Act.
California Gas & Electric Utilities. 2006. California Gas Report-Southern California Gas Company.
City of Riverside. Municipal Code Chapter 5.46 Surface Mining and Reclamation, Section
5.46.020 Definitions.
City of Riverside. Riverside Renaissance Initiative. Available at http://www.riversideca.gov/pdf2/rivren.pdf. Accessed 2007.
City of Riverside. 1999. Airport Master Plan Final Technical Report for Riverside Airport, approved by City on November 16, 1999.
City of Riverside. 2004. General Plans and Supporting Documents, Environmental Impact Report. November.
City of Riverside. 2005. General Plan 2025 Final Program Environmental Impact Report.
Available at http://www.riversideca.gov/planning/genplan2025-2.htm.
City of Riverside. 2007. Riverside General Plan 2025. November.
City of Riverside. 2009. Final Magnolia Avenue Specific Plan. October.
County of Riverside. Geographic Information System Database. Available for review at the County of Riverside Planning Department or on December 21, 2006, at http://www3.tlma.co.riverside.ca.us/pa/rclis/index.html. _____. Ordinance No. 514.10, accessed 5/25/2007. Available at http://www.clerkoftheboard.co.riverside.ca.us/ords/500/514.htm. _____. Ordinance No. 625, accessed May 25, 2007. Available at http://www.clerkoftheboard.co.riverside.ca.us/ords/600/625.1.pdf. _____. RCIP General Plan Land Use Designations Zoning Consistency Guidelines. Located on December 21, 2006 at http://www.rctlma.org/planning/indes.html. _____. 2003. General Plan, Jurupa Area Plan.
_____. 2003. Riverside County Integrated Project General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 20022051143), March. Available at http://www.rctlma.org/genplan/default.aspx.
_____. 2003. Riverside County Integrated Project, General Plan. Adopted October 7, 2003.
Available at http://www.rctlma.org/generalplan/index.html. _____. 2003. Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), Final MSHCP, including Volume IV, Final EIR/EIS (State Clearinghouse No. 2001101108, CEQ Number 020463, ERP Number SFW-K99032-CA), June 17, 2003. _____. 2004. Transportation and Land Management Agency (TLMA) Geographic Information Systems, Agricultural Preserves Shapefile.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-267
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 _____. 2007. Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, Ordinances, April. Available at http://www.clerkoftheboard.co.riverside.ca.us/ords.htm. _____. 2007. Economic Development Agency, Community Services Division, April. Available at http://www.rivcoeda.org/Default.aspx?tabid=54.
_____. 2007. Ordinance 460, Regulating the Division of Land of the County of Riverside, April.
Available at http://www.clerkoftheboard.co.riverside.ca.us/ords.htm. _____. 2009. County of Riverside Land Information System. Available at http://www2.tlma.co.riverside.ca.us/aims/pa/rclis. Accessed 2009. _____. 2009. Riverside County Zoning Ordinance.
Department of Conservation. 2000. California Surface Mining and Reclamation Policies and Procedures, Guidelines for Classification and Designation of Mineral Lands, January.
Dixon, Janet. Riverside Unified School District. Faxed communication regarding school enrollment.
Doiron, Leo. 2006. Flabob Airport. Personal communication on March 28, 2006.
Fairhurst, Becky. Alvord Unified School District. Faxed communication regarding school enrollment.
Guerin, John J.G. 2006. County of Riverside, Planning Department. Personal communication on March 28, 2006.
Hayes, Steve. 2006. City of Riverside, Community Development Department, Planning Division.
Personal communication on March 29, 2006.
Jurupa Unified School District. District Facilities Map.
Lehotsky, Genene. City of Jurupa Valley, Planning Department. Personal communication on November 18, 2011.
Michael Brandman Associates (MBA). 2008. Silverlakes Equestrian Sports Park Draft Environmental Impact Report. October 16, 2008.
National Park Service. 2006. Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail Guide, October.
Available at http://www.solideas.com/DeAnza/TrailGuide/.
Office of Mine Reclamation. 2006. Statute and Regulations, January.
Preble, Joan M. 2007. Union Pacific Railroad. Personal communication on August 1, 2007.
Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission. 2004. Riverside County Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Document, October.
_____. 2005. Flabob Compatibility Plan. June 28, 2005.
_____. 2005. Riverside Municipal Compatibility Plan. June 28, 2005.
Riverside County. 2003. Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan.
Information obtained from http://www.rctlma.org/mshcp/volume1/index.html.
Riverside County Integrated Project. 2003. General Plan Final Program, Environmental Impact Report, Volume I. Riverside County, California.
Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission. 2004. LAFCO Policies & Procedure, August City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-268
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 2004, Page 2.
Riverside Unified School District. 2007. Riverside Unified School District: School Facilities Needs Analysis, March 14, 2007.
Rodriguez, Dan. 2006. Jurupa Area Recreation and Park District. Personal communication on March 30, 2006 and April 21, 2006.
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 1996. Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG), March.
_____. 2004. Destination 2030: 2004 Regional Transportation Plan. April. _____. 2004. Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).
_____. 2004. SCAG Compass Growth Vision.
_____. 2006. Growth Forecasting. Available at .http://www.scag.ca.gov/forecast/index.htm.
Accessed April 2006.
Southern California Regional Rail Authority. 2007. SCRRA Strategic Assessment. January 26, 2007.
State of California. 2002. Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics. January.
California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook.
State of California. 2008. The California Code of Regulations.
Tapia, Irene M. 2006. Corona Norco Unified School District. Electronic Communication regarding CBEDS for 2003/04 and Generation Factors, December 19, 2006.
Trujillo, Martha. 2006. Riverside Unified School District, Maintenance & Operations. Personal communication on March 28, 2006.
Tucker, Wendell. 2007. Alvord Unified School District. Personal communication on May 17, 2007.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. 2000 Census. Available at
http://factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html?_lang=en.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1971. Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey, Western Riverside Area, California. November 1971. Available at the County of Riverside.
U.S. Department of Finance. 2005.
Production, accessed on January 30, 2007. Available at
http://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/FS_DATA/STAT-ABS/documents/G14.xls.
Viera, Kevin. 2007. Western Riverside County Council of Governments. Personal communication on July 11, 2007.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-269
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
3.2.10 MINERAL RESOURCES
Methodology for Resource Inventory and Other Data Collection The Riverside County General Plan (2003) and the City of Riverside General Plan 2025 (2007) were reviewed to determine the location of mineral resources and the policies of each jurisdiction as they relate to mineral extraction activities.
Environmental Setting
The Proposed Project area includes sections of the City of Riverside and Riverside County. The State Mining and Geology Board established Mineral Resources Zones (MRZ) to designate lands in the state that contain mineral deposits. The City of Riverside General Plan 2025 defines the four MRZ designations:
MRZ-1: adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present or likely to be present
MRZ-2: adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present or there is a high likelihood for their presence and development should be controlled MRZ-3: the significance of mineral deposits cannot be determined from the available data
MRZ-4: there is insufficient data to assign any other MRZ designation According to the City of Riverside General Plan 2025, the portion of the Proposed Project area in the City is within MRZ-4. According to the Mineral Resources Map in the 2003 Riverside County General Plan, the portion of the Proposed Project area in the county is within MRZ-3.
Regulatory Setting
The Riverside County General Plan has land use policies for the purpose of reducing or minimizing the conflicts between urban growth and mineral resources and their future extraction potential.
Applicable policies of the Riverside County General Plan are described below.
Land Use Compatibility Policy LU 21.2.Protect lands designated as Open Space-Mineral Resource from encroachment of incompatible land uses through buffer zones or visual screening (AI 3).
Land Use Compatibility Policy LU 21.3.Protect road access to mining activities and prevent or mitigate traffic conflicts with surrounding properties.
Proposed Project Consistency with LU 21.2 and LU 21.3:The Proposed Project would not traverse land designated as Open Space-Mineral Resource. The Open Space-Mineral Resource designation is based on the federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act. Areas held in reserve for future mining also fall under this designation. Land designated as Open Space- Mineral Resources are subject to policies LU 21.2 and LU 21.3, which protect lands from encroachment of incompatible land uses as well as road access to mining activities.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-270
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Significance Threshold Criteria
The following significance criteria are based on state CEQA guidelines. The CEQA Environmental Checklist Form has the following criteria as it relates to mineral resources.
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
Environmental Impacts
Based on the CEQA Guidelines, the analysis considers whether the Proposed Project and alternatives would result in significant impacts to mineral resources.
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. Given that the Proposed Project area is located within MRZs where the significance of mineral deposits cannot be determined from the available data (MRZ-3) or there is insufficient data to assign any other MRZ designation (MRZ-4), impacts to locally important and known mineral resources would not occur. No portion of the Proposed Project alignment is designated by the City of Riverside or Riverside County as a locally important mineral resource and existing mining operations are not present. For this reason, no impact associated with the loss of locally important mineral resources would occur.
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? No Impact. A review of the general plans for the City of Riverside and Riverside County did not indicate any locally important mineral resource recovery sites that would be encroached upon by the Proposed Project.
Significant Unavoidable Impacts
The Proposed Project will not result in any significant unavoidable impacts to mineral resources.
References
City of Riverside. 2007. Section 5.10-Mineral Resources, General Plan 2025.
Riverside County. 2003. Mineral Resources Map Figure OS-5, General Plan. _____. 2008. Chapter 5-Multipurpose Open Space Element, General Plan.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-271
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
3.2.11 NOISE
This section describes the noise impacts associated with the construction and operation of the Proposed Project. It outlines the methodology used to conduct the analysis, describes the existing environment related to power facility noise that occurs in the study area, and identifies the regulations and standards that could apply to these topics.
Environmental Setting
Methodology for Resource Inventory and Data Collection
Audible Noise
Sound level impacts for noise sensitive areas in the Proposed Project area are based on an A- weighting of sound intensities that best reflects the huma sound spectrum. These sound intensity levels correlate well with human perceptions of the annoying aspects of noise. Noise environments and consequences of human activities are usually well-represented by an equivalent A-weighted sound level over a given time period (Leq) or by the average day-night noise levels (Ldn). Equivalent Energy Level (Leq) is the sound level corresponding to a steady-state sound level containing the same total energy as a time-varying signal over a given sample period, typically 1, 8 or 24 hours. A-weighted Sound Pressure Level (dB(A)) is the sound pressure level, in decibels, as measured on a sound level meter using the A- weighting filter network. The A-weighting filter deemphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound, placing greater emphasis on those frequencies within the sensitivity range of the human ear. Day-Night Noise Level (Ldn) is the average equivalent A- weighted sound level during a 24-hour day obtained by adding ten decibels to the hourly noise levels measured during the night (from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m.). In this way, Ldn takes into account the lower tolerance of people for noise during nighttime periods. L50 is another metric used, representing a sound level (in dB(A)) exceeded 50% of the time.
Radio Noise
Radio Interference (RI) refers to interference primarily in the 535-1605 kilohertz (kHz) frequency range (this includes AM band operational frequencies and is in the range of the lowest end of amateur [ham] operational frequencies), and Television Interference (TVI) refers to interference in the 54-88 megahertz (MHz) range. Both RI and TVI are components of what is referred to as Radio Noise (RN). RN is measured in decibels (dB) and is referenced to a signal input of one microvolt tuned to a certain measurement frequency (dB per microvolt/meter or dBµv/m). A decibel in this case is a measure of weak electrical energy, not sound energy, propagated through air.
The RN level of the line at any particular location and measurement frequency varies based on many factors. The primary factors are the line voltage, weather conditions, and statistical time of the noise occurrence. In terms of the variation with time, RN is described in statistical terms and is typically denoted as the percentage of the total time that the RN level is less than a certain that the RN from the line can be expected to be less than this level for 50 percent of the total fair weather period (L50 dBµv/m).
Because of the frequencies involved, and the issues with designing based on foul weather City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-272
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 conditions (atmospheric interference due to precipitation), RI effects are greaterrealistically evaluated during fair weather conditions and. TVI effects are more significant only during foul
General Characteristics of Community Noise
Table 3.2.11-3 identifies the typical ranges of common sounds heard in the environment. Noise environments and consequences of human activities are usually well-represented by an equivalent A-weighted sound level over a given time period (Leq) or by the average day-night noise levels (Ldn). Noise levels are generally considered low when ambient levels are below 45 dB(A), moderate in the 45 to 60 dB(A) range, and high above 60 dB(A). Outdoor Ldn levels vary over 50 dB(A) depending on the specific type of land use. In wilderness areas, the Ldn noise levels average approximately 35 dB(A), 50 dB(A) in small towns or wooded residential areas, 75 dB(A) in urban downtown areas (e.g., City of Riverside), and 85 dB(A) near major freeways and airports. Although people often accept the higher levels associated with very noisy urban residential and residential-commercial zones, they nevertheless are considered to be adverse levels of noise to public health.
Various environments can be characterized by levels that are generally considered acceptable or unacceptable. Lower levels are expected in rural or suburban areas than what would be expected for commercial or industrial zones. Nighttime ambient levels in urban environments are about seven decibels lower than the corresponding average daytime levels. The day-to-night difference in rural areas away from roads and other human activity can be considerably less. Areas with full-time human occupation that are subject to nighttime noise that are the same as daytime levels are often considered objectionable relative to noise disturbance. Noise levels above 45 dB(A) at night can result in the onset of sleep interference effects (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] 1971). At 70 dB(A), sleep interference effects become considerable.
Noise Environment in Proposed Project Area
To gather more complete information on the most refined proposed routes, noise measurements were collected along the 230 kV (Table 3.2.11-1) and 69 kV (Table 3.2.11-2) proposed routes in February, 2011. These sites were selected in order to capture data newer data for the general land use categories along the route (e.g., residential, commercial) and provide a more accurate baseline for the determination of impacts than the 2009 conditions. The measurements included logging background ambient noise levels for a period of approximately one hour each during the day and at night (LEQ denotes the average acoustic energy content during the time period which, in this case, is a one-hour period) in order to determine a day-night average noise level.
TABLE 3.2.11-1. AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS PROPOSED 230 KV ROUTE NOISE MEASUREMENTS 230 KV LINE ROUTE
LOCATION LAND USE
LEQ
DAY
(DBA)
LEQ
NIGHT
(DBA)
Near UPS on North End of Line Commercial (Near Highway I-15) 65.5 61.6 Park and Ride off of Limonite Agricultural (Near Highway I-15) 66.3 61.3 68th Near Dana (Near Golf Course) Residential/Agricultural 60.1 49.8 City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-273
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 NOISE MEASUREMENTS 230 KV LINE ROUTE
LOCATION LAND USE
LEQ
DAY
(DBA)
LEQ
NIGHT
(DBA)
Near Center of Grulia Ct. Residential 52.4 42.0
Hidden Valley Wildlife Area Park/Open Space 49.7 N/A*
Crest Ave/Julian Drive Residential (Near Riverside Municipal Airport) 54.1 47.6
Industrial Area Near East End of Line Industrial 58.7 50.6 * Park was closed from 4:30 pm until 7:00 am; therefore no measurements were made at night.
TABLE 3.2.11-2. AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS PROPOSED 69 KV ROUTE NOISE MEASUREMENTS 69 KV LINE ROUTE
LOCATION LAND USE
LEQ
DAY
(DBA)
LEQ
NIGHT
(DBA)
Rutland near Arlington Business/Office 68.1 59.1
Keller between Crest and Keller Rural/Residential 58.4 48.9 Tyler between Magnolia and Hemet Commercial 70.0 64.7
Harrison between Indiana and Saratoga Business/Office (Near Highway 91) 69.8 67.6
The major noise sources in the Proposed Project Area are as follows:
1. Vehicular traffic on Van Buren Boulevard
Van Buren Boulevard runs approximately in a southeast to northwest direction in the Proposed Project area. The highway noise is 70 dB(A) (Community Noise Equivalent Level) to a distance of approximately 500 feet from either side of the highway and 60 dB(A) to a distance of approximately 1,200 feet from either side of the highway.
Refer to Riverside General Plan 2025 (adopted November 2007), Figure N-5.
2. Vehicular traffic on State Highway 60
State Highway 60 runs approximately in a southeast to northwest direction north of the Proposed Project area. The highway noise is 70 dB(A) (Community Noise Equivalent Level) to a distance of approximately 1,000 feet from either side of the highway and 60 dB(A) to a distance of approximately 4,000 feet from either side of the highway.
Refer to Riverside General Plan 2025 (adopted November 2007), Figure N-6.
3. Vehicular traffic on Interstate Highway 15
Interstate Highway 15 runs along the western margin of the Proposed Project area, closely paralleling approximately one half of the proposed 230 kV transmission line.
The highway noise is 70 dB(A) (Community Noise Equivalent Level) to a distance of approximately 1,000 feet from either side of the highway and 60 dB(A) to a distance of approximately 4,000 feet from either side of the highway. Refer to Riverside General Plan 2025 (adopted November 2007), Figure N-6.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-274
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
4. Vehicular traffic on State Highway 91
State Highway 91 runs approximately in a north to south direction. The highway is parallel to Segment C of the proposed new 69 kV subtransmission Line. The highway noise is 70 dB(A) (Community Noise Equivalent Level) to a distance of approximately 1,000 feet from either side of the highway and 60 dB(A) to a distance of approximately 4,000 feet from either side of the highway. Refer to Riverside General Plan 2025 (adopted November 2007), Figure N-6.
5. Riverside Municipal Airport
The Riverside Municipal Airport is south of the RERC Substation and adjacent to Segment A of the proposed new 69 kV subtransmission line. The southern boundary of the proposed Wildlife/Wilderness Substation is approximately 0.5 miles from the airport. The airport noise is 65 dB(A) (Community Noise Equivalent Level) for a distance of approximately 10,000 feet along and away from the runway and 55 dB(A) to a distance of approximately 20,000 feet from the center of the airport towards the northwest (approximately 15,000 feet towards the southeast). Refer to Riverside General Plan 2025 (adopted November 2007), Figure N-8.
Operational Characteristics of Proposed Project Components 230 kV Transmission Line
The proposed 230 kV transmission line is double-circuit. The phases comprise two subconductors separated by 18 inches. The subconductors are 1590 thousand circular mil (KCmil) aluminum conductor steel reinforced (ACSR) (Lapwing). The maximum operating voltage is 242 kV (as specified by SCE). The two circuits (for study purposes) are cross-phased (A-B-C top to bottom [one circuit] and C-B-A top to bottom [second circuit]). The audible noise fects
Program, which provides the industry standard for these types of calculations. The maximum Proposed Project). The calculated L50 foul weather audible noise at the edge of the right-of-way (ROW) (the edge of ROW is 50 feet from the 230 kV transmission centerline) is approximately 28 dB(A).
69 kV Double-Circuit Subtransmission Lines
Most of the 69 kV subtransmission line routes are double-circuit configuration. The phases comprise a single conductor, 954 KCmil ACSR (Rail). The maximum operating voltage is assumed to be 72.5 kV. The two circuits (for study purposes) are cross-phased (A-B-C top to bottom [one circuit] and C-B-A top to bottom [second circuit]). The maximum rain rate is assumed to be one inch per hour. The calculated L50 foul weather audible noise at the edge of the ROW (the edge of ROW is 20 feet from the 69 kV double-circuit subtransmission centerline) is less than 1.0 dB(A).
69 kV Single-Circuit Subtransmission Line
A few portions of the 69 kV subtransmission line routes are single-circuit. The phases comprise a single conductor, 954 KCmil ACSR (Rail). The maximum operating voltage is assumed to be
72.5 kV. The single-circuit phasing (for study purposes) is A-B-C top to bottom. The maximum rain rate is assumed to be one inch per hour. The L50 foul weather audible noise at the edge of the City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-275
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 ROW is less than 1.0 dB(A).
Wildlife and Wilderness Substations
Sources of audible noise within a substation include equipment such as transformers, voltage regulators, circuit breakers, and other intermittent noise generators. Among these sources, transformers have the greatest potential for producing noise. The broadband sound from fans, pumps, and coolers has the same character as ambient sound and tends to blend in with the ambient noise. In the substation, the electrical equipment (as identified above) can be classified as point noise sources. Because of spreading loss from point sources, approximately a 6 dBA reduction in noise can be obtained with each doubling of the distance between the source and the receiver.
230 kV and 69 kV Substation Upgrades
Additional equipment installed within existing substations would not affect the existing audible noise levels generated.
Noise Sensitive Receptors
Noise sensitive receptors and land uses are commonly locations where people reside, or areas where excessive noise may adversely impact the designated use of the land. Typically, noise- sensitive land uses include residences, hospitals, places of worship, libraries, and schools, as well as nature and wildlife preserves and parks. Open space and commercial areas are only considered noise sensitive if they are used for recreation.
Proposed 230 kV Transmission Line / Wilderness/Wildlife Substations The proposed 230 kV transmission line route from the new Wilderness/Wildlife Substations runs primarily south along Highway I-15 and then along the Santa Ana River Trail before crossing Van Buren Blvd. There are a few residences adjacent to the route south of 68th Street. From the residences along Auld Street. There is one resident on Julian Drive with the property line approximately 50 feet from the centerline. There is one residence on Bradford Street with the property line approximately 110 feet from the centerline. Construction would not be continuous along the centerline, but would occur at discrete activity sites at each structure location separated by hundreds of feet. There are no hospitals or places of worship within 1,000 feet of the proposed route. VanderMolen School is located on the northwest corner of 68th Street and Wineville Avenue, over 300 feet from the proposed route. The closest residences from Wildlife Substation are a distance of approximately 2,700 feet.The closest residences from Wilderness/Wildlife Substations are a distance of approximately 2,200 feet north of the substations. Typical audible noise levels at the property line from the operation of the substations would range from 45 to 55 dB(A). At a distance of 500 feet from the substation fence, the audible noise level would reduce by approximately 6 dB(A). Therefore, based on a 6 dB(A) reduction for a doubling of distance from the source, at the approximate distance to the nearest residence (2,200 feet), the audible noise level would be reduced by approximately 20 dB(A) or equivalently a noise level of 35 dB(A) at the nearest residential area (based on the typical maximum noise level at the substation fence line).
The Santa Ana River Parkway Grant is located approximately 100 feet from the closest City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-276
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 substation fence line. The National Recreational Trail is located approximately 150 feet from the closest substation fence line. At these distances, the noise level will be approximately 50 dB(A), which is in the range of a living room environment as shown in Table 3.2.11-3.
Wilderness Mountain View 69 kV Subtransmission Line
The Wilderness Mountain View 69 kV subtransmission line route is located in industrial and residential areas. For the residential area, there are several homes and an apartment building with property lines along Industrial Avenue within a distance of 50 to 125 feet of the proposed route.
There are no hospitals, schools, or parks close to the proposed route.
RERC Harvey Lynn/Freeman 69 kV Subtransmission Lines
The RERC Harvey Lynn/Freeman 69 kV subtransmission line routes are located primarily in residential areas. There are residences within 30 feet of the proposed route along Arlington Avenue, Cypress Avenue, Crest Avenue, Wells Avenue, Tomlinson Avenue, Mull Avenue, Jones Avenue, Hole Avenue, and Minnier Avenue. There are no hospitals or schools within 1,000 feet of the proposed route. There are places of worship within 150 feet of the proposed route. But ambient noise levels will be significantly higher than the transmission line noise levels. The Riverside Municipal Airport is east of the northern end of Segment A of the line route.
Wilderness Jurupa Ave 69 kV Subtransmission Line
The Wilderness Jurupa Ave 69 kV subtransmission line route is located in commercial and industrial areas.
TABLE 3.2.11-3. NOISE LEVEL RANGES
Sources of Noise Noise Levels - dB(A)
Threshold of Pain 130 140
Pneumatic Chipper 120 130
Chain Saw 100 120
Loud Automobile Horn (At 3 Feet) 110 120
Diesel Locomotive (At 50 Feet) 85 105
Motorcycle 80 110
Power Lawnmower 80 95
Inside Motor Bus 80 90
Pleasure Motorboat 75 115
Passenger Train 70 90
Average Traffic on Street Corner 70 80
Home Shop Tools 65 110
Food Blender 65 85
Automobile (At 50 Feet) 60 90
Passenger in Automobile 60 90
Vacuum Cleaner 60 85
Air Conditioner (Window Units) 60 75
Conservational Speech 60 70
Clothes Dryer 50 - 70
Typical Business Office 50 60
Washing Machine 45 80
Refrigerator 45 70
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-277
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Sources of Noise Noise Levels - dB(A)
Living Room (Suburban Area) 40 50
Library 30 40
Bedroom at Night 20 30
Broadcasting Studio 10 20
Threshold of Hearing 0 10
Source: HUD (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development), The Noise Guidebook, http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/energyenviron/environment/resources/guidebooks/noise/index.cfm
Regulatory Setting
Audible Noise
Federal
Currently, there are no Audible Noise (AN) control regulations that are specifically concerned with AN from power facilities. The EPA has published guidelines relating to AN in general (E
NTIS 550\9-74-004). This document
recommends that the Ldn be limited to 55 dB(A) outdoors and 45 dB(A) indoors (Ldn and dB(A) noise classifications are defined in Methodology for Resource Inventory and Data Collection section above).
State of California
California encourages each local government entity to perform noise studies and implement a noise element as part of their general plan. Standards and implementation are administered by the California Office of Noise Control. The California Administrative Code (Title 4) has guidelines for evaluating the compatibility of various land uses as a function of community noise exposure. The state land use compatibility guidelines are shown in Table 3.2.11-24.
Riverside County
Riverside County adheres to California state laws with regard to noise levels (refer to the County of Riverside General Plan, Chapter 7 Noise Element, Page N-7. Table N- Exposure chart shown in Table 3.2.11-4). Single and multiple family residential, group homes, hospitals, schools and other learning institutions and parks and open space lands where noise levels exceed 65 dB(A) are considered noise-sensitive. In business and professional offices where effective communication is essential, noise levels shall be mitigated to an interior noise level of 45 dB(A). The county also uses the California State Land Use Compatibility Chart (Table 3.2.11-4) as a guide to establish that the proposed land is: 1) a potential high noise producer; or 2) a potential noise-sensitive receptor.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-278
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 TABLE 3.2.11-4. STATE LAND USE COMPATIBILITY FOR COMMUNITY NOISE ENVIRONMENT Land Use Category Community Noise Exposure Ldn or Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) (dB) 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
Residential Low
Density, Single
Family, Duplex,
Mobile Home
A A A A A
B B B B B B
C C
D D D
Residential Multi -
Family
A A A A A A A
B B B B
C C
D D D
Transient Lodging -
Motel, Hotel
A A A A A
B B B B B B
C C
D
Schools Libraries,
Churches, hospitals,
Nursing Homes
A A A A A
B B B B
C C C C
D
Auditorium, Concert
Hall, Amphitheaters
B B B B B B B B B
C C C C C C C
Sports Arena,
Outdoor
Spectator Sports
A A A A A
B B B B B B B B B B B
C C C C C
Playgrounds,
Neighborhood Parks
A A A A A A A A A
C C C
D D D D
Golf Courses, Riding
Stables, Water
Recreation,
Cemeteries
A A A A A A A A A A A
C C C C
D
Office Buildings,
Business
Commercial and
Professional
A A A A A A A A A
C C C C
D D D
Industrial,
Manufacturing,
Utilities, Agriculture
A A A A A A A A A A A
C C C C
D D D
A Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements.
B Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design.
C Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development should be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirement must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.
D Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development generally should not be undertaken.
Guidelines for the Preparation and Content of the Noise Element of the General Plan. Appendix A in State of California General Plan Guidelines. Sacramento, CA.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-279
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 FIGURE 3.2.11-1. RIVERSIDE MUNICIPAL NOISE/LAND USE NOISE COMPATIBILITY CRITERIA
For construction activities forof the 230 kV portion of the Proposed Project, under Ordinance No. 847, the County of Riverside could consider providing a construction-related exception to the county sound level standards, if an application for a construction related exception has been filed and approved by the C According to Ordinance
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-280
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 847, an exception application shall not be approved unless: the applicant demonstrates that the activities described in the application would not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community. In determining whether activities are detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community, the appropriate decision making body or officer shall consider such factors as the proposed duration of the activities and their location in relation to sensitive receptors. If an exception application is approved, reasonable conditions may be imposed to minimize the public detriment, including, but not limited to, restrictions on sound level, sound duration and operating hours. Ordinance 847 exempts facilities and capital improvement projects of a governmental agency. The 69 kV components of the Proposed Project are not subject to this Ordinance because they would be built entirely within the City of Riverside.
City of Riverside
determined that certain noise levels are detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare and are contrary to the public interest. Therefore, the City Council declares that creating, maintaining, causing or allowing to create, maintain or cause any noise in a manner not in conformity with the provisions of this chapter, is a public nuisance and shall be punishable as such. In order to control unnecessary, excessive and/or annoying noise in the City, it is declared to be the policy of the City to prohibit such noise generated by the sources specified in this chapter. It shall be the goal of the City to minimize noise levels and mitigate the effects of noise
Title
which intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise. The relative intrusiveness of the sound depends upon its amplitude, duration, frequency and time of occurrence, tonal or informational content, and its relationship to the prevailing ambient noise level (Ord. 6273 § 1 (part), 1996, safety or health of humans or animals, or annoys or disturbs a reasonable person of normal sensitivities or endangers or injures personal or real property (Ord. 6273 § 1 (part), 1996, Section -1 and R-1 zone classifications are
70 dB(A) and 55 dB(A) (daytime)/45 dB(A) (night time) respectively (Ord. 6273 § 1 (part), 1996, Section 7.10.010). The City of Riverside noise compatibility chart is shown in Figure
3.2.11-1. The compatibility for community noise for the City and County are applicable to maximum noise exposure limit of 60 dB(A) for sensitive land uses such as residential, lodging, school libraries, churches, hospitals, and nursing homes.
p.m. on weekdays, and to 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction is not allowed on Sundays and Federal Holidays (Ord. 6273 § 1 (part), 1996, Section 7.35.010 B.5). Provisions of the noise code do not apply to construction, maintenance and repair operations, which are deemed necessary to serve the best interest of the public and which are conducted by public agencies and/or utilities or their contractors.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-281
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Radio Noise (RN)
According to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules, power transmission falls into frequency energy during the course of its operation although the device is not intentionally se regulations, harmful
a radio navigation service or of other safety services or seriously degrades, obstructs or repeatedly interrupts a radio communicatio
The FCC identifies radio noise field strength requirements on the basis of two service areas:
1) Primary service areas (city and rural); and 2) Secondary service areas (primarily rural areas with weaker signals). According to the FCC, primary limitations to types of radio service are from atmospheric and man-made noise. The types of service are furthered classified in six grades of service: Grades A, B, C, D, E and F (Grade A would be the radio service with the strongest signals).
Sparking or gap discharge occurs between two elements of a transmission line conductor that are poorly connected. This phenomenon is more apparent during dry weather because water droplets on the line tend to reduce the resistance in the connection, allowing current to flow freely.
Sparking interferes with broadcasts into the ultra high frequency (UHF) range (above 300 MHz), which makes sparking the primary cause of television interference. It is estimated, by experience, that 90- to 95 percent of all RN complaints are sparking-related. Possible poor connections of transmission line conductors would be corrected by standard maintenance procedures by RPU.
Wireless devices typically operate in the GigaHertz (referring to billions of cycles per second or Hertz) frequency range, which would not be impacted by 60 Hertz power lines.
Impact Assessment
Short-term construction impacts and long-term operational impacts could result from implementation of the Proposed Project. In this section, the potential incremental impacts associated with the construction and operation of the Proposed Project are analyzed.
Significance Threshold Criteria
There are two criteria for judging noise impacts. First, noise levels projected for the Proposed Project must comply with the relevant federal, state, or local standards or regulations. Mitigation of noise impacts that can affect worker safety and health is enforced by OSHA (by Cal/OSHA in California), but effectiveness of such mitigation depends on the vigilance of supervisors in seeing that workers use protective gear in high noise environments. Noise impacts on the surrounding communities are enforced through local noise ordinances supported by nuisance complaints and subsequent investigation.
The second measure of impact recognized by noise analysts is the increase in noise levels above the existing ambient level as a result of the introduction of a new source of noise. A change in noise level due to a new noise source can create an impact on people. Outside controlled laboratory conditions, noise level changes below 3 dB(A) are not detectable by the human ear.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-282
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 begin to notice changes in environmental noise levels of around five dB(A) (EPA 1974). Thus, average changes in noise levels less than five dB(A) cannot be considered as producing a potentially significant adverse impact because changes of that magnitude are imperceptible by the vast majority of persons. For changes in noise levels above five dB(A), it is difficult to quantify the impact beyond the determination that: the greater the noise level change, the greater the impact. A judgment commonly used in community noise impact analyses associates long-
Noise level increases of more than 10 dB(A) are generally considered significant (EPA1974). In the case of short-term noise increases, such as those from construction, the 10 dB(A) threshold bet
(EPA1974). These noise-averaged thresholds are to be lowered when the noise level fluctuates, or the noise has an irritating character with considerable high frequency energy, or if it is accompanied by subsonic vibration. In these cases, the impact must be individually estimated (EPA1974).
The assessment of significant noise impacts is weighed in consideration of CEQA requirements.
For this discussion, CEQA describes a significant effect as one that would create a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the noise conditions of the environment in the area.
Appendix G of the CEQA guidelines defines the criteria and areas of concern regarding a p -sensitive receptors by considering if a project would result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project.
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project.
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 expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Environmental Impacts
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project operation would not expose persons to noise levels in excess of standards established in plans or noise ordinances for a majority of time the facilities are in operation. Corona effectsfaint but audible noise caused by small, localized discharges most commonly on high-voltage (345 kV and above) transmission linesfrom the 69 kV subtransmission and 230 kV transmission lines would not result in short-term, temporary instantaneous noise levels in excess of local standards. (as previo Setting-
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-283
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 residential, lodging, school libraries, churches, hospitals, and nursing homes). The 230 kV transmission line route is approximately 100 to 150 feet from some residences. The calculated audible noise level at a distance of 50 feet from the center of the transmission line is 28 dB(A), which is significantly below the local standard and is in the range of a bedroom at night (Table
3.2.11-3). The primary noise sources in substations are the transformers, reactors, and circuit breakers. The maximum sound level is between 65 and 80 dB(A) (IEEE 2006) which is characteristic of noise caused by a low-frequency humming sound with occasionally louder impulse sounds during switching of a breaker. The closest residential property (approximately 2,700200 feet north of the substation) would not be impacted by the substation noise because the great distance between the source of potential noise and the residence would attenuate any noise impact to the point that it would not be perceived at the residence. Therefore, operation of the Proposed Project would not cause a change in the acoustic environment of the Project Area.
Operational noise levels from the Wildlife/Wilderness Substations will be less than 50 dB(A) at the area of protected habitat. Construction noise levels will be temporary and generally approximately 70 to 75 dB(A) due to truck traffic during construction. The truck traffic would not impact residential areas. These noise levels would not be a significant impact to the protected habitat areas around the substations.
The proposed 230 kV transmission line
Hole Lake and Savi Ranch park sites, various trails including the Santa Ana River Trail, and the Hidden Valley Wildlife Area. Construction activities would result in noise that may disrupt recreational and/or open space areas. During construction, ground work would be required at each structure location as well as along select roadways between the locations. These impacts would be temporary and of short duration, lasting only as long as required to complete the activity in a given location. Depending on the activity (structure erection, transmission line stringing, etc.), the duration of construction activities at any one location along the ROW would generally range from a few minutes to a few days, and would not result in a significant impact to recreationists.
Temporary construction-related noise would occur, but would be within allowable levels for temporary public facilities construction described in local plans and ordinances. Construction noise can be created from on-site and off-site sources. On-site noise sources would principally consist of the operation of heavy-duty diesel and gasoline-powered construction equipment. Off- site noise sources would include vehicles commuting to and from the job site, as well as from trucks transporting material to the staging areas or construction ROW.
Two types of noise are associated with on-site construction activities: intermittent and continuous. On-site construction noise would occur primarily from heavy-duty construction equipment (e.g., dozers, backhoes, cranes). It is estimated that dozers would be used on the Proposed Project site for approximately six months. However, because of the dispersed nature of particular construction locations associated with power line construction, equipment would be briefly present in any one location for as long as a few days or as little as a few hours. Noise levels from these individual pieces of equipment are shown in Table 3.2.11-5). It should be noted that noise levels are calculated based on the assumption that noise from a localized source is reduced by approximately 6 dB(A) with each doubling of distance from the source of noise because of spreading loss (EPA 1974).
Noise at construction sites is typically dominated by the loudest piece of equipment, with a City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-284
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 complex additive effect of additional pieces of equipment. The maximum intermittent construction noise levels would peak in a range of from 80 to 90 dB(A) at 50 feet for supporting structure assembly and tamping operations. Peak values would fall to 74 to 84 dB(A) at 100 feet and 68 to 76 dB(A) at 200 feet. Generally accepted construction noise exposure values for similar transmission projects are approximately 77 to 83 LEQ dB(A) at 50 feet. These exposure values would attenuate to 71 to 77 LEQ dB(A) at 100 feet, 65 to 71 LEQ dB(A) at 200 feet and 59 to 65 LEQ dB(A) at 400 feet. Direct noise impacts would result from construction activities occurring adjacent to sensitive receptors, such as houses and recreation areas. However, this noise would be short-term, occurring during daylight hours when the ambient noise levels are higher within the Proposed Project area (see Tables 3.2.11-1 and 3.2.11-2). Work activities would be scheduled during normal work days, with no weekend or holiday construction planned; thus, no potentially significant impacts would result.
While noise levels would vary for different construction tasks, the maximum predicted noise levels would occur from bulldozers, drilling (auger operation), and helicopters used for stringing operations (see Table 3.2.11-5 below for these estimated noise levels). These temporary and intermittent noise levels would not represent a substantial increase in ambient noise levels, as shown in Tables 3.2.11-1 and 3.2.11-2. Furthermore, the construction noise would be less at sensitive receptors due to their distance to the transmission lines and substations as described above in the section titled Noise Sensitive Receptors. The temporary helicopter use during construction would also not be considered substantial or significant because helicopters will be used during daytime hours, and would be used in an area where other aircraft are typically heard ity to the Riverside
Municipal Airport, along with several others.
TABLE 3.2.11-5. CONSTRUCTION NOISE SOURCES
Equipment Range of Noise Level (dB(A)) at 50 Feet
Pumps 69 71
Generators 72 83
Backhoes 72 92
Tractors, Dozers 83 89
Front-end Loader 72 86
Drill Rig 70 85
Compressors 74 88
Concrete Mixers 75 88
Cranes (Movable) 76 86
Helicopters 65 90
Source: Cowan 1984, Federal Transit Administration 1995, Nelson 1987, USDA Forest Service 1980.
Off-site noise during construction would occur primarily from commuting workers and from various truck trips to and from the construction sites. The procedures for bringing personnel, materials, and equipment to each structure site would vary along the route alignments. However, it is presumed that most workers would be meeting at one of the staging areas and would travel to the construction site in commuter vans or buses. It is also assumed that truck trips would be required to haul structures, conductor line, and other materials to the construction sites. The peak noise levels (approximately 70 to 75 dB(A) at 50 feet) associated with passing trucks and commuting worker vehicles would be short-term in duration and would generate adverse, but less than significant, impacts.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-285
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 To minimize ground disturbance within as matrix of intensive land uses, SCE plans to use light duty helicopters (Hughes 500-E) to efficiently and rapidly pull light-weight sock lines from structure to structure during conductor stringing. This is a widely used helicopter commonly used as an aerial tour helicopter in parks and other scenic areas. During stringing activities, helicopters would generate intermittent noise levels of approximately 80 dBA at 200 feet. Helicopters would operate for a short time at any given location. Because the Proposed Project area is in proximity to approaches to the Riverside Municipal Airport, construction helicopter flights would enter the Project area immediately and not pass over residential areas during Project ingress and egress.
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project operation would not produce ground- borne vibration or noise. Temporary construction-related vibrations and noise would occur, but would dissipate rapidly and not be excessive compared to other construction work occurring in the Proposed Project area. The use of jackhammers, pile-drivers, and explosives for blasting are not included in the Proposed Project description and will not be used.
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project.
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would be in compliance with audible noise requirements. Permanent noise associated with the Proposed Project would be caused mainly by the voltage on the conductors and other energized project elements. Corona noise (crackle and hiss caused by imperfections in conductor surfaces) is the issue. Although corona noise varies widely with weather conditions and may be audible, no significant corona should be produced by lines energized below 345 kV (EPRI 1987). There would neither be a substantial nor a permanent increase in noise level.
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project.
Less Than Significant Impact. Construction of the Proposed Project transmission and subtransmission lines would produce a temporary increase in noise level. Construction noise is discussed under Criterion a) above. There would be no other source of temporary or periodic increases in noise levels.
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 expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. Riverside Municipal Airport and surrounding area ambient noise levels are 55 to 60 dB(A) for distances of several thousand feet from the centerline references of these transportation areas (described in more detail in the Noise Environment in Proposed Project Area section. Therefore, noise from the transmission lines would not be higher than existing airport and highway noise. Construction workers would not be exposed to excessive noise from the airport. The long-term operational noise from the transmission and subtransmission lines would not be higher than existing ambient noise sources surrounding the airport and roads. The noise may be higher due to short-term construction work activities.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-286
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Being a power line project, the Proposed Project would not result in the construction of occupied structures that would result in an increase in the number of people residing or working in proximity to the Riverside Municipal Airport. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in people residing or working in the area being exposed to excessive noise levels. Maintenance and storage buildings at the proposed substations would not be permanently occupied.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. There are no private airstrips in the Proposed Project area.
Significant Unavoidable Impacts
The Proposed Project will not result in any significant unavoidable impacts associated with noise.
References
Beranek, Leo L., 1992, Noise and Vibration Control Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, USA.
Guidelines for the Preparation
and Content of the Noise Element of the General Plan. Appendix A in State of California General Plan Guidelines. Sacramento, CA.
City of Riverside. 1996. Noise Ordinance 6273 § 1 (part), Title 7, http://www.riversideca.gov/municipal_code.
Cowan, J. P. 1984. Handbook of Environmental Acoustics. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). 1987. Transmission Line Reference Book, 345 kV and Above. Second Edition.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 1985. National Technical Information Service, Washington, DC. Aviation Noise Effects.
Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 1995. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment.
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The Noise Guidebook, http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/energyenviron/environment/resources/guidebooks/noise/ index.cfm.
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE). 1991. IEEE Standard 430-1991, IEEE Standard Procedures for the Measurement of Radio Noise from Overhead Power Lines and Substations.
_____.IEEE/PES. 2006. Transformer Committee. Transformer Noise Sources and Characteristics. March 20, 2006.
Lord, Harold W. 1987. Noise Control for Engineers, Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, Florida.
Nelson, P. 1987. Transportation Noise Reference Book. Boston, MA: Butterworth Legal Publishers.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-287
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Riverside County. Ordinance No. 847, Regulating Noise. Available at http://www.clerkoftheboard.co.riverside.ca.us/ords/800/847.pdf.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1974. Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect the Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety. EPA 550/9-74-004, March 1974.
USDA Forest Service. 1980. Predicting Impact of Noise on Recreationists. ED&T Project No. 2688. April.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-288
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
3.2.12 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Economic Planning Resources, April 2010) was used to prepare this summary of existing conditions and potential impacts as a result of the Proposed Project and alternatives. Please consult this report in the technical appendices for additional information related to population and housing.
Methodology for Resource Inventory and Other Data Collection Population and housing characteristics were obtained for Riverside County, San Bernardino County, and the cities of Riverside, Corona, Norco, Moreno Valley, Colton, Fontana, Grand Terrace, Loma Linda, Rialto, and Ontario.
Environmental Setting
Riverside County encompasses 7,207 square miles with a population density of 292 persons per square mile in 2007. Riverside County has experienced a high growth rate for the past 20 years, increasing 80.1 percent (3.1% annually) between 1990 and 2009.
er rate than that of the
population was 304,051 (DOF 2010) or 3,731 persons per square mile (81.5 square miles).
The City of Riverside is part of an urbanized area, bordered by the cities of Norco and Corona to the west, and Moreno Valley to the east. Also bordering the City of Riverside are the City of Jurupa Valley (the Jurupa Census County Division [CCD], as named by the U.S. Bureau of the Census) to the north, and the Lake Matthews CCD and Woodcrest Census Designated Place (CDP) to the south. All of these communities are within Riverside County. Southern urbanized areas of San Bernardino County lie within a ready commute to the Proposed Project area; these areas function as a well-integrated part of the City of Riverside urbanized area.
As with much of southern California, the City of Riverside populations, as well as the populations of adjacent incorporated cities, are diverse in terms of racial and ethnic heritage, with large Hispanic populations.
The housing markets in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties exhibit a moderate degree of tightness. As of January 1, 2010, 13.0 and 11.6 percent of units were vacant in Riverside and San Bernardino counties, respectively (California Dept. of Finance 2010). In the cities in the Proposed Project area, vacancy rates are substantially lower, ranging from 2.3% in Norco to
4.5% in Riverside (California Dept. of Finance 2010). Higher County vacancy rates primarily reflect the many seasonally vacant units, which are less prevalent in the cities.
Regulatory Setting
Local
Development of the Proposed Project would follow the California Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Guidelines which are codified in the California Code of Regulations under Title 25, Division 1, Chapter 6, Subchapter 1. According to Title 25, section 6002(b) City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-289
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 (Statement of Purpose and Policy):
The Guidelines are designed to carry out the following polic[y] of the Act:
(2) In the acquisition of real property by a public entity, to ensure consistent and fair treatment for owners of real property to be acquired, to encourage and expedite acquisition by agreement with owners of such property in order to avoid litigation and relieve congestion in courts, and to promote confidence in public land acquisition.
As described in Chapter 2, SCE would be the owner/operator of the 230 kV transmission line and associated Proposed Project components, while RPU would be the owner/operator of the 69 kV subtransmission line Proposed Project components. SCE would be responsible for acquiring its own ROWs; RPU would construct its components in existing public ROWs or within property already owned by the City, such as existing substation locations.
Significance Threshold Criteria
The following significance criteria are based on state CEQA guidelines. The CEQA Environmental Checklist Form has the following criteria as it relates to population and housing.
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Environmental Impacts
Based on the CEQA Guidelines, the analysis considers whether the Proposed Project and alternatives would result in significant impacts to population and housing.
a) Induce substantial 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)?
Less than Significant Impact. As a result of construction of the Proposed Project, population is estimated to temporarily increase by 774 persons. This increase is anticipated to occur from the time construction begins (anticipated December 2013) until the Proposed Project is completed during the first half of 2015. Some minimal in-migration of job-holders and their dependents who may remain in the area permanently is likely to occur even as a result of short-term construction. This population increase was estimated by assuming workers for jobs that would be created from directly supplying the Proposed Project with goods and services, as well as workers -
output economic model Impact Analysis for Planning (IMPLAN).
The estimated temporary population increase of 774 persons was based on an IMPLAN- City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-290
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 estimated 244.3 households affected by ripple effect jobs multiplied by 3.17, which was the year 2000 census average number of persons per household for the Riverside-San Bernardino Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area. If this population increase were to occur within the City percent. However, it is likely that population increase would occur throughout the Proposed Project area, which includes various incorporated cities as along with a large portion within unincorporated Riverside County. The temporary population increase of 744 persons is a standard statistical estimate based on standard statisticssecondary (or ripple) effect and does not caused by represent workers and their dependents directly associated with the construction or operation of the Proposed Project. This population increase was estimated by assuming workers for jobs created in firms directly supplying the Project, as well as workers taking employment as a result of ripple effects.
The Proposed Project is intended to accommodate, rather than encourage, area growth. As noted in Chapter 1 of this DEIR, Purpose and Need, the Proposed Project was developed in response to sion under the Proposed Project
in order to meet projected load growth and to provide a second interconnection for system reliability.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
No Impact. The Proposed Project will not displace any dwellings, so there would be no need to construct replacement housing elsewhere. The Proposed Project construction work force is likely to be drawn from both within and outside the study area. Project workers would be employees of contractor(s), subcontractors, SCE crews (230 kV transmission line and Wildlife Substation only), RPU crews (69 kV subtransmission lines, upgrades to existing substations, and Wilderness Substation), and administrative/management personnel. The construction work force members who do not reside locally would likely stay in transient accommodations, such as hotels or RV parks for the duration of their employment on the Proposed Project and would unlikely bring dependents, given the short-term nature of the construction.
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
No Impact. The Proposed Project will not displace any dwellings, so there would be no need to construct replacement housing elsewhere.
Significant Unavoidable Impacts
The Proposed Project will not result in any significant unavoidable impacts to Population and Housing.
References
California Department of Finance (DOF). 2010. City/County/State Population and Housing Estimates.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-291
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Report-
Utilities, April 2010. Anaheim, CA and Seattle, WA.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-292
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
3.2.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
This section describes the environmental setting, regulatory setting, and potential impacts to public services and utilities systems resulting from implementation of the proposed RTRP. This section examines how implementation of the RTRP would alter the present conditions of existing services and systems.
Environmental Setting
Public services (i.e., fire protection, police protection, schools) and utilities systems (i.e., electricity, natural gas, water, wastewater, and landfill facilities) in the region are typically provided by the applicable county or municipality. Jurisdictions in the Proposed Project area include Riverside County and the cities of Riverside and Norco. SCE transmission elements of the Proposed Project (I-15 Route) would be predominantly located onin unincorporated lands in Riverside County, with a small portion of both routes extending south into and the Citycities of Jurupa Valley, Riverside. A small portion of the Proposed Project would also traverse the City of, and Norco. RPU subtransmission and substation elements of the Proposed Project would be located entirely within the City of Riverside. Entities providing public services and utilities in the RTRP area are described in detail in the sections below.
Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Response Services Fire protection services that would serve the RTRP and surrounding area include the Riverside County Fire Department, the City of Riverside Fire Department, and the City of Norco Fire Department.
Riverside County Fire Department
The Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD) operates a total of 95 fire stations, comprising 17 battalions that provide fire suppression, emergency medical, rescue, and fire prevention services. The equipment utilized by the department is suitable for response to both urban and wildland fire emergency conditions. The RCFD is staffed with approximately 952 career and 1,100 volunteer personnel, and currently serves approximately two million residents in an area of 7,004 square miles. This service area consists of all unincorporated areas in Riverside County, 18 contract cities, and one Community Service District (CSD). Under contract with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), the RCFD is the Operational Area Coordinator for the California Fire and Rescue Mutual Aid System for all fire service jurisdictions in the County of Riverside. As such, RCFD has also been given the authority to enter into several automatic aid agreements with other city jurisdictions, as well as with adjacent National Forests. The cities and CSD served by the RCFD include Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Lake Elsinore, Indian Wells, Indio, Jurupa Valley, La Quinta, Menifee, Moreno Valley, Palm Desert, Perris, Rancho Mirage, San Jacinto, Temecula, Wildomar, and the Rubidoux Community Services District (RCFD, 2010).
In addition to unincorporated areas of Riverside County, the proposed RTRP traverses portions of the Cities of Riverside and/or Norco, which administer and operate their own fire departments.
City of Riverside Fire Department
The City of Riverside Fire Department operates a total of 14 fire stations, comprising two battalions that provide fire suppression services, as well as responding to traffic accidents, City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-293
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 medical aids, and many other types of emergencies. The department responds to an average of 26,000 calls per year, and is staffed with emergency response personnel that work a three- platoon schedule consisting of a 56-hour work week. In addition to training in all disciplines of hazardous materials, arson investigation, medical emergencies, and rescue. A 911 dispatch service is in place, and the Operations division supports mutual aid agreements with the cities of Corona, Moreno Valley and other County areas as well as being part of the state mutual aid response system for large incidents (City of Riverside Fire Dept., 2010).
City of Norco Fire Department
The City of Norco Fire Department has provided a variety of services to citizens in its service area since 1957. Services include fire suppression, emergency medical care (i.e., Basic Life Support [EMT-1 level] and Advanced Life Support ([EMT paramedic level]), rescue, hazardous materials response, public fire safety education, and disaster preparedness. In addition, the Norco Fire Department has a mutual aid agreement with the Corona City Fire Department and CDF to respond to large vegetation or structure fires. The department currently operates from two station facilities located in the eastern and western halves of the City (i.e., Corydon Avenue Fire Station, and Sixth Street Fire Station) (City of Norco Fire Department, 2010).
Table 3.2.13-1 identifies fire stations located within one mile of the RTRP.
TABLE 3.2.13-1. FIRE STATIONS WITHIN ONE MILE OF THE RTRP Jurisdiction Fire Station Name Fire Station Address RTRP Component Within One Mile
Riverside County
and City of Jurupa
Valley
Pedley Fire Station 9270 Limonite Ave, Pedley I-15 Route, Van Buren230 kV Route
Glen Avon Fire Station 10400 San Sevaine Way, Glen Avon Van Buren Route City of Riverside
Riverside City Fire Station # 12 9449 Andrew Street, Riverside 69 kV Route Riverside City Fire Station # 8 11076 Hole Avenue, Riverside 69 kV Route Riverside City Fire Station # 7 10191 Cypress Avenue, Riverside 69 kV Route Riverside City Fire Station # 5 5883 Arlington Avenue, Riverside 69 kV Route
Traffic and Law Enforcement Services
Department (RCSD) in unincorporated areasRiverside County and the cities of the countyJurupa Valley and Norco, while the City of Riverside is served by the Riverside Police Department, and the City of Norco contracts with the RCSD for its municipal police services. The California Highway Patrol provides additional traffic and law enforcement services along major transportation corridors in the RTRP area including Interstate 15 and State Route 60.
law enforcement services to 15 cities and one tribal community within a 7,310 square mile area. -person staff include general community
policing, search and rescue, first response, emergency response, Coroner-Public Administrator duties, county-wide mutual aid coordination, and operation and maintenance of adult and City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-294
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 juvenile correctional facilities (RCSD, 2010).
Riverside Police Department
The Riverside Police Department (RPD) provides safety and emergency response services, as well as community programs and educational outreach to residents within its service area. A 911 emergency hotline is in place, and the City of Riverside Public-Safety Communications Center provides dispatch services related to Police, Fire, and Medical emergencies. Policing beats for the RPD are divided into four geographic areas, known as Areas of Command, with neighborhood police stations located in each of the major sections of the city and a Lieutenant Area Commander assigned to oversee the day-to-day policing needs of each community. The RPD staff includes a mixture of sworn officers and civilian personnel, and a precinct-based system assigns each officer to one of 133 Reporting Districts within the city (RPD Website).
School Districts
The RTRP area overlaps with the following school districts: Alvord Unified School District, Riverside Unified School District, Jurupa Unified School District, and Corona-Norco Unified School District (Riverside County Office of Education, 2009). There are teneleven schools located within one-quarter mile of the Proposed Project area. These schools are identified in Table 3.2.13-2 below.
TABLE 3.2.13-2. SCHOOLS LOCATED WITHIN 0.25 MILES OF THE RTRP Jurisdiction School Address RTRP Component
Within 0.25 Miles
Riverside
CountyCity of
Jurupa Valley
VanderMolen Elementary School 6744 Carnelian, Mira Loma (Jurupa Valley) I-15230 kV Route VanBuren Elementary School 9501 Jurupa Road, Riverside Van Buren Route City of
Riverside
La Granada Elementary School 10346 Keller Avenue, Riverside 69kV Route Arlanza Elementary School 5891 Rutland Street, Riverside 69kV Route Crest Haven School 5966 Robinson Avenue, Riverside 69kV Route Norte Vista High School 6585 Crest Avenue, Riverside 69kV Route Learning Bee Montessori Academy 10235 Wells Avenue, Riverside 69kV Route Inc. 10744 Hole Avenue, Riverside 69 kV Route
Wells Middle School 10000 Wells Avenue, Riverside 69kV Route Hawthorne Elementary School 2700 Irving Street, Riverside 69kV Route Myra Linn Elementary School 10435 Branigan Way, Riverside 69kV Route Our Lady Queen of Angels
Elementary School 4824 Jones Avenue, Riverside 69kV Route
Utilities Systems
Utility systems pertain to the distribution and use of electricity, natural gas, potable drinking water, stormwater, telecommunications, and solid waste, and are generally provided and managed by local jurisdictions, as well as water agencies, and privately contracted entities.
Electricity and telecommunications services are typically installed above ground on utility towers and poles or are routed through underground conduit systems. Underground pipelines or conduits are also used to transmit utilities such as potable water, wastewater, stormwater, and natural gas. In an urban environment, most public service and utility infrastructures are located within public rights-of-way. Table 3.2.13-3 identifies the relevant utility service providers in the City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-295
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 RTRP area by jurisdiction.
TABLE 3.2.13-3. UTILITY SERVICE PROVIDERS BY JURISDICTION Jurisdiction Utility Service Provider
Riverside County and
City of Jurupa Valley
Natural gas and electric service- SCE, Southern California Gas Company (natural gas), SCE (electric)
Water service- Eastern Municipal Water Jurupa Community Services District (EMWD) and Santa Ana River Water Company
Wastewater service- EMWDJurupa Community Services District City of Riverside
Natural gas - Southern California Gas Company
Electric service - RPU
Water service- RPU (in RTRP area); other water service providers in the City include: Western Municipal Water District, EMWD, and the Riverside Highland Water Company Wastewater service- Riverside Public Works Department
City of Norco
Natural gas and electric service- Southern California Gas Company (natural gas), SCE (electric) Water service- City of Norco Department of Public Works Wastewater service- City of Norco Department of Public Works Sources: RCIP (2002), City of Riverside General Plan 2025, City of Norco General Plan Solid Waste Landfills and Recycling Services
Riverside County and City of Jurupa Valley
The Riverside County Waste Management Department (RCWMD) is charged with the management of solid waste landfills and programs for solid waste recycling and diversion in Riverside County.and the recently incorporated City of Jurupa Valley.Nonhazardous municipal solid waste (MSW) generated by commercial and residential sourcesin unincorporated areas of Riverside Countyis delivered to County landfills by waste hauling companies and self-haulers.
The waste hauling companies operate under licensing agreements with the Riverside County Environmental Health Department, which requires the implementation of residential and some commercial curbside recycling programs.
MSW and waste containing large amounts of organic material is typically accepted by sanitary landfill facilities (Class III). Unclassified landfill facilities are suited to accept only inert waste (e.g., asphalt, concrete, and construction debris) that does not break -down or fully decompose.
All of the active landfills currently located in Riverside County are classified as Class III landfills, as per Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations (RCIP, 2002).
City of Riverside
The Riverside Public Works Department provides trash collection services to seventy percent of residences in the City of Riverside, while private collection services serve approximately 20,000 customers in the La Sierra, University, and Orangecrest neighborhoods. All solid waste collected is tipped at the Robert A. Nelson Transfer Station, which is owned by the County of Riverside.
The waste is then transferred to either the Badlands Landfill in Moreno Valley, the El Sobrante Landfill located east of Interstate 15 south of the City of Corona, or the Lamb Canyon Landfill located between the City of Beaumont and the City of San Jacinto for disposal (City of Riverside, 2007). The City of Riverside has taken a proactive approach to recycling by consistently exceeding the waste diversion requirements of the Integrated Waste Management Act (Public Resources Code Section 41780), and by implementing several solid waste reduction City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-296
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 (C.U.R.B), Recycling Market Development Zone, curbside recycling, and public outreach and education.
City of Norco
Solid waste disposal and diversion services in the City of Norco are provided by the RCWMD.
MSW generated by commercial and residential sources in the City of Norco is disposed of at the El Sobrante Landfills. Riverside County requires the recycling of household materials and green waste in the City of Norco. Manure containment and recycling services for horse and cattle remains are provided by private waste management firms under contract with the city.
Table 3.2.13-4 provides information on the total and remaining capacities of solid waste landfills serving the unincorporated Riverside County and the City of RiversideJurupa Valley, City of Riverside, and City of Norco.
TABLE 3.2.13-4. SOLID WASTE LANDFILLS SERVING THE RTRP AREA Jurisdiction Solid Waste
Landfill
Scheduled
Closure
Date
Permitted Max
Disposal/Day
Total Estimated
Permitted
Capacity
Total
Estimated
Capacity Used
Remaining
Estimated
Capacity
Riverside
County and
City of Jurupa
Valley
Badlands 1/1/2016 4,000 tons/day 30,386,332 cy 8,520,240 cy (28%)
21,866,092 cy
(72%)
Lamb Canyon
Sanitary 1/1/2023 3,000 tons/day 34,292,000 cy 13,383,829 cy (39%)
20,908,171 cy
(61%)
El Sobrante 1/1/2030 10,000 tons/day 184,930,000 cy 66,356,460 cy (35.9%)
118,573,540 cy
(64.1%)
City of
Riverside
Badlands See above See above See above See above See above Lamb Canyon
Sanitary See above See above See above See above See above El Sobrante See above See above See above See above See above City of Norco El Sobrante See above See above See above See above See above cy= cubic yards
Source: CIWMB, 2010.
Other Public Facilities
Other public facilities within one mile of the RTRP area include the Riverside Regional Water Quality Treatment Plant, the Pedley Station Metrolink, the Riverside-La Sierra Station Metrolink, Kaiser Permanente Riverside Medical Center, Parkview Community Hospital Medical Center, and Glen Avon Library.
Regulatory Setting
The following section summarizes the state and local utility and service system regulations, plans, and standards that are directly applicable to the Proposed Project and its alternatives.
Activities associated with construction and operation of the Proposed Project would be consistent with all applicable plans and policies related to public services and utilities systems as they are described below.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-297
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 State
Protection of Underground Infrastructure
Government Code 4216 mandates utility providers to contact a regional notification center at least two days prior to excavation of any subsurface installations. The Underground Service Alert serves as the notification center for southern California. Any utility provider planning to -free hotline.
Subsequently, Underground Service Alert will contact utility companies with buried lines within 1,000 feet of the planned excavation area. Utility company representatives are required to flag the location of their facilities within the work area prior to the commencement of excavation activities. Construction personnel must probe and expose the underground utility conduits by hand prior to using power equipment for excavation.
California Integrated Waste Management Act
The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (Assembly Bill 939) was adopted to redefine waste management practices and to minimize the volume and toxicity of solid waste that is disposed at landfill facilities in the state. Assembly Bill 939 requires that each local jurisdiction prepare a Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) to show reduction in the amount of solid waste being disposed to landfills, with diversion objectives of 50 percent by the year 2000. Table 3.2.13-5 summarizes the solid waste diversion rates recorded between 2004 and 2006 for the local jurisdictions within the RTRP area. No long-term data are available for the City of Jurupa Valley, incorporated July 2011.
TABLE 3.2.13-5 SOLID WASTE DIVERSION RATES (AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL WASTE
STREAM)
Jurisdiction 2004 2005 2006
Riverside County (Unincorporated) 54 54 53
City of Riverside 60 57 64
City of Norco 57 60 65
Source: CIWMB, 2010a
Local
Riverside County General Plan
The Riverside County General Plan (Circulation Element) includes the following policy which relates to utilities and service systems (Riverside County, 2003):
Policy C 25.2: Locate new and relocated utilities underground when possible. All remaining utilities shall be located or screened in a manner that minimizes their visibility by the public.
The Riverside County General Plan (Land Use Element) includes the following policies which relate to utilities and service systems (Riverside County, 2003):
Policy LU 5.1: Ensure that development does not exceed the ability to adequately provide supporting infrastructure and services, such as libraries, recreational facilities, City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-298
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 transportation systems, and fire/police/medical services.
Policy LU 5.2: Monitor the capacities of infrastructure and services in coordination with service providers, utilities, and outside agencies and jurisdictions to ensure that growth does not exceed acceptable levels of service.
Policy LU 5.4: Ensure that development and conservation land uses do not infringe upon existing public utility corridors, including fee owned rights-of-way and permanent large scale general plan maps. (AI 3)
Policy LU 5.10: Continue to utilize the Riverside County Fire Protection Master Plan as the base document to implement the goals and objectives of the Safety Element.
Policy LU 9.1: Require that new development contribute their fair share to fund infrastructure and public facilities such as police and fire facilities.
City of Riverside General Plan 2025
The Land Use Element of General Plan 2025 includes the following objective and policies which relate to utilities and service systems (City of Riverside, 2007):
Linear Aerial Utility Facilities
Objective LU-29:
Policy LU -29.1: Promote the formation of districts for the undergrounding of utilities.
Policy LU -29.2: Investigate the feasibility of a city-wide undergrounding of utilities ordinance.
Policy LU -29.3: Investigate funding sources to underground existing City-owned utility facilities.
The Public Facilities and Infrastructure Element of the General Plan 2025 includes the following objective and policies which relate to utilities and service systems (City of Riverside, 2007):
Public Facilities and Infrastructure Element
Objective PF-6: Provide affordable, reliable and, to the extent practical, environmentally sensitive energy resources to residents and businesses.
Policy PF-6.2: Ensure that adequate back-up facilities are available to meet critical electric power needs in the event of shortages or temporary outages.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-299
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Impact Assessment
Significance Threshold Criteria
As derived from other environmental impact assessments and Appendix G of the CEQA guidelines, significant impacts to public services, utilities and service systems would occur if the Proposed Project would:
a) Result in substantial adverse impacts associated with the construction of new or physically altered governmental facilities needed to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services:
i. fire protection;
ii. police protection;
iii. schools, parks, or other public facilities.
b) Fail to comply withExceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board.
c) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities., the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.
d) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.
e) Exceed existing Have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources.
f) Exceed existing wastewater capacity.
g) Exceed existingBe served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to .
h) Conflict with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. i) Cause utility system disruptions or cause a co-location accident through the crossing or shared location with another utility line during construction of the Project3.
Environmental Protection Elements
Following best management and design practices throughout conception, construction, and implementation of the Proposed Project ensures that public safety is paramount and potential environmental impacts are minimized through avoidance. Table 3.2.13-6 outlines the proposed SCE and RPU Environmental Protection Elements (EPEs) related to utilities. No EPEs were identified for public services by RPU or SCE. As discussed above in Section 3.1.2, the EPEs have been included as part of the Proposed Project; therefore, the impact analysis section that follows includes the implementation of the EPEs listed below. Any impact resulting from the implementation of the Proposed Project (including the EPEs) is identified below. Where mitigation measures would reduce these impacts, the measures and their effectiveness have been included in the impact discussion.
3 This condition was derived from other environmental impact assessments and is not part of Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-300
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 TABLE 3.2.13-6. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ELEMENTSUTILITIES AND SERVICE
SYSTEMS
Environmental
Protection Element Description
UTIL-1 Disposal of Construction Waste Material. Recyclable construction waste materials shall be recycled.
Non-recyclable waste materials shall be categorized and disposed of at a licensed location.
UTIL-2
Irrigation. Substation landscaping shall be planted in accordance with a landscaping and irrigation plan.
The plan shall incorporate the use of drought tolerant, low maintenance and, to the extent possible, native plants to conserve water. This EPE does not address revegetation requirements from ground disturbance associated with temporary work areas as set forth in other EPEs or mitigation measures elsewhere in this DEIR.
Environmental Impacts
a) Result in substantial adverse impacts associated with the construction of new or physically altered governmental facilities needed to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services:
ai.) Fire Protection?
Less than Significant Impact. Fire protection and emergency response services in the RTRP area are provided by the RCFD in unincorporated areas of Riverside County and the City of Jurupa Valley, the City of Riverside Fire Department in the City of Riverside, and the City of
Construction of the Proposed Project may generate a temporary increase the demand for fire protection services in the RTRP area. A portion of the Proposed Project area includes land containing dry brush near the banks of the Santa Ana River. Although unlikely, fire suppression services may be required during Proposed Project construction if sparks generated by idling construction vehicles or equipment accidentally ignite dry vegetation located in or adjacent to Proposed Project sites, rights-of-way, or staging areas. To minimize fire potential, crews would be required to avoid the idling of construction vehicles and power equipment when not in use.
Transmission and subtransmission infrastructure may present a fire hazard during Proposed Project operation, requiring the need for fire suppression services. Incidences of fire could occur if tree limbs or structures were to interface with a live phase conductor. The likelihood of this occurring would be reduced by the periodic clearing of vegetation within Proposed Project rights-of-way. Similarly, structures that may present a fire hazard and danger to the public would be restricted from the rights-of-way.
Electrical substations contain fuel and ignition sources that may present a fire hazard during facility construction or operation, potentially requiring the need for fire suppression services. The main components of a substation that pose a fire hazard are the electrical cables, which provide a source of fuel supply and ignition, and the mineral oil-insulated electrical equipment (i.e., transformers, reactors, and circuit breakers) that can ignite if an electrical failure were to occur.
To minimize fire incidences and unnecessary burden on fire protection providers, proper fire- safety standards established in the RTRP Fire Management Plan would be followed relative to Proposed Project construction, and construction personnel would be trained to use proper fire prevention and management techniques (see Section 3.2.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials).
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-301
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Electrical equipment and fencing at the substation would be grounded to prevent unexpected surges that could ignite fires, requiring a response. In the instance of fire, RPU would also coordinate with the County and the local fire district to ensure that construction activities and associated lane closures would not hinder emergency response pathways or delay response time.
Construction of the Proposed Project may generate a temporary increase to the demand for emergency response services in the Proposed Project area. Emergency medical services may be required in the event of construction-related injury or other emergency situations. To minimize the potential for construction-related injuries and the need for emergency medical services, a Health and Safety Plan would be prepared and implemented as part of the Proposed Project design (see Section 3.2.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials).
The Proposed Project would not introduce new residential populations to the area that would require the construction of new, or modification of existing, governmental facilities associated with fire protection or emergency response services. No substantial short-term provisions of additional fire facilities, equipment, or emergency response services would be required for the RTRP, resulting in a less than significant impact.
aii.) Police Protection?
Less than Significant Impact. Law enforcement services in the RTRP area are provided by the RCSD in unincorporated areas of Riverside County and the cities of Jurupa Valley and Norco and the RPD in the City of Riverside. The California Highway Patrol provides additional traffic and law enforcement services along Interstate 15 and State Route 60 in the RTRP area.
Construction of the RTRP may require the use of local law enforcement agencies in unincorporated Riverside County, the cities of Jurupa Valley and inNorco, and the City of Riverside. Much of the RTRP would require the installation of transmission towers structures or subtransmission poles within or adjacent to existing road rights-of-way. Many of the roadways are within heavily trafficked urban areas, particularly in the City of Riverside. In some areas, fiber optic cables for the Proposed Project would also be installed overhead and co-located on the RTRP subtransmission poles or installed underground.
Construction of the Proposed Project may require temporary closure or single-lane closure of roadways during the transport of oversized equipment, stringing of the conducting wires, and installation of overhead or underground fiber optic cables. Road closures and the placement of safety barriers along roadways would be coordinated with the local police and would be scheduled to take place during off-peak commute hours.
Theft of construction equipment and/or vandalism could also occur during the RTRP construction period, requiring a response by local law enforcement. Standard precautionary measures, such as securing equipment when left unattended, would be implemented by construction personnel at the job sites to minimize theft and vandalism. If necessary, RPU and SCE would contract with a local security firm to provide 24-hour security services at the substation sites, marshalling yards, and material staging and laydown areas during Proposed Project construction to minimize the involvement of local law enforcement.
Therefore, Proposed Project use of police services would be associated with temporary City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-302
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 construction-related conditions. No permanent, significant impact on law enforcement services would result.
aiii.) Schools, Parks, and Other Public Facilities?
No Impact. An increase in the demand for public facilities, such as schools, parks, or libraries, is typically correlated with a substantial increase in the size of the local population. The Proposed Project is intended to accommodate, rather than encourage, area growth. As noted in Chapter 1 electric demand exceeding the capacity of the interconnection with the regional system. Both projected load growth and to provide a second interconnection for system reliability.
RPU and SCE would utilize their existing regional labor forces for construction of the Proposed Project, and workers already residing in the Proposed Project vicinity would commute to the job- site from surrounding communities. It is highly unlikely that workers would uproot their children from the schools they are currently enrolled in and relocate their families into the Proposed Project area during the temporary construction period. Therefore, construction of the Proposed Project would not introduce any permanent sources of housing or new residents to the area, and would not impact the performance objectives of existing schools, parks or other public facilities, necessitating the construction of new, or augmentation of existing, public facilities.
b) Fail to comply withExceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
No Impact. The wastewater stream resulting from construction of the Proposed Project would include a small volume of wastewater generated by worker use of portable toilet facilities at the Proposed Project staging areas. Based on the size of the anticipated construction workforce (see Chapter 2, Proposed Project Description), the wastewater produced during Proposed Project construction would be minimal. Sanitation waste would be emptied from portable toilets and removed from the site by a licensed sanitation contractor. Wastewater would be disposed of according to RWQCB requirements.
No wastewater would be generated from operation of the Proposed Project.
Proposed Project wastewater would not exceed the wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board, and no impacts would result.
c) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
No Impact. The EMWDJurupa Community Services District provides water and wastewater treatment services to all unincorporated areas within Riverside County, which includes the area traversed by the Proposed Project. and the City of Jurupa Valley, including the area traversed by the Proposed Project. The City of Norco Department of Public Works is responsible for the operation, maintenance, production, and distribution of water to residents located within the City.
Sewer service is provided by the City of Norco. Wastewater is treated at the Western Riverside County Regional Wastewater Authority plant. RPU and the Riverside Public Works Department City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-303
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 serve as the water and wastewater purveyors in the City of Riverside, which includes the 69 kV subtransmission and new and upgraded substation elements of the RTRP.
Proposed Project construction would require the use of water to suppress fugitive dust generated by excavation at the Proposed Project sites, along transmission and subtransmission rights-of- way, and along access roads. Potable water would be imported to the site by workers for drinking and sanitation purposes. Water used during the construction phases for dust suppression and domestic drinking purposes would not generate wastewater that would entail treatment or disposal.
As previously noted, the use of portable toilet facilities at the Proposed Project staging areas would generate a minimal amount of wastewater that would be maintained by a licensed sanitation contractor, and would not require the construction of new or physical alteration of existing wastewater treatment facilities.
Operation of the Proposed Project would also require a minimal amount of water for emergency procedures (i.e., fire suppression), and for landscaping irrigation around the perimeters of the proposed Wilderness and Wildlife substations. Water utilized for these purposes would be absorbed or would naturally evaporate into the air and would not require treatment or disposal.
Therefore, construction of new or expanded wastewater facilities would not be necessary to serve the Proposed Project, and no impacts associated with such construction would result.
d) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities?, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
No Impact. Despite the fact that many development sites associated with the Proposed Project are already impervious surfaces, the RTRP would introduce some new impervious surfaces in the Proposed Project area from construction of the two new substations, transmission and subtransmission structure foundations, and Proposed Project access roads. The compaction of soil and the installation of concrete foundations would be required to support new Proposed Project-related infrastructure, including approximately seven acres for transmission towers and approximately nine acres for the new substations. Approximately 86 acres of land would also be subject to temporary construction disturbance (e.g., temporary access roads, pulling/tensioning sites) and would be returned to preconstruction conditions after the completion of Proposed Project construction. Measures provided in the Proposed Project SWPPP would address proper management of stormwater runoff flows and would be strictly followed by crews during construction. With implementation of the Proposed Project SWPPP, the net increase in impervious surfaces resulting from the RTRP would not substantially alter the volume or location of additional stormwater runoff that enters the drainage system. Therefore, under the Proposed Project, the construction of new, or expansion of existing, stormwater drainage facilities in the Proposed Project area are not planned.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-304
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 e) Exceed existing water supplies?
e) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? No Impact. The primary use of water during construction of the Proposed Project would be for dust suppression on access roads and active ground disturbance sites. The quantity of water required to manage fugitive dust typically depends on site-specific conditions such as the local climate, and the quantity, length, surface conditions, and amount of soil cover on Proposed Project access roads as well as other excavated areas. The water that would be required for construction would be trucked in from off-site. A small amount of water would also be required to be on-site for fire suppression. The work crew would bring in drinking water from off-site.
Water used during the construction period would be supplied by a local vendor or agency and would not require local water providers to obtain additional water entitlements. The source of the water has not been identified. The amount of water required for construction of the Proposed Project would be negligible, and would therefore not require new or expanded water supply resources or entitlements.
During operation of the Proposed Project substations, a minimal amount of water would also be necessary for emergency procedures (i.e., fire suppression), and to irrigate landscaped areas around the perimeters of the new Wilderness and Wildlife substations. The monthly quantity of water required for these uses would depend on the time of year and the local weather conditions, but would be relatively small compared to water resources available in the local permitted facilities. RPU and SCE would implement EPE UTIL-2 to minimize the quantity of water required for Proposed Project landscaping purposes.
Consequently, Proposed Project water needs would not surpass existing water service capacities, and would not require new or expanded water facilities or entitlements. No impacts associated with such construction would result.
f) Exceed existing wastewater capacity?
No Impact. Proposed Project construction would require the use of water to suppress dust generated during ground disturbing activities. Disposal would not be required because the amount of water needed for dust suppression would be minimal and would evaporate into the surrounding air or percolate into the ground.
As previously mentioned, construction of the Proposed Project would also generate a nominal amount of wastewater resulting from the temporary use of portable toilet facilities at the Proposed Project staging areas. The wastewater produced during Proposed Project construction would not significantly affect the service capacities of local wastewater treatment facilities.
Sanitation waste would be removed from the site by a licensed sanitation contractor and treated at the Riverside Water Quality Control Plant, and no other wastewater would result from
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-305
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 g) Exceed existingBe served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate ?
Less than Significant Impact. Construction of the Proposed Project would generate solid waste, mostly in the form of construction debris. The RCWMD regulates the collection, management, transportation, and disposal of solid waste at landfills which serve the Proposed Project area, including the Badlands, El Sobrante, and Lamb Canyon landfills. RPU and SCE would implement EPE UTIL-01 to minimize the potential for impacts to occur associated with the disposal of construction waste material, and to assist the local jurisdictions in meeting their solid waste diversion goals and AB 939 standards. Excess soil from tower foundation excavation would be backfilled in the same area, where feasible. The remaining nonhazardous construction debris would be disposed of as follows: municipal solid waste and waste consisting of large amounts of non-recyclable organic material (e.g., soil, vegetative material, cardboard boxes) would be transported to sanitary landfill facilities, and non-recyclable inert solid waste (e.g., asphalt, concrete fragments, and scrap metal) would be hauled to unclassified landfill facilities.
Hazardous waste would be picked up and transported by a licensed hauler to a disposal facility permitted to accept such waste. Solid waste resulting from construction of the RTRP would represent only a small fraction of the total landfill capacity available in the region.
Operation an
limited amount of solid waste, primarily related to packing materials associated with replacement parts. Excess solid waste materials would be removed from the substation sites and recycled, reused, or disposed at an approved landfill.
waste disposal needs, a less than significant impact would result.
h) ConflictComply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
No Impact. Solid waste generated by the Proposed Project would consist of construction debris, including concrete fragments, asphalt, scrap metal, soil, and some vegetative material. Treated wood poles associated with the 69 kV subtransmission lines requiring removal or replacement under the Proposed Project would be disposed of as waste by an approved RPU vendor pursuant to RPU waste management and agency requirements. Other construction waste that could not be diverted would be picked-up and transported to a landfill in the region permitted to accept the waste.
Since Proposed Project-generated construction waste would represent only a small fraction of the total landfill capacity available in the region, landfills in the area would have sufficient capacity to accept Proposed Project waste.
Riverside County and the City of Riverside have each adopted an SRRE that addresses solid waste diversion goals, recycling programs, and practical methods for achieving solid waste diversion objectives in compliance with AB 939 standards. As indicated by Table 3.2.13-5 (above), local jurisdictions within the Proposed Project area met or surpassed the minimum requirements of AB 939 between 2004 and 2006. RPU and SCE would implement EPE UTIL-01 to ensure that the maximum amount of Proposed Project construction waste materials would be diverted from disposal at a landfill.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-306
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
Therefore, the Proposed Project would comply with applicable statutes and standards related to solid waste; no impact would result.
i) Cause utility system disruptions or cause a co-location accident through the crossing or shared location with another utility line during construction of the Project? No Impact. To identify and ensure avoidance of a co-location accident with existing above- and underground utilities, standard procedures would be employed by SCE and RPU prior to Proposed Project construction. These procedures would generally follow a two step process:
1) At the completion of full preliminary design, plans would be sent to all other utilities to of approximately 20 utilities that are notified as standard practice on all RPU projects. Utilities would be requested to post on project plans and return, or provide as-built prints of their facilities that may be affected by the Proposed Project. This information would be transferred to final Proposed Project plans and the design would be modified to avoid any potential co-location accidents with existing utilities.
2) RPU and SCE would then notify the Underground Service Alert at least two working days prior to any Proposed Project excavation activities, in accordance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 4216-
This would facilitate the identification of existing underground utilities within 1,000 feet of the RTRP. Following notification by the Underground Service Alert, local utilities would have two days to mark the construction area, identifying the locations of their underground facilities in the field. Surveys and manual probing would also be conducted by RPU and SCE along Proposed Project alignments and sites prior to the use of powered-equipment drilling and excavation activities. Probing activities would help to determine the exact placement of pole and tower foundations along the alignment, eliminating potential interference with existing utility systems.
Significant Unavoidable Impacts
The Proposed Project will not result in any significant unavoidable impacts to public services or utilities systems.
References
California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). 2010. Jurisdiction Profiles.
Available at http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov. Accessed February 2010.
City of Riverside. 2007. Riverside General Plan 2025. November. _____. Fire Department. 2010. Available at http://www.riversideca.gov/fire/. Accessed February 2010.
_____. Police Department. Available at http://www.riversideca.gov/rpd/. Accessed February 2010.
_____. Police Department. Strategic Plan 2004-2009. Available at http://www.riversideca.gov/rpd/AGTF/RPD%20Strategic%20Plan.pdf. Accessed February 2010.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-307
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Michael Brandman Associates (MBA). Silverlakes Equestrian Sports Park Draft Environmental Impact Report. October 16, 2008.
Riverside County. 2008. Riverside County General Plan. Available at http://www.rctlma.org/genplan/default.aspx. Accessed August 2009.
Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD). 2010. Available at http://www.rvcfire.org/.
Accessed February 2010.
Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP). 2002. General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report. State Clearinghouse No. 2002051143. Available at http://www.tlma.co.riverside.ca.us/genplan/content/eir/volume1.html#4.15.3.
Riverside County Office of Education. 2009. Districts. Available at http://www.rcoe.k12.ca.us/.
Accessed August 2009.
http://www.riversidesheriff.org/.
Accessed June, 2010.
Urban Water Management Planning Act. Available at
http://www.ci.escondido.ca.us/depts/ut/UWMP.pdf.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-308
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
3.2.14 RECREATION
This section describes the environmental setting, regulatory setting, and potential impacts associated with the construction and operation of the Proposed Project with respect to recreation.
Environmental Setting
The Proposed Project would be located in the Inland Empire in northwestern Riverside County.
Riverside County incorporates a wide range of open space, parks, and recreational areas. The parks and recreational areas within the County also serve residents and visitors in the western portion of the County, as well as the desert, mountain, and Colorado River regions. The City of Riverside and City of Norco also maintain parks and recreational facilities within their municipal boundaries. In addition, private recreational facilities are found primarily in planned communities and apartment complexes. Figures 3.2.14-1 and 3.2.14-2 show the location of parks and recreation facilities in the study area.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-311
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Riverside County
Riverside County maintains 35 Regional Parks, encompassing roughly 23,317 acres. Open space and recreation areas offer residents and visitors myriad recreational opportunities while providing a valuable buffer between urbanized areas. The protection and preservation of open space areas from urbanization is an increasingly important issue for the County. The Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District manages and operates more than 44,000 acres, which includes 40 parks, reserves, historic or archaeological sites, and 90 miles of regional trails.
The district was created in 1990 and is an independent agency governed by the Board of Supervisors.
Riverside County trails are designed to serve several different groups. They are intended for the use of equestrians, hikers, joggers, and non-motorized bikers, as well as the casual walker. The Santa Ana River Trail is part of a planned regional trail extending across multiple jurisdictions from the Pacific Ocean in Orange County to the San Bernardino Mountains in San Bernardino County. Some communities have trails which are built and maintained by another entity, such as
Riverside County has four types of recreational trails:
Regional Trails - These are the main trails within the County, generally maintained and operated by the Riverside County Parks and Open Space District. They are designed to eventually provide linkages between areas which could be quite distant from each other. They are also designed to connect with state and federal trails as well as trails within other jurisdictions.
Community Trails - These trails are designed to link areas of a community to the regional trail system and to link areas of a community with each other. Such trails are typically maintained and operated by a local parks and recreation district.
Historic Trails - These are designated historic routes that recognize the history of Riverside. The Historic Trails designated on the bikeways and Trails Plan, Figure C-7, include the Juan Bautista representations of the general location of these historic routes and do not necessarily represent a planned Regional or Community Trail. In some cases, the trails have more detailed planning documents which describe interpretive routes for autos and/or non-motorized modes of Transportation. There generally are Regional or Community Trail designations that either follow or parallel these routes, thus providing opportunities to recognize the historic significance of these routes and affording the prospect of developing interpretive centers and signage.
The fourth type (National Forest and BLM Trails) is not applicable to the Proposed Project area because no such forests or trails exist in the Project area.
The Jurupa Area Recreation and Park District (JARPD) provides parks (neighborhood and community) and recreational facilities in the vicinity of the City of Jurupa Valley. The JARPD provides activities and amenities from its 18 facilities, including active sports parks, parks, its community centers, community pool, and gymnasiums. Funding sources for the JARPD include property taxes and assessments, Quimby Fees, and recreational program fees.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-312
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 There are four trail classifications in the Riverside County General Plan Circulation Element:
Class I Bike Paths, which are off-road, paved paths; Class I Bike Paths/Regional Trails (Combination Trails), which include both paved and unpaved areas to accommodate bicycle, equestrian, and pedestrian usage in a single facility; Class II Bike Lanes, which are on-road, signed and striped bicycle lanes; and Class III Bike Routes, which are on-road, signed bicycle routes with no separate lanes. Bicycling occurs throughout the County, but is more concentrated in the cities, and is more recreational than commute-oriented.
In addition, and according to the Riverside County 2008 General Plan Update, General Plan Advisory Committee, County Staff has recommended proposed revisions to the Circulation Element to update the Trails and Bikeway System.
The Jurupa Area Recreation and Park District (JARPD) was formed in 1984 to provide parks and recreation facilities and programs to residents of the Jurupa Valley area. The district provides activities and amenities from its 18 facilities including active sports parks, parks, its community centers and community pool and gymnasiums. Funding sources for the District include property taxes and assessments, Quimby Fees and recreational program fees.
City of Riverside
The City of Riverside owns and maintains 52 public parks and additional open space areas comprising more than 2,300 acres. Joint-use agreements are established with non-city-owned sports complexes, golf courses, and hobbyist parks so that public use of the site(s) is allowed in exchange for maintenance service performed by the City. The City of Riverside park system categorizes parks as local, regional/reserve parks, or signature parks, based on the size, location, and amenities provided.
According to the Park and Recreation Master Plan, the City currently maintains trails for equestrian, off-road biking, hiking, and other pedestrian-oriented uses. The intent of the multi- purpose recreational trails is to connect the major open space and recreational sites that surround the City, including the Santa Ana River and La Sierra/Norco Hills, to encircle the City. Trails provide connections to open space areas, as well as providing recreational opportunities. Existing trails in the City of Riverside include primary City trails along the Santa Ana River along the northwestern part of the City.
The City of Riverside has planned and constructed routes for bicycle, pedestrian, and equestrian travel and incorporated these plans into the Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan 2025. These routes generally follow streets in the developed portions of the General Plan 2025 area; the network also includes recreational routes in parks and other open space areas.
The City of Riverside also has joint-use agreements with Alvord Unified School District and Riverside Unified School District allowing resident use of district-owned and/or -operated ball fields, tennis courts, and swimming pools.
The City of Riverside Bicycle Master Plan designates a series of Class I and Class II bicycle facilities throughout the City.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-313
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 City of Norco
The City of Norco Parks and Community Services Department owns and maintain parks, open space, trails, and community facilities for public use in the City of Norco. The City of Norco also contains over 95 miles of pedestrian/equestrian trails. Currently, there are few bicycle-related improvements or trails in the Proposed Project area. The City proposes to connect the Santa Ana River Trail, which runs through the City of Norco and south of the Santa Ana River, to connect with the Santa Ana River Trail system.
Private
Private recreational facilities are found primarily in planned communities and apartment complexes. These facilities usually include tennis/basketball courts, pools/spas, and/or playgrounds. There are also several commercial recreational facilities within Riverside County.
Commercial recreational facilities within the study corridors/vicinity include public golf courses (Goose Creek Golf Club, Paradise Knolls Golf Course, Indian Hills Golf Club, Van Buren Golf Center) and equestrian centers. The Corona Remote Control Club flying field (La Sierra/Arlington Field) is also situated south of the Hidden Valley Wildlife Area. The Club focuses on the sport of radio control modeling.
Public parks, recreation, and preservation facilities/areas within the Proposed Project area are presented in Table 3.2.14-1 below.
TABLE 3.2.14-1. PUBLIC PARKS, RECREATION, AND PRESERVATION FACILITIES/AREAS
WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA
Existing
Facility/Area Type Location Amenities Acreage Jurisdiction Hidden Valley
Wildlife Area*
Regional
Nature and
Historic
Center
11401 Arlington
Avenue, Riverside
Open space,
interpretive center,
and hiking and
equestrian trails
1,500
Riverside County Regional
Park & Open-Space District***
[Note: The California
Department of Fish and Game
owns a small portion of the
river channel within the
Hidden Valley Wildlife Area]
Martha McLean-
Anza Narrows
Park
Regional 5759 Jurupa
Avenue, Riverside
Open space, picnic
facilities,
playground, hiking,
bicycle and
equestrian trails
40 Riverside County Regional
Park & Open-Space District***
Santa Ana River
Wetlands
Mitigation Bank**
--- --- --- --- Riverside County Regional
Park & Open-Space District***
Public/Quasi-
Public Lands*** --- --- Open space ---
Western Riverside County
Regional Conservation
Authority
Limonite
Meadows Park Community Road, Mira Loma
Playground, picnic
tables 3.49 Jurupa Area Recreation and
Park District
Horseshoe Lake
Park Community 8788 Lakeview
Avenue, Riverside Undeveloped 13.73 Jurupa Area Recreation and Park District
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-314
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Existing
Facility/Area Type Location Amenities Acreage Jurisdiction Rutland Park Neighborhood 7000 Rutland
Avenue, Riverside
Basketball half
courts, sand lot
volleyball courts,
horseshoe pits,
playground, picnic
tables, barbeques,
and covered picnic
area
8.63 City of Riverside Park,
Recreation & Community
Services
Hole Lake Site Special Use ---
Undeveloped
(plans for
trailhead/equestrian
trailer parking lot)
61.0 City of Riverside Park,
Recreation & Community
Services
Savi Ranch Special Use --- Undeveloped 37.62
City of Riverside Park,
Recreation & Community
Services
River Trails Park --- --- --- ---
City of Norco Parks,
Recreation & Community
Services
*Land & Water Conservation Fund Grant Site (as of 3/30/2006). **A Mitigation Bank is an area with resource value, where the owner records a conservation easement on the property and sells mitigation credits prior to the execution of a mitigation banking agreement with the Wildlife Agencies. Mitigation areas are permanently conserved and managed for natural resource values. Mitigation areas are intended to protect resources in large, connected areas in advance of the need for mitigation and are therefore considered a valuable tool for assembling the MSHCP Conservation Area. ***The Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District provides countywide or regional facilities that are generally large facilities and are designed to be used by residents of the entire region. County parks permit biking, hiking, equestrian use, and camping. There are no camping facilities at Hidden Valley Wildlife Area. Management of Hidden Valley Wildlife Area emphasizes wildlife habitat conservation and ality Control Plant wetland ponds were established in this area). There are efforts underway to improve wildlife habitat value in the riparian areas by removing giant reed. ****A subset of MSHCP Conservation Area lands totaling approximately 347,000 acres of lands known to be in public/private ownership and expected to be managed for open space value and/or in a manner that contributes to the conservation of Covered Species (including lands contained in existing reserves).
Table 3.2.14-2 presents the existing public (adopted) trails traversed and adjacent to the Proposed Project.
TABLE 3.2.14-2. EXISTING PUBLIC (ADOPTED) TRAILS TRAVERSED AND ADJACENT TO THE
PROPOSED PROJECT
Component Type General Location Orientation General Plan 230 kV transmission
line (I-15)
Class I Bike Path/Regional
Trail (Santa Ana River Trail*)
Wildlife/Wilderness Substation
Sites to Arlington Avenue
City of Riverside
Adjacent Jurupa Area
230 kV transmission
line (I-15)
Class I Bike Path/Regional
Trail
Arlington Avenue City of
Riverside Traversed Jurupa Area
230 kV transmission
line (I-15)
Class I Bike Path/Regional
Trail (Santa Ana River Trail*)
North of North Drive City of
Norco Traversed Jurupa Area
230 kV transmission
line (I-15) Regional Trail Santa Ana River area - (north of the City of Norco) Traversed Jurupa Area
230 kV transmission
line (I-15) Community Trail Lucretia Avenue (south of 68th Street) Traversed Jurupa Area
230 kV transmission
line (I-15) Community Trail
Lucretia Avenue (between
Dana Avenue and Wineville
Avenue)
Adjacent Jurupa Area
230 kV transmission
line (I-15) Regional Trail Wineville Avenue (at 68th
Street) Traversed Jurupa Area
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-315
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Component Type General Location OrientationGeneral Plan 230 kV transmission
line (I-15) Community Trail 68th Street (between Wineville Avenue and I-15) Adjacent Eastvale Area
230 kV transmission
line (I-15)
Class I Bike Path/Regional
Trail Bellegrave Avenue Traversed Jurupa Area
230 kV transmission
line (I-15) Community Trail Wineville Avenue (Landon
Drive to Galena Street) Adjacent Jurupa Area
230 kV transmission
line (I-15)
Primary Equestrian, Trail,
Bike and Pedestrian (Santa
Ana River Trail*)
Hole Lake Site Traversed
City of
Riverside
2025
230 kV transmission
line (I-15)
Primary Equestrian, Trail,
Bike and Pedestrian (Santa
Ana River Trail*)
Hole Lake Site (west to
Hidden Valley Wildlife Area) Adjacent
City of
Riverside
2025
230 kV transmission
line (I-15)
Secondary Equestrian, Trail,
Bike and Pedestrian (4
connectors)
Hidden Valley Wildlife Area Traversed
City of
Riverside
2025
69 kV
Subtransmission
Lines RERC to
Harvey Lynn
Substation
Secondary Equestrian, Trail,
Bike and Pedestrian
Mitchell Avenue (at Hole
Avenue) Traversed
City of
Riverside
2025
* Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District officially recognizes only portions of the Santa Ana River Trail as an existing off- road trail. The trail has two trailhead parking areas with restrooms, picnic facilities, and visitor parking to the Hidden Valley Nature Center to accommodate increased visitor use. The Santa Ana River Trail is a Class 1 bicycle path in the City of Riverside area which parallels the Santa Ana River channel. This trail is designated as a City of Riverside Primary trail, allowing pedestrian, bicycle, and equestrian uses, although it is mainly used as a bike path.
230 kV Transmission Line
The proposed 230
Lake and Savi Ranch park sites. The Hole Lake site includes a proposed trail staging area (Jurupa Trailhead to the Santa Ana River Trail) and equestrian trailer and trailhead parking lots.
Portions of the Hidden Valley Wildlife Area and the Goose Creek Golf Club are also traversed by the 230 kV transmission line. Trails potentially affected by the 230 kV transmission line are addressed in Table 3.2.14-2.
69 kV Subtransmission Lines (Wilderness Substation to Mountain View Substation, Wilderness/Wildlife Substation to Jurupa Avenue, RERC to Harvey Lynn Substation and Freeman Substation)
The proposed RERC to Harvey Lynn Substation subtransmission line crosses the Mitchell Avenue trail identified in the City General Plan 2025, a Secondary Equestrian, Trail, Bike and Pedestrian trail.
Wildlife/Wilderness 230 kV Substations
The proposed Wildlife and Wilderness Substations are located on City of Riverside-owned land.
The land is not being used for recreational purposes. The Santa Ana River Trail is situated north of the site.
69 kV Substation Upgrades (RERC, Mountain View, Harvey Lynn, Freeman) The existing RERC, Mountain View, Harvey Lynn, and Freeman substations are located on land utilized for industrial purposes.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-316
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
Fiber Optic Telecommunications System
The fiber optic cable would be installed on existing overhead distribution poles, on new 230 kV transmission structures, or in new underground conduit. New underground fiber cable ROWs along the existing distribution pole line would be required for installation of the underground fiber optic cable.
Regulatory Setting
Federal
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, 16 U.S.C., Section 460 1-8 The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) is a conservation program established by Congress in 1964 to create parks and open spaces; to protect wilderness, wetlands and refuges; to (NPS)
Pacific West Regional Office administers the LWCF program for California and other western states. Property acquired or developed with LWCF assistance is to be retained and used for public outdoor recreation.
Conversions of properties under Section 6(f)(3) of the LWCF Act occur when a project or use eliminates or diminishes the public outdoor recreation of protected lands. According to 36 CFR
59.2 (Prerequisites for conversion approval), requests for permission to convert LWCF assisted properties in whole or in part to other than public outdoor recreation uses must be submitted by the State Liaison Officer to the NPS Regional Director in writing. NPS will consider conversion requests if the following prerequisites have been met, including:
a) All practical alternatives have been evaluated;
b) The fair market value of the property has been established and a substitute property is of at least of fair market value as established by an appraisal conducted in accordance with uniform Federal appraisal standards;
c) The property proposed for replacement is of reasonably equivalent usefulness and location as that being converted;
d) The property proposed for substitution meets the eligibility requirements for LWCF assisted acquisition;
e) In the case of assisted sites which are partially rather than wholly converted, the impact of the converted portion on the remainder shall be considered. f) All necessary coordination with other Federal agencies has been satisfactorily accomplished
g) The guidelines for environmental evaluation have been satisfactorily completed and considered by NPS during its review of the proposed 6(f)(3) action; h) State intergovernmental clearinghouse review procedures have been adhered to if the proposed conversion and substitution constitute significant changes to the original Land and Water Conservation Fund project.
i) The proposed conversion and substitution are in accord with the Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) and/or equivalent recreation plans.
The authority to make a final determination as to whether a potential Section 6(f) conflict exists rests with the NPS.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-317
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Land that is converted must be replaced with land of equal value, usefulness, and location.
Repayment of the amount of LWCF assistance in lieu of replacement property will not be allowed, nor will construction of replacement facilities.
The Proposed Project (230 kV transmission line) traverses lands (12.0 acres) which have received federal funding through the LWCF program. These lands include the Hidden Valley Wildlife Area (230 kV transmission line), and Santa Ana River Wetlands Mitigation Bank.
Placement of 230 kV transmission line components on these lands would constitute a conflict with the LWCF, according to the California State Parks, Office of Grants and Local Services, which is the Agency that oversees the LWCF program in California.
State
There are no State regulations applicable to the Proposed Project relative to recreation.
Regional And Local
Riverside County General Plan
The Riverside County General Plan Multipurpose Open Space Element provides regulation for parks and recreation land use and oversight. In addition, the Land Use Element provides information that relates directly to preserving and enhancing open space through land use-related methods. The Land Use Element includes restrictions on development of open space, focusing urban growth, providing recreational and open space opportunities within the built environment, and achieving a balance between urban uses and open space/habitat.
The following Riverside County General Plan policies that relate to recreation may be applicable to the Proposed Project:
Policy OS 20.2: Prevent unnecessary extension of public facilities, services, and utilities, for urban uses, into Open-Space-Conservation designated areas.
Policy OS 20.3: Discourage the absorption of dedicated park lands by non-recreational uses, public or private. Where absorption is unavoidable, replace park lands that are absorbed by other uses with similar or improved facilities and programs.
Policy OS 20.6: Require new development to provide implementation strategies for the funding of both active and passive parks and recreational sites.
Policy LU 19.5: Require that new development meet the parkland requirements as established in the Quimby Act and County enabling ordinances.
Policy C 16.4: Identify all existing rights-of-way which have been obtained for trail purposes through the land development process.
City of Riverside General Plan 2025
Arroyos and Biological Resources
Policy OS-7.1: Focus river improvements on the following areas: Fairmount Park and Mt.
Rubidoux, Tequesquite Avenue and the Old Landfill, Martha McLean Park, Van Buren Bridge City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-318
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 and the Hidden Valley Wildlife Area.
Policy OS-7.3:Preserve and expand open space along the Santa Ana River to protect water quality, riparian habit and recreational uses.
Policy OS-7.4:Interconnect the Santa Ana River Trail with other parks, cultural and community centers throughout the City through trails and linkages to encourage more pedestrian and bicycle usage and reduce automobile traffic.
Park and Recreation Master Plan
Policy PR-2.6:Provide greater amenities at access points and trail hubs, including identification and directional signs, marked parking stalls, water facilities for equestrians, cyclists and pedestrians, hitching posts, shade and trash receptacles. Additional amenities at trail hubs could include picnic tables and rest rooms.
Santa Ana River
Policy LU-2.1:Cooperate and collaborate with Riverside County in developing recreational opportunities along the Santa Ana River.
Policy LU-2.2:Utilize the 2004 Santa Ana River Task Force Report in planning, programming and implementing environmental and recreational improvements to the River area.
Walking and Biking
Policy CCM-10.1:Ensure the provision of bicycle facilities consistent with the Bicycle Master Plan.
Policy CCM-10.2:Incorporate bicycle and pedestrian trails and bicycle racks in future development projects.
Policy CCM-10.7:Maintain an extensive trails network that supports bicycles, pedestrians and horses and is linked to the trails systems of adjacent jurisdictions.
City of Riverside Park and Recreation Master Plan
park and recreation facilities and to determine the future needs and opportunities in the City (City of Riverside 2003). It also addresses the Trails Master Plan and makes recommendations to the trails system as it pertains to park, recreation, and open space connections. The City has laid out policies in the Master Plan that are intended to provide a framework of support and guidance.
Policies and implementation strategies for the Master Plan include:
parklands and park facilities;
trails and parkways;
open space;
natural resources management;
maintenance;
community participation and stewardship; and
funding and improvements.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-319
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
Impact Assessment
Significance Threshold Criteria
For the purposes of the following evaluation, the Proposed Project would cause a significant impact on recreation if it would:
a) 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; or
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment; or c) Disrupt recreational activities, which would adversely affect the recreational value of existing facilities.
Environmental Protection Elements
Following best management and design practices throughout conception, construction, and implementation of the Proposed Project ensures that public safety is paramount and potential environmental impacts are minimized through avoidance. Table 3.2.14-3 outlines the proposed SCE and RPU Environmental Protection Elements (EPEs) related to recreation. As discussed above in Section 3.1.2, the EPEs have been included as part of the Proposed Project; therefore, the impact analysis section that follows includes the implementation of the EPEs listed below.
Any impact resulting from the implementation of the Proposed Project (including the EPEs) is identified below. Where mitigation measures would reduce these impacts, the measures and their effectiveness have been included in the impact discussion.
TABLE 3.2.14-3. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ELEMENTSRECREATION Environmental
Protection Element Description
REC-01
Recreational Areas. In the event short-term restrictions on recreation use at parks, or on existing bike lanes, bike paths, or trails are necessary during project construction, the public would be notified in coordination with the agencies that manage the impacted resource.
REC-02 Closure notices. When temporary park or trail closures are necessary, onsite notices would be posted prior to the closure.
REC-03 Revegetation. Any park areas temporarily affected by project construction would be revegetated and returned to preconstruction conditions.
Mitigation Measures
Specific mitigation measures (see Table 3.2.14-4) would be applied for impacts related to recreation.
TABLE 3.2.14-4. MITIGATION MEASURES - RECREATION
Mitigation Measure Description
MM REC-01
Recreation Area Closures. When temporary short-term closures to recreational areas are necessary for construction activities, closures would be coordinated with recreational facility owners. Schedule construction activities to avoid heavy recreational use periods (e.g., holidays or tournaments). Post notices prior to the closure.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-320
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Mitigation Measure Description
MM REC-02
Conversion of Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Property [Section 6(f)]. Where a conversion of LWCF property would occur, coordinate with the National Park Service, California State Parks- Office of Grants and Local Services, and the grantee to replace the property used by the Proposed Project in size, value and function through a conversion process.
Environmental Impacts
Parks, recreation, and preservation areas may be particularly susceptible to disturbances from noise, traffic, dust, or other environmental impacts. Activities occurring during the construction or operation of a project in the vicinity of recreation areas also have the potential to restrict access or preclude use of the recreation facilities. In general, recreational resources (including parks, open space, playgrounds, and playfields), recreational activities (such as bicycling or hiking), and recreationists are considered to be sensitive receptors for the purposes of the DEIR.
Proposed Project components would be sited on or adjacent to recreational facilities, parks, open space and trails. Parks, recreation, and preservation areas traversed by the proposed 230 kV transmission line are identified in the Land Use Technical Report included in the Technical Appendices to this DEIR. With the exception of the proposed RERC to Harvey Lynn Substation subtransmission line, parks, recreation, and preservation areas were not identified as being traversed by the 69 kV subtransmission lines. Descriptions of parks, recreation, and preservation areas within the Proposed Project area are provided in Table 3.2.14-2.
The impact analysis considers the potential adverse impacts on recreational services associated with the construction, operation, and maintenance of the Proposed Project.
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated.
No Impact. Increases in demand for recreational facilities are typically associated with substantial increases in population. The Proposed Project would not contain a residential component that would result in increased usage of existing recreational facilities once operational. The construction work force would consist primarily of local workers; therefore, construction activities associated with the Proposed Project would not increase the use of parks or recreational facilities, nor would the Proposed Project result in the need to construct or expand recreational facilities. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in a substantial increase in demand for recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the existing facilities would occur or be accelerated.
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.
No Impact. The Proposed Project does not include any plans for the addition of any recreational facilities, nor would it require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in any adverse physical effects on the environment from construction or expansion of additional recreational facilities.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-321
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 c) Disrupt recreational activities, which would adversely affect the recreational value of existing facilities.
Construction of the Proposed Project (230 kV transmission line) would temporarily disrupt operations of the Goose Creek Golf Club.
Less than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporation. Construction of the proposed 230 kV transmission line traverses the Goose Creek Golf Club. Construction activities associated with the 230 kV transmission line would require a steel lattice structure on the golf course.
Construction activities would require the temporary closure of some holes and/or a portion of the driving range.
Construction activities would cause temporary interruptions to the operations of the golf course, which would impact the golfers utilizing the course. However, implementation of mitigation measure MM REC-01 would coordinate course hole and/or driving range closures with the manager/owner of the golf course, would schedule construction activities to avoid heavy use periods (e.g., holidays or tournaments), and would post notice of the closure at the golf course prior to the closure. As such, impacts resulting in disruptions to the operations of the Goose Creek Golf Club would be short-term and temporary, resulting in less than significant impacts.
Construction or operation of the Proposed Project would disrupt recreational activities such that recreational values would be reduced.
Construction and operational activities could potentially disrupt access to established recreational facilities/areas or otherwise disturb activities in such areas. Impacts associated with construction activities would be temporary in nature and occur for short periods in any one location. Prior notification would be made with facility managers in scheduling specific construction activities so that they do not disrupt recreational use during peak use times or occurrences, and construction notices would be posted near the recreational facility prior to construction to allow for adequate noticing to recreational users prior to construction activities commencing (MM Rec- 01) Impacts associated with operation would continue for the lifetime of the Proposed Project and are therefore considered to be permanent or recurring impacts. Once constructed, the Proposed Project would be a passive feature that, through careful siting of structure (poles, LSTs and TSPs) locations, would not disrupt recreational activities to the point of decreasing recreational value. It would not create on-going disruptive activities. Operational activities associated with the Proposed Project would consist of occasional line patrols. These would be scheduled with recreational facility managers and would be infrequent. Impacts would be less than significant.
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporation. The Proposed Project (230 kV transmission line ROW) would span portions (12.013.5 acres) of the Hidden Valley Wildlife Area and Santa Ana River Wetlands Mitigation Bank. Spanning or placement of this Proposed Project component on these lan
to the California State Parks, Office of Grants and Local Services, which is the Agency that oversees the LWCF program in California. Conversions are evaluated for approval by the NPS in conjunct
resource, there are numerous prerequisites that must occur before the NPS agrees with the conversion of the resource. As such, with the implementation of mitigation measure MM REC- 02 the Proposed Project would reduce the impact of converting LWCF land to less than City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-322
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 significant.
Replacement land will be determined when the conversion process is initiated. Replacement property need not necessarily be directly adjacent to or close by the converted site.
According to the Land and Water Conservation Fund State Assistance Program Manual, October 1, 2008, the State may allow underground utility easements within a Section 6(f)(3) area as long as the easement site is restored to its pre-existing condition to ensure the continuation of public outdoor recreational use of the easement area within 12 months after the ground within the easement area is disturbed. In areas where impacts are potentially significant, immitigable, and unavoidable, impacts could be reduced to less than significant if the transmission line of the Proposed Project was undergrounded. In those limited areas where impacts are potentially significant, immitigable, and unavoidable, some impacts could be reduced to less than significant in Chapter 6
(Alternatives), undergrounding even limited sections of the Project line as a means of potential mitigation is infeasible. While undergrounding may reduce some of undergrounding would be greater and, as such, it is not considered a feasible mitigation measure for the Proposed Project. Specifically, undergrounding requires substantially more excavation than overhead structures. This level of ground disturbance would require several times more heavy equipment than overhead construction. Complete ground disturbance along the line (or sections) would make it difficult or impossible to avoid sensitive areas, such as wetlands and stream crossingsparticularly in the area where the Project crosses the Santa Ana River. In addition, vegetation restoration options are much more limited for undergrounding as opposed to the currently proposed Project. This is because vegetation growing over an underground line would need to support heat dissipation and prevent root intrusion into the lines. Further, during future repairs of an underground line, entire sections between vaults, approximately 2,000 feet apart, may require re-excavation. Undergrounded portions within the Santa Ana River corridor would be prone to washouts during a flood event, requiring re-installation. These considerations equate to increased environmental impacts to air quality, agricultural resources, biological resources, cultural resources, and geologic and water resources, as impacts would be inflicted again and again during any future repairs or wash-out incidents. Further, outages would be prolonged on the underground line, due to poor accessibility and time required in identifying the failure location, excavating the underground line, and correcting any outage. AlsoIn addition to the reasons discussed above, economic considerations associated with undergrounding show that undergrounding is infeasible as a mitigation measure, even for more limited sections of the Project, as discussed in Chapter 6. In all, then, undergrounding even a limited portion of the Project as a means of potential mitigation is both infeasible and environmentally more damaging
The proposed 230
Hole Lake and Savi Ranch park sites, various trails including the Santa Ana River Trail (refer to Table 3.2.14-2), and as noted above, the Hidden Valley Wildlife Area. Construction activities would result in noise, dust, and traffic that would reduce the aesthetic value of the area(s) and disrupt recreational and/or open space areas. Construction vehicles could also potentially restrict access by users of these facilities/areas in order to protect the safety of public recreationists.
During construction, ground work would be required at each structure location as well as along select roadways between the locations. As a result, these areas would be temporarily closed City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-323
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 during construction activities. These impacts would be temporary and of short duration, lasting only as long as required to complete the activity in a given location. Depending on the activity (structure erection, transmission line stringing, etc.), the duration of construction activities at any one location along the ROW would generally range from a few minutes to a few days.
During operational activities, it is expected that ground work would be limited to transmission structure locations and other ground-based infrastructure. Recreational resources that are adjacent to areas where ground work is necessary would be temporarily restricted from use during such activities, thus restricting access to or resulting in the disruption of normal recreational activities within such areas. In addition, impacts would also occur if operational activities require that certain roads and/or trails be closed for access to infrastructure, and such closures remove access to existing recreational resources or opportunities. Such closures would be temporary and of short duration, lasting only as long as required to complete necessary operation and maintenance of infrastructure.
The restriction or disruption of recreational resources due to construction, operational, and maintenance activities would adversely impact members of the public who would otherwise use affected recreational resources during the time period(s) that they would be restricted or disrupted. Implementation of mitigation measures MM-REC-01 (Recreation Area Closures) and MM-REC-02 (Replace land purchased or improved with Land and Water Conservation Funds) in addition to EPE REC-1 (Recreational Areas), EPE REC-2 (Closure Notices), and EPE REC-3 (Revegetation) serve to minimize the impacts to recreation users and would ensure that impacts are moderate or less than significant.
Significant Unavoidable Impacts
With the adoption of the Mitigation Measures, the Proposed Project will not result in significant unavoidable impacts to Recreation.
References
Baxter, Ronald J. 2006. Riverside County, Regional Park and Open Space District, Hidden Valley Wildlife Area. Personal communication on May 8, 2006.
Bee, Natalie. 2007. State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Parks and Recreation. Personal communication on March 10 and August 1, 2007.
Brewer, Mark. 2006, 2007. Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District. Personal communication on April 26, 2006 and April 25, 2007.
California Department of Fish and Game. Summary of Hunting Regulations & Laws. Available at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/licensing/pdffiles/2007HuntingDigest-BigGamePages48-
54.pdf. Accessed May 25, 2007.
City of Riverside. Riverside Renaissance Initiative. Available at http://www.riversideca.gov/pdf2/rivren.pdf. Accessed 2007. _____. 2003. City of Riverside Park and Recreation Master Plan Update. _____. 2004. City of Riverside Community Parks and Facilities, July. Available at http://www.riversideca.gov/park_rec/PRGuide.pdf.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-324
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 _____. 2004. General Plans and Supporting Documents, Environmental Impact Report.
November.
_____. 2005. General Plan 2025 Final Program Environmental Impact Report. Available at http://www.riversideca.gov/planning/genplan2025-2.htm.
_____. 2007. Riverside General Plan 2025. November.
County of Riverside. 2003. General Plan, Jurupa Area Plan. _____. 2003. Riverside County Integrated Project General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 20022051143), March. Available at http://www.rctlma.org/genplan/default.aspx.
_____. 2003. Riverside County Integrated Project, General Plan. Adopted October 7, 2003.
Available at http://www.rctlma.org/generalplan/index.html. _____. 2006. County Regional Park and Open Space District, Parks Directory. Available at http://www.riversidecountyparks.org/park-directory/.
Guerrero, Frank. 2006. Jurupa Area Recreation and Park District. Personal communication on March 30, 2006.
Michael Brandman Associates (MBA). 2008. Silverlakes Equestrian Sports Park Draft Environmental Impact Report. October 16, 2008.
National Park Service. 2006. Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail Guide, October.
Available at http://www.solideas.com/DeAnza/TrailGuide/.
Riverside County Integrated Project. 2003. General Plan Final Program, Environmental Impact Report, Volume I. Riverside County, California.
Rodriguez, Dan. 2006. Jurupa Area Recreation and Park District. Personal communication on March 30, 2006 and April 21, 2006.
Roman, Sian. 2006. Riverside County, Regional Park and Open Space District. Personal communication on March 28, 2006.
State of California. The Resources Agency, Department of Parks and Recreation. 6(f)(3) Boundary Maps, Project Numbers: 06-00199, 06-00517, 06-00292, 06-00355, and 06- 00321, Grant Program: Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF).
Winzler & Kelly. 2010. Jurupa Public Hearing Draft, Comprehensive Fiscal Analysis.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-325
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
3.2.15 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Information in t
Engineers, Inc. and KOA Corporation, AprilJune 2010).
Regional Setting
The regional setting for the Proposed Project includes the northwest corner of Riverside County, with Proposed Project components located within unincorporated sections of Riverside County as well as the more urbanized City of Riverside. Communities in Riverside County within the northern and western areas of the regional setting include Norco, Eastvale, and Mira Loma in addition to the Cities of Riverside and Jurupa Valley.
Methodology for Resource Inventory and Other Data Collection In order to complete the traffic impact sensitivity analysis, a field survey was conducted to collect data on the characteristics (e.g., number of lanes) of major area roadways that would be crossed by the Proposed Project links (defined as orientation to route). In order to incorporate information into the analysis from planned area roadway projects, information was compiled from Transportation Improvement Plans (TIPs) from the County of Riverside and the City of Transportation Plan (RTP). The RTP is a multi-modal, long-range planning document prepared in coordination with federal, state, and other regional, sub-regional, and local agencies in southern California. The RTP includes programs and policies for congestion management, transit, bicycles and pedestrians, roadways, freight, and finances. The State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP), maintained by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), was also reviewed.
Environmental Setting
The Proposed Project study area includes several local and major regional transportation facilities that traverse the City of Riverside and Riverside County. Local roads consist of two- lane residential streets and four-lane arterial roads. Major regional highways in proximity to the Proposed Project area include Interstate 15, State Route 60, and State Route 91.
The proposed 69 kV line or 230 kV lines would cross over the following arterials: La Sierra Avenue, Magnolia Avenue, Limonite Avenue, and Van Buren Boulevard. Arterials have been assigned measures of effectiveness by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) as part of its responsibility for congestion management in the County. The measure of LOS is a qualitative measure of traffic
facility based on volumes over a specific time period and the design capacity of that facility over CMP System of roads (Interstates, st According to
effectiveness for arterials.
2003 General Plan, the target LOS along all County-maintained roads and conventional State The City of Riverside follows Riverside County level of service standards. . Impacts for
major roadways (the study roadway segment points) and the Wilderness/Jurupa and Van City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-326
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 caused or worsened by the Proposed Project.
After the issuance of the DEIR for public review and comment, and in light of comments and input received from the public, SCE reevaluated the proposed 230 kV transmission line route across the Vernola Marketplace and determined that shifting the line to the west closer to I-15 would be feasible. This change would require the proposed transmission line to cross Limonite Avenue closer to the northbound on- and off-ramps at the interchange.
Table 3.2.15-1 is a list of the roads and trails where construction of the 230 kV transmission line and the 69 kV subtransmission lines would occur either parallel to and/or across these roadways and trails and will likely create temporary closure or lane reduction. The final design of the Proposed Project may result in the addition or removal of roadways that could be affected by construction. The existing and future LOS were not identified for these roads and streets.
TABLE 3.2.15-1. PROJECT AREA ROADWAYS AND TRAILS IN PROXIMITY TO PROPOSED LINE
CONSTRUCTION
Roadway/Trail/Bus Transit Route Number of Lanes Orientation to Route 230 kV Transmission Line
Santa Ana River Trail Paved trail Crossing & Parallel
Van Buren Boulevard* 6 Crossing
68th Street* 2 Parallel
Limonite Avenue* 4 Crossing
Interstate 15/Limonite Avenue on-ramp 6 Parallel
Interstate 15 6 Parallel
Bellegrave Avenue 2 Crossing
Wineville Road 2 Crossing & Parallel
69 kV Subtransmission Line (RERC Substation to Freeman Substation) Acorn Street 2 Parallel
Jurupa Avenue 6 Parallel
Van Buren Boulevard* 2 Crossing
Doolittle Avenue 2 Parallel
Arlington Avenue* 4 Parallel
Rutland Avenue 2 Parallel
Cypress Avenue 2 Crossing & Parallel
Crest Avenue* 2 Crossing & Parallel
Wells Avenue 2 Crossing & Parallel
Mull Avenue 2 Crossing & Parallel
Tyler Street* 2 Crossing & Parallel
Cook Avenue 2 Crossing
Hole Avenue* 4 Crossing
Magnolia Avenue 6 Crossing
Tyler Street* 6 Crossing & Parallel
Highway 91 / Indiana Avenue intersection 4 Crossing & Parallel Indiana Avenue* 4 Crossing & Parallel
Gibson Street 2 Crossing & Parallel
69 kV Subtransmission Line (RERC Substation to Harvey Lynn Substation) Acorn Street 2 Parallel
Jurupa Avenue 6 Parallel
Van Buren Boulevard* 2 Crossing
Doolittle Avenue 2 Parallel
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-327
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Roadway/Trail/Bus Transit RouteNumber of Lanes Orientation to Route Arlington Avenue* 4 Parallel
Rutland Avenue 2 Parallel
Cypress Avenue 2 Parallel
Crest Avenue* 2 Crossing & Parallel
Wells Avenue 2 Crossing & Parallel
Tomlinson Avenue 2 Parallel
Mull Avenue 2 Crossing & Parallel
Mobbley Avenue 2 Crossing & Parallel
Jones Avenue 2 Crossing & Parallel
Cook Avenue 2 Crossing & Parallel
Hole Avenue 4 Crossing & Parallel
Minnier Avenue 2 Crossing & Parallel
Schuyler Avenue 2 Crossing & Parallel
69 kV Subtransmission Line (Wilderness/Wildlife Substations to RERC Substation) Wilderness Avenue 2 Crossing
69 kV Subtransmission Line (Wilderness/Wildlife Substations to Mountain View Substation) Industrial Avenue 2 Parallel
Railroad Tracks/Jurupa Avenue 2 Crossing & Parallel
*Denotes Riverside Transit Agency bus route (as of January 8, 2012)
Fixed-route transit services and demand response (dial-a-ride) transit services are provided by the Riverside Transportation Authority (RTA). Figure 3.2.15-1 shows the location of RTA bus transit routes in the Proposed Project area. RTA also participates with Omnitrans in San Bernardino County to provide express bus service between downtown Riverside and downtown San Bernardino, connecting with express service to Ontario. Additionally, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) supports a number of specialized transportation programs, including shared ride and vanpool services, social service dial-a-ride, and specialized services for seniors and persons with disabilities. Metrolink is the regional commuter rail service provider, with two routes located in the Proposed Project area (see Figure 3.2.15-1).
Greyhound Bus Lines provides private transportation services that link the principal population centers of Riverside County with other regions.
Union Pacific Railroad Company and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company operate railway lines within the Proposed Project study area.
Pedestrian facilities include hiking and walking trails. One major facility, the Santa Ana River Trail, is proposed to extend along the Santa Ana River from the foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains to the Pacific Ocean.
Bicycles are permitted on all roads in the State of California with the exception of access- bicycle network, regardless of whether or not a bikeway stripe, stencil, or sign is present on a given street. The City of Riverside has a Bicycle Master Plan (Alta Planning + Design 2007) that documents existing and planned bicycle facilities, as well as goals and objectives for bicycle transportation management. The Bicycle Master Plan provides classifications for certain bicycle facilities located in the Proposed Project area. The previously mentioned Santa Ana River Trail is also classified by the City of Riverside as a Class I Bikeway. A Class I bikeway provides bicycle travel on a paved right-of-way completely separated from any street or highway. A Class City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-328
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 II bikeway provides a striped and stenciled lane for one-way travel on a street. In the Proposed Project area, the following three roadway sections are classified as Class II bikeways:
Arlington Avenue from Coolwater Drive to Van Buren Boulevard Van Buren Boulevard from Arlington Avenue to California Avenue Van Buren Boulevard from the north Riverside city limits to Jurupa Avenue Two general aviation airports, Riverside Municipal Airport and Flabob, are located in the study area.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-329
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 FIGURE 3.2.15-1. TRANSIT ROUTES
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-330
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-331
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Regulatory Setting
Federal
Federal Aviation Administration regulation
navigable airspace.
State
The California Vehicle Code (CVC) and the California Streets and Highway Code outline regulations as pertains to the transportation of hazardous waste within the State. The California Streets and Highway Code includes regulations for the care and protection of State and County highways and provisions for the issuance of written permits.
Local
Riverside General Plan 2025 are the plans that are used by Riverside County and the City of Riverside to manage the transportation system.
Impact Assessment
Significance Threshold Criteria
The CEQA Environmental Checklist Form has the following criteria as it relates to transportation and traffic.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths and mass transit? 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? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?
Methodology
This section discusses the sensitivity ratings and values utilized for determining impact potential along the length of the Proposed Project links, and is focused on traffic impacts that could occur outside of the defined study roadway segment points. This sensitivity framework was then
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-332
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Sensitivity Ratings
Sensitivity ratings were developed for transportation resources that could be significantly impacted by the Proposed Project, in order to help determine the sensitivity to the siting and construction of the proposed transmission lines. Further, the sensitivity ratings were intended to compare geographic opportunities by Project links. Transportation facilities that would be crossed by the Project links would have similar sensitivity to impacts based on the type of facility or resource crossed by the links, and were therefore analyzed by this specialized methodology.
Sensitivity is defined as a measure of probable adverse response of a resource to direct and indirect impacts associated with the construction, operation, and maintenance of a transmission line. Sensitivity ratings were assigned to a number of transportation resources within the study impact potential that construction and maintenance of a transmission line would have upon that resource for the short-term (construction period) and long-term (operations and maintenance) durations of the Project. The determinations of sensitivity levels included consideration of the following:
Roadway Classification: Functional classification is used to categorize roadways according to their predominant role in the highway network and their physical setting.
Typically, the role of the roadway in the network is determined by the level of mobility provided to automobile traffic by that roadway. On this basis, the functional classification differentiates between highways, arterial, collector/secondary, and local roadways.
Highways provide regional connectivity and have high sensitivity, while arterials serve those corridor movements that have long trip length and high volumes and have moderate sensitivity. Collectors serve subordinate traffic generators, and local roads provide access to individual parcels; therefore, both have a low sensitivity in terms of potential impacts.
Closures: The construction and maintenance of the transmission line may involve temporary partial or full road closures that can have an effect on traffic flow.
Present and Future Uses: Potential conflicts could occur with planned and programmed transportation improvement projects. Roadway widenings, as the primary example, could necessitate an intensification of mitigation measures for identified impacts.
Traffic volume: Truck trips and construction employee trips during the construction of the transmission line may create an increase of traffic and cause significant operational service degradations on roadways.
Access: Maintenance access between major roadways and smaller access roadways, if directly connected, could cause localized traffic delays. Where construction or maintenance access would transition from a major roadway to a new small access roadway, safety conflicts or potential significant traffic delays could occur on the main roadway due to new truck movements.
Sensitivity Values
Using the framework defined above, the transportation network crossed by the Proposed City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-333
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 sensitivity rating for potential impacts within the Project study area. Sensitivity ratings were ca
High Sensitivity: Includes areas that have the following characteristics:
1. An increase of traffic could have a direct detrimental effect on transportation system operations, where roadways are operating at or near capacity under existing conditions;
2. A planned roadway construction project would provide a wider roadway cross-section once complete, and Proposed Project construction methods would need to be modified significantly to span the road or selected travel lanes;
3. A fire station or hospital is located within 0.25 mile of the Project corridor and alternative access routes to those facilities around potential closures do not exist;
4. A public transit route would not have a viable alternative route (collector roadways or better) within 0.25 mile of existing route; and
5. Mitigation is not likely to be effective in substantially reducing significant impacts, based on roadway shoulder characteristics, topography, and other limiting factors toward the provision of temporary travel lanes.
Moderate Sensitivity: Includes areas that have the following characteristics:
1. An increase of traffic could have a direct detrimental effect on transportation system operations, but could be mitigated to insignificance on roadways that are operating at good levels of service under existing conditions;
2. The roadway would have limited conflict with current or planned roadway classification, and Proposed Project construction methods could be easily changed to accommodate any improved roadway cross-section;
3. A fire station or hospital is located within 0.25 mile of the Project corridor, with an alternate but longer access route to those facilities around the Project-related closure; and
4. A public transit route would have a viable but longer alternate route (collector roadways or better) within 0.25 mile of existing route.
Low Sensitivity: Includes areas that have the following characteristics:
1. Roadway sensitivity that has not been classified as high or moderate;
2. Planned roadway construction projects where construction methods would need little modification to accommodate minor cross-sectional or other changes;
3. Roadways where measures may be easily implemented to reduce the effects to less than significant;
4. Roadways likely used by emergency or transit vehicles, or other general access issues located on a grid system, with multiple available alternative routes on collectors or arterials.
5. Roadways that would have little or no change in traffic flow due to the construction or operation of the transmission line.
Traffic Impacts and Construction Methods
The traffic study assumed that some ground-based construction activity will be necessary on all analyzed links, although the details of the construction methods (e.g., construction of new towers) may be different within each link. The closure of bicycle lane facilities within work areas and the effect on rail operations, emergency vehicles response, school bus access, and other such City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-334
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 transportation resources/modes will also be of concern.
Construction Access
Access by construction vehicles to and from construction sites within the Project links, as well as direct access between existing area roadways and construction access roadways, can potentially cause localized traffic impacts. For the impact analysis, the characteristics of roadways within the study area were considered in terms of safe and efficient access to construction areas or construction access roads. This type of access would necessitate turning movements by construction vehicles from larger roadways to smaller construction access roadways.
Due to potential safety issues associated with construction access and major roadways (arterials), these were given higher sensitivity ratings.
Sensitivity Summary: Project Construction (Short-Term)
Table 3.2.15-2 summarizes the sensitivity ratings for the short-term period of Proposed Project duration (construction activities), and the rationale for each.
TABLE 3.2.15-2. SHORT-TERM DURATION SENSITIVITY RATINGS FORROADWAYS Resource Component Sensitivity RationaleHigh Moderate Low Roadways
Dirt and Private Roads
Sole Route to Land Uses (non-grid)
Access could create closures, but detours/diversions could likely accommodate access
Collector Roadways
Collector, Grid Street System
Alternate access exists, via longer travel route
Collector, Non-grid Street System
Access could be cut off
Arterial Roadways
Arterial or Mountain Road, Straight
Alignment
Closures could cause significant traffic delays, but
closures would be visible for long approach distances
Arterial or Mountain Road,
Curvilinear Alignment
Closures could cause significant traffic delays, and many create significant traffic safety impacts due to short
approach distances on curves
Highway (State Routes) or Freeway Facilities
Any Highway or Freeway
Closures could cause significant traffic delays through single or multiple lane closures
Public Transportation Routes
Without Alternate Route within 0.25
mile (non-grid)
Transit line temporary closures could be necessary
With alternate Route within 0.25
mile (grid)
Transit line route lengths and passenger walking distances could be lengthened
Emergency Access Route (within 0.25 mile of Fire Station, Hospital) Without Alternate/Parallel Route
Emergency access could be significantly impacted
With Alternate/Parallel Route
Emergency access would not likely be impacted, but
response time would potentially be increased
School Bus Routes
Public Schools within 0.25 mile
School bus routes could be lengthened during detour
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-335
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Resource Component Sensitivity RationaleHigh Moderate Low Railroad Corridors
Passenger Rail
Passenger commute service could be affected
Freight Rail
Freight service could be delayed
Bicycle Routes
Class I and Class II Facilities
Bicycle lane closures or detours could be necessary
Sensitivity Summary: Project Operations (Long-Term)
Table 3.2.15-3 summarizes the sensitivity ratings for the long-term period of Proposed Project duration (operations and maintenance), and the rationale for each.
TABLE 3.2.15-3. LONG-TERM DURATION SENSITIVITY RATINGS FOR ROADWAYS Resource Component Sensitivity RationaleHigh Moderate Low Roadways
All Dirt and Private Roads
Maintenance access could create temporary closures but
detours/diversions could likely accommodate access
All Local Roads
Maintenance access would not likely cause traffic impacts All Collector Roads
Maintenance access would not likely cause traffic impacts All Arterial Roadways
Maintenance access would not likely cause traffic impacts All Highways/Freeways
Maintenance access would not likely cause traffic impacts Public Transportation Routes
All Transit Routes
Maintenance activity would not likely create transit impacts School Bus Routes
Public Schools within 0.25 mile
Maintenance activity would not likely create school bus service impacts
Railroad Corridors
Passenger Rail
Maintenance activity would not likely require access to rail rights-of-way
Freight Rail
Maintenance activity would not likely require access to rail rights-of-way
Recreational Routes
Class I and Class II Facilities
Temporary impacts during access could be mitigated through the provision of bike lane diversions/detours
Environmental Protection Elements
Following best management and design practices throughout conception, construction, and implementation of the Proposed Project ensures that public safety is paramount and potential environmental impacts are minimized through avoidance. Table 3.2.15-14outlines the proposed SCE and RPU Environmental Protection Elements (EPEs) related to transportation and traffic.
As discussed above in Section 3.1.2, the EPEs have been included as part of the Proposed Project; therefore, the impact analysis section that follows includes the implementation of the EPEs listed below. Any impact resulting from the implementation of the Proposed Project (including the EPEs) is identified below. Where mitigation measures would reduce these impacts, the measures and their effectiveness have been included in the impact discussion.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-336
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 TABLE 3.2.15-14. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ELEMENTS - TRANSPORTATION Environmental
Protection
Element
Description
TRANS-01 Minimize Street Use. Construction activities would be designed to minimize work on, or use of, local streets.
TRANS-02
Incorporate Protective Measures. Any construction or installation work requiring the crossing of a local street, highway, or rail line would incorporate the use of guard poles, netting, or similar means to protect moving traffic and structures from the activity. If necessary to ensure the safety of construction crews and the traveling public on state highways, continuous traffic breaks operated by the California Highway Patrol would be planned and provided.
TRANS-03 Prepare Traffic Management Plans*. Traffic control and other management plans would be prepared to minimize project impacts on local streets.
TRANS-04 Repair Damaged Streets. Any damage to local streets caused as a result of project construction would be repaired and restored to preconstruction conditions.
*Traffic control and other management plans would be prepared to minimize Proposed Project impacts on local streets and bike lanes, railroad operations (Union Pacific, Metrolink), emergency services, transit bus operations, recreation facilities, school bus operations and other planned roadway projects. The plans would be developed in collaboration with the responsible agencies of these transportation modes, programs, and projects. The plans will include provisions to accommodate emergency response vehicles at all times, such as immediately stopping work for emergency vehicle passage, short detours, and alternate routes.
Mitigation Measures
When the Proposed Project (even with integration of EPEs) would result in significant initial impacts, specific mitigation measures (see Table 3.2.15-25) are recommended to reduce impact levels to less than significant. The following mitigation measures would be applied for impacts related to transportation and traffic during construction.
TABLE 3.2.15-25. MITIGATION MEASURES - TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Mitigation Measure Description
MM TRANS-01
Arterials, straight alignments; residential streets, roadway with specific access need (fire station, hospital/medical facility, school bus) Provide construction closures that keep at least one lane of traffic open in each direction of travel at all times, or provide adequate lane capacity to generally provide a good level of service (maintain within bounds of current level of service) in traffic operations.
MM TRANS-02
Avoid Peak-Period Construction: To minimize traffic congestion and delays during construction, RPU and SCE shall restrict all necessary lane closures or obstructions on major roadways (i.e., Congestion Management Plan roadways) associated with project construction activities to off-peak periods. Lane closures shall be avoided during the 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. timeframe and the 3:30 to 6:30 p.m. timeframe, or as otherwise defined within the TMPs.
MM TRANS-03
Minimize Roadway Closures: Construction activities shall be designed to minimize work on, or use of, roadways crossed by the project corridor(s).This would be accomplished through limiting construction vehicle and equipment operations to identified disturbance sites (pad areas, access roads and staging areas) and by maintaining sock lines and conductors well above roadways during stringing operations.
MM TRANS-04
Bus transit route: Provide construction closures that keep at least one lane of traffic open with reversible flow (via flagmen) during times of transit line operation, unless an adequate detour route can be found within 0.25 mile of the closure point.
MM TRANS-05
Roadway with Class I or Class II Bicycle Facility: Provide construction closures that allow for continued bicycle access within the existing facilities during all times, or provide a safe diversion of the bicycle facility around the construction zone.
Environmental Impacts
Based on the CEQA Guidelines, the analysis considers whether the Proposed Project and alternatives would result in significant impacts to transportation.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-337
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths and mass transit.
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporation. Operation and maintenance of the Proposed Project would not conflict with Riverside City and Riverside County plans that establish measures of effectiveness of the transportation circulation system. After the Proposed Project is operational, service vehicles on the circulation network would only need to travel the transportation system to perform routine maintenance or respond to emergencies at the Proposed Project facilities. Such activities would not generate substantial vehicle traffic as to exceed City and County LOS standards.
Based on the sensitivity analysis conducted for determining traffic impacts, construction of the 230 kV transmission line wouldand the 69 kV subtransmission line from the RERC substation to the Freeman substation is anticipated to create temporary impacts along approximately 0.4 miles of the transmission line route at Limonite Avenue and the Vernola Marketplace shopping center parking lot south of Limonite Avenue.high traffic volumes. Table 3.2.15-6 shows the roads that are anticipated to have temporary high traffic volumes during 230 kV and 69 kV line construction. Temporary lane closures, detours, and stoppages of traffic that may occur during construction activity are expected to create transportation operation impacts, such as fewer travel lanes, an increaselane reduction, delays in travel time, reduced speeds, or stoppage of travel for motorists travelling.
TABLE 3.2.15-6. ROADWAYS ANTICIPATED TO HAVE HIGH TRAFFIC VOLUMES DURING
CONSTRUCTION
Roadway Approximate Length
of Roadway Affected
230 kV Transmission Line
Limonite Avenue at Vernola Marketplace# 0.4 mile
69 kV Subtransmission Line-RERC Substation to Freeman Substation* Tyler Street at Cook Avenue 0.05 mile
Tyler Street from Magnolia Avenue to Indiana Avenue (across Highway 91); Indiana Avenue from Tyler Street for approximately ¼ mile northeast 1 mile
Indiana Avenue from Harrison Street to Gibson Street 0.7 mile Gibson Street from Indiana Avenue to railroad tracks 0.1 mile *The three other 69 kV subtransmission line routes are not anticipated to experience temporary high traffic impacts during construction. #With the proposed realignment of the 230 kV transmission line west of Vernola Marketplace, high traffic impacts on Limonite Avenue as well as motorists entering, exitingare anticipated in the vicinity of the northbound I-15 on- and travelling withinoff-ramps instead of the shopping center parking lot. entry/exit points; however, the approximate length of Limonite Avenue would be affected by this realignment.
Integrated EPEs provide general protection but without specific mitigation, these temporary impacts would be significant. Specific mitigations to reduce impacts are described in Table
3.2.15-3 and would include: MM TRANS-01 to maintain level of service along straight alignments by keeping at least one lane open in each traffic flow direction; MM TRANS-02 to schedule construction to avoid peak traffic periods; and MM TRANS-03 to minimize closures at crossing points through restricting vehicle operations to designated work areas and keeping stringing operations well above roadways. With the implementation of mitigation measures MM City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-338
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 TRANS-01, -02, and -03; MM TRANS-04 to keep at least one lane of traffic open with reversible flow (via flagmen) during times of transit line operation, unless an adequate detour route can be found within 0.25 mile of the closure point; and MM TRANS-05 to provide construction closures that allow for continued bicycle access at all times or provide a safe diversion for bicyclists around the construction zone. Table 3.2.15-7 identifies the transportation infrastructure and the specific mitigation measure(s) that would be applied. With the implementation of mitigation measures, the resulting traffic impacts to each type of transportation resource would be less than significant.
TABLE 3.2.15-7. TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE WHERE MITIGATION MEASURES
WOULD BE APPLIED
Roadway/Trail/Bus Transit Route Mitigation Measure(s)
230 kV Transmission Line
Santa Ana River Trail (Class I Bikeway) MM TRANS-05
Van Buren Boulevard* MM TRANS-01, -02, -03, -04, -05
68th Street* MM TRANS-01, -03, -04
Limonite Avenue* MM TRANS-01, -02, -03, -04
Interstate 15/Limonite Avenue on-ramp MM TRANS-01, -02, -03 Interstate 15 MM TRANS-01, -02, -03
Bellegrave Avenue MM TRANS-01, -03
Wineville Road MM TRANS-01, -03
69 kV Subtransmission Line (RERC Substation to Freeman Substation) Acorn Street MM TRANS-01, -03
Van Buren Boulevard* MM TRANS-01, -02, -03, -04, -05
Arlington Avenue* MM TRANS-01, -02, -03, -04, -05
Rutland Avenue MM TRANS-01, -03
Cypress Avenue MM TRANS-01, -03
Crest Avenue* MM TRANS-01, -03, -04
Wells Avenue MM TRANS-01, -03
Tomlinson Avenue MM TRANS-01, -03
Tyler Street* MM TRANS-01, -03, -04
Indiana Avenue* MM TRANS-01, -03, -04
69 kV Subtransmission Line (RERC Substation to Harvey Lynn Substation) Acorn Street MM TRANS-01, -03
Van Buren Boulevard* MM TRANS-01, -02, -03, -04, -05
Arlington Avenue* MM TRANS-01, -02, -03, -04, -05
Rutland Avenue MM TRANS-01, -03
Cypress Avenue MM TRANS-01, -03
Crest Avenue* MM TRANS-01, -03, -04
Wells Avenue MM TRANS-01, -03
Tomlinson Avenue MM TRANS-01, -03
Mull Avenue MM TRANS-01, -03
Jones Avenue MM TRANS-01, -03
Hole Avenue MM TRANS-01, -03
Minnier Avenue MM TRANS-01, -03
Schuyler Avenue MM TRANS-01, -03
69 kV Subtransmission Line (Wilderness/Wildlife Substations to RERC Substation) Wilderness Avenue MM TRANS-01, -03
69 kV Subtransmission Line (Wilderness/Wildlife Substations to Mountain View Substation) Jurupa Avenue MM TRANS-01, -02, -03
*Denotes Riverside Transit Agency bus route (as of January 8, 2012)
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-339
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 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.
No Impact. The RCTC adoptedis the CMP in March 2010 to address congestion management in the County.agency and prepares congestion management plan (CMP). The latest update was prepared in December 2011 (VRTA Technologies, Inc. 2011). According to this document, roads that are in the Proposed Project area include principal arterials (Limonite Avenue, Arlington Avenue, La Sierra Avenue, Magnolia Avenue and Van Buren Boulevard), Interstate 15 and State Highway 91. All principle arterials within The initial LOS screening-level analysis conducted as part of the CMP Update process showed that none of the CMP system roads in the Proposed Project area are crossed perpendicularly, except for Arlington Avenue which would be paralleled for approximately 0.7 miles. Interstate 15 would not be crossed; State highway 91 would be crossed at an existing overpass (Tyler Street). Not all of the streets where Proposed Project elements cross or parallel are principal arterials. Most of the streets are local streets. The target LOS along all County maintained roads and conventional state The City of Riverside follows Riverside Countyexperiencing deficiencies (i.e., LOS standards for the roads it is responsible for maintaining.
A specific roadway impact level of service (LOS) analysis was conducted for construction- related traffic for the Wildlife and Wilderness substations. Table 3.2.15-8 shows the results of the analysis. According to the LOS calculations that were conducted for the construction phase of the Proposed ProjectWilderness and Wildlife substations, the Wilderness Avenue/Jurupa As shown in Table 3.2.15-8,
Proposed Project, so the existing condition would not be worsened by the Proposed Project.
TABLE 3.2.15-8. LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: WILDERNESS AND WILDLIFE SUBSTATIONS
CONSTRUCTION
Intersection Existing Existing
WITH Project Increase Impact?
Weekday AM Peak Hour (Delay/Level of Service)
Wilderness Ave at Jurupa Ave
Worst Case 2.1 A 2.7 A 0.6 No
Average Delay 19.6 C 22.6 C 3.0 No
Van Buren Blvd. at Jurupa Ave. 37.0 D 39.1 D 2.1 No Weekday PM Peak Hour (Delay/Level of Service)
Wilderness Ave at Jurupa Ave
Worst Case 2.2 A 3.0 A .8 No
Average Delay 18.4 C 19.8 C 1.4 No
Van Buren Blvd. at Jurupa Ave. 44.2 D 46.5 D 2.3 No
There are some designated roads and highways in the CMP system that would be impacted by the Proposed Project during construction. For the 230 kV transmission line, the traffic sensitivity analysis identified Limonite Avenue where it intersects with the Vernola Marketplace shopping City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-340
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 center parking lot entrance/exit points. With the proposed realignment of the 230 kV transmission line west of the Vernola Marketplace that SCE determined would be feasible after the issuance of the DEIR, these intersections are not anticipated to be impacted. However, Limonite Avenue, where it intersects the interchange on- and off-ramps, has the potential for high temporary traffic impacts when construction of the 230 kV transmission line is required to cross it. A specific LOS analysis of this intersection was not conducted as part of the traffic study or analysis of this new realignment. For the 69 kV subtransmission line construction, the traffic impact sensitivity analysis identified Highway 91 (at Tyler Street) as having the potential of experiencing high temporary traffic impacts (see Table 3.2.15-4).
Operation and maintenance of the Proposed Project, including the 69 kV subtransmission lines, 230 kV transmission line and substations, would not conflict with the CMP as these activities would involve only service vehicles to perform routine maintenance or respond to an emergency.
Such activities would not generate substantial vehicle traffic as to exc Given the
intermittent nature of operations and maintenance activities, trips by service vehicles would be expected to occur on the order of several times per year, but could be more frequent during emergencies.
To minimize traffic congestion and delays during construction to the extent feasible, RPU and SCE shall restrict all necessary lane closures or obstructions on major roadways associated with Proposed Project construction activities to off-peak periods, as feasible.
A possibility exists that CMP roadways and other roadways may be inadvertently damaged or purposely disturbed by construction activities. Tables 2.3.2, 2.5.1, 2.5.2, and 2.5.4 in Chapter 2 of the DEIR provide estimates of light (pick-up) and heavy truck types and use for the distribution, transmission, subtransmission, and fiber optic lines construction. Temporary construction damage may include cracked roadway pavement on shoulders resulting from operating heavy trucks and equipment or the removal of pavement for trenching purposes. No damage to traffic lanes of CMP System roads is anticipated. Trenching required for undergrounding of distribution lines, a section of the 69 kV subtransmission line along Doolittle Avenue and Morris Street west of Riverside Municipal Airport(see Section 2.3.5 and Figure 2.3- 8)),and telecommunication pathways (see Section 2.3.6 and Figure 2.3-9) would occur in very few roadway areas, and only on minor roads in these areas. Repairs would include patching or replacing the disturbed areas of pavement. Damage would not increase traffic, delay travelers or decrease road safety.
A delivery truck trip generation analysis was conducted for the construction of the Wilderness and Wildlife substations. It was assumed that deliveries would be arriving to the work site via Van Buren Boulevard and Jurupa Avenue. Therefore, each delivery would be equivalent to one vehicle round-trip (in/out). The total number of deliveries on site was determined based on previous experience with such projects:
Wildlife Substation: 162 daily deliveries at any given time, which would potentially generate 324 vehicle round-trips
Wilderness Substation: 162 daily deliveries at any given time, which would potentially generate 324 vehicle round-trips.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-341
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 It was assumed that one substation would be constructed at a time with the same number of employees working on both substations. Table 3.2.15-9 shows the truck trip generation summary for the construction of the new substations.
TABLE 3.2.15-9. TRUCK TRIP GENERATION SUMMARYWILDERNESS AND WILDLIFE
SUBSTATION CONSTRUCTION
Daily AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR
AM IN AM OUT PM IN PM OUT
Wildlife Substation 324 52 17 17 52
Wilderness Substation 324 52 17 17 52
Construction employee peak hour trip generation was also estimated for the 230 kV transmission line and 69 kV subtransmission line construction. For trip generation purposes, it was conservatively assumed that each employee would be driving to the work site. Therefore, each employee would be equivalent to one vehicle round-trip (in/out). The total number of employees on site was determined based on the total manpower for that particular project component. For the 230 kV line construction, 117 daily vehicle round trips over 12 months were projected. This is a worst-case estimate based on overlap of multiple construction phases and maximum activity at each of two marshalling yards. For the 69 kV subtransmission line, 63 daily vehicle round trips over 12 months were projected. For manpower information, see Chapter 2 Tables 2.5-1,
2.5-2, and 2.5-2a and accompanying text.
According to Exhibit 4-1D (2011 Level of Service on CMP System in North Western Riverside) in the 2011 Riverside County Congestion Management Plan, peak hour volumes of arterials in proximity to the proposed 230 kV transmission line route are:
Limonite Avenue between I-15 and Etiwanda Avenue: 2,181 Limonite Avenue between Etiwanda Avenue and Bain Street: 2,263 Limonite Avenue between Bain Street and Van Buren Boulevard: 1,185 Limonite Avenue west of I-15: 1,748
Van Buren Boulevard between Arlington Avenue and California Avenue: 3,305 An additional 117 peak hour trips by construction workers would not contribute substantially to vehicle trips on these roads. The additional trips under this scenario would increase use of these arterial sections approximately 3.5% to 10%. Because the Proposed Project is a linear facility constructed in phases, workers would be distributed widely among construction locations and arterial commuting routes.
Peak hour volumes of arterials in proximity to the proposed 69 kV transmission line routes are:
Limonite Avenue between Bain Street and Van Buren Boulevard: 1,185 Van Buren Boulevard between Arlington Avenue and California Avenue: 3,305 Van Buren Boulevard between Magnolia Avenue and Highway 91: 3,964 Van Buren Boulevard between Highway 91 and Mockingbird Canyon Road: 3,179 An additional 63 peak hour trips by construction workers would not contribute substantially to City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-342
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 vehicle trips on these roads. The additional trips would increase use of these arterial sections by approximately 1.5% to 5%.
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? Less than Significant Impact. Air traffic departure and arrival patterns for fixed wing aircraft and helicopters would have no reason to change at Flabob Airport or Riverside Municipal Airport as a result of the Proposed Project. The tallest structures proposed for the Proposed kV tubular steel poles, which would not exceed 170 feet above ground level.Since the publication of the DEIR for public review, RPU and SCE re-evaluated the potential impacts of the Proposed Project, in particular the 69 kV subtransmission line and the 230 kV transmission line, on air navigation and consistency with the Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. RPU will underground a section of the 69 kV subtransmission line along Doolittle Avenue, between Jurupa Avenue and Morris Street, as well adhere to other conditions established by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) during its April 12, 2012 development review to be compatible with the airport land use compatibility plan. SCE would be required to file 23 structures and one catenary associated with the 230 kV transmission line with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The catenary will require marking and the FAA may require lighting some of the structures due to Visual Departure Flight Procedures. No current Visual or Instrument procedures would be impacted. The entire ALUC Development Review
The operations area of a helicopter during construction would be limited to staging areas, stringing locations, the transmission line route, the airport, and the lattice tower locations. Final siting of staging areas and stringing locations for the Proposed Project would be conducted with the input of the helicopter contractor, and affected private landowners and land management agencies. The size of each staging area and stringing location would be dependent upon the size and number of structures to be removed and installed. Staging areas and stringing locations would likely change as the work progresses along the transmission lines. Helicopter fueling and overnight parking is assumed to occur at a local airport (e.g. Riverside Municipal Airport) and would be supervised by
planned to occur during a total of approximately 35 days spread over the anticipated 18-month construction window. This level would result in an inconsequential change to Riverside
The helicopter contractor will contact the FAA Riverside Flight Standards District Office to coordinate the helicopter construction activity and file a helicopter lift plan. For temporary changes to published air traffic procedures, the FAA will notify the aviation community through in the Proposed Project area. The increased flights by one helicopter would not create substantial safety risks to the helicopter operator or to the areas where the helicopter construction is proposed.
Prior toDuring final project design and as far in advance of construction as possible, SCE will submit a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration (Form 7460-1) to the FAA in accordance with applicable regulations and initiate consultation with the FAA to determine the extent of any aeronautical hazards, changes to existing air traffic patterns, and potential recommendations due City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-343
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 to the proximity of SCE facilities to existing airports. Following the completion of consultation, and the determination of the FAA, SCE will reviewincorporate any recommendations of the FAA, and will submit documentation of this consultation to RPU into the design, construction, and operation of the 230 kV transmission line components of the Proposed Project.
kV subtransmission lines will be in compliance with FAA height requirements. RPU will prepare and submit a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration (Form 7460-1) in accordance with FAA regulations to the FAA for review to ensure that the proximity of new overhead transmission lines will not create a hazard for pilots or result in a change to existing air traffic patterns.
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project includes construction on both existing right-of-way and new right-of-way. Transmission line maintenance roads are classified into two groups: access roads and spur roads. Access roads are through roads that run between tower sites along a right-of-way and serve as the main transportation route along line right-of-way. These access roads are for the exclusive use of authorized personnel and not for use by the general public. Spur roads are roads that lead from line access roads and terminate at one or more transmission pole/tower sites. All curves on the roads would have a radius of curvature of not less than 50 feet, measured at the center line of the usable road surface. Access and spur road gradients would be leveled so that any sustained grade does not exceed 12 percent. New points of access to the existing roadway network will be required where new right-of-way is required for the Proposed Project.
RPU has consulted with the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission regarding Proposed Project compatibility with airport operations. RPU will place a section of the 69 kV subtransmission line underground in the vicinity of Doolittle Avenue to be compliant with airport land use compatibility zones and remove a potential hazard to aircraft. No current Visual or Instrument procedures would be impacted at airports as a result of the Proposed Project.
e) Result in inadequate emergency access.
Less Than Significant Impact. Implementation of EPE TRANS-03 will include provisions in traffic management plans, which isare developed in conjunction with agencies, to accommodate emergency vehicles, such as immediately stopping work for emergency vehicle passage, short detours, and alternate routes. The impact to emergency response vehicles would be less than significant as these vehicles would be given priority to travel through construction zones by traffic control personnel and other motorists in order to reach their destination or have agreed to other arrangements, such as an alternate route or detour. In addition, emergency responders are expected to participate in the development of the traffic management plans, which would reflect their input and address their concerns.
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.
NoLess Than Significant Impact.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-344
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 ify policies, plans and programs related to public
transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities where the Proposed Project could create conflicts or be incompatible. The City of Riverside identifies public transportation (bus and rail service) and alternative modes of travel, such as bicycling and walking, as important components of a related to alternative transportation and non-motorized transportation:
Objective CCM- -modal transportation
Objective CCM-
pedestrian and
The City of Riverside included nine policies (Policies CCM-9.1 to 9- -9 and twelve policies (Policies
CCM-10.1 to 10.12) in support of Objective CCM-10.
transit systems and increased use of alternative modes of transportation, including bicycles and -Motorized
existing and planned use of these alternative transportation modes and infrastructure. The subsection includes policies (Policies C9.1 to 9.5) related to Inter and Intra-
(such as Greyhou
12.5); and
-
-Motorized
17.4).
These policies were reviewed to determine their applicability to the Proposed Project and whether the construction, operation and/or maintenance of the Proposed Project would conflict with them. It was determined that the Proposed Project would not conflict or interfere with alternative transportation policies and objectives. During construction, buses, vans and other vehicles that provide the public or alternative transportation service and bicycles would be subject to the same construction-related traffic and detours as other motorists who travel in a construction zone area; however, these would be temporary. Operation and maintenance of the Proposed Project would not permanently decrease the performance of public transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities or programs in the City of Riverside and Riverside County.
EPE TRANS-03 (Prepare Traffic Management Plans) includes consulting with transit agencies and agencies responsible for managing pedestrian facilities and bicycle lanes to coordinate project construction activities and temporary effects to transportation operations of these alternative transportation modes, including lane/sidewalk closures. See Table 3.2.15-7 for the transportation infrastructure and the specific mitigation measure(s) that would be applied.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-345
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464 Nighttime Construction
After sunset construction has the potential to occur approximately from 5 p.m. to 6 p.m. each work day afternoon during the winter months (December, January, February) when twilight settles onto the Proposed Projec
artificial illumination may be required for allow for the completion of work tasks and daily clean-up as well as for safety. When work is being performed on the Proposed Project adjacent to or across roads during this time, temporary lighting units would be in operation to provide workers with a level of illumination that will allow the safe continuation of their work. Similar to daytime construction, motorists may experience travel delays resulting from detours, lane closures and reduction in speed in these nighttime construction zones. Light from the temporary lighting units may temporarily distract motorists until their vehicles pass by the temporary lighting units. No overnight or late-hour construction is planned as part of the Proposed Project.
Simultaneous Construction of the 230 kV Transmission and 69 kV Subtransmission lines As discussed in Chapter 2, it is infeasible forunlikely that construction of the 230 kV and 69 kV components of the Proposed Project towould overlap significantly because of additional permitting, procurement, land acquisition, agency coordination, mitigation implementation and possible variances required for construction of a 230 kV transmission line. Nevertheless, because exact schedules are unknown at this time, the following analysis is provided assuming that, due to unforeseen circumstances, the Proposed Project components were constructed simultaneously.
The only places where the 230 kV and 69 kV components are located in the same vicinity are near the intersection of Jurupa Avenue and Van Buren Avenue and along Acorn Street west of and adjacent to the RERC substation. As the 230 kV and 69 kV components are separated geographically for the most part, the components could be sequenced so that equipment and material deliveries and the commutes of workers to the Proposed Project sites would not create travel delays and congested roadway conditions above the current condition. Coordination between the general contractors, the City of Riverside, Riverside County, RPU and SCE would occur to work out the details of Proposed Project sequencing, including delivery routes for equipment and materials.
Significant Unavoidable Impacts
Mitigation measures would reduce all potential transportation-related impacts to less-than- significant. A statement of overriding considerations would not be required should the Proposed Project be approved.
References
or the City of
Riverside. Adopted May 22, 2007. Berkeley, CA
-Riverside
Anaheim and Ontario, CA.
Riverside Transit Agency. 2012. System Map. 2012. Riverside, CA Prepared for Riverside County Transportation Commission. December 2011.
City of Riverside Chapter 3. Environmental Analysis
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OCTOBER 2012
RIVERSIDE TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY PROJECT 3-346
ANA 032-126 (PER-02) RPU (October 2012) SB 124462/124464
3.3 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
CEQA Guidelines Section 15065 (Mandatory Findings of Significance) states that an EIR is required to be prepared for a project where there is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record that any of the following conditions may occur:
a) The project has the potential to 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, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory; b) The project has possible environmental effects that are individually limited, but cumulati
effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects); and,
c) The environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly
In 2007, during early Proposed Project development, an Initial Study was prepared where RPU determined that an EIR was warranted because of the potential for significant environmental effects. Since that time, RPU and SCE have continued a process of alternative route refinement, data collection, and inter-agency consultation. As the Lead Agency, the City of Riverside determined that the Proposed Project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment as noted, that preparation of a new Initial Study would not be useful as a decision- making document, and that an EIR should be prepared. This approach is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(a) as the Proposed Project in its present form clearly requires the preparation of an EIR.
Based on the entire record developed for this draft EIR, a mandatory finding of significance is warranted. Most elements of the Proposed Project would be constructed and operated in areas with a long history of ground disturbance and urban development; in addition, the Proposed Project would be developed within the guidelines of the MSHCP in coordination the Regional Conservation Authority to maintain the quality of the natural environment. Proposed Project development does not involve extensive demolition of buildings or archaeological resources.
However, based on criterion (b)), the Proposed Project would produce cumulatively considerable effects on agriculture, air quality, hazardous waste and hydrological resources. The Proposed Project would neither directly not indirectly cause substantial adverse effects on humans.