and de velopment reached the Maximum or Max. w/PRD levels, demand would exceed the currently expected supply.
The General Plan identified the minimization of water consumption through policies and implementation tools. Policies proposed include PF- 1.5, which imp lements water conservation programs for new and existing development. Policies PF- 1.6, 2.1 and 2.2 aim to increase the use of recycled water in the City by continuing and expanding the use of recycled water for irrigation. The policy also examines a “gray water” ordinance, which re-circulates water in the home before going into sewage system. Implementation Plan tools include Tool OS -35 through OS -41, which also implement water conservation programs and incentives. Tool OS-39, 40 and 41 concentrate on using recycled or reclaimed water where potable water is being used for irrigation. Implementation of the policies and tools help reduce future demand and both RPU and WMWD have sufficient water supplies available to serve buildout of the General Plan, the General Plan would not require new or expanded water entitlements. Although water demand within RPU boundaries may exceed supply under the “worst case” analysis of Maximum and Maximum w/PRD, WMWD can sell water to RPU. As shown on GP PEIR Table 5.16-I, WMWD will have 123,784 acre-feet annually to sell to other agencies like RPU.
Therefore, even at the higher levels of development, water supply may be available. Water supplies will be adequate for the General Plan buildout at Typical development levels, therefore the water supply impact associated with RPU and WMWD water service would not cause these suppliers to have insufficient water supplies available. Impact is less than significant.
Although projected to be available for purchase by other agencies from WMWD, because RPU does not presently have contracts to purchase higher levels of water from WMWD should it be necessary in the future, new or expanded entitlements would be needed in the unlikely event that population grew to the Maximum or Maximum w/PRD lev els and impacts would be considered significant without mitigation. Notably, however, water supply planning and land use planning are closely linked, and are continuously updated to address conditions on the ground. UWMPs, for example, must be updated ever y five years to include the most recent population trends. Similarly, the City must consult with RPU or WMWD regarding development projects involving greater than 500 dwelling units worth of demand to ensure that sufficient water supplies are available. Ad ditionally, policies within the General Plan address water supply within the Planning Area. Policies OS-10.1 through 10.5 and OS-10.8, and PF-1.3 through 1.7 require coordination with other entities, both public and private, to consumption, water quality a nd quantity of groundwater, and coordinated service. Policies PF-
1.5, and PF-2.1 and 2.2 address demand reduction strategies. Impacts to inadequate water supply if build -out of the General Plan Project exceeds the expected Typical development level are considered significant. With implementation of these General Plan policies and Mitigation Measure MM UTL 1, impacts related to water availability are reduced to less than significant.
Proposed Project
The City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) developed water demand projections considering variables such as climate, population growth, and customer behaviors. The UWMP used 2020 Census data, SCAG population growth projections, and updates to the City’s General Plan to calculate future water demands within RPU’s service area. The UWMP estimates water service CEQA Sections 15168 and 15183 Analysis
City of Riverside Case No. PR-2024-001656
February 2025 Section 5.19: Utilities and Service Systems
reliability by calculating supply and demand for the following scenarios normal year supply, single dry year supply, and multiple dry year supply. These estimates are based on assumptions that 100 percent of RPU’s groundwater and recycled water supplies would remain available during a single dry year and multiple dry years. The availability of imported water has been adjusted based on the reliability assessment by WMWD. Table 5.19-1: Existing and Future Water Service Supply and Demand below, shows estimated supply and demand calculated in the UWMP for future years. For all the scenarios (normal year, single dry year, and multiple dry year) the available water supply is greater than the anticipated demands. (UWMP, pp. III, 7-5, 7-6).
Table 5.19-1: Existing and Future Water Service Supply and Demand
As identified in Table 5.19-1 above, water supplies are estimated to accommodate demand projections through 2045 under normal and multiple dry-year conditions. As mentioned in Section 16 – Population and Housing of this Checklist, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in the development of 49 housing units that will increase the population by approximately 162 residents lending to a permanent increase in demand for water supply. However, the dwelling units and population associated with the Proposed Project is within the s cope of the population increases assumed in the General Plan and GP PEIR. Per SB X7-7 water agencies are required to calculate their baseline water use for a 10-to-15-year period. As such RPU determined in their 2020 UMWP that the average base daily per-capita water use within the RPU service area was 266 gallons per capita per day (gpcd). (UWMP, pp. 5-1 - 5-2). Utilizing this information, the projects the anticipated water demand of the Proposed Project would be 43,092 gpcd (166 persons X 266 gpcd = 43,092 gpcd = 48 Acre Feet per Year (AFY).
CEQA Sections 15168 and 15183 Analysis
City of Riverside Case No. PR-2024-001656
February 2025 Section 5.19: Utilities and Service Systems
Even assuming that the Proposed Project ’s water demand was not accounted for in the UWMP as within the scope of the assumed General Plan buildout for future years, a s reflected in Table 5.19-1 above, implementation of the Proposed Project would increase water demands by approximately 48 AFY over existing and future conditions in normal, dry, and multiple dry years. This represents a range of increase in water demand of 0.03% to 0.04% as compared to the water demand of 114,923 AFY for 2025 and 129,693 AFY for 2045. Additionally, as identified in Table 5.19-1 above, RPU’s supplies are larger than existing and projected demands. Thus, the increased demand resulting from the Proposed Project would be accommodated. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.
No mitigation is required.
The Proposed Project complies with applicable standards and regulations, including General Plan Policies, General Plan Implementing Programs, Riverside Municipal Code requirements , and any applicable GP PEIR mitigation measures as identified above and listed in Section 5.1 9.3 of this document. The Proposed Project’s implementation of those regulations, policies, and standards, including the General Plan designation and zoning, which permit the Proposed Project, ensures that the project would not result in significant impacts. As such, the Proposed Project does not have peculiar effects, new substantially more severe significant effects, new off-site or cumulative effects, or is there new information that would result in a more severe impact than identified within the GP PEIR.
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
GP PEIR Impact – Less than Significant
The GP PEIR analyzes this threshold on pages 5.16-44 through 5.16-45. The GP PEIR explained that the addition of approximately 59,546 residents through General Plan buildout would increase demand for wastewater treatment. In 2005, RPU treated 33 mgd for the then-existing Citywide demand. The GP PEIR identified that future demand was assumed to increase to 45.6 mgd and that upgrades to the Riverside Regional Water Quality Control Plan (RWQCP) were required to treat that increased demand. RPU has indicated in its 2005 Urban Water Management Plan that its Riverside RRWQCP will have capacity once upgraded as proposed to treat wastewater generated within the General Plan Planning Area through the year 2025. Thus, under the Typical buildout scenario, the General Plan project would not result in a significant impact. However, the demand under the Maximum buildout scenario would not be served adequately, which was identified as a significant and unavoidable impact.
Also, portions of the Planning Area are not currently served with adequate infrastructure (trunk sewer lines) to accommodate the growth anticipated in the General Plan. New and/or expanded sewer collection lines may be required to serve proposed land uses. Additionally, the delivery lines for the resulting recycled water will also need to be upgraded to accommodate the additional treated wastewater. As the GP PEIR was a program EIR, CEQA analysis of the construction of such facilities was deferred until plans for such facilities are developed. Since detailed plans for any such facilities have not been created, mitigation for any such facilities would be speculative at the programmatic CEQA Sections 15168 and 15183 Analysis
City of Riverside Case No. PR-2024-001656
February 2025 Section 5.19: Utilities and Service Systems
level of analysis. However, all future projects would be consistent with the General Plan and would incorporate mitigation and policies presented in the GP P EIR and as described above as appropriate. Therefore, impacts from the construction or expansion of wastewater faci lities, as a result of the General Plan, are considered less than significant.
Proposed Project
Based on the average daily wastewater flow identified in the City’s Capital Improvement Program and Rate Development Study, the Proposed Project’s proposed single-family residential units would generate an average of 206 gallons per day (gpd) (CIP 2014). Therefore, the proposed 49 residence Proposed Project would result in an average daily flow of 10,094 gpd. As discussed above, the Proposed Project’s residential units and associated population are consistent with the General Plan and within the assumed growth of the GP PEIR.
Wastewater generated at the Proposed Project site is treated at the Riverside Regional Water Quality Treatment Plant (RRWQCP). The RWQCP currently treats approximately 28 million mgd of AAF with a hydraulic capacity of approximately 46 mgd AAF. The RWQCP has a projected daily effluent flow of approximately 39 mgd through the year 2037 so the RWQCP can treat the 10,094 gp d flows of the Proposed Project. Therefore, there would be adequate capacity to serve the Proposed Project, and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
The Proposed Project complies with applicable standards and regulations, including General Plan Policies, General Plan Implementing Programs, Riverside Municipal Code requirements, and any applicable GP PEIR mitigation measures as identified above and listed in Section 5.1 9.3 of this document. The Proposed Project’s implementation of those regulations, policies, and standards, including the General Plan designation and zoning, which permit the Proposed Project, ensures that the project would not result in significant impacts. As such, the Proposed Project does not have peculiar effects, new substantially more severe significant effects, new off-site or cumulative effects, or is there new information that would result in a more severe impact than identified within the GP PEIR.
d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
e) W ould the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
GP PEIR Impact – Less than Significant
The GP PEIR analyzes this threshold on pages 5. 16-46 through 5.16-48. The increase in solid waste generated by the development under the proposed General Plan is not anticipated to exceed the capacity of the landfills as an isolated contributor. In addition, Public Resource Code Section 41780 requires every city and county to divert from landfills at least 50% of the waste generated within their jurisdiction, and the City has exceeded its required reduction in recent years and currently diverts 60%. Adherence to and implementation of General Plan Policies PF 5.1 through 5.3 above (which CEQA Sections 15168 and 15183 Analysis
City of Riverside Case No. PR-2024-001656
February 2025 Section 5.19: Utilities and Service Systems
deal with a goal of 100% recycling, recycling service provided to all residents, and donation or reuse of some items in lieu of landfill disposal, respectively) will substantially lessen solid waste impacts.
To be conservative, the GP PEIR analysis anticipated that at least 50% of the estimated increase in solid waste generation could be diverted. In addition, the GP PEIR found that the continuation of the City standards and practices also would help reduce the overall amount of waste, as follows:
• Continue to implement waste diversion programs as well as public education programs as outlined in the City’s Source Reduction and Recycling Element. • Continue implementing and participating in programs that increase the City ’s diversion of solid waste fro m regional landfills. Existing programs supported by the City include Green Waste Collection, Curbside Recycling, Newspaper Drop -Off, Car Tire Amnesty, Household Hazardous Waste, Appliances, Backyard Composition Workshops, Refrigerator Recycling Rebate (Co ol Returns), C.U.R.E., Electronic waste, Curbside Oil Collection and Recycling Market Development Zone. Support expansion of these programs to all City addresses. • Implement CEQA during the development review process for future projects. Analyze and mitigate potential public facility, service, and utility impacts to the maximum extent practicable. For projects that require construction of new public facilities or extension of utilities, ensure that the environmental documentation considers related off- site physical environmental impacts of these activities.
The GP PEIR concluded that because the Typical Project will contribute only about 8% of projected capacity, because landfill capacity is expected to increase, because of the City’s excellent record and current policies and standards related to waste reduction programs and diversion from landfills, and with implementation of MM UTL 4, which requires City review of the County Waste Management Annual Reports to California Integrated Waste Management Board ev ery five years and City adjustments to its diversion policies if landfill capacity appears insufficient, the General Plan project impacts will be less than significant.
Proposed Project
The Proposed Project proposes 49 single-family units that could have a population of 162 persons.
The Proposed Project could be expected to generate approximately 0.12 tons of solid waste per day based on data from the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) per the Air Quality and GHG Technical Memorandum prepared for the Proposed Project (refer to Appendix A of this document).
The majority of waste from the City of Riverside goes to the nearby El Sobrante Landfill in the City of Corona. This landfill has a permitted daily capacity of 16,054 tons per day and a total capacity of 184,930,000 tons with a remaining capacity of 145,530,000 tons. This landfill is estimated to close in 2045. The Proposed Project could generate up to 1,900 tons of waste per year or 1.9 tons per day which is 0.01 percent of the landfill’ s permitted daily capacity. Therefore, there is adequate landfill capacity in the region to accommodate Proposed Project -generated waste. Considering the availability of landfill capacity and the relatively nominal amount of solid waste generation from the Proposed Project, Project solid waste disposal needs can be adequately met without a significant CEQA Sections 15168 and 15183 Analysis
City of Riverside Case No. PR-2024-001656
February 2025 Section 5.19: Utilities and Service Systems
impact on the capacity of the nearest and optional, more distant, landfills. In addition, the Proposed Project would be required to comply with City requirements that ensure compliance with state- mandated (AB 939) waste diversion requirements and CALGreen Code Section 5.408, which requires that at least 65 percent of construction waste be recycled or salvaged for reuse. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant relative to landfill capacity directly, indirectly, or cumulatively. No mitigation is required.
The Proposed Project complies with applicable standards and regulations, including General Plan Policies, General Plan Implementing Programs, Riverside Municipal Code requirements, and any applicable GP PEIR mitigation measures as identified above and listed in Section 5.1 9.3 of this document. The Proposed Project’s implementation of those regulations, policies, and standards, including the General Plan designation and zoning, which permit the Proposed Project, ensures that the project would not result in significant impacts. As such, the Proposed Project does not have peculiar effects, new substantially more severe significant effects, new off-site or cumulative effects, or is there new information that would result in a more severe impact than identified within the GP PEIR.
5.19.2 Cumulative Impacts Analysis
The GP PEIR evaluated the potential impacts associat ed with the General Plan Project, a citywide plan for buildout and design of the City. To that end, because it evaluates planned buildout (multiple projects at the programmatic level), the GP PEIR inherently considers cumulative impacts associated with population growth and increased development.
With respect to utilities and service systems, the GP PEIR concluded regional growth will result in increased demand for flood control, water service, sewer service, energy utilities, solid waste services and other community facilities. With respect to water, sewer, and energy, the GP PEIR included mitigation measures (MM UTL 1, 2 and 3) which cause ongoing review of service needs with respect to capacity. Those measures will ensure that sufficient capacity exists t o accommodate buildout and ensure that cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
With respect to solid waste, the GP PEIR concluded that adherence to and implementation of General Plan policies will substantially lessen solid waste impacts. Never theless, for cumulative impact purposes, the City conservatively assumed that landfill expansion will not keep pace with growth in the region and/or growth within the General Plan Planning Area. Therefore, cumulative impacts were determined to be significant and unavoidable.
The Genera Plan also would result in additional runoff, which will require expanded and/or new facilities will need to be constructed to accommodate both existing and planned development. The City of Riverside has developed a five year Capital Improvement Program (CIP), which includes a Strom Drain Program. This particular program will include improvement projects that eliminate flooding during major storm events. Also, individual projects will be evaluated to ensure no exceedance of ap plicable standards. The GP PEIR concluded impacts were not cumulatively significant.
CEQA Sections 15168 and 15183 Analysis
City of Riverside Case No. PR-2024-001656
February 2025 Section 5.19: Utilities and Service Systems
As discussed above, the Proposed Project would not result in any exceedance of available capacity for utilities or associated services. The Proposed Project can connect to existing facilities and would not trigger the construction of new facilities. Ultimately, the Proposed Project’s demand is considered negligible in the context of buildout of the City. And, the City has General Plan policies and other standards (including tools) in place to ensure that adequate utilities are available to accommodate buildout of the City. The Proposed Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact.
5.19.3 Uniformly Applied Development Standards and GP PEIR Mitigation Measures Applicable General Plan Policies
• Policy PF-1.5: Implement water conservation programs aimed at reducing demands from new and existing development.
• Policy PF-1.7: Protect local groundwater resources from localized and regional contamination sources such as septic tanks, underground storage tanks, industrial businesses, and urban runoff.
• Policy PF-3.1: Coordinate the demands of new development with the capacity of the wastewater system.
• Policy PF-3.2: Continue to require that new development fund fair -share costs associated with the provision of wastewater service.
• Policy PF 5.1: Develop innovative methods and strategies to reduce the amount of waste materials entering landfills. The City should aim to achieve 100% recycling citywide for both residential and non-residential development.
Applicable General Plan Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures identified in the GP PEIR relative to Utilities and Service Systems would be applicable to this Proposed Project because all GP PEIR mitigation measures apply to the City to continually evaluate system needs
5.19.4 Conclusion
With regards to the issue area of Utilities and Service Systems, the following findings can be made:
1. No peculiar impacts to the Proposed Project or its site have been identified.
2. There are no impacts that were not analyzed as significant effects in the GP PEIR, with which the Proposed Project is consistent.
3. There are no potentially significant off- site and/or cumulative impacts which wer e not discussed by the GP PEIR.
CEQA Sections 15168 and 15183 Analysis
City of Riverside Case No. PR-2024-001656
February 2025 Section 5.19: Utilities and Service Systems
4. No substantial new information has been identified which results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the GP PEIR.
5. No mitigation measures contained within the GP PEIR would be required because Proposed Project specific impacts would be less than significant.
CEQA Sections 15168 and 15183 Analysis
City of Riverside Case No. PR-2024-001656
February 2025 Section 5.20 Wildfire
5.20 Wildfire
Impact
GP PEIR
Impact
Determination
Effect Peculiar
to Proposed
Project or
Site?
New or
Substantially
more Severe
Significant
Effect?
New
Significant
Off-Site or
Cumulative
Impact?
New
Information/
More Severe
Impact?
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an
adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
Less Than
Significant
Not
Applicable
Not
Applicable Not Applicable Not
Applicable
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds,
and other factors, exacerbate
wildfire risks, and thereby expose
project occupants to, pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire?
Less Than
Significant
Not
Applicable
Not
Applicable Not Applicable Not
Applicable
c) Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other
utilities) that may exacerbate fire
risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing impacts to
the environment?
Less Than
Significant
Not
Applicable
Not
Applicable Not Applicable Not
Applicable
d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including
downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result
of runoff, post-fire slope instability,
or drainage changes?
Less Than
Significant
Not
Applicable
Not
Applicable Not Applicable Not
Applicable
5.20.1 Discussion
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? GP PEIR Impact – Less than Significant
The GP PEIR analyzes this threshold on page 5.7-35. The GP PEIR identified that the growth planned by the General Plan could result in traffic congestion that during an accident or natural disaster could increase in traffic in the City and impede the rate of evacuation or adversely affect the response times for emergency medical or containment services. But the GP PEIR found that the City has an extensive Emergency Operations Plan, created by the Emergency Management Office. The CEQA Sections 15168 and 15183 Analysis
City of Riverside Case No. PR-2024-001656
February 2025 Section 5.20 Wildfire
City’s Fire Department promotes a high level of multijurisdictional cooperation and communication for emergency planning and response management through activation of the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS). The General Plan also provides policies to identify methods of implementing the emergency plan, including PS-9.1, PS-10.3, PS-10.4, and PS-10.9, as well as other policies listed on GP PEIR pages 5.7 -29 through 5.7-30. The GP PEIR concluded that w ith continued use of the SEMS and implementation to the General Plan policies related to multi-hazard functional planning and interagency response, which held to ensure compliance with the Emergency Operations Plan, impacts to emergency response plans will be less than significant.
Proposed Project
A limited potential exists for the Proposed Project to temporarily interfere with an emergency response or evacuation plan during construction. Construction work in the street associated with the Proposed Project will be limited to lateral utility connections (i.e., water and sewer) that will be limited to nominal potential traffic diversion. Control of access will ensure emergency access to the site and Proposed Project area during construction through the submittal and approval of a traffic control plan (TCP), as required by City regulations. The TCP is designed to ensure there are no substantial construction circulation impacts. Following construction, emergency access to the Proposed Project site and area will remain as was before the P roposed Project and as anticipated in the City’s emergency and evacuation plans. The Proposed Project ’s minimal additional trips would not interfere with these plans.
The City has standard conditions of approval (COAs) that require a project to comply with the City Fire Code (State Fire Code as adopted by the City) and Fire Department requirements based on the review of tentative tract maps and plot plans.
One of these requirements is to ensure that adequate emergency access is provided to proposed homes and other uses. T hese Conditions of Approval (COAs) are determined during the City’s development review process to ensure compliance with Fire Code and Public Works requirements.
The Proposed Project will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopte d emergency response plan or evacuation plan, because no permanent public street or lane closures are proposed and the addition of Proposed Project residents would not result in delayed emergency response. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
The Proposed Project complies with applicable standards and regulations, including General Plan Policies, General Plan Implementing Programs, Riverside Municipal Code requirements, and any applicable GP PEIR mitigation measures as identified above and listed in Section 5. 20.3 of this document. The Proposed Project’s implementation of those regulations, policies, and standards, including the General Plan designation and zoning, which permit the Proposed Project, ensures that the project would not result in significant impacts. As such, the Proposed Project does not have peculiar effects, new substantially more severe significant effects, new off-site or cumulative effects, or is there new information that would result in a more severe impact than identified within the GP PEIR.
CEQA Sections 15168 and 15183 Analysis
City of Riverside Case No. PR-2024-001656
February 2025 Section 5.20 Wildfire
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spre ad of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? GP PEIR Impact – Less than Significant
The GP PEIR addressed this topic on pages 5.7 -35 through 5.7-37 under Section 5.7 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials under the threshold:
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.
The determination for this criterion was as follows:
The City of Riverside Fire Department takes proactive and preventative measures to reduce fire risks and is a first responder to fire emergencies. The Fire Department utilizes a highly trained work force, progressive technology and responsible fiscal management to provide its diverse services to the community. In addition, the Riverside County Fire Department and California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection provide mutual aid to the City for fire protection to unincorporated territory within the City’s sphere if influence.
Required roads around structures subject to the fire hazards are required to meet the minimum roadway widths of Title 18, of the revised Subdivision Code, and clearance around any structures will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis as part of the review of the project.
The level of hazard to life and property is affected not only by a fire but also by road access for evacuation, the number of available firefighters, vegetation clearance around property, availability of water and water pressure and the effectiveness of building/fire Codes and inspection of developments in areas of higher fire hazard, see Figure 5.7 -3. Riverside will reduce the destructive potential of fire by providing funding through the General Fund for the Fire Department so that it will continue providing adequate levels of fire protection and fire hazard education. The current Uniform Fire Code will also be used to reduce structural fire hazards.
Through implementation of the General Plan Policies, the City will continue to reduce the potential for damage by dangerous fires by providing adequate fire fighting services, by protecting hillsides and urban -wildland interface areas, by encouraging residents to plant and maintain drought -resistant, fire-retardant plant species on slopes to reduce the risk of brush fire and soil erosion and by working with the Fire Department to control haza rdous vegetation.
CEQA Sections 15168 and 15183 Analysis
City of Riverside Case No. PR-2024-001656
February 2025 Section 5.20 Wildfire
In summary, with implementation of General Plan policies, compliance with existing codes and standards, and with continuation of current City and Fire Station practices, impacts from wildland fires are considered less than significant.
Subsequent to the adoption of the GP PEIR, the wildfire risk assessment was created as its own topic area with new specific topic areas b – d identified for evaluation. The discussion in the GP PEIR applies to topic areas b – d, as identified above, with the result as less than significant.
Proposed Project
Based on the current CEQA Guidelines Checklist, Appendix G, this topic area requires assessment “if located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones….” This Proposed Project is not located in or near a state responsibility area or within lands classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone. The issue of wildland fire hazards was addressed under Section 5.9 (g), Hazards and Hazardous Materials, which concluded that impacts would be less than significant . In addition, the Proposed Project would be required to meet the minimum roadway widths of Title 18 and the City will review clearance around the residences for compliance with its Fire Code and related policies.
The Proposed Project complies with applicable standards and regulations, incl uding General Plan Policies, General Plan Implementing Programs, Riverside Municipal Code requirements, and any applicable GP PEIR mitigation measures as identified above and listed in Section 5. 20.3 of this document. The Proposed Project’s implementation of those regulations, policies, and standards, including the General Plan designation and zoning, which permit the Proposed Project, ensures that the project would not result in significant impacts. As such, the Proposed Project does not have peculiar effects, new substantially more severe significant effects, new off-site or cumulative effects, or is there new information that would result in a more severe impact than identified within the GP PEIR.
5.20.2 Cumulative Impacts Analysis
The GP PEIR analyzed cumulative impacts on page 6-10. The GP PEIR found that the City will reduce the potential for dangerous fires by concentrating development in previously developed areas within the General Plan Planning Area where risk of wildland fire is lower than in urban/wildl and interface areas on the urban periphery. The GP PEIR concluded that compliance with existing City, State and Federal regulations and mitigation measures identified in this EIR will ensure that no significant cumulative impact will result from a hazard, including accidental and wildland fires.
The Proposed Project is not located in a very high fire hazard severity zone or a state responsibility area. In addition, the Proposed Project would comply with City requirements designed to reduce the damage from fires, including the Fire Code and street design standards. Accordingly, the Proposed Project when considered with other existing and future projects would not create a cumulative wildfire impact.
CEQA Sections 15168 and 15183 Analysis
City of Riverside Case No. PR-2024-001656
February 2025 Section 5.20 Wildfire
5.20.3 Uniformly Applied Development Standards and GP PEIR Mitigation Measures Applicable General Plan Policies
• Policy PS-6.1: Ensure that sufficient fire stations, personnel and equipment are provided to meet the needs of the community as it grows in size and population. • Policy PS-6.2: Endeavor to meet/maintain a response time of five minutes for Riverside's urbanized areas.
• Policy PS-6-3: Integrate fire safety considerations in the planning process. • Policy PS-6.7: Continue to involve the City Fire Department in the development review process.
• Policy PS-6.9: Provide outreach and education to the community regarding fire safety and prevention.
• Policy PS-9.5: Provide effective and relevant information to the public regarding disaster preparedness.
• Policy PS -9.8: Reduce the risk to the community from hazards related t o geologic conditions, seismic activity, flooding and structural and wildland fires by requiring feasible mitigation of such impacts on discretionary development projects. • Policy PS-10.3: Ensure that public safety infrastructure and staff resources keep pace with new development planned or proposed in Riverside and the sphere of influence. • Policy PS-10.4: Continue to ensure that each development or neighborhood in the City has adequate emergency ingress and egress, and review neighborhood access needs to solve problems, if possible.
Applicable General Plan Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are identified in the GP PEIR relative to wildfire.
CEQA Sections 15168 and 15183 Analysis
City of Riverside Case No. PR-2024-001656
February 2025 Section 5.20 Wildfire
6 REFERENCES
General Plan 2025 – Figure OS-2 – Agricultural Suitability & General Plan. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), state base map last updated 1/1/2024 and located on the state website at https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp);
South Coast Air Quality Management District’s 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP CalEEMod Model)
General Plan 2025 PEIR Table 5.3-B SCAQMD CEQA Regional Significance Thresholds, South Coast Air Quality Management District’s 2022 Air Quality Management Plan General Plan 2025 PEIR. Figures related to Biological Resources:
Figure OS-6 – Stephen’s Kangaroo Rat (SKR) Core Reserve and Other Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP),
Figure OS-7 – MSHCP Cores and Linkages,
Figure OS-8 – MSHCP Cell Areas,
Figure 5.4-2 – MSHCP Area Plans,
Figure 5.4-4 - MSHCP Criteria Cells and Subunit Areas,
Figure 5.4-6 – MSHCP Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area) Figure 5.4-7 – MSHCP Criteria Area Species Survey Area, MSHCP Section 6. 1.2 - Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools General Plan 2025 PEIR, Table 5.5-A Historical Districts and Neighborhood Conservation Areas General Plan 2025 PEIR, Figure PS-1 – Regional Fault Zones General Plan 2025 FPEIR, Figures and Tables related to Geology and Soils:
Figure 5.6-1 – Areas Underlain by Steep Slope,
Figure 5.6-4 – Soils,
Table 5.6-B – Soil Types
Figure PS-1 – Regional Fault Zones
Figure PS-2 – Liquefaction Zones
Figure PS-3 – Soils with High Shrink-Swell Potential
Figure 5.6-5 – Soils with High Shrink-Swell Potential
General Plan 2025 FPEIR, Tables 5.7 A – D
General Plan 2025 FPEIR, Figure 5.7-B – Regulated Facilities in TRI Information March Air Reserve Base/March Inland Port Comprehensive Land Use Plan (1999), Air Installation Compatible Use Zone Study for March Air Reserve Base)
CEQA Sections 15168 and 15183 Analysis
City of Riverside Case No. PR-2024-001656
February 2025 Section 5.20 Wildfire
City of Riverside’s EOP, Riverside Operational Area – Multi-Jurisdictional LHMP, 2004 Part 1, and OEM’s Strategic Plan)
General Plan 2025 FPEIR. Public Safety Technical Background Report, October 5, 2021, Figure CP-5, Very-High Fire Hazard Safety Zone Area.)
General Plan 2025 FPEIR, Table 5.8-A – Beneficial Uses Receiving Water, FEMA Flood Hazard Maps Panel 06065C0715G dated 8-27-2008) State Department of Water Resources (DWR) Adjudicated Areas Interactive Map Website 2021 https://sgma.water.ca.gov/webgis/index.jsp?appid=adjbasin) Alvord Unified School District Website; and California Department of Education (CDE) website, School/District Profile Search https://www.cde.ca.gov/sdprofile/search.aspx) RPU 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP)