5.2.1 Non-renewable Resources
A majority of the 25 housing rezone sites and two Graves Avenue sites, collectively known as the Rezone Sites, are located within existing developed or disturbed areas; however, a few sites are located on vacant land with potentially sensitive resources present. While the potential for impacts to biological habitat and cultural resources is low, there is a potential for impacts to resources at certain sites. Biological and cultural resource impacts associated with future development would be mitigated to a level less than significant, as described in Sections 4.3 and 4.4. The potential for paleontological resources impacts to occur associated with future development at the Rezone Sites would be mitigated to less than significant (Section 4.5) with implementation of a mitigation framework that would ensure paleontological monitoring is required (where appropriate).
Implementation of the project would result in less than significant impacts to water bodies (drainage and water quality) as described in Section 4.8.
As described in Chapter 8.0, the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program classifies the majority of the Rezone Sites as “Urban and Built Up Land,” “Other Land,” and “Grazing Land.” The areas classified as “Grazing Lands” are not considered a significant farmland resource under CEQA. A few Rezone Sites are classified as “Farmland of Local Importance”; however, there is no recent history of agricultural use at these sites. There are no lands protected by a Williamson Act Contract within the City. There are no lands protected by a Williamson Act Contract within the City. Additionally, there is no forestland within the City, and the City does not possess any zoning classifications for forestland, timberland, or timberland production zones. Therefore, no impacts to agricultural and forestry resources would occur.
Although Rezone Sites 1-12, 18, 19, 24, 25, 29, and 30 and both Graves Avenue Sites are located within a Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) 2 designated area, these areas are not zoned for mining operations and no mining operations existing within the sites While these lands may support mineral resources, mining operations at these sites would not be feasible considering the proximity to sensitive receptors and existing established neighborhoods. Furthermore, the Rezone Sites are not designated as locally important mineral resource recovery sites in the City’s General Plan. Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource or locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan, and impacts would be less than significant.
With regard to energy resources, actions related to future development would result in an irretrievable commitment of nonrenewable resources, including energy supplies and construction materials, such as lumber, steel and aggregate. Non-renewable energy resources (coal, natural gas, oil) would be used in construction, heating and refrigeration of food and water, transportation, lighting, and other associated energy needs.
Residential and mixed-use development anticipated within the Rezone Sites, together with other projects in the City, would require the commitment or destruction of other nonrenewable and slowly renewable resources. These resources include (but are not limited to) lumber and other forested products; sand and gravel; asphalt; petrochemical construction materials; steel, copper, lead, other metals; and water. However, the amount and rate of consumption of these resources would not
5.0 Significant Unavoidable Environmental Effects/
Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
result in significant environmental impacts because multi-family and mixed-use development are not uses that are associated with an unnecessary, inefficient, or wasteful use of resources.
As described previously, the Rezone Sites are mainly developed with existing commercial uses or located on underutilized residential sites. Development at the Rezone Sites would reinvigorate underutilized areas by allowing new residential uses in close proximity to commercial services and community facilities, while preserving established residential neighborhoods. Most of the project areas are presently developed. Development on vacant parcels would, however, result in the longterm commitment to urbanization because reversion back to vacant land would be difficult and highly unlikely. However, the development of mid- to high-density residential units or mixed-uses would result in an efficient provision of housing and efficient land use pattern.
In summary, future construction and operation associated with implementation of the Rezone Program would result in the irretrievable commitment of limited, slowly renewable, and nonrenewable resources, which would limit the availability of these particular resource quantities for future generations or for other uses. Therefore, although irreversible environmental changes would result from future development, such changes would not be considered significant.
5.2.2 Secondary Impacts
The Rezone Sites are accessible via major roadways (e.g., State Routes (SR) 52, 67, and 125, as well as numerous arterials and local streets) and are served by existing utilities, and other public services.
As a result, secondary impacts are not anticipated from environmental changes resulting from the construction of new infrastructure, as discussed in Sections 4.12 and 4.14.
5.2.3 Environmental Accidents
The CEQA Guidelines also require a discussion of the potential for irreversible environmental damage caused by an accident associated with the project. As described in Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, implementation of the proposed project would allow for the development of residential and mixed-uses (including commercial uses) that commonly store, use, and dispose of hazardous materials. Likewise, industries and businesses using hazardous materials may expand or increase to accommodate the projected population growth under buildout of the project.
Due to the nature of past and current land uses, future development/redevelopment within the City has the potential to expose people and the environment to hazards through the routine transport, use, disposal, or accidental release of hazardous materials. Businesses that are likely to store hazardous substances and petroleum products or generate waste include the following: gasoline service stations, automobile repair facilities, dry cleaning facilities, photograph developing facilities, and medical and dental facilities.
All future projects would be subject to review to ensure conformance with the Municipal Code, General Plan policies, and regulations imposed by federal, state, and local agencies. Compliance with applicable federal, state, and local hazardous materials regulations such as the Chemical Accident Prevention Provision, Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, the California Health and Safety Code, California Code
5.0 Significant Unavoidable Environmental Effects/
Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
of Regulations Title 23, the Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act, California Accidental Release Prevention Program, and the California Emergency Services Act would ensure that buildout of the Rezone Sites would not result in irreversible environmental damage related to the accidental release of hazardous materials.
6.0 Growth Inducement
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Chapter 6
Growth Inducement
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that an environmental impact report (EIR) evaluate the “growth-inducing” effects of a proposed project. Specifically, CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(e) requires that an EIR:
Discuss the ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Included in this are projects which would remove obstacles to population growth (for example, a major expansion of a wastewater treatment plant might, for example, allow for more construction in service areas). Increases in the population might tax existing community services facilities, requiring construction of new facilities that could cause significant environmental effects. Also discuss the characteristic of some projects which may encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively. It must not be assumed that growth in any area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment.
A project can directly or indirectly induce growth. Construction of new housing would directly induce population growth. However, if a project creates substantial new permanent employment opportunities, it could indirectly induce growth by stimulating the need for additional housing and services to support the new employment demand. It could also indirectly induce growth by removing infrastructure limitations or regulatory constraints on a required public service, such as roads or water service. The following section analyzes potential impacts that could result from growth inducing conditions from the City of Santee’s (City) 6th Cycle Housing Element Rezone Program (project).
6.1 Population and Housing Growth
The project would result in the adoption of rezones required to implement the 6th Cycle Housing Element as described in Table 3-2. The rezoning of the 25 housing sites and the two sites located on Graves Avenue, collectively referred to as the Rezone Sites, would result in the potential future construction of up to 1,945 residential units which more than accommodates the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation of 1,219 units for the City’s share of statewide forecasted growth through April 15, 2029. Overall, the region needs to plan for an additional 171,685 units. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) has allocated the City its share of the regional housing need for the 2021-2029 RHNA period based on a number of factors, including recent growth trends, income distribution, and capacity for future growth. As the project would implement necessary rezones needed to facilitate construction of housing in the City to meet state housing mandates, it would support and encourage redevelopment of housing to support a range of income levels in the City. For projects that would be allowed to process ministerially, some obstacles to development would be removed, particularly the processing time and cost associated with a discretionary entitlement process. However, the project does not involve other changes in the environment (such
6.0 Growth Inducement
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
as construction of a wastewater treatment plant or a road within an undeveloped area) that would allow for unplanned population growth. Therefore, while the project would result in growth, it would be growth that has been anticipated under the City’s Housing Element and would accommodate the City’s RHNA allocation associated with anticipated growth in the City.
6.2 Removal of an Impediment to Growth
The project does not propose the construction or expansion of new housing, services, or other infrastructure development; rather it would adopt rezones that would facilitate future development consistent with state Housing Element Law. A vast majority of the permitted future residential units and mixed-use development would occur as infill development and redevelopment within urbanized areas already served by essential roads, utilities, and public services. Therefore, the project would not remove an impediment to growth.
6.3 Foster Economic or Employment Growth
The City is adding a new R-30 Mixed-Use Overlay Zone that would apply within the Town Center to allow mixed-use development and a residential density range of 30 to 36 dwelling units per acre.
Specifically, Rezone Sites 16A and 20B would be designated with the new R-30 zone, potentially allowing a combined 633 residential units with mixed use commercial at these sites. New commercial uses permitted within the mixed-use overlay zone would generally be composed of local neighborhood-serving retail and office uses, intended to serve the residents of new and existing housing in the immediate area. The project additionally would rezone two Graves Avenue sites to General Commercial which would allow for a range of commercial uses. These rezones would allow for commercial development in new areas which would foster economic growth consistent with the City’s existing commercial growth projections based on the SANDAG modeling completed for the transportation analysis (refer to Section 4.13.4 and Appendix G for discussion of commercial assumptions in the SANDAG Series 13 model). The potential for new commercial land uses with the proposed rezones would therefore be consistent with existing projections for commercial development in the City and would not be considered growth inducing in regard to significant economic or employment growth for the City.
6.4 Conclusion
Overall, the project would facilitate growth through rezoning to allow more housing to meet RHNA allocations. However, the project would not induce unplanned growth. The project would serve to accommodate projected and planned growth under the City’s Housing Element and pursuant to the City’s RHNA allocation. The project would not remove an impediment to growth; nor does it propose to develop or permit the encroachment into an isolated area adjacent to open space, or foster economic and employment expansion. As discussed above, the project would accommodate projected population growth and would not be considered growth inducing because it would provide housing capacity for projected population growth. The opportunities to provide housing would be consistent with the City’s need to establish a resilient housing base for the community and comply with state law.
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Chapter 7
Cumulative Impacts
This section addresses cumulative impacts associated with implementation of the City of Santee (City) Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation (project). The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15355 defines cumulative impacts as “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” Section 15355 further states that cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time.
Section 15130(a) of the CEQA Guidelines requires a discussion of cumulative impacts of a project “when the project’s incremental effect is cumulatively considerable.” Cumulatively considerable, as defined in Section 15065(a)(3), “means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.” According to Section 15130(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, the discussion of cumulative effects “. . . need not provide as great a detail as is provided for the effects attributable to the project alone. The discussion should be guided by standards of practicality and reasonableness . . . .” The evaluation of cumulative impacts is to be based on either (a) “a list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those impacts outside the control of the agency,” or (b) “a summary of projections contained in an adopted local, regional, or statewide plan or related planning document, that describes or evaluates conditions contributing to the cumulative effect . . . Any such planning document shall be referenced and made available to the public at a location specified by the Lead Agency” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1)). Pursuant to Section 15130(d), cumulative impact discussions may rely on previously approved land use documents such as general plans, specific plans, and local coastal plans, which may be incorporated by reference.
7.1 Cumulative Analysis Setting and Methodology
In the case of the project, which includes a number of rezones within various sites throughout the City (Rezone Sites) that would ultimately be built out over a 20+ year buildout horizon, cumulative effects would occur from development associated with buildout of the rezone sites combined with effects of development on land within and around the City and the region in the horizon year (2045).
The cumulative impacts of the project would, therefore, consider growth projected by the City and the County of San Diego. A broad examination of cumulative impacts involves considering buildout of the project together with growth and new development in the surrounding jurisdictions identified above.
The geographic area considered for each cumulative impact depends upon the impact that is being analyzed. For example, in assessing air quality impacts, all development within the air basin contributes to regional emissions of criteria pollutants, and basin wide projections of emissions are the best tool for
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
determining the cumulative effect. Each subsection below identifies the specific parameters for the cumulative evaluation.
A significant impact would occur if the project’s contribution to the cumulative effect is determined to be substantial. Each subsection below provides an overview of the potential cumulative impacts that could occur followed by a summary of the project’s contribution to that cumulative effect. The subsection concludes with a determination of the significance of the project.
7.1.1 Plans and Programs Evaluated for Determination of Cumulative Impacts
Multiple federal, state, and local planning documents and programs were used to evaluate the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts. These plans and programs are discussed under the Regulatory Framework subsections throughout Chapter 4.0. Highlighted below are a number of regional and City plans and programs relied upon throughout the cumulative evaluation.
7.1.1.1 San Diego Forward: The 2021 Regional Plan
San Diego Forward combines and updates the region’s two big picture planning documents: the Regional Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Community Strategy. San Diego Forward provides a vision for the region’s growth through the year 2050. The plan reflects a strategy for a more sustainable future.
7.1.1.2 General Plan
The City’s General Plan serves as a blueprint for physical development and contains goals and policies, which aim to enhance the City’s character, to provide a balance of land uses and services, and to preserve environmentally sensitive areas.
7.1.1.3 Municipal Code
The City’s Municipal Code contains the primary zoning implementation mechanisms for the General Plan Land Use Element. The zoning ordinance classifies and regulates the uses of land and structures within the City, consistent with the General Plan. The Zoning Code (Title 13) is adopted to protect and to promote the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, prosperity, and general welfare of residents and businesses in the City. The City’s Zoning Code also regulates the physical development of land by imposing minimum standards on lot size, lot width and depth, setbacks, and by placing maximum limits on lot coverage and floor area ratio. These development standards are intended to reduce unacceptable mass and bulk, ensure proper scale of development, provide minimum light, air, and open space for every lot, and minimize the potential for spillover and edge effects between uses.
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
7.2 Cumulative Effect Analysis
7.2.1 Aesthetics
Based on the location of the Rezone Sites, the study area for the assessment of cumulative visual impacts includes the entirety of the City in addition to portions of each of the surrounding cities within the viewshed of the project area including: the City of El Cajon to the south and southeast; the City of San Diego to the west and northwest; and the County of San Diego to the east and northeast. The project is comprised of 25 Rezone Sites that are a part of the Housing Element sites inventory, with two additional sites located on Graves Avenue. Future development within these Rezone Sites could have a cumulative impact on visual resources due to changes in the existing visual quality and aesthetics resulting from incremental increases in density and urbanization. This growth could gradually alter the visual quality of the study area. The following is a summary of the project’s contribution to cumulative aesthetic impacts.
As discussed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, the vacant and underutilized sites are primarily located within urbanized areas that are surrounded by residential and commercial development. Development of these Rezone Sites would be consistent with the visual quality and character of surrounding development based on application of required design review and consistency with City Municipal Code standards. Additionally, some of the underutilized sites consist of aging structures with poor visual quality, and redevelopment of these structures would result in new residential structures developed consistent with the visual requirements of the City’s Municipal Code. Furthermore, development of vacant and underutilized sites within the City’s General Plan and/or Town Center Specific Plan areas would be required to adhere to the land use plans that provide supplemental development regulations of those sites.
Regarding public views, the Rezone Sites are located throughout the City. Development at most sites would constitute infill development resulting in development consistent with surrounding urbanization that would not affect existing views. However, some larger vacant sites located near the San Diego River or within undeveloped lands that are not surrounded by urbanized lands could affect views. Both future ministerial and discretionary development would be required to adhere to relevant portions of the City’s Municipal Code including Chapter 13.08, et seq., which establishes the City’s development review procedures. For ministerial and discretionary development of Rezone Sites, the requirement for Development Review consistent with Municipal Code Chapter 13.08 would ensure consistency with General Plan policies and applicable design and development review requirements including supplemental development regulations from the Town Center Specific Plan.
The Development Review process would ensure that future development would not degrade scenic vistas and views and, therefore, there would be no substantial cumulative obstruction of public views.
Regarding light pollution, development of the Rezone Sites would be required to comply with the City’s Municipal Code standards related to light and glare (Chapter 13.08.070(G)), which requires that outdoor lighting be directed away from adjacent properties and set in a way to avoid any detriment to the surrounding area. Additionally, the City’s General Plan Community Enhancement Element includes the standard for lighting and signage to minimize spillover of lighting through use of directional, cut-off, and non-glare fixtures.
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Overall, the development of the Rezone Sites combined with development in the surrounding cumulative study areas would not result in a cumulatively significant visual impact due to the urbanized nature of the cumulative study area. Adherence to regulatory requirements including Development Review consistent with Municipal Code Chapter 13.08 implementation and Town Center Specific Plan development regulations would ensure that future development would not substantially degrade scenic resources. Thus, the project’s incremental contribution to visual impacts would not be cumulatively considerable and cumulative visual impacts would be less than significant.
7.2.2 Air Quality
Cumulative impacts to air quality may be regional or localized. Regional air quality would be impacted if emissions from the project contributed to cumulative degradation of air quality in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB). Localized air quality would be impacted if emissions from the project and other proximate emissions sources resulted in pollutant concentrations that exceeded standards at a sensitive receptor. The analysis provided in Section 4.2 is cumulative in nature as it considers buildout of land uses to the year 2045.
The study area for the assessment of cumulative regional air quality impacts is the SDAB which is considered a nonattainment area due to exceedances of the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for ozone and inhalable particulate matter (PM10). Future development within the study area could have a cumulative impact on air quality due to increased air pollution emissions associated with construction and operations, including transportation.
The cumulative assessment of regional air quality impacts to the SDAB relies partially on assessment of the project’s consistency with the adopted Regional Air Quality Strategies (RAQS) and State Implementation Plan (SIP). The RAQS and SIP are based on growth forecasts for the region, which are in turn based on maximum buildout of land uses as allowed in the adopted community and general plans. As discussed in Section 4.2.5, the project would result in increased land use intensity compared to what is anticipated under the adopted General Plan, and thereby would likely result in increased air emissions that are not accounted for in the RAQS. Because the significant air quality impact stems from an inconsistency between the project and the adopted land use plans upon which the RAQS was based, a significant impact would occur until the San Diego Air Pollution Control District updates the RAQS.
As detailed in Section 4.2.6, construction and operational emissions associated with cumulative construction activities associated with buildout of the Rezone Sites may result in some instances where future development would occur simultaneously and would cumulatively exceed the relevant thresholds. Therefore, cumulative construction-related regional air quality impacts would be potentially significant (Impact AQ-2). Regarding cumulative operational emissions, since buildout of the project would conflict with implementation of the RAQS, a cumulatively considerable net increase in emissions would occur compared to the emissions that would occur under existing land use designations. This is the same impact identified above as Impact AQ-1 related to inconsistency with the RAQs.
Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would be applied to address significant cumulative construction impacts.
This measure would apply as a requirement of the City’s Objective Design and Performance
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Standards, and would ensure individual projects apply measures to reduce construction related air pollutants. No feasible mitigation has been identified to address the project’s inconsistency with the RAQs. The RAQS is updated periodically by the San Diego Air Pollution Control District, at which time the growth projections of jurisdictions would be incorporated, and consistency would be achieved.
Therefore, until the anticipated growth is included in the emissions estimates of the RAQs and the SIP, cumulative impacts relative to conformance with the RAQs would remain significant and unavoidable.
7.2.3 Biological Resources
The study area for the assessment of cumulative impacts to biological resources includes the East County inland region composed of the City and neighboring jurisdictions identified above. As discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, the Rezone Sites are largely located on existing urbanized properties that contain limited biological value. Future development of Rezone Sites that require a discretionary process would be subject to future environmental review. For these projects, site-specific analysis would be required to identify the presence of sensitive species and appropriate mitigation would be applied to reduce potential impacts. Application of a future discretionary review and implementation of the City’s General Plan Mitigation Monitoring Requirements for biological resources would ensure impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
However, some future development on Rezone Sites may proceed with ministerial process which would not require a subsequent environmental review. For ministerial projects, potential development could occur on lands that support sensitive species, wildlife, or nesting/migratory birds, resulting in a potentially significant impact. Additionally, indirect impacts could occur from development located adjacent to sensitive habitats. However, implementation of mitigation measure BIO-1 would require all future development projects to conduct surveys to identify potential sensitive plant or wildlife species, including any migratory or nesting birds. If potentially significant impacts to sensitive biological resources are identified, the future projects shall recommend appropriate mitigation to reduce the impacts to below a level of significance. Therefore, implementation of mitigation measure BIO-1 would reduce potentially significant cumulative impacts to a level less than significant. Compliance with existing federal and state regulations, General Plan policies and implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1 through BIO-4 would ensure that future development within the Rezone Sites would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to biological resources impacts. Impacts to sensitive vegetation communities would be reduced to less than significant levels with the implementation of mitigation measures BIO-2 and BIO-5, for both discretionary and by-right development projects.
Impacts to state or federally protected wetlands associated with future discretionary projects within the Rezone Sites would require mitigation framework for the implementation of both discretionary and by-right development projects. The implementation of mitigation measure BIO-6 would reduce impacts to a level less than significant and ensure that the project would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact to biological resources.
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
7.2.4 Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
The study area for the assessment of cumulative impacts to cultural resources includes the entirety of the City because loss of cultural resources would be detrimental to the entire City. Future development within the cumulative study area could have a cumulative impact on cultural resources through loss of records or artifacts as land is developed (or redeveloped).
As discussed in Section 4.4, future development in accordance with the project could impact historical or archaeological resources, which may be present within the project areas (see Impact CUL-1, CUL-2, and CUL-3). Implementation of mitigation measures CUL-1, CUL-2, and CUL-3 would reduce impacts to cultural resources to less than significant through the requirement for historic and archaeological surveys and archaeological monitoring during grading and construction.
Implementation of these measures would ensure that the project would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact to historical or archaeological resources.
7.2.5 Geology/Soils
The study area for the assessment of cumulative impacts related to geology and soils is the City.
Future development would be required to adhere to regulatory requirements including the California Building Code and City’s Municipal Code requirements for soils engineering/engineering geology reports and erosion control plans would prevent adverse effects associated with fault rupture, ground shaking, liquefaction, or landslides. Like the project, all future development would be required to adhere to all regulations applicable to the site/zone, including Chapter 11.40 (Grading Ordinance), which include objective standards relating to the elimination or reduction of potential seismic hazards prior to the issuance of permits. Additionally, all development would be subject to General Plan policies from the Safety Element. Future development at the Rezone Sites in addition to other future development within the City would be required to adhere to regulatory requirements including preparation of Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan and Municipal Code Chapter 11.40 (Grading Ordinance) to ensure that they would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Adherence to California Building Code requirements as adopted by the City would ensure that future development would not create substantial direct or indirect risks associated with expansive soils.
Regarding paleontological resources, the mitigation measure GEO-1 would reduce project impacts to less than significant. Additionally, other development in the City would be required to implement measures identified in the City’s General Plan mitigation monitoring program for paleontological resources which would reduce impacts to a level less than significant. All potential impacts associated with geology and soils would be reduced to less than significant levels because future development would be required to adhere to regulations and implement the General Plan EIR’s existing mitigation framework. Additionally, mitigation measure GEO-1 would require applicants to provide information to the City regarding the paleontological sensitivity of the site. On properties determined to be moderately to highly sensitive for paleontological resources where grading would disturb sensitive formations, the ordinance shall require implementation of a mitigation plan. Therefore, implementation of mitigation measure GEO-1 would ensure that the project would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact to paleontological resources.
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
7.2.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The analysis of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is, by its nature, a cumulative issue; thus, the study area is global in nature. The analysis provided in Section 4.6 was modeled in year 2035 to align with the Sustainable Santee Plan emission projections and for the Housing Element buildout year 2050.
The Rezone Sites were modeled in the soonest operational year of 2024. Development at the Rezone Sites would increase GHG emissions and would exceed VMT thresholds. Both ministerial and discretionary development implemented under the project would be required to demonstrate compliance with Sustainable Santee Plan through completion of the Consistency Checklist. Overall, the project would be consistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan, 2021 Regional Plan/SCS, and Sustainable Santee Plan goals; however, because the project would result in an increase in development not accounted for in the Sustainable Santee Plan and would result in significant VMT impacts, the project would conflict with GHG emissions reduction plans and impacts would be significant. To reduce potentially significant impacts associated with VMT associated with future development within the Rezone Sites, mitigation measure TRA-1, described in Section 4.13.6, would be implemented. While the Consistency Checklist and the requirement for implementation of measures associated with mitigation measure TRA-1 would minimize GHG impacts associated with future development at the Rezone Sites, impacts would not be fully mitigated. Likewise, cumulatively significant impacts associated with GHG emissions would remain significant and unavoidable.
7.2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The study area for the assessment of cumulative impacts to hazards and hazardous materials impacts is the City. As population growth increases, the number of people potentially exposed to hazards and hazardous materials would increase.
Generally, the release of hazardous materials has site-specific impacts that do not compound or increase in combination with impacts elsewhere. As discussed in Section 4.7, future development in within the Rezone Sites could result in hazards to the public or the environment by disturbance of existing unknown contaminated soils. Mitigation measure HAZ-1 would require that future projects identify potentially hazardous conditions prior to grading, through preparation of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and a Phase II ESA if necessary. Remediation of any contaminated soils would be required prior to development. Additionally, cumulative projects within the region would be required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local regulations of agencies having jurisdiction over hazardous materials, including the U.S. EPA, federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, County Department of Health Services, and County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health. Therefore, implementation of mitigation measure HAZ-1 would ensure that the project would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact to hazards or the release of hazardous materials. The cumulative study area for airport hazards includes the entirety of the airport influence area (AIA) for the Gillespie Field Airport. The Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) includes policies that are applicable within the AIA. In order to assure safety compliance with the Gillespie Field ALUCP, future development must adhere to the existing City policies and regulations, and policies of the ALUCP. Therefore, the project’s incremental contribution to airport hazard impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. As discussed in Section 4.7, the project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with the City’s
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
emergency response plan, evacuation routes and would not conflict with any Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan hazard mitigation goals. Furthermore, applications for all future projects within the project areas in addition to cumulative projects in the surrounding area would require review and approval by the Santee Fire Department prior to issuance of building permit. Therefore, the cumulative impacts associated with airport safety would be less than significant.
Regarding potential cumulative impacts related to wildfire, Rezone Sites 1 through 10 and 35 are located within the City’s designated Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. However, cumulative impacts resulting from development of these sites in addition to development of cumulative projects within high fire hazard areas would be reduced through adherence to California Fire Code Title 19, Division 1, Section 3.07(b), which requires a minimum 30-foot brush clearance around structures for fire safety. Additionally, future cumulative projects would be required to comply with state and local regulations including City Municipal Code Chapter 11.18, which states all new developments, subdivisions, or tracts that are planned in Fire Hazard Severity Zones and/or Wildland Urban Interface Areas shall have a minimum of 100 horizontal feet of “fuel modified” defensible space between structure and wildland areas. Adherence to these regulations and the General Plan policies would reduce risks in conjunction with future development related to wildland fire. Thus, the project’s incremental contribution to wildfire impacts would not be cumulatively considerable and cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
7.2.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
The study area for potential hydrology and water quality impacts is the drainage basin or basins applicable to each Rezone Site as shown on Figure 4.8-1 of this Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR).
7.2.8.1 Water Quality
While future development within the drainage basins of each Rezone Site has the potential to increase pollutants discharged into surface waters, all future development would be subject to federal, state, and local regulations aimed at controlling water quality impacts. Both discretionary and ministerial development would be required to adhere to regulatory requirements including Santee Municipal Code Chapters 9.06 (Stormwater Ordinance) and Chapter 11.40 (Grading Ordinance), which include requirements to ensure storm water runoff is captured and treated and erosion control measures are implemented. Thus, based on the requirements of future development within the Rezone Sites to comply with the existing regulatory framework that requires treatment of pollutants generated on-site, the project’s incremental contribution to cumulative water quality impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable and cumulative impacts associated with water quality would be less than significant.
7.2.8.2 Drainage
While future development has the potential to alter drainage patterns resulting in increased erosion, stormwater runoff, and impacts to the existing drainage system, all future development would be subject to federal, state, and local regulations aimed at reducing polluted storm water and avoiding overloading the City’s drainage system. Both ministerial and discretionary development would be
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
required to adhere to regulatory requirements including City Municipal Chapter 9.06 (Stormwater Ordinance), which includes requirements for the elimination or reduction of storm water runoff.
Impacts associated with drainage patterns and storm water runoff would be less than cumulatively considerable and cumulative impacts associated with drainage would be less than significant.
7.2.8.3 Flooding
Future development of the Rezone Sites would be required to conform to applicable federal, state, and City regulatory standards to effectively avoid and/or address potential impacts associated with development in flood zones. The Rezone Sites are not within an area anticipated to be adversely affected by a tsunami. Implementation of all regulatory requirements would ensure that cumulative impacts related to flood hazards would be less than significant.
7.2.9 Land Use and Planning
The study area for the assessment of cumulative land use impacts would be the City and neighboring jurisdictions as detailed above. Cumulative land use impacts could result from changes to land use plans, which become incompatible and/or unsustainable.
Adoption of the project could contribute to cumulative impacts if buildout would conflict with land use plans and/or policies. As discussed in Section 4.9.6, policy consistency review associated with future discretionary development at the Rezone Sites would ensure no conflict would occur related to policies or regulations adopted for the purpose of mitigating an environmental impact. Future development at the Rezone Sites may occur either with a discretionary action, or with a ministerial approval for project that meet certain criteria. Future discretionary development would require a subsequent site-specific environmental review that would consider each project’s consistency with all applicable plans, including the City’s General Plan. Future by-right development would be required to adhere to the City’s proposed Objective Design Standards which includes design guidelines and regulations to ensure consistency with City plans and policies. Both future ministerial and discretionary review would be subject to review for consistency with the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code regulations that serve to reduce or avoid environmental impacts. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to policy inconsistency would be less than significant.
7.2.10 Noise
The analysis provided in Section 4.10 is cumulative in nature as it considers future (year 2050) traffic volumes. Refer to Section 4.10.5.1 for details on the increase in noise levels due to buildout of roads.
Future development at the Rezone Sites would result in a significant noise increase over existing ambient noise levels at nine of the analyzed roadway segments. The Noise Element contains Policies
2.2 and 2.3 that requires new development to mitigate the noise impact to existing uses resulting from new development. Possible noise-reduction measures would include retrofitting older homes with new window and door components with higher sound transmission class ratings. However, for existing uses, it cannot be determined whether the existing structures contain adequate attenuation to reduce interior noise to the 45 A-weighted decibels day-night equivalent level [dB(A) Ldn] standard nor what measures would be required to retrofit these structures. In addition, there is no mechanism
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
in place for implementing such a retrofit. Because the significant noise impacts are to existing homes in an already urbanized area, there is no feasible mitigation and potentially significant cumulative noise impacts would remain significant and unmitigated.
Future development at the Rezone Sites could expose sensitive receivers to exterior noise levels that exceed 65 community noise equivalent level and impacts from vehicle traffic would be significant.
Regarding interior noise, future ministerial and discretionary projects would be required to demonstrate that interior noise levels would be reduced to 45 dB(A) Ldn or less. Mitigation measures NOS-1 would address land use compatibility impacts related to vehicle traffic and requires the City to assess whether proposed noise-sensitive receivers or associated noise-sensitive exterior use areas would be subject to transportation noise levels that potentially conflict with policies established in the City’s General Plan. Therefore, implementation of mitigation measure NOS-1 and implementation of the General Plan policies would reduce noise impacts associated with transportation to a level less than significant ensuring that the project would not contribute to a significant cumulative noise impact.
Regarding stationary noise, the City requires that noise from new stationary sources comply with the City’s Noise Abatement and Control Ordinance, which provides general noise regulations, prohibits disturbing, excessive or offensive noises, and places noise limitations on motorized equipment and loading and unloading operations. Noise Abatement and Control Ordinance requirements would reduce nuisances to sensitive land uses. With enforcement of the Noise Abatement and Control Ordinance, noise impacts (direct and cumulative) associated with stationary sources of noise would be less than significant.
Construction activities associated with any individual development may occur near noise-sensitive receptors and noise disturbances may occur. Without project-specific information to evaluate potential construction noise impacts and specific distances to sensitive receptors, impacts are considered significant at this programmatic level of review. Mitigation measures NOS-2 and NOS-3 would address potentially significant impacts related to construction noise associated with development within the Rezone Sites. Based on the criteria outlined in Section 4.10.5.3, the City shall require preparation and implementation of a construction noise best management practice plan that demonstrates house noise levels would be minimized to comply with the time of day restrictions and notification requirements of the City’s Municipal Code. Mitigation measure NOS-3 would ensure future development with the potential to generate substantial vibration implement a plan to ensure vibration thresholds are not exceeded during construction. Implementation of the requirements specified in mitigation measures NOS-2 and NOS-3 would reduce construction noise exposure to a level less than significant. However, for construction sites that are adjacent to noise-sensitive uses, there still could be a substantial temporary increase in noise levels that could lead to adverse noiserelated impacts. Other construction sites could create similar increases in noise levels, resulting in a cumulative construction noise impact, which would be significant and unavoidable.
7.2.11 Population and Housing
The study area considered for the population and housing cumulative impact analysis is defined as the region. Buildout of the project would respond to the need for affordable housing in compliance with Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocation and associated projected population increase
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
within the City through the horizon year. The increase in housing stock would accommodate the projected growth in population in the region and is consistent with adopted plans and regional growth principles. No permanent displacement of housing or people would occur with implementation of the project. Significant population and housing impacts associated with cumulative development within the region is not anticipated to result in a displacement of housing or people because future development is generally growth accommodating and each jurisdiction has a mandate to comply with its adopted Housing Element and associated Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocation. Therefore, cumulative impacts associated with population and housing would be less than significant.
7.2.12 Public Services and Recreation
The study area for public services and recreation is the applicable provider’s service area. New development or redevelopment within the service area could result in cumulative impacts associated with additional demands for public services, resulting in the need for new or expanded facilities. As discussed in Section 4.12, all future development within the City would be reviewed to ensure that adequate facilities and services are available at the time of application. Other projects proposed in the City would similarly be required to demonstrate adequate facilities are available prior to development. All future development is required to pay applicable fees that support schools, parks, and recreational facilities. Cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
7.2.13 Transportation
The Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory recommends setting a VMT per capita threshold of 15 percent below that of existing development as a reasonable threshold. In other words, in order to result in a less than significant impact, VMT per capita resulting from a project should be at or below the 85th percentile of the region’s average for that land use type (OPR 2018). The VMT analysis utilized the average resident VMT per capita for San Diego County as the regional average.
A plan-to-ground analysis compared the project to Base Year (2016), which is representative of the baseline conditions. As shown in Table 4.13-2, the City has a less efficient VMT per capita when compared to the region, at approximately 108 percent of the region’s resident VMT per capita. The higher VMT per capita in the City compared to the greater San Diego County is representative of major job centers being located in other areas of San Diego County and City residents relying heavily on commutes to job centers in other cities.
As detailed in Chapter 4.13 and shown in Table 4.13-2, future development at the Rezone Sites in conjunction with buildout of the City’s General Plan land use map and transportation network would result in a change from 20.5 VMT per capita in the base year (2016) to 18.7 VMT per capita, representing a slight increase in VMT efficiency in the City. Mitigation measure TRA-1 would ensure implementation of the Mobility Element Policies outlined in Chapter 4.13 that would support VMT reductions for individual projects. While mitigation measure TRA-1 would minimize VMT impacts associated with future development at the Rezone Sites, impacts would not be fully mitigated. This analysis is cumulative in nature as it considers citywide buildout of the existing plan plus the project.
Based on the City’s higher VMT per capita compared to the regional average, other development in
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
the City is also likely to result in significant VMT impacts. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to VMT would be significant and unavoidable.
7.2.14 Utilities and Service Systems
The study area for public utilities is the applicable provider’s service area. Future development at the Rezone Sites is located within existing developed areas with access to utility infrastructure. Significant utility extensions or improvements are not anticipated beyond local connections from adjacent roadways. Utility infrastructure improvements and relocations associated with the future Rezone Sites would be evaluated in their respective subsequent environmental documents for discretionary projects, or as part of the ministerial review that will be implemented through an overlay zone that includes objective standards and requirements to reduce physical impacts to the extent feasible.
Similarly, other projects in the City would be required to undergo a similar review to ensure the environmental impacts of utility and services improvements are minimized. A cumulative impact related to the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects, is not anticipated. Cumulative impacts related to utilities and service systems would be less than significant.
7.2.14.1 Storm Water System
Development anticipated in the Rezone Sites would occur within areas of the City that are already served by existing stormwater infrastructure. Although future Rezone Sites would require connection to these existing facilities, stormwater infrastructure improvements would be evaluated upon submittal of project-specific development plans. All future project applications, whether discretionary or ministerial would be required to adhere to the mitigation framework presented in this PEIR which would ensure that any physical impacts associated with construction of pipeline connections to existing water infrastructure would be addressed as part of the City review for each individual project.
At this program-level of review, the project’s incremental contribution to storm water facility impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
7.2.14.2 Wastewater
Development anticipated in the Rezone Sites would occur within areas of the City that are already served by existing wastewater utility infrastructure. Although future Rezone Sites would require connection to these existing facilities, wastewater utility infrastructure improvements and relocations would be evaluated upon submittal of project-specific development plans. All future project applications, whether discretionary or ministerial, would be required to adhere to the mitigation framework presented in this PEIR which would ensure that any physical impacts associated with construction of pipeline connections to wastewater infrastructure would be addressed as part of the City review for each individual project. Thus, the project’s incremental contribution to wastewater impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
7.2.14.3 Water System/Water Supply
Cumulative impacts related to the water system and water supply would be less than significant because future development within the City would require a project-by-project review to confirm the availability of adequate fire hydrant flow, and if necessary, determine the local water system improvements needed to achieve required fire hydrant flow. Buildout potential within the Rezone Sites could result in the construction of up to 1,945 residential dwelling units that have not all been accounted for within the latest Padre Dam Municipal Water District (PDMWD) planning documents.
Urban Water Management Plans (UWMPs) are required to be updated on a five-year cycle and the next update to the PDMWD UWMP is anticipated by 2025. Future UWMP updates would account for the anticipated water use associated with future development consistent with any adopted rezones. While the proposed rezones would add development potential within the City, they would primarily authorize higher density residential development which is more water efficient than singlefamily residential. Based on the water efficiency of multi-family development, water conservation requirements, along with existing regulations that require new construction to be water efficient, it is not anticipated that the project would affect the ability of PDMWD to plan for adequate water supplies within the City during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Thus, the project’s incremental contribution to water system/water supply impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
7.2.14.4 Solid Waste Disposal
Cumulative impacts related to solid waste disposal would be less than significant because an existing regulatory framework is in place, detailed in Section 4.14.8, that would apply to future development associated with the project in addition to cumulative development within the City. Future development at the Rezone Sites is located within existing developed areas with access to solid waste disposal services. No development is proposed as part of the project; however, it is anticipated that future projects would result in an increase in solid waste generation. Solid waste requirements associated with the future development of the Rezone Sites would be evaluated upon submittal of project-specific development plans. All projects whether discretionary or ministerial would be reviewed for conformance with state and local regulations and adherence to General Plan policies.
Thus, with implementation of the existing regulatory framework addressing solid waste disposal, the project’s incremental contribution to solid waste disposal impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
7.2.15 Wildfire
The study area for the assessment of cumulative impacts related to wildfire is the City. Development at the Rezone Sites would not physically interfere with any emergency response or evacuation plans because they would not include any features that would prevent continued implementation of these plans. Additionally, applicable General Plan Safety Element policies would continue to be implemented to ensure adequate citywide emergency response and preparedness. Development of the Rezone Sites, especially within or adjacent to Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, could potentially result in impacts related to wildfire. However, future ministerial and discretionary development at Housing Sites would be required to adhere to all regulatory requirements in place to minimize wildfire hazards including applicable sections of the Municipal Code, fire and building
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
codes, and requirements from the fire chief that would be identified during future building permit reviews. Additionally, implementation of the City’s General Plan policies support implementation of measures that will enhance wildfire safety. Future discretionary projects would require review by the Building Official/Fire Marshal. All impacts associated with infrastructure improvements including any required measures to address fire safety would be evaluated in their respective subsequent environmental documents for discretionary projects, or as part of the ministerial review for by-right sites. The City fire chief may also use their authority to require additional building, planning, or landscaping requirements that provide enhanced fire protection. Development of future Rezone Sites would be required to comply with applicable regulations and policies related to flooding, drainage patterns, and landslides, and thereby avoid significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. Like the project, all future development in the City would be required to comply with applicable Municipal Code and building and fire code regulations that would reduce the potential for cumulative impacts. The project’s incremental contribution to impacts related to wildfire would not be cumulatively considerable.
8.0 Effects Found Not to be Significant
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Chapter 8
Effects Found Not to be Significant
Section 15128 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines requires that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) briefly describe potential environmental effects that were determined not to be significant, and therefore were not discussed in detail in the EIR. Based on initial environmental review, the City of Santee (City) determined that the project would not have the potential to cause significant impacts associated with the environmental categories discussed below.
8.1 Agricultural and Forestry Resources
Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, a significant impact to agricultural and forestry resources would occur if the project would:
1) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use. 2) Conflict with existing zoning agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. 3) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220[g]), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104[g]).
4) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. 5) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use.
The California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection, identifies important farmland throughout the state through its Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP). The FMMP is non-regulatory and was developed to inventory land and provide categorical definitions of important farmlands and consistent and impartial data to decision makers for use in assessing present status, reviewing trends, and planning for the future of California’s agricultural land resources. The FMMP classifies the majority of the Rezone Sites as “Urban and Built Up Land,” “Other Land,” and “Grazing Land.” The areas classified as “Grazing Lands” are not considered a significant farmland resource under CEQA. A few Rezone Sites are classified as “Farmland of Local Importance”; however, there is no recent history of agricultural use at these sites. There are no lands protected by a Williamson Act Contract within the City. Additionally, there is no forestland within the City, and the City does not possess any zoning classifications for forestland, timberland, or timberland production zones. Therefore, no impacts to agricultural and forestry resources would occur.
8.0 Effects Found Not to be Significant
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
8.2 Energy
Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, a significant impact to energy would occur if the project would:
1) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation. 2) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
8.2.1 Energy Consumption
Energy use associated with a project typically includes fuel (gasoline and diesel), electricity, and natural gas, and sources include the following:
• Construction-related vehicle and equipment energy use; • Transportation energy use from people traveling to and from a project area during operation; and
• Building and facility energy use during operation.
8.2.1.1 Construction
Construction grading and construction activities consume energy through the operation of heavy off-road equipment, trucks, and worker traffic. At the program-level, it is too speculative to quantify total construction-related energy consumption of future development, either in total or by fuel type.
Energy used during future construction of the project areas is not considered significant given typical energy use associated with the type of development proposed and short-term nature of the energy consumption. There are no conditions in the project areas that would require non-standard equipment or construction practices that would increase fuel-energy consumption above typical rates. Consistent with state requirements, all construction equipment would meet California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 3 In-Use Off-Road Diesel Engine Standards. Engines are required to meet certain emission standards, and groups of standards are referred to as Tiers. A Tier 0 engine is unregulated with no emission controls, and each progression of standard level (i.e., Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3, etc.) generate lower emissions, use less energy, and are more advanced technologically than the previous tier. CARB’s Tier 3 In-Use Off-Road Diesel Engine Standards requires that construction equipment fleets become cleaner and use less energy over time. Therefore, the project would not result in a wasteful and inefficient use of energy resources during the construction of future development, and impacts would be less than significant.
8.2.1.2 Long-term Operations
Long-term operational energy use associated with buildout of residential housing at the Rezone Sites includes fuel consumption of vehicles; electricity and natural gas consumption by residents and commercial operations, and energy consumption related to obtaining water. However, anticipated
8.0 Effects Found Not to be Significant
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
housing will be multi-family housing which is a more efficient way to provide housing than lower density single-family development. Although the project would provide capacity for future housing development that could increase energy use, energy demand of future residential development would be consistent with energy demand for multi-family housing within other cities in the region and would not be associated with inefficient or wasteful energy use. Implementation of the project would not result in any unusual characteristics that would result in excessive long-term operational building energy demand. Future development associated with implementation of residential development at the Rezone Sites would be subject to compliance with the California Building Code (Title 24) which aims to reduce excessive and inefficient energy use. The California Building Code is regularly updated and includes higher energy-efficiency standards in comparison to other states.
Individual development projects in the City would be required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local energy and building regulations, including the requirements of the Sustainable Santee Plan.
a. Transportation
Buildout of the Rezone Sites would consume energy associated transportation uses. Trips by individuals traveling to, from, and within the project area would largely rely on passenger vehicles or public transit. Passenger vehicles would be mostly powered by gasoline, with some fueled by diesel or electricity. Public transit would be powered by diesel or natural gas, and could potentially be fueled by electricity. Pursuant to the Federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration is responsible for establishing vehicle standards and for revising existing standards. Compliance with federal fuel economy standards is not determined for each individual vehicle model. Rather, compliance is determined based on each manufacturer’s average fuel economy for the portion of their vehicles produced for sale in the United States. Over time, fuel economy standards have increased and reduced the greenhouse gas emissions footprint of vehicles. As discussed in Section 4.13, the project would result in a reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita which would move the City in the direction of reducing VMT citywide, although a significant VMT impact would still result due to the fact that VMT per capita would be greater than 85 percent of the regional average. The higher VMT per capita in Santee compared to the County of San Diego is representative of major job centers being located in other areas of the County and Santee residents relying heavily on commutes to job centers in other cities. Although the City has a less efficient VMT per capita when compared to the region, this does not indicate that the project would result in a wasteful or inefficient use of transportation-related energy since the growth is planned and needed to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) obligations. By locating housing at existing retail sites and developing retail uses along with multifamily residential uses at the Rezone Sites, non-commute vehicle trips may be reduced. The City shall ensure that future projects are compliant with Mobility Element Policies 9.1 through 9.5, which encourage the use of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies, such as ride sharing programs, flexible work schedule programs, and incentives for employees to use transit. Future projects would be required to comply with the Sustainable Santee Plan by promoting non-motorized transportation options, improving bicycle transit, installing electric vehicle charging stations, and improving traffic flow. This would be demonstrated through completion of the Sustainable Santee Plan Consistency Checklist. Additionally, alternative transportation modes, such as walking, cycling, and public transit are encouraged to reduce peak hour vehicular trips, save energy, and improve air quality. Therefore, the project would not create a land use pattern that would result in a wasteful,
8.0 Effects Found Not to be Significant
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
inefficient, or unnecessary use of transportation-related energy, and impacts would be less than significant.
b. Electricity and Natural Gas
Non-transportation energy use would be associated with electricity and natural gas. The Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) promotes diversification of the state’s electricity supply and decreased reliance on fossil fuel energy sources. Renewable energy includes (but is not limited to) wind, solar, geothermal, small hydroelectric, biomass, anaerobic digestion, and landfill gas. Originally adopted in 2002 with a goal to achieve a 20 percent renewable energy mix by 2020 (referred to as the “Initial RPS”), the goal has been accelerated and increased by Executive Orders S-14-08 and S-21-09 to a goal of 33 percent by 2020. In April 2011, Senate Bill (SB) 2 (1X) codified California’s 33 percent RPS goal. SB 350 (2015) increased California’s renewable energy mix goal to 50 percent by year 2030.
SB 100 (2018) further increased the standard set by SB 350 establishing the RPS goal of 44 percent by the end of 2024, 52 percent by the end of 2027, and 60 percent by 2030. The City is served by San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E). Based on the most recent annual report, SDG&E has already procured 44 percent (California Public Utilities Commission [CPUC] 2019) renewable energy and is on track to procure 60 percent by 2030 as outlined in SDG&E’s 2019 RPS Procurement Plan. The California Code of Regulations, Title 24, is referred to as the California Building Code (CBC). It consists of a compilation of several distinct standards and codes related to building construction, including plumbing, electrical, interior acoustics, energy efficiency, handicap accessibility, and so on. Of particular relevance to greenhouse gas reductions are the CBC’s energy efficiency and green building standards as outlined below. Title 24, Part 11 of the California Code of Regulations is CALGreen.
Beginning in 2011, CALGreen instituted mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground-up new construction of commercial and low-rise residential buildings, state-owned buildings, schools, and hospitals. It also includes voluntary tiers (I and II) with stricter environmental performance standards for these same categories of residential and non-residential buildings. Local jurisdictions must enforce the minimum mandatory requirements and may adopt CALGreen with amendments for stricter requirements. Future development would, at a minimum, be required to comply with the mandatory measures included in the current 2019 Energy Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6) and the 2019 CALGreen standards. The mandatory standards require the following:
• Residential solar requirements;
• Outdoor water use requirements as outlined in local water efficient landscaping ordinances or current Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance standards, whichever is more stringent;
• Requirements for water conserving plumbing fixtures and fittings; • 65 percent construction/demolition waste diverted from landfills; • Inspections of energy systems to ensure optimal working efficiency; and • Low-pollutant emitting exterior and interior finish materials such as paints, carpets, vinyl flooring, and particle boards.
8.0 Effects Found Not to be Significant
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Similar to the compliance reporting procedure for demonstrating Energy Code compliance in new buildings and major renovations, compliance with the CALGreen operational water reduction requirements must be demonstrated through completion of water use reporting forms for new lowrise residential and non-residential buildings. The water use compliance form must demonstrate a 20 percent reduction in indoor water use by either showing a 20 percent reduction in the overall baseline water use as identified in CALGreen or a reduced per-plumbing-fixture water use rate. The project does not involve any unusual characteristics that would result in excessive long-term operational demand for electricity or natural gas. The applicable state plans that address renewable energy and energy efficiency are CALGreen, the California Energy Code, and RPS, and the applicable local plan is the General Plan. All future development projects would be required to meet the mandatory energy requirements of 2019 CALGreen and the 2019 California Energy Code, at a minimum. Future projects would be required to comply with the Sustainable Santee Plan by increasing energy efficiency and installing solar photovoltaic systems. This would be demonstrated through completion of the Sustainable Santee Plan Consistency Checklist. The project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of CALGreen and the California Energy Code, or with SDG&E’s implementation of RPS. Project adherence with state and federal regulations and the Sustainable Santee Plan goals will guide reductions in the City’s collective long-term operational energy use. Impacts relative to the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy would be less than significant.
8.2.2 Energy Plans
The applicable state plans that address renewable energy and energy efficiency are CALGreen, the California Energy Code, and RPS, and the applicable local plan is the Sustainable Santee Plan. As discussed under Section 8.2.1, Energy Consumption, above, the project would be required to meet the mandatory energy requirements of 2019 CALGreen and the 2019 California Energy Code. The project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of CALGreen and the California Energy Code, or with SDG&E’s implementation of RPS. Additionally, as detailed in Section 4.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, future development would be consistent with Sustainable Santee Plan Goals and Implementing Measures. Therefore, the project wound not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, and impacts would be less than significant.
8.3 Mineral Resources
Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, a significant impact to mineral resources would occur if the project would:
1) 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.
2) 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.
The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975 established policies for the conservation, development, and reclamation of mineral lands. It also contained specific provisions for the California
8.0 Effects Found Not to be Significant
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Geological Survey to classify the regional significance of mineral resources through the use of Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs). The following provides a description of the four different MRZs:
• MRZ-1 designates areas where adequate geologic information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence.
• MRZ-2 designates areas underlain by mineral deposits where geologic data indicates that significant measured or indicated mineral resources are present. • MRZ-3 designates areas that contain known mineral deposits, the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data.
• MRZ-4 designates areas where available information is inadequate for assignment to an MRZ zone.
Rezone Sites 15, 16A, 16B, 17, and 20A are designated as MRZ-2, Sites 1-12, 19, 24, 29, 30 and both Graves Avenue sites are designated as MRZ-3, and Sites 18, 20B, 35, and 25 are designated as a mix of both MRZ-2 and MRZ-3. Although some Rezone Sites are located within a MRZ-2 designated area, these areas are not zoned for mining operations and the existing land use would also not be a mining land use as mining would not be a consistent land use with the surrounding area. While these lands may support mineral resources, mining operations at these sites would not be feasible considering the proximity to sensitive receptors and existing established neighborhoods.
Furthermore, the Rezone Sites are not designated as locally important mineral resource recovery sites in the Santee General Plan. Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource or locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan, and impacts would be less than significant.
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Chapter 9
Project Alternatives
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15126.6 requires that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) compare the effects of a “reasonable range of alternatives” to the project. The State CEQA Guidelines further specify that the alternatives selected should attain most of the basic project objectives and avoid or substantially lessen one or more significant effects of the project. The “range of alternatives” is governed by the “rule of reason,” which requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit an informed and reasoned choice by the lead agency, and to foster meaningful public participation (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f]). CEQA generally defines “feasible” to mean an alternative that is capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, while also taking into account economic, environmental, social, technological, and legal factors.
9.1 Selection of Alternatives
As discussed throughout Chapter 4.0 of this Program EIR (PEIR), the 6th Cycle Housing Element Rezone Program (project) would result in significant unavoidable environmental impacts related to air quality (consistency with air quality plans, criteria pollutants), greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (emissions; policy consistency), noise (vehicular generated ambient noise), and transportation (vehicle miles traveled [VMT]). All other impacts were determined to be less than significant or would be mitigated to a level less than significant.
In developing the alternatives to be addressed, consideration was given to their ability to meet the basic objectives of the project and eliminate or substantially reduce significant environmental impacts. As identified in Chapter 3.0, project objectives include the following:
1. Implement Program 9 of the 6th Cycle 2021-2029 Housing Element to provide for the opportunity for future residential development on various sites throughout the City as identified by the Sites Inventory, with a density range of 30 to 36 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) on selected sites.
2. Also consistent with Program 9 and Program 10 of the 6th Cycle 2021-2029 Housing Element, provide a minimum of 25 acres to be rezoned (within 18 months of Housing Element adoption) to permit multi-family housing by right (without discretionary action) and to meet the requirements of Government Code 65583.2, including but not limited to a minimum density of 20 units per acre.
3. Maintain adequate housing sites for all income groups throughout the eight-year planning period.
4. Minimize potential land use compatibility conflicts associated with the proposed change to existing land use designations and zoning.
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
5. Increase the City of Santee’s (City) overall housing capacity and capability to accommodate housing as required per the adopted Housing Element for the 2021-2029 housing cycle.
Alternatives selected for consideration include the No Project (No Rezone Program) Alternative and the Reduced Project Alternative. Alternative rezone sites were considered through the separate Housing Element process which evaluated numerous sites throughout the City for consideration as candidate rezone sites. Refer to the City’s Housing Element adopted July 14, 2021 for additional information on the evaluation and selection of housing sites As required under Section 15126.6 (e)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR must identify the environmentally superior alternative. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, if the No Project Alternative is determined to be the most environmentally superior project, then another alternative among the alternatives evaluated must be identified as the environmentally superior project. Section 9.3 addresses the environmentally superior alternative selected.
The following section provides an analysis of each major issue area included in the impact analysis for the project. Table 9-1 provides a matrix comparison of the significant impacts of the project as compared to each alternative.
Table 9-1
Matrix Comparison of the Project and Alternatives Impacts Environmental Issue Area Project
No Project
(No Rezone Program)
Alternative
Reduced Project
Alternative
Aesthetics LTS LTS/LESS LTS/LESS
Air Quality SU SU/SAME SU/SAME
Biological Resources SM SM/LESS SM/LESS
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources SM SU/GREATER SM/LESS Geology and Soils SM SM/SAME SM/SAME
Greenhouse Gas Emissions SU SU/SAME SU/SAME
Hazards and Hazardous Materials LTS LTS/LESS LTS/LESS
Hydrology and Water Quality LTS LTS/LESS LTS/SAME
Land Use and Planning LTS LTS/LESS LTS/SAME
Noise SU SU/SAME SU/SAME
Population and Housing LTS LTS/SAME LTS/SAME
Public Services and Recreation LTS LTS/LESS LTS/SAME
Transportation SU SU/SAME SU/SAME
Utilities and Service System SM LTS/LESS SM/SAME
Wildfire LTS LTS/LESS LTS/LESS
LTS = less than significant; SM = significant and mitigated; SU = significant and unavoidable
9.2 Project Alternatives
Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126(d), the alternatives described below are analyzed to include sufficient information to allow a meaningful analysis and comparison with the project. For purposes of this analysis, those subject areas included in Chapter 4.0 are also included in the analysis
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
of the alternatives. The following sections include a discussion of the impacts of the alternatives compared to the project. The conclusion for each alternative also provides an overview of how the alternative meets, partially meets, or fails to meet the project objectives.
9.2.1 No Project (No Rezone Program) Alternative
The following discussion of the No Project (No Rezone Program) Alternative (No Project Alternative) is based on the CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(A) which states:
When the project is the revision of an existing land use or regulatory plan, policy or ongoing operation, an alternative will be the continuation of the existing plan, policy or operation into the future. Typically this is a situation where other projects initiated under the existing plan will continue while the new plan is developed. Thus, the projected impacts of the proposed plan or alternative plans would be compared to the impacts that would occur under the existing plan.
Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(A), the No Project Alternative represents the continued implementation of the City’s General Plan land use and zoning for each of the 25 housing sites and 2 sites on Graves Avenue, collectively known as the “Rezone Sites.”
9.2.1.1 Description of the No Project (No Rezone) Alternative Under the No Project Alternative, development within the City would proceed pursuant to the adopted General Plan and zoning map, which would have lesser overall residential development potential and would not include implementation of the 6th Cycle Housing Element Programs 9 and
10. Zoning changes at the Rezone Sites would not be contemplated and existing zoning would remain in place. Existing zoning at the Rezone Sites is shown in Chapter 3.0, Table 3-2. The No Project Alternative would not consider adoption of rezones necessary to achieve the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA).
9.2.1.2 Environmental Analysis of the No Project (No Rezone) Alternative a. Aesthetics
Under the No Project Alternative, development throughout the City would continue based on existing zoning. The No Project Alternative would not result in the increased residential density required to meet the City’s RNHA objectives. Although higher density development could not occur at these sites, development could proceed based on the existing land use designation and zoning, which is detailed in Table 3-2. Development under the No Project Alternative would be subject to Development Review consistent with Municipal Code Chapter 13.08 to ensure consistency with General Plan policies and applicable design and development review requirements including supplemental development regulations from the Town Center Specific Plan. The Development Review process would ensure that future development would not degrade scenic vistas, scenic resources, or visual quality. Compliance with Municipal Code standards related to light and glare (Chapter 13.08.070(G)), requiring that outdoor lighting be directed away from adjacent properties and set in a way to avoid any detriment to the surrounding area and lighting standards of the
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Community Enhancement Element would ensure that future development would not result in impacts related to light and glare. Therefore, impacts related to aesthetics under the No Project Alternative would be less than significant, and slightly reduced compared to the project due to decreased density associated with the retention of existing zoning. b. Air Quality
Future development under the No Project Alternative would occur consistent with the City’s adopted General Plan land use plan, and therefore would be consistent with the existing growth projections for which regional air quality standards (RAQs) are based. Although development potential would be less compared to the project, construction time frames and equipment for site-specific development projects are not available at this time, and there is a potential for multiple development projects to be constructed at one time, resulting in significant construction-related emissions. While future development under this alternative would be required to implement mitigation measures documented in the City’s General Plan, mitigation for air quality impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Therefore, impacts associated with air quality under the No Project Alternative would be significant and unavoidable, the same as the project. c. Biological Resources
Future development under the No Project Alternative would occur consistent with the City’s adopted General Plan land use plan. The No Project Alternative would develop approximately 1,209 fewer dwelling units compared to the project, which is consistent with the existing General Plan and zoning.
Although this decreased density could reduce impacts to biological resources, development consistent with the existing zoning designations could still occur within areas that support sensitive resources.
Future development under the No Project Alternative would be subject to implementation of mitigation measures documented in the City’s General Plan for biological resources, which would reduce impacts related to sensitive species, sensitive habitats, and wetlands to a level less than significant. Therefore, impacts related to biological resources under the No Project Alternative would be less than significant, and slightly reduced compared to the project due to decreased density associated with the retention of existing zoning.
d. Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
Future development under the No Project Alternative would occur consistent with the City’s adopted General Plan land use plan. The No Project Alternative would develop approximately 1,209 fewer multi-family dwelling units compared to the project, which is consistent with the existing General Plan and zoning. Future development under this alternative would be required to implement mitigation measures documented in the City’s General Plan for cultural resources and conduct tribal consultation consistent with the requirements of Assembly Bill (AB) 52. However, the City’s General Plan EIR determined that some potential impacts associated with cultural resources may remain significant even with application of mitigation measures. Therefore, impacts related to cultural resources under the No Project Alternative would be significant and unavoidable, and greater than the project.
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
e. Geology/Soils
Future development under the No Project Alternative would occur consistent with the City’s adopted General Plan land use plan and would be subject to the same regulations as the project. The No Project Alternative would develop approximately 1,209 fewer multi-family dwelling units compared to the project, but would support development consistent with the existing General Plan and zoning which could be subject to potential geologic hazards. Adherence to Safety Element policies, the Municipal Code, and the California Building Code would ensure that future development under this alternative would not cause substantial adverse effects associated with fault rupture, ground shaking, liquefaction, landslide, or expansive soils, and impacts would be less than significant. Similarly, adherence to applicable Municipal Code requirements would ensure that future development under this alternative would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, and impacts would be less than significant. Implementation of mitigation measures documented in the City’s General Plan for paleontological resources would reduce impacts related to paleontological resources to a level less than significant. Therefore, impacts related to geology and soils under the No Project Alternative would be mitigated to a level less than significant, the same as the project. f. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Future development under the No Project Alternative would occur consistent with the City’s adopted General Plan land use plan and would be subject to implementation of the City’s Sustainable Santee Plan (Climate Action Plan). However, development under the No Project Alternative could result in significant and unmitigated impacts related to GHG emissions due to VMT inefficiency. Therefore, impacts associated with GHG under the No Project Alternative would be significant and unavoidable, the same as the project.
g. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The No Project Alternative would develop approximately 1,209 fewer dwelling units compared to the project, and thereby result in fewer residential units that may be affected by potential hazards and hazardous materials. Future development would be required to adhere to multiple regulations related to hazardous materials handling and transport, including applicable state and local regulatory measures. Citywide General Plan Safety Element policies (refer to Section 4.7.2.4.a) would also support safe handling of hazardous materials. Future development under this alternative would be required to implement mitigation measures documented in the City’s General Plan for hazardous materials. Future development under this alternative located within the Gillespie Field and MCAS Miramar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans (ALUCPs) would be required to adhere to applicable City policies and regulations, as well as policies of the ALUCP. Furthermore, applications for all future projects under the No Project Alternative would be reviewed and approved by the Santee Fire Department prior to issuance of a building permit. Therefore, impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials under the No Project Alternative would be mitigated to a level less than significant, the same as the project.
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
h. Hydrology and Water Quality
Future development under the No Project Alternative would be required to adhere to all applicable water quality standards as provided in various water quality regulations and plans including all pertinent requirements of the City’s Jurisdictional Runoff Management Plan, Best Management Practice (BMP) Design Manual, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit, as well as all regulations related to water quality. Both redevelopment and new development on vacant sites would be required to comply with applicable stormwater management requirements which focuses on retention and infiltration of waters on-site. Additionally, development under this alternative would be required to comply with City General Plan policies and regulations that prioritize infiltration and treatment of stormwater. Future development would also be required to implement applicable stormwater BMPs and erosion control measures to retain flows on-site and minimize the velocity of stormwater runoff. Such BMPs could include on-site drainage swales, bioretention features, use of permeable pavers in parking areas and streets, or infiltration basins which also serve as a means for pollutant removal. Development under this alternative would be required to adhere to all state and local development regulations including the Municipal Code (Chapter 11.36), which establishes Flood Damage Prevention standards. Therefore, impacts associated with hydrology and water quality under the No Project Alternative would be less than significant, and slightly reduced compared to the project due to decreased density associated with the retention of existing zoning.
i. Land Use and Planning
The No Project Alternative would develop approximately 1,209 fewer dwelling units compared to the project. Future development under the No Project Alternative would occur consistent with the City’s adopted General Plan land use plan. All future development under this alternative would be subject to a site-specific review that considers consistency with all applicable plans, including the City’s General Plan. Therefore, impacts related to land use under the No Project Alternative would be less than significant, the same as the project.
j. Noise
Future development under the No Project Alternative would occur consistent with the City’s adopted General Plan land use plan and would be subject to implementation of mitigation measures documented in the City’s General Plan for noise to reduce potential impacts to a level less than significant. However, even with implementation of the mitigation measures, noise impacts could remain significant and unmitigated. Therefore, impacts associated with noise under the No Project Alternative would be significant and unavoidable, the same as the project. k. Population and Housing
The No Project Alternative would develop approximately 1,209 fewer dwelling units compared to the project, and thereby result in less population growth. Future development under the No Project Alternative would be located in areas that are already served by infrastructure, and therefore would not induce population growth. The No Project Alternative would not displace a substantial number
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
of people or housing. Therefore, impacts associated with population and housing would be less than significant, the same as the project.
l. Public Services and Recreation
The No Project Alternative would develop approximately 1,209 fewer dwelling units compared to the project, and thereby result in fewer residential units that would require public services and recreation facilities. Future development under the No Project Alternative would not directly result in sufficient demand to require construction of new fire protection, police protection, school, library, or park and recreation facilities, since each incremental housing development would pay its fair share toward anticipated facility needs. Construction of any future public service or recreation facilities would require a separate environmental review and approval. Therefore, impacts associated with public services and recreation would be less than significant, and slightly reduced compared to the project due to decreased density associated with the retention of existing zoning. m. Transportation
Future development under the No Project Alternative would be subject to an engineering and policy review that would ensure consistency with applicable policies related to transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. The No Project Alternative does not propose any changes to the existing roadway network. The Transportation Impact Study prepared for the project determined that buildout of the No Project Alternative would generate an average resident VMT per capita of 18.7, which would be a reduction compared to 20.5 under the 2016 base year. However, the 18.7 VMT per capita under buildout of the No Project Alternative represents 98 percent of the base year regional average. Therefore, VMT per capita associated with the No Project Alternative would be greater than 85 percent of the regional average and would exceed the VMT threshold. Future development would be designed consistent with established roadway design standards, and access to the existing roadway network would be configured consistent with established roadway design standards that would allow for emergency access. Therefore, impacts associated with transportation would be significant and unavoidable, the same as the project.
n. Utilities and Service System
The No Project Alternative would develop approximately 1,209 fewer dwelling units compared to the project, and thereby result in fewer residential units that would require utility services. However, development under the existing General Plan would increase demand for utilities and services. Utility infrastructure improvements and relocations under the No Project Alternative would be evaluated as part of a future review for site-specific projects. Should separate utility extensions be required outside of the footprints of future site-specific projects, they would require an environmental review and compliance with regulations in existence at that time would address potential environmental impacts. The No Project Alternative would likely result in less demand for water supply, wastewater treatment, and solid waste disposal compared to development proposed under the project.
Therefore, impacts associated with utilities and service system would be less than significant, and slightly reduced compared to the project due to decreased density associated with the retention of existing zoning.
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
o. Wildfire
The No Project Alternative would develop approximately 1,209 fewer dwelling units compared to the project, and thereby result in fewer residential units that may be exposed to wildfire. This alternative does not propose any changes to the City’s existing circulation network, and no land uses are proposed that would impair implementation of or physically interfere with the City’s emergency response plan, evacuation routes, or conflict with any of the Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan specific hazard mitigation goals, objectives, and related actions. Additionally, future development would be required to adhere to the City’s General Plan (Safety Element) policies including, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.11, and 4.12 which address emergency response and emergency evacuation.
Future development located within the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) would comply with applicable California Fire Code and City General Plan requirements, and include enhanced fire protection measures as detailed in the City’s building and fire codes. Future development under this alternative would also be required to comply with applicable regulations and policies related to flooding, drainage patterns, and landslides. Therefore, impacts associated with wildfire under the No Project Alternative would be less than significant, and slightly reduced compared to the project due to decreased density associated with the retention of existing zoning.
9.2.1.3 Conclusion Regarding the No Project Alternative As described throughout Section 9.2.1.2 and summarized in Table 9-1, the No Project Alternative would result in similar impacts compared to the project, with only cultural and tribal cultural resources seeing an increase in the severity of impacts. The No Project Alternative would develop approximately 1,209 fewer dwelling units, resulting in less density throughout the City; however, future development would be required to adhere to existing state and local regulations and would be required to implement relevant mitigation measures set forth in the City’s General Plan EIR.
Therefore, impacts associated with geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, land use, and population and housing would be the same compared to the project. Impacts associated with aesthetics, biological resources, hydrology and water quality, public services and recreation, utilities and service system, and wildfire would be slightly reduced under this alternative due to the retention of the existing zoning designations, which would decrease density at these sites. Impacts related to air quality, GHG, noise, and transportation would be significant and unavoidable, the same as the project. Impacts related to cultural and tribal cultural resources would be significant and unavoidable, greater than the project. Furthermore, the No Project Alternative would not meet any of the project objectives.
This alternative would not satisfy any of the project objectives stated in Chapter 3.0, Project Description, because buildout of the No Project (No Rezone) Alternative would not provide enough residential units to meet the City’s RHNA allocation; nor would it implement Housing Element programs.
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
9.2.2 Reduced Project Alternative
9.2.2.1 Description of the Reduced Project Alternative
The Reduced Project Alternative would remove Rezone Sites 1 through 10 (refer to Table 3-2 and Figure 3-2a) from consideration for future rezone actions and associated residential development.
Rezone Sites 1 through 10 would retain the existing Low Density Residential (R-1A) zoning designation.
Removal of these 10 Rezone Sites would reduce the potential for development of approximately 124 residential units at these sites. However. the Reduced Project Alternative would still allow for adoption of rezones up to approximately 1,821 residential units, which would exceed the 1,209 units needed through rezones to accommodate the City’s RHNA allocation. Therefore, the Reduced Project Alternative would ultimately result in development of an adequate amount of new residential options; however, a subset of the rezone sites that could be developed would be eliminated. All other aspects of the project would remain the same, including adoption of Housing Element Program 9, Housing Element Program 10, and rezoning of the Graves Avenue Parcels.
9.2.2.2 Environmental Analysis of the Reduced Project Alternative a. Aesthetics
The Reduced Project Alternative would remove Rezone Sites 1 through 10 located just north of the urbanized portion of the City. Future development of these sites would occur consistent with the existing R1-A (Low Density Residential) zoning designation, which would reduce alterations of scenic vistas, scenic resources, and visual quality in these locations compared to the project due to the decreased density. Potential impacts related to aesthetics would be the same for the remaining Rezone Sites. However, development under this alternative would be subject to Development Review consistent with Municipal Code Chapter 13.08 to ensure consistency with General Plan policies and applicable design and development review requirements including supplemental development regulations from the Town Center Specific Plan. The Development Review process would ensure that future development would not degrade scenic vistas, scenic resources, or visual quality. Compliance with the Municipal Code standards related to light and glare (Chapter 13.08.070(G)), requiring that outdoor lighting be directed away from adjacent properties and set in a way to avoid any detriment to the surrounding area and lighting standards of the Community Enhancement Element would ensure that future development would not result in impacts related to light and glare. Therefore, impacts related to aesthetics under the Reduced Project Alternative would be less than significant, the same as the project, and incrementally reduced compared to the project due to the removal of Rezone Sites 1 through 10.
b. Air Quality
Although this alternative would reduce the potential for development of approximately 124 residential units compared to the project, the Reduced Project Alternative would still potentially allow for development of approximately 1,821 residential units through rezones. This remaining
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
development potential through future rezones would exceed the 1,209 units that are needed through rezones to accommodate the City’s RHNA allocation. Therefore, while this alternative would provide less flexibility for potential rezone sites, the Reduced Project Alternative would ultimately result in development of the same number of residential units as the project since only a subset of the total sites will ultimately be selected for rezoning. As with the project, buildout of the Reduced Project Alternative would result in an increase in emissions compared to buildout of the adopted zoning and land use designations. Therefore, buildout of this alternative would exceed the assumptions used to develop the RAQS and would result in significant unavoidable impact associated with air quality plan consistency and operational criteria pollutants. Even with implementation of mitigation measure AQ1, impacts associated with criteria pollutants during construction would remain significant and unavoidable. As with the project, buildout of the Reduced Project Alternative would not result in a carbon monoxide (CO) hot spot. Additionally, construction and operation of future development would not result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic air contaminants (TACs) from construction activities, stationary sources, or mobile sources, and impacts would be less than significant. Emissions from construction equipment, such as diesel exhaust, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from architectural coatings and paving activities may generate odors; however, these odors would be temporary, intermittent, and not expected to affect a substantial number of people. Once operational, future development implemented under this alternative would include residential and associated commercial uses that are generally not a source of objectionable odors.
Therefore, impacts associated with air quality under the Reduced Project Alternative would be significant and unavoidable, the same as the project.
c. Biological Resources
The Reduced Project Alternative would remove Rezone Sites 1 through 10 located just north of the urbanized portion of the City. Future development of these sites would occur consistent with the existing R1-A (Low Density Residential) zoning designation, which would potentially reduce impacts on sensitive plants, sensitive wildlife, including coastal California gnatcatcher nesting birds or migratory birds, Diegan coastal sage scrub, valley, foothill grassland, and wetlands compared to the project due to the decreased density. Potential impacts on biological resources would be the same for the remaining Rezone Sites. Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1 through BIO-5 would reduce impacts to sensitive plants, sensitive wildlife, and sensitive vegetation communities to a level less than significant. Implementation of mitigation measure BIO-6 would reduce impacts to on-site jurisdictional waters and wetlands to a level less than significant. Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1 through BIO-6 would ensure future development under this alternative would be consistent with the Draft Santee Subarea Plan by requiring site-specific surveys, determining the extent of any potential impacts, and providing mitigation to reduce impacts to a level less than significant. Therefore, impacts related to biological resources under the Reduced Project Alternative would be mitigated to a level less than significant, the same as the project, and incrementally reduced compared to the project due to the removal of Rezone Sites 1 through 10. d. Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Rezone Sites 1 through 10 that would be removed under the Reduced Project Alternative are not located adjacent to any known historic resources. Therefore, this alternative would not reduce potential impacts on historic resources compared to the project. Implementation of mitigation
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
measure CUL-1 would reduce potential impacts associated with the remaining Rezone Site to a level less than significant. Rezone Sites 1 through 10 that would be removed under the Reduced Project Alternative are designated as having Moderate Potential for Register Eligible Buried Archaeological Sites. Therefore, this alternative would slightly reduce potential impacts on archaeological resources, religious, and sacred uses or tribal cultural resources due to the decreased density of development at these sites. Potential impacts on archaeological resources, religious and sacred uses, or tribal cultural resources would be the same for the remaining Rezone Sites. Implementation of mitigation measures CUL-2 and CUL-3 would reduce potential impacts associated with the remaining Rezone Site to a level less than significant. This alternative would additionally implement Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and comply with the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (2001), the federal Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (1990), as well as AB 52 to avoid adverse impacts to human remains. Therefore, impacts related to cultural resources under the Reduced Project Alternative would be mitigated to a level less than significant, and incrementally reduced compared to the project due to the removal of Rezone Sites 1 through 10 designated as having moderate potential for Register Eligible Buried Archaeological Sites. e. Geology/Soils
Removal of Rezone Sites 1 through 10 from the Reduced Project Alternative would reduce the amount of land mapped with liquefaction potential. However, all remaining Rezone Sites under this alternative are identified as having liquefaction potential. Adherence to Safety Element policies, the Municipal Code, and the Uniform Building Code would ensure that future development under this alternative would not cause substantial adverse effects associated with fault rupture, ground shaking, liquefaction, landslide, or expansive soils, and impacts would be less than significant. Similarly, adherence to applicable Municipal Code requirements would ensure that future development under this alternative would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, and impacts would be less than significant. Implementation of mitigation measure GEO-1 would reduce impacts related to paleontological resources to a level less than significant. Therefore, impacts related to geology and soils under the Reduced Project Alternative would be mitigated to a level less than significant, the same as the project.
f. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Although this alternative would reduce the potential for development of approximately 124 residential units, the Reduced Project Alternative would still potentially allow for development of approximately 1,821 residential units through rezones. This remaining development potential through future rezones would exceed the 1,209 units that are needed through rezones to accommodate the City’s RHNA allocation. Therefore, while this alternative would provide less flexibility for potential rezone sites, the Reduced Project Alternative would ultimately result in development of the same number of residential units as the project. Removal of Rezone Sites 1 through 10 located just north of the urbanized portion of the City would potentially have some incremental benefit in terms of GHG emission reductions since they are the furthest removed from activity centers and could generate more VMT per capita compared to other sites located within job centers and commercial areas. However, the degree of this VMT reduction is uncertain, and this alternative would still result in an increase in development not accounted for in the Sustainable
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Santee Plan. Both discretionary and by-right development implemented under the project would be required to incorporate each of the applicable measures identified in the Consistency Checklist to mitigate cumulative GHG emissions as well as applicable Transportation Demand Management measures listed in mitigation measure TRA-1. However, because the effectiveness of GHG and VMT reducing measures is context-sensitive and would vary depending on the site-specific project site, it is not guaranteed that each individual project would fully mitigate impacts at this program level of review. Therefore, impacts associated with GHG under the Reduced Project Alternative would be significant and unavoidable, the same as the project.
g. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Future development would be required to adhere to extensive regulations related to hazardous materials handling and transport, including applicable state and local regulatory measures. Citywide General Plan Safety Element Policies (refer to Section 4.7.2.4.a) would also supporting safe handling of hazardous materials. Implementation of mitigation measure HAZ-1 would reduce potential impacts associated with accidental release of unknown hazardous materials to a level less than significant. None of the Rezone Sites that would remain under this alternative are located within 0.25 mile of an existing school or adjacent to a known hazardous materials site. Rezone Sites that would remain under this alternative located within the Gillespie Field and MCAS Miramar ALUCPs would be required to adhere to applicable City policies and regulations, as well as policies of the ALUCP. The Reduced Project Alternative does not propose any changes to the City’s existing circulation network, and no land uses are proposed that would impair implementation of or physically interfere with the City’s emergency response plan, evacuation routes, or conflict with any of the Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan specific hazard mitigation goals, objectives, and related actions. Furthermore, applications for all future projects within the Rezone Sites, whether discretionary or by-right, would be reviewed and approved by the Santee Fire Department prior to issuance of a building permit. This alternative would remove Rezone Sites 1 through 10, which are located within an area mapped as VHFHSZ, and thereby reduce risk associated with wildfire compared to the project. The only remaining Rezone Site located within the VHFHSZ would comply with applicable California Fire Code, City General Plan, and City Municipal Code requirements. Therefore, impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials under the Reduced Project Alternative would be less than significant, and incrementally reduced compared to the project due to the removal of Rezone Sites 1 through 10 located within the VHFHSZ.
h. Hydrology and Water Quality
Future discretionary and/or by-right development under this alternative would be required to adhere to all applicable water quality standards as provided in various water quality regulations and plans including all pertinent requirements of the City’s Jurisdictional Runoff Management Plan, BMP Design Manual, NPDES General Construction Permit, as well as all regulations related to water quality. Both redevelopment and new development on vacant sites would be required to comply with applicable stormwater management requirements which focuses on retention and infiltration of waters on-site.
Additionally, development under this alternative would be required to comply with City General Plan policies and regulations that prioritize infiltration and treatment of stormwater. Future development would also be required to implement applicable stormwater BMPs and erosion control measures to retain flows on-site and minimize the velocity of stormwater runoff. Such BMPs could include on-site
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
drainage swales, bioretention features, use of permeable pavers in parking areas and streets, or infiltration basins which also serve as a means for pollutant removal. Development under this alternative would be required to adhere to all state and local development regulations including Municipal Code (Chapter 11.36), which establishes Flood Damage Prevention standards. Therefore, impacts associated with hydrology and water quality under the Reduced Project Alternative would be less than significant, the same as the project.
i. Land Use and Planning
Removal of Rezone Sites 1 through 10 under the Reduced Project Alternative would not avoid any land use impacts. The remaining Housing Sites are in urbanized areas that are already served by existing infrastructure. Implementation of the rezones would result in increased allowable residential density, or newly allowed residential density within all sites, except the Graves Avenue Sites (see Table 3-2). Although the additional density or change to residential use would increase the intensity of land uses at the sites, they would constitute infill development and would not divide an established community. Additionally, this alternative would not require any new major infrastructure or improvements that could physically divide an established community. Furthermore, development of the Rezone Sites within the TCSP would be required to adhere to all supplemental development regulations of those sites ensuring they would be compatible with the existing community.
The Reduced Project Alternative would implement the City’s Housing Element programs to meet the City’s RHNA requirements and comply with state housing mandates. Future discretionary development would require a subsequent site-specific environmental review that would consider each project’s consistency with all applicable plans, including the City’s General Plan. Future by-right development would be required to adhere to the City’s proposed Objective Design Standards which includes design guidelines and regulations to ensure consistency with City plans and policies. Both future ministerial and discretionary review would be subject to review for consistency with the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code regulations that serve to reduce or avoid environmental impacts.
Therefore, impacts associated with land use under the Reduced Project Alternative would be less than significant, the same as the project.
j. Noise
The Reduced Project Alternative would remove Rezone Sites 1 through 10. Impacts related to noise at all the remaining Rezone Sites under this alternative would be the same as for the project.
Implementation of mitigation measure NOS-1 would reduce land use compatibility noise impacts associated with vehicle noise to a level less than significant. However, impacts associated with increases in ambient noise levels would remain significant and unavoidable. Implementation of mitigation measure NOS-2 would reduce impacts associated with construction of future development under this alternative to a level less than significant. Impacts associated with stationary noise would be less than significant. Implementation of mitigation measure NOS-3 would reduce impacts associated with vibration to a level less than significant. None of the Rezone Sites that would be developed under this alternative are within the 65 CNEL noise contours of Gillespie Field Airport or MCAS Miramar. Therefore, impacts related to noise under the Reduced Project Alternative would remain significant and unavoidable, the same as the project.
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
k. Population and Housing
Although this alternative would reduce the potential for development of approximately 124 residential units compared to the project, the Reduced Project Alternative would still potentially allow for development of approximately 1,821 residential units through rezones. This remaining development potential through future rezones would exceed the 1,209 units that are needed through rezones to accommodate the City’s RHNA allocation. Therefore, while this alternative would provide less flexibility for potential rezone sites, the Reduced Project Alternative would ultimately result in development of the same number of residential units as the project since only a subset of the total sites will ultimately be selected for rezoning. As with the project, buildout of the Reduced Project Alternative would facilitate land use changes in the City that would allow the City to achieve their housing goals. The project would further implement state requirements to allow for ministerial approvals of certain housing projects that include an affordable component, which would facilitate and encourage construction of housing in the City. The project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth as all rezones are located within existing developed areas with access to services, roadways, and utilities. Therefore, impacts associated with population and housing under the Reduced Project Alternative would be less than significant, the same as the project. l. Public Services and Recreation
Future discretionary and/or by-right development under the Reduced Project Alternative would not directly result in sufficient demand to require construction of new fire protection, police protection, school, library, or park and recreation facilities. While each incremental housing development would pay development impact fees toward anticipated facility needs, this alternative would not warrant construction of a new facility at this time. Construction of any future public service or recreation facilities would be evaluated under a separate environmental review and approval. Although this alternative would reduce the potential for development of approximately 124 residential units, the Reduced Project Alternative would still potentially allow for development of approximately 1,821 residential units through rezones. This remaining development potential through future rezones would exceed the 1,209 units that are needed through rezones to accommodate the City’s RHNA allocation. Therefore, while this alternative would provide less flexibility for potential rezone sites, the Reduced Project Alternative would ultimately result in development of the same number of residential units as the project. Therefore, impacts associated with public services and recreation would be less than significant, the same as the project. m. Transportation
Future discretionary and/or by-right development at the Rezone Sites would adhere to an engineering and policy review that would ensure consistency with applicable policies related to transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Although this alternative would reduce the potential for development of approximately 124 residential units, the Reduced Project Alternative would still potentially allow for development of approximately 1,821 residential units through rezones. This remaining development potential through future rezones would exceed the 1,209 units that are needed through rezones to accommodate the City’s RHNA allocation. Therefore, while this alternative would provide less flexibility for potential rezone sites, the Reduced Project Alternative would ultimately result in development of the same number of residential units as the project.
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Removal of Rezone Sites 1 through 10 under the Reduced Project Alternative would potentially have some incremental benefit in terms of VMT reductions since these sites are the most removed from activity centers and could generate more VMT per capita compared to other sites located within job centers and commercial areas. However, the degree of this VMT reduction is uncertain, and it is unknown whether individual projects would be able to fully mitigate potential VMT impacts through implementation of Transportation Demand Management measures listed in mitigation measure TRA-1. Therefore, it is assumed that the Reduced Project Alternative would generate the same amount of VMT as the project, which would exceed 85 percent of the regional average, and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.
This alternative does not propose any changes to the existing roadway network. Future discretionary and/or by-right development would be designed consistent with established roadway design standards, and access to the existing roadway network would be configured consistent with established roadway design standards that would allow for emergency access. Therefore, impacts associated with transportation would be significant and unavoidable, the same as the project. n. Utilities and Service System
Although this alternative would reduce the potential for development of approximately 124 residential units, the Reduced Project Alternative would still potentially allow for development of approximately 1,821 residential units through rezones. This remaining development potential through future rezones would exceed the 1,209 units that are needed through rezones to accommodate the City’s RHNA allocation. Therefore, while this alternative would provide less flexibility for potential rezone sites, the Reduced Project Alternative would ultimately result in development of the same number of residential units as the project.
Future discretionary and/or by-right development would be located within existing developed areas with access to utility infrastructure; however, like the project new development would require connections to existing lines, thee physical impacts of which would be evaluated at the time of future project submittal. Regulatory conformance and application of the same mitigation framework in this PEIR, including MM-VIS-1, MM-AQ-1, MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-6, MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL3, MM-GEO-1, MM-GHG-1 and MM-GHG-2, MM-HAZ-1, MM-NOS-1 through MM-NOS-3, and MMTRA-1, would ensure impacts associated with the relocation or construction of utility infrastructure would be less than significant.
With respect to adequacy of water supply, future discretionary and/or by-right development would be required to adhere to state and local water conservation and efficiency measures. Based on the water efficiency of multi-family development and existing regulations that require new construction to be water efficient, future development under this alternative would not affect the ability of the Padre Dam Municipal Water District (PDMWD) to plan for adequate water supplies within the City during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Based on the PDMWD existing facility capacity and expansion plans for the Ray Stoyer Water Recycling Facility, the water efficiency of multi-family residential development, and review of future development for conformance with local regulations and adherence to General Plan policies, this alternative would not result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments. Future discretionary and/or
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
by-right development would be reviewed for conformance with state and local regulations and adherence to General Plan policies regarding solid waste. Therefore, impacts associated with utilities and service system would be less than significant, the same compared to the project. o. Wildfire
The Reduced Project Alternative does not propose any changes to the City’s existing circulation network, and no land uses are proposed that would impair implementation of or physically interfere with the City’s emergency response plan, evacuation routes, or conflict with any of the MHMP specific hazard mitigation goals, objectives, and related actions. Additionally, future development would be required to adhere to the City’s General Plan (Safety Element) policies including, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.11, and 4.12, which address emergency response and emergency evacuation. This alternative would remove Rezone Sites 1 through 10, which are located within an area mapped as VHFHSZ, and thereby reduce risk associated with wildfire compared to the project. The only remaining Rezone Site located within the VHFHSZ would comply with applicable California Fire Code and City General Plan requirements, and include enhanced fire protection measures as detailed in the City’s building and fire codes. Future development under this alternative would also be required to comply with applicable regulations and policies related to flooding, drainage patterns, and landslides. Therefore, impacts associated with wildfire under the Reduced Project Alternative would be less than significant, and incrementally reduced compared to the project due to the removal of Rezone Sites 1 through 10 located within the VHFHSZ.
9.2.2.3 Conclusion Regarding the Reduced Project Alternative As described in Section 9.2.2.2 above, and summarized in Table 9-1, the Reduced Project Alternative would result in similar impacts compared to the project. The Reduced Project Alternative would remove potential rezone sites A and U that are proposed under the project. Adherence to applicable regulations and implementation of the mitigation measures identified in this PEIR would reduce impacts associated with aesthetics, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, population and housing, public services and recreation, utilities and service systems, and wildfire to a level less than significant, the same as the project. The Reduced Project Alternative would have the same significance conclusions as the project. However, removal of Rezone Sites 1 through 10 would incrementally reduce impacts associated with aesthetics, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, and wildfire. This alternative would ultimately result in development of the same number of residential units on all other Rezone Sites besides Rezone Sites 1 through 10 and therefore would result in the same level of impacts related to air quality, GHG, hydrology and water quality, land use, noise, population and housing, public services and recreation, transportation, and utilities and service system. As under the project, impacts associated with air quality, GHG, noise and transportation would remain significant and unavoidable.
9.3 Environmentally Superior Alternative
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) requires an EIR to identify the environmentally superior alternative. If the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, the EIR must
9.0 Project Alternatives
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
identify an environmentally superior alternative from the other alternatives. The project itself may not be identified as the environmentally superior alternative.
The Reduced Project Alternative would be the environmentally superior alternative because it would incrementally reduce significant impacts associated with aesthetics, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, and wildfire compared to the project.
However, none of the potentially significant impacts of the project would be completely avoided.
Although this alternative would provide less flexibility for potential rezone sites, the Reduced Project Alternative would ultimately result in development of the same number of residential units as the project based on the ultimate selection of sites to be rezoned. The Reduced Project Alternative would meet most project objectives, although it would provide slightly less flexibility for implementation of rezoning adequate to meet the City’s remaining RHNA allocation of 1,209 units (objective 5).
10.0 References Cited
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Chapter 10
References Cited
2.0 Environmental Setting
U.S. Consensus
2020 U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: Santee city, California. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/santeecitycalifornia.
4.1 Aesthetics
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
2018 State Scenic Highways System Map. https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscapearchitecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways. Accessed November 2021.
Santee, City of
1986 Town Center Specific Plan, adopted October.
https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/services/development-services/planning-and-zoningservices/town-center-specific-plan. 2003a City of Santee General Plan 2000-2020, adopted August. https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/services/development-services/planning-and-zoningservices/general-plan. 2003b Final Master EIR for the City of Santee General Plan Update. June 6. 2020 Fanita Ranch EIR. October.
4.2 Air Quality
American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers 2022 Technical Resources – Filtration and Disinfection. https://www.ashrae.org/technicalresources.
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) 2009 Health Risk Assessments for Proposed Land Use Projects. July 2009.
10.0 References Cited
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
2021 California Emissions Estimator model (CalEEMod). Version 2020.4.0. May 2021.
California Air Resources Board (CARB)
2000 Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles. California Air Resources Board. Stationary Source Division, Mobile Source Control Division. October.
2005 Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. April. 2016 Ambient Air Quality Standards. California Air Resources Board. May 4 2021 California Air Quality Data Statistics. http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/welcome.html. Top 4 Summary and Hourly Listing. Accessed November 8, 2021.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
2020 Traffic Census Program. 2020 Peak Hour Volume Data. https://dot.ca.gov/programs/trafficoperations/census.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
2021 Climate Database – SC ACIS Version 2. http://scacis.rcc-acis.org/. Accessed November 8, 2021.
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) 2015 Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Risk Assessments (Guidance Manual), February.
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)
2002 (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region.
April.
San Diego Air Pollution Control District
1992 1991/1992 Regional Air Quality Strategies. Air Pollution Control District. June. 2013 Air Quality in San Diego County. 2013 Annual Report. 2021 Air Toxics “Hot Spots” and Emissions Inventory Programs. Facility Emissions 2015 through 2019 Criteria Emissions Inventory Reports.
https://www.sdapcd.org/content/sdc/apcd/en/engineering/Permits/Engineering_Emissio ns_Inventory.html. Accessed November 8, 2021.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
2021 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Website Criteria Air Pollutants. Last updated March 22. https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants.
10.0 References Cited
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
4.3 Biological Resources
California Native Plant Society (CNPS)
2014 Inventory of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants of California (8th Edition). http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/.
California, State of
2021a Special Animals. Natural Diversity Database. Department of Fish and Wildlife. April. 2021b Natural Diversity Data Base. RareFind Version 3.1.0. Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2021c State and Federally Listed Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Animals of California.
Natural Diversity Database. Department of Fish and Wildlife. April. 2021d State and Federally Listed Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Plants of California. Natural Diversity Database. Department of Fish and Wildlife. April.
Oberbauer, T., M. Kelly, and J. Buegge
2008 Draft Vegetation Communities in San Diego County. Based on “Preliminary descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California,” Robert F. Holland, Ph.D. April.
San Diego, County of
1998 Final Multiple Species Conservation Program MSCP Plan. https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/pds/mscp/docs/SCMSCP/FinalMSCP ProgramPlan.pdf.
SanGIS
2021 GIS data derived, modified, reduced, and/or processed from SanGIS downloadable data - www.sangis.org.
Santee, City
2006 Multiple Species Conservation Program: Santee Subarea Plan. 2018 Draft Santee Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea Plan. Wildlife Agency Review Draft. December.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
2021a Wetlands Mapper. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/Mapper.html. 2021b Species Observation Points. Provided by Carlsbad Field Office. November.
10.0 References Cited
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
4.4 Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
Brandes, Raymond
1984 National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form for Edgemoor Farm Dairy Barn. https://npgallery.nps.gov/GetAsset/6e43be87-2d36-4817-aa9b7c6f943fd368/.
Cline, Lora L.
1984 Just Before Sunset. J and L Enterprises, Jacumba, California.
Crafts, Karen
2003 Historic Property Survey Report: State Route 52 Stage V, Santee, San Diego County.
Unpublished report on file at the South Coastal Information Center, San Diego State University.
Hector, Susan, and Stephen Van Wormer
1986 Broken Fragments of Past Lifeways: Archaeological Excavations at Los Peñasquitos Ranch House, Volumes I and II. RECON.
May, Ronald V.
1978 A Southern California Indigenous Ceramic Typology: A Contribution to Malcolm J. Rogers Research. ASA Journal 2:2.
Nationwide Environmental Title Research LLC
2021 Historic photographs of the survey area. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
Accessed April 15, 2021.
Pourade, Richard F.
1963 The Silver Dons. The History of San Diego. Union-Tribune Publishing, San Diego, California.
1969 Historical Ranchos of San Diego. Union-Tribune Publishing, San Diego, California.
Rolle, Andrew
1998 California: A History. Harlan Davidson, Inc. Wheeling, Illinois.
Santee, City of
2003 City of Santee General Plan 2000-2020, adopted August. https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/services/development-services/planning-and-zoningservices/general-plan. 2021 Santee: A Look at the Past. https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/how-do-i/santee-s-history.
Accessed April 14, 2021.
10.0 References Cited
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Shipek, Florence C. (editor)
1986 The Impact of Europeans upon Kumeyaay Culture. In The Impact of European Exploration an Settlement on Local Native Americans. Cabrillo Festival Historical Seminar, pp. 13-25.
San Diego: Cabrillo Historical Association.
1991 The Autobiography of Delfina Cuero. Ballena Press: Menlo Park, CA.
Spier, Leslie
1923 Southern Diegueño Customs. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 20(16):295-358. Berkeley.
True, Delbert L.
1970 Investigation of a Late Prehistoric Complex in Cuyamaca Rancho State Park, San Diego County, California. Department of Anthropology Publications, University of California, Los Angeles.
1980 The Pauma Complex in Northern San Diego County: 1978. The Journal of New World Archaeology 3(4):1-39.
Warren, Claude N., Gretchen Siegler, and Frank Dittmer
1993 Paleoindian and Early Archaic Periods in Historic Properties Background Study by Brian F.
Mooney and Associates. Document on file with the City of San Diego Clean Water Program.
4.5 Geology and Soils
Deméré, Thomas A., and Stephen L. Walsh
1993 Palentological Resources, County of San Diego. San Diego Natural History Museum, Department of Paleontology.
Kennedy, M. P., and S. S. Tan
2008 Geologic Map of the San Diego 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California. California Geological Survey, Regional Geologic Map Series 1:100,000 scale, map no. 3. https://ca.water.usgs.gov/sandiego/data/gis/geology/kennedy2008/RGM3_San_Diego_2 008_Pamphlet.pdf. Accessed March 23, 2022.
San Diego, County of
2009 County of San Diego Guidelines for Determining Significance for Paleontological Resources. https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/dplu/docs/Paleo-Guidelines.pdf. Accessed January 18, 2022 and March 23, 2022.
San Diego, City of
2016 California Environmental Quality Act Significance Determination Thresholds. https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/july_2016_ceqa_thresholds_final_0.pdf.
10.0 References Cited
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Santee, City of
2003 Final Master EIR for the City of Santee General Plan Update. June 6. 2020 Fanita Ranch Project EIR. https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2005061118/8.
4.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) 2008 CEQA & Climate Change, Evaluating and Addressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Projects Subject to the California Environmental Quality Act, January. 2021 California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). Version 2020.4.0. May 2021.
California Air Resources Board (CARB)
2007 California Greenhouse Gas Inventory – Summary by Economic Sector. Last updated November 19, 2007.
2008 Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change. December. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//cc/scopingplan/document/adopted_sc oping_plan.pdf.
2011 In-Use Off-Road Equipment (Construction, Industrial, Ground Support, and Oil Drilling) 2011 Inventory Model.
2017 The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update: The Proposed Strategy for Achieving California’s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target. January 20.
2020 Greenhouse Gas Inventory Data—2000 to 2018 (last updated October 15, 2020). https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-inventory-data.
California Energy Commission (CEC)
2006 Our Changing Climate Assessing the Risks to California, A Summary Report from the California Climate Action Center.
2016 CalAdapt Online Webpage. https://cal-adapt.org/.
California Public Utilities Commissions (CPUC)
2021 2021 Padilla Report. Costs and Cost Savings for the RPS Program (Public Utilities Code §913.3). Published May 2021.
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
2012 Federal Greenhouse Gas Accounting and Reporting Guidance, June 4.
CR Associates
2021 VMT Analysis Data and Highway Load _1299 shapefile. Provided to Jesse Fleming, RECON. May 27.
10.0 References Cited
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
2007 Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. 2014 Fifth Assessment Report (AR5), Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report.
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)
2002 (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region.
April.
2021 San Diego Forward – The 2021 Regional Plan. Draft for Public Review. May.
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) 2009 Guidance for Valley Land-use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA. December 17.
Santee, City of
2019 Sustainable Santee Plan. The City’s Roadmap to Greenhouse Gas Reductions. Final December.
2020 Revised Environmental Impact Report Fanita Ranch Project (SCH No. 2005061118). May.
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
2008 Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA GHG Significance Thresholds for Stationary Sources, Rules, and Plans. October.
2009 Greenhouse Gas CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group 14.
November 19.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA)
2021a Energy Star. http://www.energystar.gov.
2021b U.S. EPA State and Local Climate and Energy Program. http://www.epa.gov/statelocalclimate/index.html.
4.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Airport Land Use Commission
2010 Gillespie Field Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Approved December. 2011 MCAS Miramar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Approved December.
San Diego, County of
2017 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.
https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/oes/emergency_management/oes_jl_mitplan.html.
10.0 References Cited
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
San Diego County Regional Airport Authority (SDCRAA)
2010 Gillespie Field Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. https://www.san.org/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/API/Entries/Download?Comma nd=Core_Download&EntryId=2984&language=en-US&PortalId=0&TabId=225. 2011 MCAS Miramar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Adopted October 2008, amended November.
https://www.san.org/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/API/Entries/Download?Comma nd=Core_Download&EntryId=2989&language=en-US&PortalId=0&TabId=225. Accessed December 17, 2021.
State Resources Control Board (SWRCB)
2021 GeoTracker. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/. Accessed December 2021.
4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
BSI Consultants
1990 City of Santee Citywide Drainage Study. February.
California, State of, Department of Water Resources
2021 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).
https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Groundwater-Management/SGMA-GroundwaterManagement.
Regional Water Quality Control Board
2016 Water Quality Control Plan for the Basin Plan.
Santee, City of
2003a City of Santee General Plan 2000-2020, adopted August. https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/services/development-services/planning-and-zoningservices/general-plan. 2003b Final Master EIR for the City of Santee General Plan Update. June 6. 2021 Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2022 – 2026. https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/21446/63766631806767 0000. Accessed December 21, 2021.
4.9 Land Use and Planning
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
2014 Transportation Impacts (SB 743). https://opr.ca.gov/ceqa/sb-743/.
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)
2016 Smart Growth in the San Diego Region.
https://www.sandag.org/uploads/projectid/projectid_296_13993.pdf.
10.0 References Cited
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Santee, City of
1986 Town Center Specific Plan. October.
https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/services/development-services/planning-and-zoningservices/town-center-specific-plan. 2003 City of Santee General Plan 2000-2020, adopted August. https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/services/development-services/planning-and-zoningservices/general-plan.
4.10 Noise
California Code of Regulations (CCR)
2019 2019 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Chapter 12 Interior Environment, Section 1206, Sound Transmission. http://www.bsc.ca.gov/codes.aspx.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
2013a Technical Noise Supplement. November.
2013b Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. September.
CR Associates
2021 VMT Analysis Data and Highway Load _1299 shapefile. Provided to Jesse Fleming, RECON. May 27.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
2006 FHWA Highway Construction Noise Handbook. FHWA-HEP-06-015. August.
Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
2006 Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. Office of Planning and Environment.
FTA-VA-90-1003-06. May.
2018 Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. FTA Report No. 0123. Prepared by John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. September 2018.
Navcon Engineering, Inc.
2018 SoundPLAN Essential version 4.1.
Santee, City of
2003 City of Santee General Plan 2000-2020, adopted August. https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/services/development-services/planning-and-zoningservices/general-plan.
10.0 References Cited
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
4.11 Population and Housing
San Diego Association of Government (SANDAG)
2021a Series 14: Regional Growth Forecast.
https://www.sandag.org/index.asp?classid=12&subclassid=84&projectid=620&fuseaction =projects.detail.
2021b San Diego Forward. https://sdforward.com/mobility-planning/2021-regional-plan.
4.12 Public Services and Facilities
Education Data Partnership
2021 Grossmont Union High School. http://www.ed-data.org/district/San-Diego/GrossmontUnion-High. Accessed on May 12, 2021.
Marine Corps Air Station Miramar (MCAS)
2021 Stowe Trail Permit Application and Access.
https://www.miramar.marines.mil/Resources/StoweTrail/. Accessed May 18, 2021 Santee, City of
2003 City of Santee General Plan 2000-2020, adopted August. https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/services/development-services/planning-and-zoningservices/general-plan. 2017 Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update. April.
https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/8489/636567059672500 000. Accessed May 13, 2021.
2020 Santee Municipal Code. http://qcode.us/codes/santee/?view=desktop. Accessed May 24, 2021.
2021 Fire and Life Safety Services, Department Overview. https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/government/fire-department/department-overview.
Accessed May 12, 2021
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)
2020 Forty Years of Crime in the San Diego Region: 1980 Through 2019. https://www.sandag.org/uploads/publicationid/publicationid_4669_27472.pdf. Accessed May 12, 2021.
San Diego, County of
2021 San Diego County Sheriff’s Department, Santee Station. https://www.sdsheriff.gov/Home/Components/FacilityDirectory/FacilityDirectory/42/34?n page=2. Accessed May 12, 2021.
2011 Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan Update. August 3.
10.0 References Cited
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
4.13 Transportation
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)
2021 San Diego Forward (Regional Plan). Adopted December 10.
Santee, City of
2003 Final Master EIR for the City of Santee General Plan Update. June 6. 2017a City of Santee Mobility Element. Adopted October 25, 2017. https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/11054/63644632742007 0000. Accessed November 22, 2021.
2017b Final Program Environmental Impact Report Mobility Element (Circulation Element Update), State Clearinghouse #2016121022. October.
2022 City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines. April 13, 2022. Available at https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/22091/63786233631367 0000 (Attachment A).
4.14 Utilities
BSI Consultants
1990 City of Santee Citywide Drainage Study. February.
CalRecycle
2019 Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates.
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastecharacterization/general/rates. Accessed April 27, 2022.
2021 Solid Waste Information System (SWIS). SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details Sycamore Landfill (37-AA-0032). SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details (ca.gov). Accessed November 24, 2021.
Padre Dam Municipal Water District (PDMWD)
2019 Sewer System Management Plan.
2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan. Water Shortage Contingency Plan (padredam.org).
Accessed January 14, 2022.
2021 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. June.
Santee, City of
2015 Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program. June.
10.0 References Cited
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
2020 Fanita Ranch Project EIR. https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2005061118/8.
4.15 Wildfire
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) 2018 Strategic Fire Plan for California. August 22. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5590/2018- strategic-fire-plan-approved-08_22_18.pdf. Accessed May 2020. 2021 2021 Statistics and Events – 2020 Fire Statistics. https://www.fire.ca.gov/stats-events/.
Accessed May 27, 2021.
Moench, R., and Fusaro, J.
2012 Soil Erosion Control after Wildfire. Factsheet No. 6.308. Colorado State University Extension. https://mountainscholar.org/bitstream/handle/ 10217/183596/AEXT_063082012.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. Accessed May 2020.
Murphee, T., E. Szasz, and L. T. Kellen Jones
2018 Santa Ana Events in California: Global Scale Teleconnections and Potential Subseasonal to Seasonal Predictability. 43rd National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Annual Climate Diagnostics and Prediction Workshop. October.
https://www.nws.noaa.gov/ost/climate/STIP/43CDPW/43cdpw-TMurphree.pdf. Accessed May 27, 2021.
San Diego, County of
2017 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.
https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/oes/emergency_management/oes_jl_mitplan.html.
7.0 Cumulative Impacts
California, State of, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) 2018 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. April. https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20180416-743_Technical_Advisory_4.16.18.pdf.
8.0 Effects Found Not to be Significant
California Public Utilities Commission [CPUC]
2019 2019 Padilla Report. Costs and Cost Savings for the RPS Program (Public Utilities Code Section 913.3. https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/-/media/cpucwebsite/files/uploadedfiles/cpucwebsite/content/about_us/organization/divisions/office_ of_governmental_affairs/legislation/2019/padilla-report-2019-final.pdf.
11.0 Individuals and Agencies Consulted
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Chapter 11
Individuals and Agencies Consulted
Agencies and individuals contacted during preparation of the Program Environmental Impact Report include the following:
City of Santee, Development Services Department
• Michael Coyne, Project Planner
• Minjie Mei, Principal Traffic Engineer
Santee School District • Bryce Storm, Director of Facilities, Maintenance & Operations Grossmont Union High School District • Katy Wright, Executive Director Facilities Management Native American Heritage Commission • Andrew Green, Cultural Resources Analyst
12.0 Certification
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Chapter 12
Certification
This document has been completed by the City of Santee’s (City) Development Services Department and is based on independent analysis and determinations made pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act.
A list of contributing City and consultant staff members, their titles, and affiliations is provided below.
City of Santee
• Michael Coyne, Project Planner
• Minjie Mei, Principal Traffic Engineer
RECON Environmental, Inc.
Environmental Analysis and Report Preparation
• Jennifer Campos, Principal
• Lori Spar, Senior Environmental Analyst
• Morgan Weintraub, Environmental Analyst
• Natasha Dulik, Environmental Planner
• Cailin Lyons, Principal Biologist
• Carmen Zepeda-Herman, Archaeology Project Director
• Jesse Fleming, Senior Noise, Air, and GHG Technical Specialist • Frank McDermott, GIS Manager/Coordinator
• Stacey Higgins, Senior Production Specialist
• Jennifer Gutierrez, Production Specialist
CR Associates
Traffic Impact Analysis
• Monique Chen, Principal
• Phuong Nguyen, PE, Transportation Engineer
13.0 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Chapter 13
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Section 21081.6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines requires that a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) be adopted upon certification of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to ensure that the mitigation measures are implemented. The MMRP specifies the mitigation measures that have been identified to address potential impacts that would result from adoption and implementation of the City of Santee (City) 6th Cycle Housing Element Rezone Program (project) and future rezoning actions. The MMRP additionally identifies the entity responsible for implementing and/or monitoring the mitigation; and when in the process it should be accomplished.
The Housing Element Rezone Program EIR (PEIR) focuses on issues determined to be potentially significant by the City. The issues addressed in the PEIR include aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources and tribal cultural resources, geology/soils, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, population and housing, public services and recreation, transportation, utilities and service systems, and wildfire.
Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 requires monitoring of only those impacts identified as significant or potentially significant. After analysis, potentially significant impacts were identified for air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, geology and soils (paleontological resources), GHG emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, noise, transportation, and public utilities.
Since implementation of the project would result in both future discretionary development and future ministerial development, the PEIR includes two levels of analysis and identifies mitigation appropriate to each scenario. Both future discretionary and ministerial development implemented consistent with the project would be required to implement identified mitigation measures.
Additionally future ministerial development would require the incorporation of the City’s objective design standards that would be applied during future ministerial reviews.
Mitigation measures have been identified for significant impacts related to air quality (criteria pollutants), biological resources (sensitive species, sensitive vegetation communities, wetlands, wildlife corridors), cultural and tribal cultural resources (archaeological and tribal cultural resources), geology and soils (paleontological resources), GHG emissions (GHG emissions and policy and plan consistency), hazardous materials (transport, accidental release, emission of hazardous emissions), noise (noise standards and groundborne noise and vibration), GHG (vehicle miles traveled [VMT]), and public utilities (relocation or construction of facilities). Impacts related to air quality (land use plan consistency, criteria emissions), GHG emissions (GHG emissions and policy and plan consistency), land use and planning (policy/plan consistency), noise (noise standards), and transportation (VMT) would remain significant and unavoidable at the program level.
The MMRP for the project is under the jurisdiction of the City. As specified in Table 13-1, the MMRP summarizes the potentially significant impacts and lists the associated mitigation measures and the monitoring efforts necessary to ensure that the measures are properly implemented City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
Aesthetics
Impact VIS-1: Visual Character or
Quality
Refer to mitigation measure MM-CUL-1 below. Prior to the issuance of any permit for a
development in the
Rezone Site areas.
City of Santee
Air Quality
Impact AQ-2: Cumulative Net
Increases of Criteria Pollutants
MM-AQ-1: Construction:
The City shall require project applicants to identify the measures that would be taken at the construction site to reduce construction-related criteria air pollutants such that they do not exceed the SDAPCD screening thresholds.
Based on typical construction emissions, implementation of the following measures would be sufficient to reduce air pollutant emissions during construction:
• Requiring fugitive dust control measures that exceed SDAPCD’s Rules , 52, 54, and 55, such as:
• Requiring use of non-toxic soil stabilizers to reduce wind erosion. • Applying water every four hours to active soil-disturbing activities. • Tarping and/or maintaining a minimum of 24 inches of freeboard on trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials.
Using construction equipment rated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as having Tier 3 (model year 2006 or newer) emission limits, applicable for engines between 50 and 750 horsepower.
Ensuring construction equipment is properly serviced and maintained to the manufacturer’s standards. Limiting nonessential idling of construction equipment to no more than five consecutive minutes.
Using Super-Compliant VOC paints for coating of architectural surfaces whenever possible. A list of Super-Compliant architectural coating materials Prior to the issuance of
any permit for a
development in the
Rezone Site areas.
City of Santee
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
can be found on the SCAQMD’s website at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/prdas/brochures/SuperCompliant_AIM.pdf.
Operation:
In regard to operational emissions, measures included as part of the Sustainable Santee Plan, such as expansion of the pedestrian and bicycle networks, installation of electric vehicle charging stations, and solar photovoltaics requirements, would also reduce criteria air pollutants within the City. However, because the project would exceed the growth projections used to develop the RAQS, no mitigation measures are available that would reduce impacts below the screening thresholds
Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1: Sensitive Species
(sensitive plants and sensitive
wildlife)
Impact BIO-2: Sensitive Species
(least Bell’s vireo)
Impact BIO-3: Sensitive Species
(coastal California gnatcatcher)
Impact BIO-4: Sensitive Species
(migratory and/or nesting birds)
MM-BIO-1: Applications for future development, where the City has determined a potential for impacts to sensitive biological resources, shall be required to comply with the following mitigation measure. a) Prior to issuance of any construction permit or any earth-moving activities, a site specific general biological resources survey shall be conducted to identify the presence of any sensitive biological resources, including any sensitive plant or wildlife species. A biological resources report shall be submitted to the City to document the results of the biological resources survey. The report shall include: (1) the methods used to determine the presence of sensitive biological resources; (2) vegetation mapping of all vegetation communities and/or land cover types; (3) the locations of any sensitive plant or wildlife species; (4) an evaluation of the potential for occurrence of any listed, rare, and narrow endemic species; and (5) an evaluation of the significance of any potential direct or indirect impacts from the proposed project. If suitable habitat for sensitive species is identified based on the general biological survey, then focused presence/absence surveys shall be conducted in accordance with applicable resource agency survey protocols and incorporated into the biological Prior to the issuance of
any permit for a
development in the
Rezone Site areas.
City of Santee
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
resources report. If potentially significant impacts to sensitive biological resources are identified, project-level grading and site plans shall incorporate project design features to avoid or minimize direct impacts on sensitive biological resources to the extent feasible, and the report shall also recommend appropriate mitigation to reduce the impacts to below a level of significance, where feasible If suitable habitat for sensitive species is identified based on the general biological survey, then focused presence/absence surveys shall be conducted in accordance with applicable resource agency survey protocols and incorporated into the biological resources report.
b) Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) shall be identified in the biological resources report and avoided to the maximum extent practicable. In areas near or adjacent to ESAs (i.e., natural habitats and vegetation, wetlands, wildlife areas, wildlife corridors), the biological resources report will consider the following measures:
Avoidance of ESAs. In areas near or adjacent to ESAs, construction limits shall be clearly demarcated using highly visible barriers (such as silt fencing), which shall be installed under the supervision of a qualified biologist prior to the commencement of work. Construction personnel shall strictly limit their activities, vehicles, equipment, and construction materials to the project footprint, including designated staging areas, and routes of travel. The construction areas shall be limited to the minimal area necessary to complete the proposed project. The fencing shall remain in place until the completion of all construction activities and shall be promptly removed when construction is complete.
Biological Monitoring. A qualified biological monitor shall conduct construction monitoring of all work conducted within/adjacent to environmentally sensitive areas during all vegetation removal and grounddisturbing activities such as staging and grading, for the duration of the City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
proposed project to ensure that practicable measures are being employed to avoid incidental disturbance of habitat outside the project footprints and to survey for sensitive wildlife species. When vegetation removal and ground-disturbing activities are not occurring, as-needed monitoring at the project sites shall occur.
Worker Environmental Awareness Program. In areas near or adjacent to ESAs, a qualified biologist shall conduct a Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training session for project and construction personnel prior to the commencement of work. The training shall include a description of the species of concern and their habitats, the general provisions of the Endangered Species Acts (FESA and CESA), the penalties associated with violating the provisions of the acts, the general measures that are being implemented to conserve the species of concern as they relate to the project, and the access routes to and project site boundaries.
Best Management Practices. During future project construction activities, the following best management practices (BMPs) shall be implemented:
• All equipment maintenance, staging, and dispensing of fuel, oil, or any other such activities shall occur in developed or designated nonsensitive upland habitat areas. The designated upland areas shall be located to prevent runoff from any spills from entering Waters of the US.
• A construction Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a soil erosion and sedimentation plan shall be developed (where requirements are met) to minimize erosion and identify specific pollution prevention measures that shall eliminate or control potential point and nonpoint pollution sources onsite during and following the project construction phase. The SWPPP shall identify specific BMPs during project construction to prevent any water quality standard exceedances. In addition, the SWPPP shall contain provisions for City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
changes to the plan such as alternative mechanisms, if necessary, during project design and/or construction to achieve the stated goals and performance standards.
• Trash shall be stored in closed containers so that it is not readily accessible to scavengers and shall be removed from the construction site on a daily basis.
• Water quality shall be visually monitored by the biological monitor to ensure that no substantial increases in turbidity occur during construction.
• All relevant natural resource permits and authorizations shall be obtained from appropriate agencies (i.e., USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW) prior to the initiation of construction activities. Permit conditions contained within the permits and authorizations shall be employed throughout the duration of the project.
• Hydrologic connectivity shall be maintained within drainages during the duration of construction. Brush, debris material, mud, silt, or other pollutants from construction activities shall not be placed within drainages and shall not be allowed to enter a flowing stream. • Dust control measures shall be implemented by the contractor to reduce excessive dust emissions. Dust control measures shall be carried out at least two times per day on all construction days, or more during windy or dry periods, and may include wetting work areas, the use of soil binders on dirt roads, and wetting or covering stockpiles. • No pets shall be allowed in, or adjacent to, the project sites. • Rodenticides, herbicides, insecticides, or other chemicals that could potentially harm wildlife or native plants shall not be used near or within ESAs within or near the roadway segments.
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
• Construction equipment shall be cleaned of mud or other debris that may contain invasive plants and/or seeds and inspected to reduce the potential of spreading noxious weeds before mobilizing to the site and before leaving the site during the course of construction. • The cleaning of equipment will occur at least 300 feet from ESA fencing
• Use of Native Plants. All project-related planting and landscaping shall not use plants listed on California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC).
Locally native plants shall be used near open space and native areas to the greatest extent feasible.
MM-BIO-2: Applications for future development, wherein the City has determined a potential for impacts to least Bell’s vireo, shall be required to comply with the following mitigation framework.
Prior to issuance of a permit for grading or vegetation removal, USFWS protocol surveys for least Bell’s vireo shall be required should project construction occur within 300 feet of riparian habitat during the breeding season (April 10 to July 31). If least Bell’s vireo are identified during the protocol surveys, then noise attenuation measures shall be required to ensure that noise levels from construction do not exceed a 60 dB(A) hourly average per hour at the edge of the riparian habitat or to the ambient noise level if it exceeds 60 dB(A) prior to construction. Construction noise monitoring shall be required to verify that noise levels at the edge of occupied habitat are maintained below 60 dB(A) hourly average unless an analysis completed by a qualified acoustician shows that noise generated by construction activities would not exceed 60 dB(A) hourly average at the edge of occupied habitat.
MM-BIO-3: Applications for future development, where the City has determined a potential for impacts to coastal California gnatcatcher, shall be required to comply with the following mitigation framework.
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
Prior to issuance of a permit for grading or vegetation removal, USFWS protocol surveys for coastal California gnatcatcher shall be required where project construction is proposed within 300 feet of coastal sage scrub or chaparral habitat during the breeding season (March 1 through August 15). If coastal California gnatcatcher are identified during the protocol surveys, then noise attenuation measures shall be required to ensure that noise levels from construction do not exceed a 60 dB(A) hourly average per hour at the edge of the coastal sage scrub or chaparral habitat or to the ambient noise level if it exceeds 60 dB(A) prior to construction. Construction noise monitoring shall be required to verify that noise levels at the edge of occupied habitat are maintained below 60 dB(A) hourly average unless an analysis completed by a qualified acoustician shows that noise generated by construction activities would not exceed 60 dB(A) hourly average at the edge of occupied habitat.
MM-BIO-4: Applications for future development, where the City has determined a potential for impacts to mature trees and/or native vegetation suitable for nesting birds, shall be required to comply with the following mitigation framework If any construction commences during the bird breeding season, a preconstruction survey for nesting birds shall occur within three days prior to construction activities by an experienced avian biologist. The survey shall occur within all suitable nesting habitat within the project impact area and a minimum 250-foot buffer (or as otherwise mandated by wildlife agencies [CDFW and USFWS]). If nesting birds are found, an avoidance area shall be established, in consultation with the wildlife agencies as appropriate, by a qualified biologist around the nest until a qualified avian biologist has determined that young have fledged or nesting activities have ceased. The project site shall be re-surveyed if there is a lapse in construction activities for more than 3 days.
Impact BIO-5: Impacts to Sensitive
vegetative Communities
MM-BIO-5: Prior to issuance of any grading or removal of sensitive vegetation communities, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City that replacement habitats have been preserved in accordance with the mitigation ratios in the Prior to issuance of a
permit for grading or
City of Santee
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
2018 Draft Santee Subarea Plan. The required acreages and types of replacement habitat shall be included as a note on the grading plans and the City shall require evidence of satisfaction prior to grading. Replacement habitats may be in the form of a dedicated easement, proof of purchase of mitigation credits, or other method of conservation. The applicant shall additionally implement all feasible avoidance and minimization measures to protect habitats remaining on-site.
vegetation removal in the
Rezone Site areas.
Impact BIO-6: Wetlands MM-BIO-6: Applications where the City has determined a potential for impacts to jurisdictional waters and wetlands, shall be required to comply with the following mitigation framework. Prior to issuance of any construction permit or any earth-moving activities, a site-specific general biological resources survey (BIO-1) shall be conducted to identify the presence of any sensitive biological resources, including any wetlands. Should any potential jurisdictional waters or wetlands be identified on-site during the general biological resources survey, then a jurisdictional wetlands delineation shall be conducted following the methods outlined in the USACE’s 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Delineation Manual for the Arid West Region. The limits of any wetland habitats on-site under the sole jurisdiction of CDFW shall also be delineated, as well as any special aquatic sites that may not meet federal jurisdictional criteria but are regulated by the RWQCB.
Avoidance measures based on project-level grading and site plans shall be incorporated into the project design to minimize direct impacts to jurisdictional waters consistent with federal, state, and City guidelines. Unavoidable impacts to wetlands shall be minimized to the maximum extent practicable and would be subject to alternatives and mitigation analyses consistent with U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency 404(b)(1) findings and procedures under the USACE’s permit process. Unavoidable impacts would require the in-kind creation of new wetland of the same type lost, at a ratio determined by the applicable regulatory agencies that would prevent any net loss of wetland Prior to issuance of any
construction permit or
earth-moving activities
for any development
project in the Rezone
Site areas.
City of Santee
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
functions and values. Wetland creation on-site or within the same wetland system shall be given preference over replacement off-site or within a different system. The City shall also control use and development in surrounding areas of influence to wetlands with the application of buffer zones. Buffer widths shall be 50 to 200 feet from the edge of the wetland/riparian habitat, unless the applicant demonstrates that a buffer of lesser width would protect the resources of the wetland based on site-specific information related to construction and operation. Use and development within buffer areas shall be limited to minor passive recreational uses with fencing, desiltation or erosion control facilities, or other improvements deemed necessary to protect the habitat, to be located in the upper (upland) half of the buffer when feasible wetlands and buffers shall be permanently conserved or protected through the application of an open space easement or other suitable device.
Additional requirements apply for development along the San Diego River to implement Draft Subarea Plan Section 5.3.14. Specifically, wherever development is proposed in or adjacent to riparian habitats along the main stem San Diego River, the riparian area and other wetlands or associated natural habitats located on the project site shall be designated as biological open space and incorporated into the preserve, including recordation of an easement to ensure their protection in perpetuity. In addition, a minimum 100- foot biological buffer shall be established for upland habitats, beginning at the outer edge of riparian vegetation. Within the 100-foot biological buffer, no new development shall be allowed, and the area shall be managed for natural biological values as part of the preserve system. In the event that natural habitats do not cover the 100-foot buffer area at the time of the proposed action, habitats appropriate to the location and soils shall be restored as a condition for the proposed action. In most cases, coastal sage scrub vegetation shall be the preferred habitat to restore within the biological buffer.
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
Cultural Resources
Impact CUL-1: Historic Resources MM-CUL-1: Applications for future development of project areas, wherein the City Development Services Director has determined a potential for impacts to historical resources, shall be required to comply with the following mitigation framework:
a) Prior to the issuance of any permit for a future development project, the age and original structural integrity and context of any buildings/structures occurring on the project areas shall be verified. A staff level evaluation is required in conjunction with the development permit application to verify the age and original structural integrity of all on-site structures. b) For any building/structures in excess of 50 years of age having its original structural integrity intact, a qualified professional historian may be required to determine whether the affected building/structure is historically significant. The evaluation of historic architectural resources shall be based on criteria such as age, location, context, association with an important person or event, uniqueness, or structural integrity, as indicated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. A historical resource report shall be prepared by a Secretary of Interior’s Standard Historic Architect or Architectural Historian and submitted by the project applicant to the City and shall include the methods used to determine the presence or absence of historical resources, identify potential impacts from the proposed project, evaluate the significance of any historical resources, and identify mitigation measures.
c) Future development at Rezone Site 20 shall be required to obtain the services of a Secretary of Interior’s Standard Historic Architect or Architectural Historian to submit a report to the City demonstrating how development adjacent to the Polo Barn would adhere to Secretary of Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and standards and guidelines prescribed by the State Office of Historic Preservation to Prior to the issuance of
any permit for a
development in the
Rezone Site areas.
City of Santee
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
ensure indirect impacts are avoided. Development on Site 20 is not subject to items (a) and (b) above as the Polo Barn is already known to be a significant historical site.
Impact CUL-2: Archaeological
Resources, Religious and Sacred
Uses or Tribal Cultural Resources
MM-CUL-2: Applications for future development, wherein the City Development Services Director has determined a potential for impacts to subsurface archaeological resources, shall be required to comply with the following mitigation framework:
Prior to the issuance of any permit for future development consistent with the project and if the project has not been surveyed within the last five years, an archaeological survey shall be conducted by a qualified archaeologist to evaluate the presence of archaeological resources and the need for project impact mitigation by preservation, relocation, or other methods. The archaeological survey shall include a records search at the South Coastal Information Center branch of the California Historical Research Information System, to determine if previously recorded prehistoric or historic archaeological resources exist on the housing site. In addition, the Native American Heritage Commission should be contacted to perform a Sacred Lands File Search. An archaeological resource report detailing the results of the record search, Sacred Lands Search, and the field survey of the project area shall be submitted by the project applicant to the City. The report shall include the methods used to determine the presence or absence of archaeological resources, identify potential impacts from the proposed project, and evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources identified. If potentially significant impacts to an identified archaeological resource are identified, the report shall also recommend appropriate mitigation to reduce the impacts to below a level of significance, which could include avoidance as the preferred method, a data recovery program, and/or construction monitoring. All information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum and Prior to the issuance of
any permit for future
development in any of
the Rezone Site areas.
City of Santee
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
not be made available for public disclosure. Reports shall be submitted to the South Coastal Information Center upon finalization.
MM-CUL-3: Applications for future development wherein the City Development Services Director or a site-specific report has determined a potential for discovery of buried archaeological resources shall be required to comply with the following mitigation framework for archaeological and Native American construction monitoring:
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the City’s Project Planner at the City must verify that the requirements for archaeological and Native American construction monitoring have been noted on the construction documents.
The applicant must provide written verification to the City Project Planner stating that a Secretary of Interior’s Standards qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor have been retained by the owner/applicant to implement construction monitoring.
The qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor shall be invited to attend the pre-construction meeting with the contractor and any subcontractors to describe the goal of construction monitoring.
Archaeological and Native American monitors shall be present during grounddisturbing activities (grubbing, demolition of foundations, grading, trenching) that have the potential to unearth unknown subsurface archaeological deposits or Tribal cultural resources. If archaeological or Tribal cultural resources are discovered, both monitors may halt or divert ground-disturbing activities within 50 feet to allow for a determination of the resource’s potential significance. The qualified archaeologist shall notify the City Project Planner of the discovery.
Isolates and non-significant deposits shall be minimally documented in the field. Significant archaeological discoveries include intact features, stratified deposits, previously unknown archaeological sites, and human remains.
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
If a significant discovery is made, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare a data recovery plan in consultation with the Native American monitor to submit for approval by the City Project Planner. The plan shall be implemented using professional archaeological methods. Construction ground-disturbing activities, including grubbing, grading, and trenching, would be allowed to resume after the completion of the recovery of an adequate sample and recordation of the discovery.
All cultural material collected during the monitoring and data recovery program shall be processed and curated at a San Diego facility that meets federal standards per 36 CFR Part 79 unless the tribal monitors request the collection.
If human remains are discovered, work shall halt in that area and the procedures set forth in the California Public Resources Code (Sec. 5097.98) and State Health and Safety Code (Sec. 7050.5) will be followed. The qualified archaeologist shall contact the County Coroner.
After the completion of the monitoring, an appropriate report shall be prepared by project archaeologist. If no significant cultural resources are discovered, a brief letter to the City Project Planner and South Coastal Information Center shall be prepared by the project archaeologist. If significant cultural resources are discovered, a report with the results of the monitoring and data recovery (including the interpretation of the data within the research context) shall be prepared by project archaeologist, reviewed by a Native American representative, and submitted to the City Project Planner and South Coastal information Center.
Geology/Soils
Impact GEO-1: Paleontological
Resources and Unique Geology
MM-GEO-1: Paleontological Resources:
To address potential impacts to paleontological resources, the City shall review the project application materials including the geotechnical report to determine Prior to and during
grading operations at
City of Santee
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
if project grading has the potential to disturb geologic formations with the potential to contain paleontological resources. If grading depths remain within the organic and soil layers, no monitoring would be required. The City may request information from the applicant such as the depth of grading, geologic formations and paleontological sensitivity in order to determine the potential for impacts. In the event grading may disturb geologic formations with a moderate or high potential to contain paleontological resources, the following monitoring program shall be implemented prior to and during grading operations:
a) Preconstruction Personnel and Repository: Prior to the commencement of construction, a qualified project paleontologist shall be retained to oversee the mitigation program. A qualified project paleontologist is a person with a doctorate or master’s degree in paleontology or related field and who has knowledge of the County of San Diego paleontology and documented experience in professional paleontological procedures and techniques. In addition, a regional fossil repository, such as the San Diego Natural History Museum, shall be designated by the City of Santee to receive any discovered fossils.
b) Preconstruction Meeting: The project paleontologist shall attend the preconstruction meeting to consult with the grading and excavation contractors concerning excavation schedules, paleontological field techniques, and safety issues.
c) Preconstruction Training: The project paleontologist shall conduct a paleontological resource training workshop to be attended by earth excavation personnel.
d) During-Construction Monitoring: A project paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall be present during all earthwork in formations with moderate to high paleontological sensitivity. A paleontological monitor (working under the direction of the project paleontologist) shall be any of the Rezone Site
areas.
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
on site on a full-time basis during all original cutting of previously undisturbed deposits.
e) During-Construction Fossil Recovery: If fossils are discovered, the project paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall recover them. In most cases, fossil salvage can be completed in a short period of time. However, some fossil specimens (e.g., a bone bed or a complete large mammal skeleton) may require an extended salvage period. In these instances, the project paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) has the authority to temporarily direct, divert, or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner.
f) Post-Construction Treatment: Fossil remains collected during monitoring and salvage shall be cleaned, repaired, sorted, and cataloged. 7. PostConstruction Curation: Prepared fossils, along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps, shall be deposited in the designated fossil repository.
g) Post-Construction Final Report: A final summary paleontological mitigation report that outlines the results of the mitigation program shall be completed and submitted to the City of Santee within two weeks of the completion of each construction phase of the proposed project. This report shall include discussions of the methods used, stratigraphic section(s) exposed, fossils collected, inventory lists of cataloged fossils, and significance of recovered fossils.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact GHG-1: GHG Emissions Refer to mitigation measure TRA-1 below.
MM-GHG-1: For development at Rezone Sites that proceed before an update to the Sustainable Santee Plan is adopted, as detailed in MM-GHG-2, a sitespecific GHG analysis is required. The site-specific GHG analysis shall (1) determine whether the project would result in GHG emissions that may have a Prior to any permit for
development at the
Rezone Site areas.
City of Santee
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
significant impact on the environment and specifically must demonstrate how the project would reduce emissions to achieve consistency with the State Scoping Plan and applicable GHG reduction targets, and (2) the analysis must demonstrate how the project would be consistent with the Sustainable Santee Plan Consistency Checklist in addition to other applicable GHG reduction plans.
The site-specific GHG analysis shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City during the permitting process.
For development at Rezone Sites that proceed after the Sustainable Santee Plan is adopted as detailed in MM-GHG-2, only project consistency with the Sustainable Santee Plan Consistency Checklist is required.
MM-GHG-2: Within one year of adoption of the rezone program, the City shall prepare an update to the Sustainable Santee Plan to incorporate the additional emissions that would result from development at the rezone sites as part of the baseline inventory. The updated Sustainable Santee Plan shall determine GHG emission reduction targets consistent with the current Scoping Plan, based on the updated inventory and provide any necessary updates to the Consistency Checklist.
Impact GHG-2: Policies, Plans, and
Regulations Intended to Reduce
GHG Emissions
Refer to MM-GHG-1 and MM-GHG-2 Prior to any permit for
development at the
Rezone Site areas.
City of Santee
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact HAZ-1: Hazardous
Materials—Use, Transport,
Disposal; Accidental Release; and
Emissions near a School
MM-HAZ-1: Applications for future development in the Rezone Sites, wherein the City has determined a potential for impacts to known and unknown hazardous materials sites, shall be required to comply with the following mitigation framework. Future projects shall be required to identify potential conditions, which require further regulatory oversight and demonstrate compliance based on the following measures prior to issuance of any permits. a) A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) shall be completed in accordance with American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standards. If hazardous materials are identified requiring remediation, a Phase II ESA and remediation effort shall be conducted in conformance with federal, state, and local regulations.
b) If the Phase II ESA identifies the need for remediation, then the following shall occur prior to the issuance of grading permits:
1. The applicant shall retain a qualified environmental engineer to develop a soil and/or groundwater management plan to address the notification, monitoring, sampling, testing, handling, storage, and disposal of contaminated media or substances (soil, groundwater). The qualified environmental consultant shall monitor excavations and grading activities in accordance with the plan. The plans shall be approved by the City prior to development of the site.
2. The applicant shall submit documentation showing that contaminated soil and/or groundwater on proposed development parcels have been avoided or remediated to meet cleanup requirements established by appropriate local regulatory agencies (Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]/DTSC/DEH) based on the future planned land use of the specific area within the boundaries of the site (i.e., commercial, residential), and that the risk to human health of future occupants of Prior to the issuance of
any permit for a
development in the
Rezone Site areas.
City of Santee
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
these areas therefore has been reduced to below a level of significance.
3. The applicant shall obtain written authorization from the appropriate regulatory agency (RWQCB/DTSC/DEH) confirming the completion of remediation. A copy of the authorization shall be submitted to the City to confirm that all appropriate remediation has been completed and that the proposed development parcel has been cleaned up to the satisfaction of the regulatory agency. In the situation where previous contamination has occurred on a site that has a previously closed case or on a site included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, the DEH shall be notified of the proposed land use.
4. All cleanup activities shall be performed in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations, and required permits shall be secured prior to commencement of construction to the satisfaction of the City and compliance with applicable regulatory agencies such as but not limited to the City of Santee Municipal Code.
Noise
Impact NOS-1: Noise Standards
(Increases in Ambient Noise)
Impact NOS-2: Noise Standards
(Land Use Compatibility) Impact
NOS-3: Noise Standards
(Construction Noise)
MM-NOS-1: Applications for future development, where the City has determined a potential for land use compatibility impacts related to vehicle traffic, shall be required to comply with the following mitigation measure:
Prior to the issuance of a permit to develop at the Rezone Sites, the City shall assess whether proposed noise-sensitive receivers or associated noise-sensitive exterior use areas would be subject to transportation noise levels that potentially conflict with policies established in the City General Plan. Based on the analysis herein, the following sites are anticipated to require implementation of this measure: Sites 1 through 10, Sites 17 and 18, Sites 20A and 20B, Site 24, Site 25, and Site 29. Where noise levels would potentially conflict with City policies, the City shall require preparation of a noise technical Prior to the issuance of a
permit to develop at any
of the Rezone Site areas.
City of Santee
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
analysis by a qualified professional that demonstrates (1) noise levels would not exceed the City’s General Plan Noise Element compatibility guidelines, or (2) noise levels which already exceed the levels considered compatible for that use are not increased by 3 dB or more. In lieu of detailed analysis, the City will accept information demonstrating that noise reduction techniques have been incorporated that would reduce noise levels at exterior use areas consistent with City standards Noise reduction techniques may include site design (including building orientation) that provides noise barriers free of gaps and obstructs line-of-sight between the source and receiver, and has a weight of at least 2 pounds per square foot, or other noise reduction technique as applicable.
MM-NOS-2: The City shall review applications for future development to determine applicability of a Construction Noise Best Management Plan. An applicant may provide site-specific noise generation information demonstrating that construction activities will not exceed 75 dB at the nearest sensitive receptor. If this site-specific information is not provided, a construction best management plan shall be required when the construction site is located within 150 feet of a sensitive receptor. The criteria of 150 feet is provided as a screening tool for use by the City, based on an average construction noise level of 83 dB, attenuating to 75 dB at 150 feet.
Construction Noise Best Management Practice Plan
Where applicable based on the criteria provided above, the City shall require preparation and implementation of a best management practice plan that demonstrates how noise levels would be minimized to comply with the time of day restrictions and notification requirements of Santee Municipal Code Section
5.04.090. Noise reduction measures can include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Construction equipment with a manufacturer’s noise rating of 85 dB(A) Lmax or greater may only operate at a specific location for 10 City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
consecutive workdays. If work involving such equipment would involve more than 10 consecutive workdays, a notice must be provided to all property owners and residents within 300 feet of the site no later than 10 days before the start of construction. The notice must be approved by the City and describe the proposed project and the expected duration of work and provide a point of contact to resolve noise complaints.
2. Idling times for noise-generating equipment used in demolition, construction, site preparation, and related activities shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes.
3. Demolition, construction, site preparation, and related activities within 100 feet from the edge of properties with existing, occupied noisesensitive uses shall incorporate all feasible strategies to reduce noise exposure for noise-sensitive uses, including:
• Provide written notice to applicable noise-sensitive land uses at least two weeks prior to the start of each construction phase of the construction schedule;
• Ensure that construction equipment is properly maintained and equipped with noise control components, such as mufflers, in accordance with manufacturers’ specifications;
• Re-route construction equipment away from adjacent noisesensitive uses; • Locate noisy construction equipment away from surrounding noise-sensitive uses;
• Use sound aprons or temporary noise enclosures around noisegenerating equipment; City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
• Position storage of waste materials, earth, and other supplies in a manner that will function as a noise barrier for surrounding noisesensitive uses; • Use the quietest practical type of equipment;
• Use electric powered equipment instead of diesel or gasoline engine powered equipment;
• Use shrouding or shielding and intake and exhaust
silencers/mufflers; and
• Other effective and feasible strategies to reduce construction noise exposure for surrounding noise-sensitive uses.
4. For construction of buildings that require the installation of piles, an alternative to installation of piles by hammering shall be used where sensitive receptors are located within 150 feet. This could include the use of augured holes for cast-in place piles, installation through vibration or hydraulic insertion, or another low noise technique.
Impact NOS-4: Groundborne
Noise and Vibration
MM-NOS-3: Applications for future development, where the City has determined a potential for vibration impacts in relation to sensitive receptors, shall be required to comply with the following mitigation measure:
Prior to the issuance of a permit to develop at the Rezone Sites, the City shall determine whether the construction process will require equipment or activities that may result in vibration, such as pile driving. For projects requiring pile driving during construction within 135 feet of fragile structures, such as historical resources, 100 feet of non-engineered timber and masonry buildings (e.g., most residential buildings), or within 75 feet of engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster); or a vibratory roller within 25 feet of any structure, the project applicant shall prepare a noise and vibration analysis to assess and mitigate potential noise and vibration impacts related to these activities. These distances are based on reference vibration levels generated by pile drivers and vibratory rollers and standard vibration propagation rates as published by the Prior to the issuance of a
permit to construct at
any of the Rezone Sites.
City of Santee
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
Federal Transit Administration Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018). This noise and vibration analysis shall be conducted by a qualified and experienced acoustical consultant or engineer. The vibration levels shall not exceed Federal Transit Administration architectural damage thresholds (e.g., 0.12 inches per second [in/sec] peak particle velocity [PPV] for fragile or historical resources, 0.2 in/sec PPV for non-engineered timber and masonry buildings, and 0.3 in/sec PPV for engineered concrete and masonry). If vibration levels would exceed this threshold, alternative uses such as drilling piles as opposed to pile driving and static rollers as opposed to vibratory rollers shall be used. If necessary, construction vibration monitoring shall be conducted to ensure vibration thresholds are not exceeded.
Transportation
Impact TRA-1: Vehicle Miles
Traveled
MM-TRA-1: The City shall require implementation of applicable Mobility Element Policies that would support VMT reductions for individual projects.
Specifically, the City shall require that future projects are compliant with Mobility Element Policies 9.1 through 9.5, which encourage the use of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies, such as ride sharing programs, flexible work schedule programs, and incentives for employees to use transit. Additionally, alternative transportation modes, such as walking, cycling and public transit are encouraged to reduce peak hour vehicular trips, save energy, and improve air quality. Sample TDM measures that may be applied at the project-level are provided below:
• Increase mixed-use development
• Increase transit accessibility
• Provide pedestrian network improvement along project frontage • Provide bicycle network improvement along project frontage • Provide bicycle parking and bike lockers
• Implement subsidized or discounted transit passes
• Provide rider-sharing programs
• Implement commute trip reduction marketing
Prior to the issuance of a
permit to construct at
any of the Rezone Sites.
City of Santee
City of Santee Housing Element Rezone Program Implementation PEIR
Table 13-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measures Timeframe of Mitigation Monitoring,
Enforcement,
and Reporting
Responsibility
• Implement school pool program
• Implement bike-sharing or micro mobility program
• Provide local shuttle to connect visitors to different attractions throughout the City
Mitigation measures should be consistent with the City’s Active Transportation Plan.
Public Utilities
Impact UTIL-1: New or expanded
utility systems
See MM-VIS-1, MM-AQ-1, MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-6, MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-3, MM-GEO-1, MM-GHG-1 and MM-GHG-2, MM-HAZ-1, MM-NOS-1 through MM-NOS-3, and MM-TRA-1.
Prior to the issuance of a
permit to construct at
any of the Rezone Sites.
City of Santee
Program EIR Appendices
The appendices referenced in this Program Environmental Impact Report can be downloaded from the following website:
https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/services/project-environmental-review