Noise sources from parking lots include car alarms, door slams, radios, and tire squeals. These sources typically range from approximately 51 to 66 dBA at a distance of 10 feet (Gordon Bricken & Associates 2012) and are generally short term and intermittent. Parking lots have the potential to generate temporary noise levels that exceed the sound level limit s established in the Noise Ordinance, depending on the location of the source; however, noise sources from park ing lots would be different from each other in kind, duration, and location. Therefore, the overall effects would be separate and, in most cases, would not affect noise-sensitive receptors at the same time, and noise generated from parking lots would be less than significant.
Mixed-Use Development
Mixed-use development would include multi -family residential development in proximity to commercial or office development. As discussed previously, commercial development adjacent to or within the same property as multi-family residences would be required to comply with the stricter hourly noise level limit for multi-family residential use. Noise sources within future mixed- use development would be similar to commercial and office development discussed previously and would include noise from HVAC systems, truck deliveries, and parking lots. Noise generated from deliveries and parking lot sources would be intermittent and not likely to occur at the same time. Noise from HVAC equipment would be restricted by the performance standards outlined in the Noise Ordinance. Therefore, with required compliance with the Victorville Noise Ordinance including the performance standards for HVAC equipment, impacts would be less than significant.
Industrial Development
Industrial land uses would continue to be accommodated under the General Plan Update and in the SOI. Operation of an industrial facility can generate noise associated with mechanical equipment (pumps, rooftop equipment, condenser units, HVAC units, and pneumatic equipment), operation-related vehicles, speakers, bells, chimes, and outdoor human activity in defined limited areas. Light industrial uses typically include light manufacturing, warehouse, distribution, assembly, and wholesale uses. Heavy industrial uses typical ly include intense manufacturing, Section 3.5: Noise
Draft PEIR 3.5-13 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
warehouse and distribution, assembly, and wholesale industrial operations that generate higher noise levels than light industrial uses. Industrial land uses would generally operate during normal daytime business hours and would not result in sleep disturbance. Additionally, if new industrial development would be adjacent to existing noise -sensitive land uses or an area zoned for commercial or residential use, it would be required to comply with the stricter hourly noise lev el limits for these land uses at the property line. New land uses would be required to meet performance standards for HVAC equipment and implement equipment shielding, as necessary.
Therefore, compliance with the Victorville Noise Ordinance would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.
Civic and Public Development
Noise sources from civic and public land uses such as schools, civic uses including government facilities, child care facilities, and recreational facilities include parking lot noise, children at play, athletic events, landscape maintenance, school bells, and public address systems. These land uses currently exist throughout the General Plan Update Planning Area. In addition, libraries and civic uses are not typical noise sources except from associated parking lots. Similar to nuisance noises in residential neighborhoods and from commercial and office development, noise sources from these land uses would be intermittent and would be different from each other in kind, duration, and location so that the overall effects would be separate and, in most cases, would not affect the same noise-sensitive receptors at the same time. Parks may result in some nuisance noise; however, these uses would be generally consistent with surrounding d evelopment and normal use is considered exempt from the Noise Ordinance. Events at public facilities would be subject to permit requirements to limit noise exposure. Similar to residential and commercial development, nuisance noise generated by civic and public land uses would also be less than significant.
Permanent Increases in Traffic Noise Levels from Project Operation Future growth in Victorville would have the potential to result in a permanent increase in vehicle noise levels on local roads. As stated in the Transportation Impact Study (Vehicle Miles Traveled [VMT] Analysis) prepared for the project (CR Associates 2022), total future VMT would increase compared to existing conditions, although future total VMT per service population would be less than anticipated under the current General Plan. Permanent increases in noise levels may cause roadway noise to exceed the noise compatibility criteria in Table 3.5 -3, or result in a noticeable increase in noise levels on roadways that currently exceed these standards.
Vehicle noise increases would generally occur in the areas where the proposed General Plan Update anticipates an intensification of development. Therefore, the greatest increases in noise level would likely occur in the City center and commerci al corridors. However, development throughout the City would have the potential to result in a significant permanent increase in vehicle noise levels. General Plan Noise Element Policy 1.2.1 requires implementation of noise mitigation Section 3.5: Noise
Draft PEIR 3.5-14 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
in the design of new roadway projects, but does not include specific requirements for development that would increase traffic noise levels. Additionally, the Noise Element includes Implementation Measures that require a noise compatibility study for development of new sensitiv e receptors (Implementation Measure 2.1.1.1) that may be exposed to substantial noise, and mitigation for noise emitting equipment (Implementation Measure 2.1.1.5). However, it does not specifically require evaluation of permanent vehicle noise increases t hat may result from new land development projects. Therefore, this impact would be potentially significant.
Noise Incompatibilities with New Sensitive Receptors
In addition to the potential to increase vehicle noise because of growth under the proposed General Plan Update, implementation of the project would have the potential to result in the placement of new sensitive receptors in areas exposed to vehicle noise levels in excess of the City’s noise land use compatibility standards. As part of the General Plan Update, new sensitive receptors would be concentrated in the City center and commercial corridors that are currently subject to relatively higher traffic noise levels from existing activity. New sensitive receptors may also be exposed to noise from existing railroad and industrial operations. Therefore, new sensitive receptor development that is planned under the General Plan Update would have the potential to be exposed to vehicle noise above the normally acceptable lim its. New development accommodated by the proposed General Plan Update throughout the City and SOI would have the potential to be exposed to ambient noise levels in excess of the existing General Plan Noise Element Noise Compatibility Standards. However, the City would continue to implement requirements in the Noise Element that require noise analysis prior to approval of new sensitive receptors that evaluate noise compatibility and implementation of appropriate noise attenuation. Implementation Measure
2.1.1.1 requires a study to be performed where multi-family residential or mixed-use development may be exposed to conditionally acceptable noise levels of 65 dBA or above. This measure implements the California Noise Insulation Standards that require noise attenuation to appropriate interior noise levels of 45 dBA CNEL . Future development would be required to demonstrate consistency with California Building Standards, including the Noise Insulation Standards for multi-family and mixed-use residences. Most future noise-sensitive development is anticipated to be multi-family or mixed-use development. A significant impact would not occur to these types of developments due to existing regulations. However, additional types of noise sensitive land uses may be accomm odated, including new hospital, educational, or library uses that are also noise sensitive but are not subject to Implementation Measure 2.1.1.1. Therefore, this impact would be potentially significant.
Significance of Impact
Implementation of the General Plan Update would have the potential to permanently increase vehicle noise levels within the proposed project area in excess of the City’s Noise Compatibility Standards. Temporary impacts due to construction activities would also be a potential source of Section 3.5: Noise
Draft PEIR 3.5-15 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
substantial noise. Operation of land uses and placement of new multi-family residential uses accommodated by the General Plan Update would be less than significant with compliance with the Noise Ordinance, Noise Element, and California Noise Insulation Stan dards. However, other new noise sensitive land uses may be exposed to incompatible noise levels.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of the proposed project would have the potential to result in permanent increases in vehicle noise and temporary constructio n noise impacts ; therefore , it would result in a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure NOI -1 would reduce impacts related to increases in vehicle noise level by requiring future development or redevelopment to evaluate potential impact and implement noise reduction measures where feasible. Mitigation Measure NOI-2 would require noise attenuation features for new noise sensitive land uses exposed to incompatible exterior noise. Mitigation Measure NOI -3 would reduce impacts related to construction noise by requiring construction best management practices to limit noise exposure.
NOI-1: Roadway Noise Measures. Before the approval of building permits and in conjunction with any required California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review for new projects that would result in increased vehicular traffic , project applicants shall be required to complete a site -specific Noise Technical Study to determine if the project would result in a significant increase in traffic noise. A qualified acous tical analyst shall prepare the Noise Technical Study.
If a significant increase in vehicle noise level is identified because of project implementation, the project shall incorporate buffers or other noise reduction measures to the extent feasible to reduce noise levels at affected sensitive receptors to a normally acceptable noise level. Reduction measures that shall be considered include but are not limited to alternative road design, reduced speeds, alternative paving, building retrofits to provide additional noise attenuation, and setbacks or buffers before berms and walls.
A qualified acoustical engineer shall design the noise reduction measures. Where noise reduction measures in the public right-of-way are infeasible, the project applicant shall conduct outreach to potentially affected sensitive receptors to determine the feasibility of noise reduction measures on private property, including a noise barrier or building retrofits. Based on affected receptor response, a qualified acoustical engineer shall determine the feasibility of a noise barrier on private property and/or the extent of required building retrofits. The project applicant shall submit plans to the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments for review and approval before the start of any construction. These plans shall demonstrate that the proposed noise reduction measures would reduce traffic noise exposure at sensitive receptors to the extent feasible.
Section 3.5: Noise
Draft PEIR 3.5-16 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
NOI-2: New Noise Sensitive Land Use. Before the approval of building permits and in conjunction with any required California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review for new noise -sensitive projects that are not subject to General Plan Noise Element Implementation Measure 2.1.1.1, project applicants shall be required to complete a site- specific Noise Technical Study to determine if the project would be exposed to exterior noise levels that exceed the applicable normally acceptable noise compatibility standard in General Plan Noise Element Table N-3, Victorville Land Use Compatibility Standards. If a potentially incompatible exterior noise level is identified, the project shall incorporate noise attenuation features, such as enhanced windows or insulation, to provide interior noise levels of 45 dBA CNEL or below. The project applicant shall submit the analysis to the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments for review and approval before the start of any construction. These plans shall demonstrate that the proposed noise reduction measures would reduce interior noise exposure to 45 dBA CNEL or less.
NOI-3: Construction Noise Best Management Practices. Prior to approval of a grading permit for new development requiring use of heavy construction equipment, th e construction contractor shall demonstrate that the following best management practices would be implemented during construction, as applicable. Best management practices shall be documented on the project’s grading or other construction plan and submitte d to the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments for review and approval before the start of any construction.
1. Limit hours of construction to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday.
2. The construction contractor shall provide written notification to the noise sensitive uses within 500 feet of construction activities at least 3 weeks prior to the start of construction activities informing them of the estimated start date and duration of construction activities.
3. Construction activities that could generate high noise levels, such as pile driving, shall be scheduled during times that would have the least impact on sensitive receptor locations.
4. Stationary construction noise sources, such as temporary generators, shall be located as far from nearby noise-sensitive receptors as possible.
5. Trucks shall be prohibited from idling along streets serving the construction site where noise-sensitive receptors are located.
6. Outfit construction equipment with properly maintained, manufacturer-approved or recommended sound abatement means on air intakes, combustion exhausts, heat dissipation vents, and the interior surfaces of engine hoods and power train enclosures.
Section 3.5: Noise
Draft PEIR 3.5-17 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
7. Position (to the extent practical) construction laydown and vehicle staging areas as far from noise-sensitive land uses as feasible.
8. If feasible and determined to be an effective option, install temporary noise barriers around the perimeter of the construction area to minimize construction noise.
Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI -1 would reduce impacts from vehicle noise by implementing noise reduction measures where feasible. However, roadway noise buffers and additional noise reduction measures would not necessarily be feasible in all circumstances throughout the City and SOI. For example, for a permanent noise barrier to be effective, the barriers would need to be continuous across multiple properties. Because multiple City roadways include existing cross streets and driveways, noise walls would not n ecessarily be effective to reduce traffic noise. Implementation of retrofits of existing residences would require approval from private homeowners. Future projects put forward through implementation of the General Plan Update would continue to be subject to results according to the noise standards under CEQA and the Noise Element but cannot be determined to be less than significant at this time. Therefore, permanent increases in vehicle noise because of the General Plan Update would remain significant and unavoidable.
Impacts related to operation of new development and siting of new sensitive receptors would be less than significant with implementation of existing regulation and Mitigation Measure NOI -2.
Temporary nuisance impacts due to construction activ ities would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-3.
3.5.5.2 Threshold 2: Excessive Groundborne Vibration or Noise Impact Analysis
Groundborne vibration that would potentially occur through implementation of the General Plan Update would result from construction equipment and, following construction, industrial sources that may result in operational impacts from heavy machinery. Other land uses accommodated under the General Plan Update, including proposed residential, commercial, and civic uses, are not land uses that typically generate groundborne vibration and, therefore, are not addressed below.
Future development may also be exposed to vibration from operation of the BNSF and Union Pacific railroad line.
Construction
The F TA thresholds provided in Table 3. 5-2 are the applicable significance thresholds for groundborne vibration. Construction vibration is subject to the infrequent event criteria because operation of vibration-generating equipment is anticipated to be intermittent throughout the day in the vicinity of an individual receptor. These thresholds are 65 VdB at vibration-sensitive land uses Section 3.5: Noise
Draft PEIR 3.5-18 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
and 80 VdB at residences and buildings where people normally sleep. Vibration -sensitive land uses include manufacturing uses, ho spitals, and research operations (FTA 2018). Construction would typically occur during the day and would not disturb sleep. However, daytime construction may result in a nuisance to residences . Therefore, the 75 VdB threshold for nuisance to daytime land uses would apply to all land uses that are not vibration sensitive. The threshold of 65 VdB is applicable to all vibration-sensitive receptors.
Typical vibration levels for typical construction equipment that may be required for future projects proposed under the General Plan Update are provided in Table 3.5-6, Vibration Source Levels for Typical Construction Equipment . As shown in Table 3. 5-6, all vibration levels from all construction equipment would attenuate to below 75 VdB at 110 feet from the source and vibration from construction equipment other than vibratory equipment would attenuate to 75 VdB or below beyond 65 feet from the source . All vibration levels from all construction equipment would attenuate to below 65 VdB at 235 feet from the source, and vibration from construction equipment other than vibratory equipment would attenuate to 65 VdB or below beyond 135 feet from the source. Table 3. 5-7, Vibration Impact Screening Distances , summarizes the screening distances for potential impacts from vibratory construction equipment and typical construction equipment at vibration-sensitive and non-sensitive uses.
Table 3.5-6. Vibration Source Levels for Typical Construction Equipment Construction
Equipment
Approximate
VdB at 25 Feet
Approximate
VdB at 65 Feet1
Approximate
VdB at 110 Feet1
Approximate
VdB at 135 Feet
Approximate
VdB at 235 Feet
Large Bulldozer 87 75 68 65 58
Caisson Drilling 87 75 68 65 58
Loaded Trucks 86 74 67 64 57
Small Bulldozer 58 46 39 36 29
Jackhammer 79 67 60 57 50
Vibratory Roller 94 82 75 72 65
Sources: FTA 2018.
Notes: VdB = vibration decibel
1 Based on the formula VdB = VdB(25 feet) – 30log(d/25) provided by the FTA (2018).
Table 3.5-7. Vibration Impact Screening Distances
Type of Receptor
Screening Distance for Construction
Requiring Vibratory Equipment (Feet)
Screening Distance for Typical
Construction without Vibratory
Equipment (Feet)
Vibration-Sensitive Land Uses 235 135
Non-Sensitive Land Uses 110 65
Sources: FTA 2018 (for source levels and attenuation formula).
Section 3.5: Noise
Draft PEIR 3.5-19 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
As shown in Table 3.5-6, a potential impact would occur if future construction activities would occur within 135 feet of a vibration-sensitive land use or 235 feet if vibratory equipment would be required.
In addition, a potential impact would occur if future construction activities would take place within 65 feet of existing non-sensitive land uses or 135 feet if vibratory equipment would be required. Vibration- sensitive land uses are found throughout the General Plan Update Planning Area, including medical facilities and industrial operations. Because no specific construction is proposed at this time, it cannot be guaranteed that vibration levels would not exceed the thresholds at the nearest sensitive receptors.
In addition, the proposed project encourages compact development and redevelopment of underused land in proximity to existing development. Therefore, typical noise levels for construction equipment under the General Plan Update, as shown in Table 3.5-6, could exceed the applicable FTA threshold.
Construction vibration impacts would be potentially significant.
Operation
Industrial land uses would continue to be accommodated under the General Plan Update.
Operation of future industrial facilities cou ld generate groundborne vibration associated with heavy mechanical equipment. New industrial land uses would be subject to the Victorville Municipal Code, Section 16-3.11.010, which allows the City to exclude uses that would result in vibrations that are disruptive to nearby uses. However, the code does not include a specific limit for vibration. Therefore, this impact is potentially significant.
Rail Vibration
The BNSF and Union Pacific Railroad operate freight rail services through the City , which generate vibration from freight train pass-by. Based on generalized ground surface vibration curves published by the FTA (FTA 2018), freight trains travelling at 50 miles per hour generate vibration levels of 72 VdB at up to 200 feet from the rail line. Use of the Union Pacific Railroad is infrequent (less than 30 trips per day); therefore, 80 VdB is the applicable threshold for annoyance from this rail line for residences, and 65 VdB is the applicable threshold for vibration sensitive uses. Freight operations would have the potential to gen erate vibration levels of 80 VdB up to approximately 110 feet from the rail line , and 65 VdB up to 350 feet from the rail line . It is unlikely that n ew residences would be located within 110 feet of the rail line; however, new industrial uses or other uses that may include vibration sensitive equipment may be within 350 feet of the line. Therefore, a significant impact related to railroad vibration would occur.
Significance of Impact
Implementation of the General Plan Update would result in a significant impact related to groundborne noise during construction, operation of industrial equipment, or siting of vibration sensitive receptors near freight operations.
Section 3.5: Noise
Draft PEIR 3.5-20 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI -4 would reduce temporary vibration impacts from future construction activities. Mitigation Measure NOI -5 would reduce vibration exposure from new industrial equipment. Mitigation Measure NOI -6 would reduce vibration nuisance from the siting of new vibration sensitive equipment near freight operations.
NOI-4: Vibration Best Management Practices. Before the start of construction activities that would involve use of a vibratory roller (or equivalent equipment) within 235 feet of a vibration-sensitive land use or within 110 feet of other land uses or the use of typical (not vibratory) construction equipment within 135 feet of a vibration-sensitive land use or within 65 feet of other land uses, t he project applicant shall retain a qualified acoustician to demonstrate that vibration would not exceed the applicable FTA threshold (65 VdB for vibration-sensitive land uses of 75 VdB for other daytime land uses), or shall identify best management practices to be implemented by the construction contractor to reduce vibratio n levels to below the applicable threshold .
The best management practices shall be included in project construction documents, including the Grading Plan and contract with the construction contractor. Practices may include but not be limited to the following:
Use only properly maintained equipment with vibratory isolators Operate equipment as far from sensitive receptors as possible Use rubber-tired vehicles as opposed to tracked vehicles NOI-5: Vibration from Industrial Operation. Before the approval of bu ilding permits, project applicants for future development projects that would include vibration -generating equipment shall be required to complete a site -specific analysis to determine if proposed sources of vibration would result in a significant vibration at nearby land uses.
The analysis shall identify the potential sources of vibration, equipment specifications, and evaluate whether vibration would exceed the applicable FTA threshold at surrounding land uses. If significant vibration levels are identifi ed, the analysis shall identify vibration reduction measures to the extent feasible to reduce vibration levels at affected receptors, such as relocating equipment. The project applicant shall submit the analysis to the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments for review and approval before the start of any construction.
NOI-6: Railroad Vibration. Prior to approval of building permits and in conjunction with any required California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review , if new vibration - sensitive land uses are in close proximity to the railroad, the project applicant shall retain an acoustical engineer to conduct an acoustic analysis that includes a vibration analysis for potential impacts from vibration generated by operation of the rail line. If levels of Section 3.5: Noise
Draft PEIR 3.5-21 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
vibration are detected that exceed the applicable FTA threshold, the acoustic analysis shall recommend site design features, such as setbacks and trenches, and/or required building improvements, such as harder building materials (e.g., steel framing vs. wood framing), to eliminate the potential for train operations to result in levels of vibration that would interfere with proposed operation. The site design features shall be identified on the Final Site Plan and withi n associated CEQA documents as applicable to the satisfaction of the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments.
Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-3 would reduce groundborne vibration impacts during construction to a less than significant level by minimizing nuisance impacts to affected receptors in accordance with FTA standards . However, feasible alternative construction methods may not be available to reduce vibration levels to below the applicable threshold, particularly for vibration- sensitive equipment in buildings adjacent to construction zones. V ibration impacts would be temporary and would cease following construction. However, this temporary impact would be significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measure NOI-4 would reduce impacts from industrial operations to less than significant by establishing a performance standard for new permanent vibration sources. Mitigation Measure NOI-5 would reduce impacts from freight operations to less than significant by requiring rail vibration to be considered in the design of new vibration-sensitive uses. Therefore, impacts related to groundborne vibration would be less than significant.
3.5.5.3 Threshold 3: Aircraft Noise
Impact Analysis
The City contains one airport, the SCLA , in the northwestern portion of the City. The existing SCLA aircraft contours of 70 and 75 dB CNEL remain entirely on airport property. The 65 dB CNEL noise contour extends off airport property to the south. This area is currently undeveloped.
The 60 dB C NEL noise contour extends off airport property to the north, south, and southwest.
The 55 dB CNEL noise contour extends off airport property to the north, south, northeast, and southwest (City of Victorville 2008 ). The City has also adopted a Specific Plan for development near the SCLA. The Specific Plan includes Public/Open Space, Business Park, and Industrial designations for land southeast of the runways. The SCLA Specific Plan establishes policies to ensure SCLA operations are compatible with proximate land uses (City of Victorville 2021).
In addition, policies of the Victorville General Plan 2030 Noise Element, notably Policies 1.1.2 and 2.2.1 and their respective implementation measures, seek to ensure that no conflict or inconsistency between the oper ation of the SCLA and future land uses within the Planning Area occurs. These policies and measures require the City to continue to monitor SCLA operations and Section 3.5: Noise
Draft PEIR 3.5-22 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
to coordinate these activities into the planning process. Future development would be required to comply with both the SCLA Specific Plan and the Victorville General Plan 2030 compatibility policies. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan Update would not expose people residing or working in the Planning Area to excessive noise during construction activities or operational activities from aircraft noise.
Significance of Impact
Implementation of the General Plan Update would not expose people residing or working in the Planning Area to excessive noise during construction activities or op erational activities resulting from aircraft noise.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts are less than significant, and mitigation measures are not required.
3.5.6 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation
The following sections address various potential cumulative impacts relating to noise that could result from implementation of the project. As discussed in Chapter 3, Environmental Analysis, the proposed General Plan Update is inherently cumulative and considers cumulative development that could occur in the Planning Area over a defined time frame. Therefore, the impact analysis of a General Plan project generally constitutes the cumulative analysis. Impacts are summarized below.
3.5.6.1 Cumulative Threshold 1: Exceedance of Noise Standards Cumulative development would have the potential to result in an ambient regional increase in vehicle noise and stationary noise levels, as well as intermittent construction noise. Cumulative development would be subject to regula tions that require compliance with the Victorville Noise Ordinance and General Plan policies, or similar policies in surrounding jurisdictions. Additionally, impacts related to new noise sensitive receptors would be site specific. Development of a new sensitive land use in an area with incompatible existing noise levels would not increase exposure of other sensitive receptors. Existing regional and state regulations would generally limit operational and stationary impacts so that a significant cumulative impact related to development of new noise sensitive land uses would not occur.
However, buildout of the General Plan Update, along with future regional growth, would result in increases in traffic that would cumulatively increase traffic noise. Mitigation Measures NOI-1 would reduce impacts from Project implementation from vehicle noise by implementing noise reduction measures where feasible. While this mitigation would reduce the General Plan Update’s incremental Section 3.5: Noise
Draft PEIR 3.5-23 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
contribution to the cumulative impact to the extent feasible, the General Plan Update would have the potential to result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a cumulatively significant impact.
Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would reduce impacts, but not to below a cumulatively considerable level. This impact would be cumulatively considerable and unavoidable.
Construction noise impacts are localized in nature because they are limited to the construction site where construction equipment is operating. Therefore, projects that would be considered for the construction noise cumulative analysis would be projects close to future individual projects. Because projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be spread out over time and throughout the Planning Area, projects are unlikely to overlap and cause a cumulative impact. Therefore, a cumulatively considerable impact would not occur related to temporary construction noise.
3.5.6.2 Cumulative Threshold 2: Excessive Groundborne Vibration or Noise Similar to noise effects, vibration is a localized phenomenon and is progressively reduced as the distance from the source increases. Therefore, projects that would be considered for the vibration cumulative analysis would be projects close to future individual projects. Because projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be spread out over time and throughout th e Planning Area, projects are unlikely to overlap and cause a cumulative impact. Therefore, a cumulatively considerable impact would not occur related to vibration.
3.5.6.3 Cumulative Threshold 3: Aircraft Noise
Implementation of the General Plan Update would not expose people residing or working in the Planning Area to excessive aircraft noise through consistency with existing plan requirements. In addition, impacts related to nuisance noise from overflights are site specific and are not cumulative in nature. Therefore, a cumulatively considerable impact would not occur for this issue.
Section 3.5: Noise
Draft PEIR 3.5-24 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
This page intentionally left blank.
Section 3.6: Transportation
Draft PEIR 3.6-1 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
3.6 Transportation
This section evaluates the potential for impacts to transportation resulting from implementation of the proposed City of Victorville General Plan Update (project). The analysis in this section is based on the information in the 2022 Transportation Impact Study ( Vehicle Miles Traveled [VMT] Analysis) prepared by CR Associates (Appendix E).
3.6.1 Environmental Setting
3.6.1.1 Existing Circulation System
This section describes the existing conditions for the project as they relate to transportation.
The City of Victorville (the City) circulation system is comprised of freeways and their interchanges, arterial, collector and local streets, public transportation and non -motorized transportation. In addition to these facilities and services, the implementation and management of the circulation system includes parking policies and goods and freight movement.
Located in the heart of San Bernardino County, the Planning Area for the City is approximately 35 miles northeast of the City of San Bernardino and about 97 miles northeast of the City of Los Angeles. Nestled just north of the San Bernardino Mountains and at the edge of the Mojave Desert, the City is in an area known as Victor Valley and commonly referred to as the “High Desert”. The City shares boundaries with the City of Adelanto to the northwest, the Town of Apple Valley to the east, the City of Hesperia to the south and unincorporated San Bernardino County to the southwest and to t he north. There are also portions of unincorporated San Bernardino County nested within the City. The Mojave Freeway (Interstate [I-] 15) and United States Federal Highway (US-) 395 serve as the primary regional connections to other San Bernardino County cities, while State Route (SR-) 18 provides connection to San Bernardino County communities east and west of the City. In addition, major rail routes pass through the City and Southern California Logistics Airport is a commercial airport in place of the decommissioned George Air Force Base.
3.6.1.2 Roadways
The City’s circulation system is comprised of freeways and their interchanges, arterial, collector and local streets, public transportation and non-motorized transportation (City of Victorville 2008).
In addition to these facilities and services, the implementation and management of the circulation system includes parking policies and goods and freight movement.
Four major roadway facilities serve the City: I-15, US-395, SR-18 and Historic Route 66 (City of Victorville 2008).
Interstate 15 is a major north-south corridor having three lanes through Victorville in each direction.
Section 3.6: Transportation
Draft PEIR 3.6-2 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
United States Federal Highway 395 is a north-south highway that passes through the western part of the City. Primarily a two-lane highway, the roadway widens to four lanes north and south of Palmdale Road.
State Route 18 is a four -lane divided street with a continuous left -turn lane in the City along D Street and a raised median with turn pockets along Palmdale Road . The easterly segment of SR- 18 intersects with I-15, and continued west of I-15 at Palmdale Road. SR-18 is a designated Truck Route within the City. SR-18 in the Town of Apple Valley is known as Happy Trails Highway.
Historic Route 66 (National Trails Highway) wa s established in 1926 and extended 2,500 miles from Chicago, Illinois to Los Angeles, California. Today, Historic Route 66 follows the current alignment of I-15 from the City’s southern border to Palmdale Road (SR-18), continues northeast on D Street (Happy Tails Highway) to the northwestern edge of the City.
The City has 21 different street classifications, from two lane, undivided collectors to an eight - lane divided roadway with a raised median , as well as various retrofit street classifications (City of Victorville 2008). The roadways are designated by their primary function and level of mobility.
3.6.1.3 Bicycle Facilities
A majority of the non -motorized facilities include both shared -use and exclusive bicycle use facilities. Shared-use facilities, include shared paths for pedestrians and bicycles, and shared right of ways with bicycles and automobiles.
The City’s bikeway network consists of three types of facilities, as follows:
Class I bikeways, such as ‘bike paths’, provide a completely separated right of way designated for exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with minimum cross flows by motorists. These are shared use paths that may be used by pedestrians, skaters, wheelchair users, joggers and other non - motorized users.
Class II bikeways , such as ‘bike lanes’, provide a restricted right of way designated for the exclusive or semi-exclusive use of bicycles with through travel by motor vehicles or pedestrians prohibited, but with permitted vehicle parking and cross flows by pedestrians and motorists. This is a portion of roadway that has been designated by striping, signing, pavement delineation, and pavement markings for preferential or exclusive use of bicyclists.
Class III bikeways, such as on-street or off-street ‘bike routes,’ provide a right of way designated by signs or permanent markings and shared with pedestrians or motorists. Under the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Design Standards, Class III bikeways are designated by signage as a preferred route for bicycle use and routes.
Section 3.6: Transportation
Draft PEIR 3.6-3 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
3.6.1.4 Transit Facilities
The Victor Valley Transit Authority (VVTA) provides bus service within the City. VVTA currently operates ten fixed -routes in or through the City. Transit service is provided fro m 6:00 AM to 9:00 PM Monday through Friday, and from 7:00 Am to 8:00 PM on Saturdays.
Daily passenger rail service is provided by Amtrak at the Victor Valley Transportation Center on the north side of D Street between 2nd Street and 6th Street. Amtrak’s So uthwest Chief Liner connects Chicago, Illinois with Los Angeles, California. Amtrak Motor Coach service provides two daily round trips to San Joaquin trains in the City of Bakersfield.
In addition to passenger rail service, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe freight rail corridor serves the City, with a double main line and lead tracks for industrial users. Existing major inter -model cargo loading facilities in the region are in the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.
3.6.1.5 Truck Routes
Commercial vehicles exceeding a maximum gross weight limit of 12,000 pounds must generally adhere to truck routes while traveling through the City. The General Plan Circulation Element identifies the following eight current truck routes within the City: (1) Air Expressway, (2) National Trails Highway/D Street, (3) Hesperia Road from Bear Valley Road to D Street, (4) Green Tree Boulevard from 7th Street to Hesperia Road, (5) Mariposa Road from Bear Valley Road to Green Tree Boulevard, (6) Amargosa Road from Bear Valley Road to Palmdale Road, (7) Nisqualli Road from I-15 to Hesperia Road, and (8) Bear Valley Road.
3.6.1.6 Existing Vehicle Miles Traveled
VMT refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project. To establish a baseline understanding, Table 3.6-1, Victorville and Region VMT Metrics for Transportation Impact Analysis, displays both San Bernardino County Region and City of Victorville VMT per service population for both the current 2008 General Plan and Proposed Project.
Table 3.6-1. Victorville and Region VMT Metrics for Transportation Impact Analysis VMT Metric
Base Year 2008 General Plan
San Bernardino
Region Victorville
San Bernardino
Region Victorville
VMT/Service
Population 15.2 13.2 16.1 17.9
Source: Appendix E.
Section 3.6: Transportation
Draft PEIR 3.6-4 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
3.6.2 Regulatory Framework
This section describes the federal, state, and local regulatory framework adopted to address transportation.
3.6.2.1 Federal
Highway Capacity Manual
The Highway Capacity Manual, prepared by the federal Transportation Research Board, is the result of a collaborative, multiagency effort between the Transportation Research Board, Federal Highway Administration, and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. The Highway Capacity Manual contains concepts, guidelines, and computationa l procedures for the capacity and quality of service of various highway facilities, including freeways, signalized and unsignalized intersections, rural highways, and the effects of transit, pedestrians, and bicycles on the performance of these systems. Th e procedures from the Highway Capacity Manual 2000 methodology were used at intersections where the Highway Capacity Manual is limited in its analysis capabilities.
Code of Federal Regulations, Title 23, Section 450.220
Revised in April 1, 2005, the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 23, Section 450.220, requires each state to carry out a continual, comprehensive, and intermodal statewide transportation planning process. This planning process must include the development of a Statewide Transportation Plan and Transportation Improvement Program that facilitates the efficient, economic movement of people and goods in all areas of the state.
3.6.2.2 State
California Department of Transportation Standards
The Caltrans is responsible for planning, designing, building, operating, and maintaining California’s transportation system. Caltrans sets standards, policies, and Strategic Plans that aim to (1) provide the safest transportation system for users and workers, (2) maximize transportation system performance and accessi bility, (3) efficiently deliver quality transportation projects and services, (4) preserve and enhance California’s resources and assets, and (5) promote quality service.
Caltrans has the discretionary authority to issue special permits for the use of stat e highways for other than normal transportation purposes. Caltrans also reviews all requests from utility companies, developers, volunteers, nonprofit organizations, and others desiring to conduct various activities within the State Highway right -of-way. The Caltrans Highway Design Manual, prepared by the Office of Geometric Design Standards (7th edition, updated 2020), establishes uniform policies and procedures to carry out the highway design functions of Caltrans. Caltrans also prepared a Guide for Section 3.6: Transportation
Draft PEIR 3.6-5 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (Caltrans 2002) to provide consistency and uniformity in the identification of traffic impacts generated by local land use proposals.
Senate Bill 743
On September 27, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill (SB) 743, which created a process to change the way transportation impacts are analyzed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). SB 743 requires the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to amend the CEQA Guidelines to provide an alternative to level of service (LOS) for evaluating transportation impacts. Aside from changes to transportation analysis, SB 743 also includes several important changes to CEQA that apply to transit-oriented developments, including aesthetics and parking.
In December 2018, the California Natural Resources Agency certified and adopted the update to the CEQA Guidelines, implementing SB 743 (Section 15064.3). Under OPR’s revisions to the CEQA Guidelines, VMT exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may i ndicate a significant transportation impact. Under the VMT standard, projects within 0.25 mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high-quality transit corridor should generally be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. Furthermore, under the CEQA Guidelines revisions, for projects other than roadway capacity projects, automobile delay, as described solely by LOS or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion, should not be considered a significant effect on the environment. The revisions to the CEQA Guidelines allow a lead agency to elect to evaluate transportation impacts under the revised CEQA Guidelines at any time and made the revised CEQA Guidelines applicable statewide beginning July 1, 2020.
3.6.2.3 Regional
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the designated metropolitan planning organization for six Southern California counties (Ventura, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, Orange, and Imperial). As the designated metropolitan planning organization, SCAG is mandated by the Federal and State governments to prepare plans for regional transportation and air quality conformity. The most recent plan ado pted by SCAG is the 2020 -2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), which was adopted on September 3, 2020. The RTP/SCS integrates transportation planning with economic development and sustainability planning and aims to comply with State greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction goals, such as SB 375. The SCS portion of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS highlights strategies for the region to reach the regional target of reducing GHG emissions from autos and light -duty trucks by eight percent per capita by 2020, and 19 percent by 2035 (compared to 2005 levels).
Specifically, these strategies are:
Focus growth near destinations and mobility options
Section 3.6: Transportation
Draft PEIR 3.6-6 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Promote diverse housing choices
Leverage technology innovations
Support implementation of sustainability policies
Promote a green region
Furthermore, the 2020 -2045 RTP/SCS discusses a variety of land use tools to help achieve the state mandated reductions in GHG emissions through reduced per capita VMT. Some of these tools include center focused placemaking, focusing on priority growth area s, job centers, transit priority areas, as well as high quality transit areas and green regions.
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority Recommended Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment In February 2020, the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) released the SBCTA Recommended Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for VMT and LOS Assessment (SBCTA Guidelines) that address both traditional automobile delay -based LOS and new VMT analysis requirements per SB 743. The SBCTA Guidelines provide local jurisdictions with sufficient information to adopt VMT baselines and thresholds of significance prior to the July 2020 implementation deadline.
San Bernardino County Non-Motorized Transportation Plan The San Bernardino County Non -Motorized Transportation Plan (NMTP), prepared by SBCTA, revised June 2018, provides regional goals, objectives, and policies, bicycle and pedestrian planning, local jurisdiction bicycle plans, design guidelines, and plan implementation. The NMTP serves as a response to the initiatives to reduce vehicle travel and GHG emissions embedded in California SB 375 and satisfies the State of California requirements of a Bicycle Transportation Plan for purposes of Caltrans Bicycle Transportation Account funding.
3.6.2.4 Local
Victorville General Plan 2030
Circulation Element
The Circulation Element of the General Plan is intended to provide guidance to decisions that expand and improve the transportation system for local and regional trips, and to accommodate the diverse transportation needs of the residents of the Planning Area. Furthermore, Circulation Element is intended to specify the City’s policies for coordination of transportation infrastructure planning with planning of publi c utilities and facilities, where joint benefits can be achieved.
Circulation Element goals and policies that pertain to the proposed project include, but are not limited to, the following:
Section 3.6: Transportation
Draft PEIR 3.6-7 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Goal 1: Good Mobility – Provide a safe, efficient transportation system that enhances mobility for local residents and businesses, and facilitates regional travel for automobiles and trucks. Objective 1.1: Provide sufficient traffic carrying capacity at intersections throughout the roadway network, to achieve LOS performance standards. Policy 1.1.1: Maintain LOS “D” or better at intersections (as defined in the most current version of the Highway Capacity Manual), except in certain high activity areas designated by the Planning Commission, where a LOS E is acceptable. Policy 1.1.2: If a development project would worsen an intersection peak hour LOS to E or worse, it is considered a significant impact that must be mitigated.
If a development project would worsen an already deficient intersection by two percent or more, it is considered a significant impact that must be mitigated. Policy 1.1.3: Require new development and redevelopment projects to bear responsibility for traffic system improvements necessary to mitigate the project’s significant impacts at affecte d intersections, concurrently with construction of such projects.
Objective 1.2: Achieve and maintain mobility goals set forth in countywide CMP, on local CMP segments.
Policy 1.3.1: Participate with Caltrans and SANBAG on the environmental documents for the realignment of Highway 395 through the Planning Area. Policy 1.3.2: Complete the project approval and environmental document for the High Desert Corridor Project.
Policy 1.3.3: Prioritize the General Plan improvements for new interchanges, interchange modifications, new road constructions and road widenings.
Goal 2: Efficient Multi -Model Transportation Network – Meet diverse transportation needs of existing and future residents and businesses in the Planning Area through convenient, safe, multi- modal means.
Objective 2.1: Shall work toward developing an integrated and connected multimodal transportation system of Complete Streets that serves all neighborhoods Objective 2.2: Expand public transit in conjunction with population growth Policy 2.2.1: Require new development and redevelopment projects (public and private), to incorporate needed public transit facilities as identified by the VVTA.
Section 3.6: Transportation
Draft PEIR 3.6-8 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Goal 3: Adequate Infrastructure – Develop and maintain infrastructu re that supports the transportation and circulation needs of the community in a cost -effective and environmentally sensitive manner.
Objective 3.2: Design infrastructure that minimizes impacts to the environment. Objective 3.3: Provide adequate infrastructure improvements in conjunction with new development and redevelopment projects
Policy 3.3.1: Require private and public development projects to be responsible for constructing road improvements along all frontages abutting a public street right of way, in accordance with the design specifications for that roadway.
Such road frontage improvements shall be constructed concurrently with and completed prior to opening of the project.
City of Victorville Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines The City VMT Analysis Guidelines dated June 16, 2020 provides methodology and thresholds for VMT analyses with regard to CEQA for projects in the City. The guidelines also provide screening thresholds to determine if VMT analysis for CEQA is required.
City of Victorville Non-Motorized Transportation Plan
As part of the San Bernardino County Non-Motorized Transportation Plan, the City of Victorville Non-Motorized Transportation Plan was developed and approved by City Council in 2011, which designates various corridors, thoroughfares, and facilities to encourage bicycle and pedestrian use.
The plan helps in meeting the goals and objectives of the General Plan and guides the future, orderly development of trails and bikeways, by requiring developers to install the segments adjoining their projects. Supplemental to coordinating and guiding the San Bernardino County’s bicycle and pedestrian plans, programs, and projects, the NMTP for the Victor Valley area includes regional and intra-jurisdictional bicycle connections and pedestrian facilities.
3.6.3 Thresholds of Significance
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the project would have a significant impact on transportation if it would:
Threshold 1: Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities Threshold 2: Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b) such that a land use project will induce substantial VMT Threshold 3: Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment) Threshold 4: Result in inadequate emergency access
Section 3.6: Transportation
Draft PEIR 3.6-9 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
3.6.4 Methods of Analysis
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis
VMT is positively correlated with growth and as the region is expected to grow, VMT is expected to increase. However, where the growth occurs plays a significant role to determine how much the VMT will increase. Growth in areas with access to high -quality transit, a complete active transportation network, and/or complementary land use mixes are projected to be more VMT efficient.
Per the City VMT Analysis Guidelines, the VMT effi ciency for the City is the average VMT per service population. The VMT per service population is described as the daily trips originating from or ended within the study area divided by the total service population (residents plus employees).
The VMT Guidelines also established the following thresholds in determining transportation related impacts: “Thresholds shall be consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) future year VMT projections for the City’s General Plan buildout. A project’s VMT generation per service population shall be less than the City’s VMT General Plan Buildout per service population. However, feasible mitigation measures may be identified to reduce the project VMT below the thresholds.” (VMT Guidelines, P. 4) For the purposes of this transportation impact study, a Plan -to-Plan analysis was conducted by comparing the Proposed Project to the No Project Alternative.
3.6.5 Impacts and Mitigation
The following sections address various potential impacts relating to transportation that could result from implementation of the project.
3.6.5.1 Threshold 1: Circulation System Performance
Impact Analysis
Pursuant to Section 21099(b)(2) of the California Public Resources Code, “automobile delay, as described solely by LOS or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment.” Therefore, impacts on the City’s roadway network are not considered CEQA impacts pursuant to Section 21099(b)(2). This issue focuses on whether the proposed project conflicts with an adopted program, plan, ordinance, or policy related to the transportation system. For the purposes of this analysis, a significant transportation impact could occur if the proposed project would conflict with other adopted transportation programs, plans, ordinances, or policies including the City’s Circulation Element.
New development facilitated by the proposed project would increase traffic volumes in the Planning Area. Future development project would be required to comply with City’s Circulation Section 3.6: Transportation
Draft PEIR 3.6-10 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Element goals and policies. Specifically, future development projects would be required to bear responsibility for traffic system improvements necessary to mitigate the project’s significant impacts at affected intersections, concurrently with construction of such projects (CE Policy 1.1.3), complete deficiency plans to mitigate near -deficient and deficient intersections to an acceptable LOS or to prevent degrading to a worse LOS (CE Policy 1.1.4), and be responsible for constructing road improvements along all frontages abutting a public street right of way, in accordance with the design specifications for that roadway (CE Policy 3.3.1).
In addition, implementation of the proposed project would in crease demand for public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, which would require the improvement and expansion of the circulation system. The proposed Land Use Element Update and new Environmental Justice Element includes specific policies that support Circulation Element Goal 2 to provide an efficient multi-modal transportation network that meets the diverse transportation needs of existing and future residents and businesses in the Planning Area through convenient, safe, multi-modal means.
Such policies include:
LU-D.5: Promote linkages within and around mixed-use projects and areas using a multi-modal circulation network, including transit, pedestrian sidewalks, paths and paseos, and bicycle and trail networks, to ensure safe, convenient access between uses and to minimize vehicular traffic.
LU-F.1: Encourage infill development, redevelopment of underutilized sites and reuse of existing commercial and industrial buildings before expanding in undeveloped areas within the City to enhance community character, optimize infrastructure investments, support increased transit use, promote non -motorized transportation, and enhance commercial viability.
LU-F.9: Continue to utilize Specific Plans to ensure that new development achieves carefully planned comprehensive communities with a number and variety of amenities, is sustainable, provides a multi -modal transportation network, and incorporates and integrates appropriate General Plan goals, objectives, and policies.
LU-H.2: Encourage the provision of m ulti-modal access to activity centers, such as public and civic facilities, commercial centers and corridors, employment centers, schools, parks and recreation facilities, tourist attractions, and transit stops.
EJ-D.2: Work with the VVTA to encourage transit providers to establish, maintain, and increase frequency of routes to jobs, shopping, schools, daycares, parks, and healthcare facilities that are convenient to the southwest of the City, as it lacks walkable transit access and is considered disadvantaged.
Section 3.6: Transportation
Draft PEIR 3.6-11 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
EJ-D.3: Work with the VVTA to increase the frequency of the B -V Link service, particularly during the weekends.
EJ-D.4: Prioritize seeking public funding for the establishment of a transportation fare assistance program for income-qualified households.
EJ-I.2: Prioritize transportation system improvements that encourage walking, biking, and transit use.
EJ-K.3: Work with the VVTA to ensure public transportation is provided from disadvantaged areas to recreational facilities and explore incentives for carpooling and using alternative means of transportation.
In summary, implementation of the proposed project would increase traffic volumes and demand for public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, which would require the improvemen t and expansion of the circulation system. However, the Circulation Element incorporates goals, objectives, policies, and implementation measures to achieve the vision of the Circulation Element and to guide the City’s efforts to continue to build and main tain an efficient transportation and circulation infrastructure to support the community development policies.
Significance of Impact
Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with a program plan, ordinance , or policy addressing the circul ation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle , and pedestrian facilities. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts are less than significant, and mitigation measures are not required.
3.6.5.2 Threshold 2: Induction of Substantial Vehicle Miles Traveled Impact Analysis
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.3(b), an impact is considered significant if a project’s VMT generation per service population would be greater than the City’s VMT General Plan Buildout per service population.
As shown in Table 3.6-2, Victorville & San Bernardino Region VMT Metrics for Transportation Impact Analysis, with the implementation of the Proposed Project land uses, including buildout of Proposed Project land uses and the sphere of influence (SOI) area, the study area VMT per service Section 3.6: Transportation
Draft PEIR 3.6-12 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
population is reduced from 17.9 under the 2008 General Plan scenario to 17.0 under the Proposed Project scenario.
Table 3.6-2. Victorville and San Bernardino Region VMT Metrics for Transportation Impact Analysis
VMT Metric
Base Year 2008 General Plan Proposed Project
San
Bernardino
Region
Victorville
San
Bernardino
Region
Victorville
San
Bernardino
Region
Victorville
VMT/Service
Population 15.2 13.2 16.1 17.9 15.1 17.0
Source: Appendix E.
Therefore, based on the VMT Guidelines, the Proposed Project VMT per service population is less than those of the 2008 General Plan.
In addition, the Land Use Element update would promote land use and development practices that are consistent with Smart Growth principles. The Land Use Element Update includes the following specific policies to support an efficient, fiscally responsible, and sustainable growth strategy:
LU-H.1: Coordinate the land use and mobility plans and policies to reduce VMT and emphasize walking, biking, use of transit, and other types of low -emission, local-use modes of transportation as viable and affordable alternatives to the use of the personal automobile.
LU-H.2: Encourage the provision of multi -modal access to activity centers, such as public and civic facilities, commercial centers and corridors, employment centers, schools, parks and recreation facilities, tourist attractions, and transit stops.
LU-H.3: Incorporate sustainable and Smart Growth principles in all new developments and when updating existing developments to the extent possible, to minimize adverse impacts of development on air quality, traffic, open space, water quality, energy, and other resources and optimize walkability, quality of life, and community vitality.
Significance of Impact
The project does not conflict and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b). Impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts are less than significant, and mitigation measures are not required.
Section 3.6: Transportation
Draft PEIR 3.6-13 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
3.6.5.3 Threshold 3: Hazardous Design Features
Impact Analysis
The General Plan Update does not propose incompatible us es that present hazards to travel on local roadways. Buildout of the General Plan Update would involve the alteration, intensification, and redistribution of land uses in the City and SOI. The specific design and operations of individual future development projects cannot be known at this time. The Circulation Element contains a plan, roadway cross -sections and objectives and policies that are designed to reduce hazards, promote design features for local roadways consistent with City standards and accommoda te projected traffic at local intersections. Future development would be required to comply with the Circulation Element goals and policies specifically r estricting residential driveway access to arterial roadways to locations where a finding can be made t hat such access would not result in a significant safety problem, would not conflict with traffic movements , and would not result in a congestion impact (Policy 1.4.1).
Significance of Impact
Implementation of the proposed project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts are less than significant, and mitigation measures are not required.
3.6.5.4 Threshold 4: Inadequate Emergency Access
Impact Analysis
Emergency access would be evaluated on a project-by-project basis as the buildout of the proposed project occurs. Buildout of the proposed project would enhance the capacity of the roadway system by upgrading roadways and intersections, when necessary, ensure that the future dedication and acquisitions of roadways are based on projected demand, and implement the construction of paved crossover points through medians for emergency vehicles. Future development under the General Plan Update would be subject to City regulations regarding street design, site access, and internal emergency access.
Significance of Impact
Implementation of the proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access. Impacts would be less than significant.
Section 3.6: Transportation
Draft PEIR 3.6-14 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts are less than significant, and mitigation measures are not required.
3.6.6 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation
The VMT impact analysis relies on existing and future growth accommodated through the General Plan Update and accounts for the projected growth of the City and SOI. Therefore, the identified transportation and traffic impacts are inherently cumulative. As discussed under Threshold 2 VMT, with the implementation of the Proposed Project land uses, the Proposed Project VMT per service population would be less than 2008 General Plan and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore , the project would not co ntribute to a cumulative ly considerable transportation impact.
Chapter 4: Other CEQA Considerations
Draft PEIR 4-1 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Chapter 4 Other CEQA Considerations
This chapter addresses the potential for additional consequences related to the implementation of the proposed City of Victorville General Plan Update (project), pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Sections 15128 and 15126.2(e). Specifically, this chapter (1) summarizes the environmental effects of the project that were determined not to be significant during the initial environmental review process , (2) discusses the significant and unavoidable environmental effects , (3) discusses the significant and irreversible environmental changes, and (4) discusses growth-inducing impacts of the proposed project, which pertain to ways in which the proposed project could promote either direct or indirect growth.
4.1 Less Than Significant Resource Areas
An Initial Study (included as Appendix A of this Program Environmental Impact Report [PEIR]) was prepared in accordance with CEQA Guideline s, Section 15063(c), during the environmental scoping process. The Initial Study determined that no impacts or less than significant impacts would lead to environmental effects listed in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines associated with the following environmental resource areas:
Aesthetics
Agricultural and Forestry Resources
Energy
Geology and Soils
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use and Planning
Mineral Resources
Population and Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Utilities and Service Systems
Wildfire
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15128, a brief justification regarding the effects found not to be significant (e.g., the environmental resource areas not analyzed in Chapter 3, Environmental Analysis) can be found in Appendix A.
Chapter 4: Other CEQA Considerations
Draft PEIR 4-2 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
4.2 Significant Environmental Impacts
The Executive Summary and Sect ions 3.1 through 3.6 provide a comprehensive identification of the project’s significant environmental effects, including the level of significance both before and after mitigation.
4.3 Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Impacts
Section 15126.2(b) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR describe any significant impacts that could not be avoided, even with the implementation of feasible mitigation measures. The environmental effects of the project on various aspects of the environment are discussed in detail in Chapter 3 of this EIR.
These project-specific and cumulative impacts could not be avoided if the project is approved and could not be mitigated to a less than significant level. Therefore , they would remain significant and unavoidable. The remaining impacts could be mitigated to a less than significant level through the adoption of recommended mitigation measures. Thus, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required.
4.4 Significant and Irreversible Environmental Impacts
Section 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires a discussion of any significant , irreversible environmental changes that would be caused by the project. Generally, a project would result in significant, irreversible environmental impacts if the following would occur:
The project would involve a large commitment of nonrenewable resources. The primary and secondary impacts would generally commit future generations to similar uses ( e.g., a highway improvement that provides access to a previously inaccessible area).
The project would involve uses in which irreversible damage could result from any potential environmental accidents associated with the project. The proposed consumption of resources is not justified (e.g., the project invol ves the wasteful use of energy).
Uses of nonrenewable resources during the initial and continued phases of the project may be irreversible since a large commitment of such resources makes removal or nonuse thereafte r unlikely. Primary impacts and, particularly, secondary impacts (such as a highway improvement that provides access to a previously inaccessible area) generally commit future generations to similar uses. In addition, irreversible damage can result from en vironmental accidents associated with the project. Irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated to ensure that such current consumption is justified.
Chapter 4: Other CEQA Considerations
Draft PEIR 4-3 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
In general, the CEQA Guidelines refer to the need to evaluate and justify the consumption o f nonrenewable resources and the extent to which the project commits future generations to similar uses of nonrenewable resources. In addition, CEQA requires that irreversible damage resulting from an environmental accident associated with the project be evaluated.
Potential physical effects of project implementation on a programmatic level are addressed in Sections 3.1 through 3.6 of this PEIR and Appendix A. Future development in accordance with the project is a long-term, irreversible commitment of vacant parcels of land or redevelopment of existing developed land in the City and its sphere of influence. In general, conversion of parts of the Planning Area from undeveloped land to urbanized uses (paved roadways and graded lots with structures and landscaping) would represent a permanent, irreversible change to the Planning Area.
Project construction and maintenance of future buildings and infrastructure through implementation of the project would require the commitment of energy, natural resources, and building materials. Nonrenewable and limited resources that would be consumed with project development under the General Plan Update would include oil, natural gas, gasoline, lumber, sand and gravel, asphalt, aggregate, water, steel, and similar materials. No nrenewable fuels would be used by future construction equipment, haul trucks, and worker vehicles. This commitment of resources and energy would be irreversible. Post -construction consumption of nonrenewable resources would include the use of electricity, natural gas, and water by future residents, employees, and visitors. The commitment of resources required for the construction and operation of the proposed project would limit the availability of such resources for future generations or for other uses dur ing the life of the project. Given the low likelihood that the land would revert to lower intensity uses or to its current form, the proposed project would generally commit future generations to these environmental changes.
4.5 Growth Inducement
As required by Section 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR must discuss ways in which a proposed project could foster economic or population growth or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Additional ly, an EIR must discuss the characteristics of the project that could encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment either individually or cumulatively. Growth can be induced in a number of ways, such as through the elimination of obstacles to growth, the stimulation of economic activity in the region, or the establishment of policies or other precedents that directly or indirectly encourage additional growth. Under CEQA, this growth is not to be considered necess arily detrimental, beneficial, or of significant consequence. Induced growth would be considered a significant impact if it can be demonstrated that the potential growth, directly or indirectly, significantly affects the environment.
Chapter 4: Other CEQA Considerations
Draft PEIR 4-4 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
In general, a project could foster economic or population growth in a geographic area if the project removes an impediment to growth (e.g., the establishment of an essential public service, the provision of new access to an area, or a change in zoning or General Plan Amendment approval) or economic expansion or growth occurs in an area in response to the project (e.g., changes in revenue base or employment expansion). These circumstances are further described below.
4.5.1 Economic Growth
Economic effects refer to the extent to which a proposed project could cause increased activity in the local or regional economy. Economic effects can include such effects as the “multiplier effect.” A “multiplier” is an economic term used to describe interrelationships among various sectors of the economy. The multiplier effect provides a quantitative description of the direct employment effect of a project and the indirect and induced employment growth. The multiplier effect acknowledges that the on -site employment and population growth of each projec t is not the complete picture of growth caused by the project.
The project would affect the local economy through the construction of new residences that would encourage people to live in the City and would help encourage people to stay in the City to take advantage of the proximity to local shops, restaurants, and other amenities in nearby downtown Victorville. Additional indirect growth can occur as new businesses are established or existing businesses expand, thus creating new sources of employment. Incr eased commercial and residential development typically generates a secondary or indirect demand for other services, such as groceries, entertainment, and medical services, that stimulate economic activity.
In addition, Victorville residents will purchase g oods and services in the Victorville area, which could encourage the creation of new businesses and services and improve the economic viability.
Implementation of the project would enhance the economic potential of the area, which already contains underused residential and commercial land uses. Therefore, implementation of the project would not result in direct or indirect inducement of unplanned growth. Moreover, the project is growth accommodating due to the focus on underused residential and commercial land uses.
4.5.2 Population Growth
The project would serve as a comprehensive, long -term plan to document the physical development of the City and sphere of i nfluence. As discussed in Section 2.4.1.2, Proposed Buildout, in Chapter 2, Project Description, the Planning Area population will increase to 231,861 residents by 2045, an increase of 84,168 people compared to the 2020 Planning Area population.
The project is accommodating for continued growth expected in the region and is not necessarily inducing said growth . The project identifies where development may occur and is a plan to accommodate future projected growth and development in the City. While the project will provide for accommodating future growth projections, it does not, in and of itself, serve to induce future growth in the City beyond what is currently projected.
Chapter 4: Other CEQA Considerations
Draft PEIR 4-5 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Furthermore, the potential growth in the City under the project consists of infill development and intensification of existing uses in the City and would not result in the urbanization of land in a remote location. Developed areas of the City are served by an extensive network of electricity, water, sewer, storm drain, roadways, and other i nfrastructure sized to accommodate or allow for existing and planned growth. As no new major roads or highways have been proposed to provide new access to the City, the project would not be removing an impediment to growth. Instead, proposed development under the project would serve to accommodate growth that will imminently occur in the Southern California region, as captured by Southern California Association of Governments projections in previous and future updates of its Regional Transportation Plan .
Therefore, the project would not be growth inducing or set new precedent for growth but , rather, would adequately plan for expected growth.
The adverse environmental effects associated with projected growth, such as those resulting from increased traffic and increased demands on services and utilities, are analyzed in Chapter 3 and Appendix A of this PEIR.
4.5.3 Elimination of Obstacles to Growth
Elimination of obstacles to growth refers to the extent to which a proposed project removes infrastructure limitations or provides infrastructure capacity, or removes regulatory constraints that could result in growth unforeseen at the time of project approval. The elimination of either physical or regulatory obstacles to growth is considered a growth-inducing effect although not necessarily a significant one. A physical obstacle to growth typically involves the lack of public service infrastructure. The project would trigger growth if it would result in infrastructure with excess capacity or if it would remove an obstacle to growth in an area, such as providing infrastructure that was previously not available.
Development under the project would encourage development within proximity to the City center and commercial corridors and near underutilized commercial centers and aim to minimize the expansion of infrastructure. Only minor connections would be needed to accommodate new development. The added land use designations would provide housing in proximity to resident serving uses and close to transit, provide greater flexibility in types of uses to be responsive to market change, and encourage revitalization in underutilized areas of Victorville. Because no new major roads or highways have been proposed to provide new access to the City, the project would not be removing an impediment to growth. Therefore, the project would not result in the elimination of obstacles to growth that would result in growth-inducing development.
Chapter 4: Other CEQA Considerations
Draft PEIR 4-6 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
This page intentionally left blank.
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-1 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Chapter 5 Alternatives
Section 15126.6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines requires that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) describe a reasonable range of alternatives to the project that could feasibly attain most of the project objectives while avoiding or considerably reducing any of the significant impacts of the project. In addition, a “No Project” Alternative must be analyzed in the document. CEQA also requires that an environmentally superior alternative be selected from among the alternatives. The environmentally superior alternative is the alternative with the fewest or least severe adverse e nvironmental impacts. When the No Project Alternative is th e environmentally superior alternative, the EIR must also identify an environmentally superior alternative from among the other alternatives (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6[e][2]).
To comply with the purposes of CEQA, it is necessary to identify alternat ives that reduce the significant impacts that are anticipated to occur if the project is implemented while trying to meet most of the basic objectives of the project. The CEQA Guidelines emphasize a common sense approach. The alternatives shall be reasonab le, “foster informed decision making and public participation,” and focus on alternatives that avoid or substantially lessen the significant impacts of the project (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6[a]).
5.1 Summary of Impacts
A summary of the environmental imp acts resulting from implementation of the proposed City of Victorville (City or Victorville) General Plan Update (project), as disclosed in Chapter 3 , Environmental Analysis, of this EIR, is provided in Table 5-1, Summary of Impacts of the Project.
Table 5-1. Summary of Impacts of the Project
Issue Area
Proposed Project Impact Determination
Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Section 3.1, Air Quality
Threshold 1: Consistency with
Applicable Air Quality Plan LS LS
Threshold 2: Cumulative Increase in
Criteria Pollutant Emissions PS SU
Threshold 3: Sensitive Receptors PS SU
Threshold 4: Odors PS LS
Section 3.2, Biological Resources
Threshold 1: Candidate, Sensitive, or
Special-Status Species PS LS
Threshold 2: Riparian Habitat and
Other Sensitive Natural Communities LS LS
Threshold 3: Jurisdictional Aquatic
Resources PS LS
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-2 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table 5-1. Summary of Impacts of the Project
Issue Area
Proposed Project Impact Determination
Without Mitigation With Mitigation
Threshold 4: Native Resident or
Migratory Fish or Wildlife Species PS LS
Threshold 5: Conflict with Tree
Preservation Policy or Ordinance LS LS
Threshold 6: Conflict with Habitat
Conservation Plan LS LS
Section 3.3, Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Threshold 1: Historical Resources PS SU
Threshold 2: Archaeological
Resources PS LS
Threshold 3: Human Remains PS LS
Threshold 4: Tribal Cultural Resources PS LS
Section 3.4, Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Threshold 1: Generation of
Greenhouse Gas Emissions LS LS
Threshold 2: Conflict with Applicable
Plan PS SU
Section 3.5, Noise
Threshold 1: Exceedance of Noise
Standards PS
LS (Construction and Noise Sensitive
Land Use)
SU (Vehicular Noise)
Threshold 2: Excessive Groundborne
Vibration or Noise PS
LS (Vibration from Industrial Operation
and Railroad Vibration)
SU (Construction Vibration)
Threshold 3: Aircraft Noise LS LS
Section 3.6, Transportation
Threshold 1: Circulation System
Performance LS LS
Threshold 2: Induction of Substantial
Vehicle Miles Traveled LS LS
Threshold 3: Hazardous Design
Features LS LS
Threshold 4: Inadequate Emergency
Access LS LS
Notes: LS = Less than Significant Impact; NI = No Impact; PS = Potentially Significant Impact; SU = Significant and Unavoidable As shown in Table 5-1, the project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts after mitigation to the following environmental issues:
Air Quality: Cumulative Increase in Criteria Pollutant Emissions Air Quality: Sensitive Receptors
Cultural Resources: Historic Resources
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-3 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Conflict with Applicable Plan Noise: Exceedance of Noise Standards (Permanent Increase in Vehicular Noise) Noise: Excessive Groundborne Vibration or Noise (During Construction)
5.2 Project Objectives
The process of identifying potential alternatives involves consideration of the objectives for the project, which are described in Chapter 2, Project Description, and restated below:
1. Guide and accommodate future growth in Victorville in a manner that achieves the community’s vision, enhances our community’s quality of life, and provides a mix of land uses that promote sustainability and economic vitality.
2. Create a balanced lan d use pattern to accommodate Victorville’s future housing, commerce, industry, recreation and open space, education, employment, social, and health needs.
3. Create an aesthetically pleasing community by promoting a distinctive identity for Victorville.
4. Meet new statutory requirements identified in the Housing Element Update and ensure opportunities for a variety of housing types and affordability levels.
5. Create strategies to separate sources of pollution from sensitive land uses to reduce pollution exposure and improve regional air quality.
6. Promote access to public facilities and services by developing complete streets concepts throughout Victorville.
7. Protect Victorville against natural and human -made disasters by emphasizing hazard reduction through land use and development restrictions and promoting accident prevention.
5.3 Alternatives Considered but Rejected
The CEQA Guidelines state that an EIR should identify alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected , and should briefly state the reasons underlying the lead agency’s determination. Among factors used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in the EIR is the failure to meet most of the basic project objectives or inability to avoid significant environmental effects (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6[c]).
The following section describes alternatives or alternative concepts that were given consideration by the lead agency but rejected from further analysis in the EIR.
5.3.1 Reduced High Density Residential Alternative
The Reduced High Density Residential Alternative would eliminate the High Density Residential (HDR) land use and replace with Medium Density Residential (MDR ) land uses . HDR Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-4 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
development is generally typified by garden apartments and low - to mid-rise multi-family buildings and results in density of 20.1–30 dwelling units per acre. This alternative was rejected from further consideration because the proposed elimination of HDR land uses would make it infeasible to comply with the statutory requirements of the Housing Element Update (2021) and ensure opportunities for a variety of housing types and affordability levels.
5.4 Analysis of Project Alternatives Selected for Evaluation The following alternatives are analyzed in this chapter:
Alternative 1: No Project Alternative/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative 2: Reduced Density Alternative
Alternative 3: Increased Conservation Alternative
These alternatives were determined to adequately represent the range of feasible alternatives required under CEQA for the project. The No Project Alternative is included, as required by CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(e), even though it would not meet the basic project objectives .
Detailed descriptions of the alternatives are presented below, along with an evaluation of their environmental impacts.
5.4.1 Alternative 1: No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative Consistent with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(e), t he d iscussion of the No Project Alternative must examine the existing conditions and reasonably foreseeable future conditions that would exist if the project were not approved . The No Project/Existing 20 08 General Plan Alternative would leave the existing 2008 General Plan Land Use Element in place and assumes development would occur as designated in the 2008 General Plan land use map (Figure 5-1, No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative). Table 5-2, Comparison of Development Capacity of 2008 General Plan and Proposed General Plan Update, provides a summary of the development capacity under the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative compared to the project. As shown in Table 5 -2, future development under the existing General Plan would result in 21,381 more dwelling units in the City and 43,361 more units within t he sphere of influen ce (SOI). In addition, the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would result in 18,452,909 fewer square feet of non-residential development in the City but 39,087,464 more square feet within the SOI. The No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative does not include the proposed HDR land use designation nor the Greenway/Utility Corridor (GUC) and Health and Wellness Overlay (HWO). In addition, the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative maintains the existing Mixed Use-High Density land use designation and would not incorporate two new Mixed Use designations compared to the project. This alternative would also not update the Safety Element and would not include the creation of the new Environmental Justice Element consistent with current state requirements.
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-5 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table 5-2. Comparison of Development Capacity of
2008 General Plan and Proposed General Plan Update
Land Use
Designations
Existing 2008 General Plan1 Proposed Project2
Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage
City SOI City SOI City SOI City SOI
Residential1
Very Low Density
Residential 3,071 4,624 NA NA 3,715 4,420 NA NA
Low Density
Residential2 26,151 25,381 NA NA 8,387 4,534 NA NA
Low Density
Residential in
Low Density
Residential Infill
Overlay
N/A NA NA NA 22,356 NA NA NA
Low-Medium
Density
Residential
N/A NA NA NA 2,338 NA NA NA
Medium Density
Residential 2,212 0 NA NA 10,657 52 NA NA
Mixed Density
Residential 183 0 NA NA 700 NA NA NA
High Density
Residential 15,742 98 NA NA 1,274 NA NA NA
Mixed Use3
Mixed Use 715 8,549 32,927 1,407,692 NA NA NA NA
Mixed Use 1 NA NA NA NA 744 402 1,701,454 3,677,355
Mixed Use 2 NA NA NA NA 5,315 320 4,167,385 313,632
Commercial
General
Commercial NA NA 7,164,574 9,547,516 NA NA 18,825,76
1 1,398,276
Office
Professional NA NA 470,541 0 NA NA NA NA
Industrial
Light Industrial NA NA 2,078,061 4,044,158 NA NA 8,804,565 567,805 Heavy Industrial NA NA 2,067,592 2,062,951 NA NA 6,733,287 NA Public/Institutional/Open Space
Public/Institutional NA NA 1,081,239 1,068,766 NA NA 529,907 252,866 Open Space NA NA NA 101 NA NA
Greenway/Utility
Corridor NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Specific Plan
Specific Plan 36,674 15,220 4,835,282 7,166,297 7,909 605 7,252,423 0 Total 84,746 53,774 17,730,215 45,297,378 63,395 10,413 36,183,124 6,209,914 Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-6 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Source: City of Victorville 2008.
Note: SOI = sphere of influence
1 Existing General Plan capacity estimates both the maximum amount of dwelling units and employment square footage that could occur. 2 Average density is lower than the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay density range to account for existing low density residential that was developed at the lower density; Residential Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 80 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element);Mixed Use Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 67 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element).
3 Mixed Use Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 67 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element).
Impact Analysis
Air Quality
Similar to the project, the No Project/200 8 Existing General Plan Alternative would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD) attainment plan. However, the No Project/Existing 200 8 General Plan Alternative would result in greater levels of criteria air pollutant emissions and toxic air contaminants (TACs) as the project, cumulatively considerable net increase of pollutants for which the project region is in non -attainment, exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, and resulting in other emissions that could adversely affect a substantial number of people due to the an increase in residential units and non -residential square footage compared to the project.
Mitigation measures identified for the project would be applicable to this alternative ; however, due to the increase in criteria pollutant emissions and TACs, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. The No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative does not include changes to Land Use Element policies that encourage infill development and controlled growth within the City boundaries and SOI by directing focused change consistent with Smart Growth principles. In addition, the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative does include the creation of the Environmental Justice Element and would not include goals and policies that focus on reducing the health risk of disadvantaged communities, such as reducing pollution exposure and improving air quality in the region compared to the project. Under the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative, air quality impacts would be greater compared to the project and would r emain significant and unavoidable.
Biological Resources
Under the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative, biological resources impacts would be greater due to the increase in residential units and non-residential square footage in the City and SOI, compared to the project. A number of special-status plant species and special-status wildlife species are known to occur within or immediately adjacent to the City and SOI or are known to occur in the region based on historical data. In addition, sensi tive riparian communities and jurisdictional wetlands are also found within the City and SOI. Federal and state regulations would require future development projects under this alternative to assess and mitigate potential biological resources, similar to t he project. Mitigation measures identified for the project would be applicable to this alternative. Therefore, impacts on biological resources would be greater Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-7 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
compared to the project. However, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level with the incorporation of mitigation measures identified for the project.
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Cultural resource impacts are primarily associated with potential ground disturbance and development of previously undisturbed areas, or impacts to potential historic structures (building additions, demolition, etc.). Development under th e No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would be greater due to the increase in total development, including residential units and non-residential square footage, compared to the project. The potential to impact archaeological resources and tribal cultural resources would be greater due to the greater development potential of the alternative . In addition, similar to the project, this alternative would have the potential to impact historic buildings as a result of redevelopment and would remain significant and unavoidable. Therefore, impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources would be the greater compared to the project but would remain significant and unavoidable.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Under the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative o peration of the land uses would result in the generation of greater amounts of greenhouse gas ( GHG) emissions from direct sources, due to the increase in single-family residential units and non -residential square footage, compared to the project. The No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would not include an update to the Land Use Element that promotes more sustainable land use pattern s and would result decrease emission efficiency which would result in an increase in GHG emissions per capita compared to the project. Similar to the project, under the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative, the City does not have a n adopted qualified Climate Action Plan ( CAP), which is a tool to evaluate the consistency of new growth with statewide emissions reduction standards or effectively enforce feasible mitigation . The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on the importance of adopting a local CAP that meets the criteria specified in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15183.5(b), to be considered a qualified CAP that may be used for determining the significance of project GHG impacts under CEQA . Similar to the project, the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would be inconsistent with the CAP component of the 2022 Scoping Plan. The impact would remain significant and unavoidable , with no feasible mitigation measures available to mitigate the impact. Therefore, GHG impacts would be greater under the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative due to the greater development potential of the alternative compared to the project, and would remain significant and unavoidable.
Noise
Under the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative, impacts related to an increase in permanent ambient noise levels from vehicular traffic and infrastructure improvements would be greater relative to the project due to the greater development potential of the alternative, including Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-8 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
increased single-family residential units and non-residential square footage, compared to the project.
Similar to the project, implementation of the No Project/Existing 200 8 General Plan Alternative would have the potential to result in a significant impact related to ambient noise and groundborne noise during construction. Implementation of mitigation measures identified for the project would reduce noise impacts of the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative during construction.
However, feasible alternative construction methods may not be available to reduce vibration levels to below the applicable threshold and this temporary impact would remain significant and unavoidable under this alternative.
Similar to the project, implementation of the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative could result in the operation of industrial facilities that generate groundborne vibration associated with heavy mechanical equipment and place vibration sensitive receptors near freight operations, which would result in a signific ant impact. Implementation of mitigation measures similar to the project would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
Similar to the project, the No Project/Existing 200 8 General Plan Alternative Planning Area is located within the airport noise contour for the Southern California Logistics Airport (SCLA). Future development would be required to comply with both the SCLA Specific Plan and the Victorville General Plan 2030 compatibility policies and would not expose people residing or working in the Planning Area to excessive aircraft noise during construction activities or operational activities.
Overall, noise impacts would be greater under the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative due to the higher development potential of the alternative, compared to the project, and would remain significant and unavoidable.
Transportation
Future development under the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would be consistent with applicable goals and policies outlined in the 2008 Circulation Element and impacts would be less than significant. Similarly, the project would be consistent with the applicable goals and policies of the Victorville General Plan 2030 Circulation Element and would result in a less than significant impact. However, f uture total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per service population would be greater under the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative due to the less sustainable land use pattern that would result in longer trip distances, compared to the project. This impact would be less than significant under the project, but may require mitigation under the alternative. Similar to the project, the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would not result in incompatible uses tha t present hazards to travel on local roadways or inadequate emergency access. Similar to the project, future development under the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would be required to comply with the Circulation Element goals and policies to reduce hazards, promote design features for local roadways consistent with City standards, accommodate projected traffic at local intersections, and be subject to City regulations Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-9 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
regarding street design, site access, and internal emergency access. These impacts would be less than significant, similar to the project.
Overall, transportation impacts related to VMT would be greater under the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative, compared to the project, and mitigation may be required under this alternative.
Ability to Meet Project Objectives
It is important to note that the No Project/Existing 2018 General Plan Alternative does not address topics and issues pursuant to state requirements that have been adopted since the existing General Plan was approved in 2008 including the preparation of the Environmental Justice Element.
The No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would not update the Land Use Element to guide and accommodate future growth in Victorville in a manner that achieves the community’s vision, enhances quality of life, and provides a mix of land uses that promote sustainability and economic vitality ( Project Objective 1), nor would it create a balanced land use pattern to accommodate Victorville’s future housing, commerce, industry, recreation and open space, education, employment, social, and health needs ( Project Objective 2). In addition, it would not include policies to create an aesthetically pleasing community by promoting a distinctive identity for Victorville (Project Objective 3).
The No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would make it infeasible to comply with the statutory requirements identified in the Housing Element Update and ensure opportunities for a variety of housing types and affordability levels (Project Objective 4). The No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would retain the existing Mixed-Use High Density land use designation, would not promote revitalization in underutilized areas of the City and would not coordinate with the Housing Element Update to accommodate the Regional Housing Needs Allocation.
The No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative does not include an Environmental Justice Element. Without an Environmental Justice Element, the No Project/20 08 Existing General Plan Alternative would not be able to ensure that strategies are created to separate sources of pollution from sensitive land uses to reduce pollution exposure and improve regional air quality (Project Objective 5) and promote access to public facilities and services by developing complete streets concepts throughout Victorville (Project Objective 6). In addition, the No Project/Existing 20 08 General Plan Alternative does not include an update to the Safety Element and would no t be able to ensure protection of Victorville against natural and human -made disasters by emphasizing hazard reduction through land use and development restrictions and promoting accident prevention (Project Objective 7).
Therefore, the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative does not fully meet any of the project objectives.
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-10 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
5.4.2 Alternative 2: Reduced Density Alternative
The Reduced Density Alternative would remove the proposed Low Density Residential Infill Overlay. As shown on Figure 5 -2, Reduced Density Alternative, development in the area of the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay would still occur in accordance with the designated land use and would not result in an increase in density in the core area of the City . Table 5 -3, Comparison of Development Capacity of the Reduced Density Alternative and Proposed General Plan Update, provides a summary of the development capacity under the Reduced Density Alternative compared to the project. As shown in Table 5 -3, future development under the Reduced Density Alternative would result in 22,356 fewer dwelling units in the core area of the City. The Reduced Density Alternative would also include preparation of proposed new Environmental Justice Element and updated Safety Element, similar to the project.
Table 5-3. Comparison of Development Capacity of the
Reduced Density Alternative and Proposed General Plan Update Land Use
Designations
Reduced Density Alternative Proposed Project2
Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage
City SOI City SOI City SOI City SOI
Residential1
Very Low
Density
Residential
3,715 4,420 NA NA 3,715 4,420 NA NA
Low Density
Residential2 8,387 4,534 NA NA 8,387 4,534 NA NA
Low Density
Residential in
Low Density
Residential Infill
Overlay
0 NA NA NA 22,356 NA NA NA
Low-Medium
Density
Residential
2,338 NA NA NA 2,338 NA NA NA
Medium Density
Residential 10,657 52 NA NA 10,657 52 NA NA
Mixed Density
Residential 700 NA NA NA 700 NA NA NA
High Density
Residential 1,274 NA NA NA 1,274 NA NA NA
Mixed Use3
Mixed Use 1 744 402 1,701,454 3,677,355 744 402 1,701,454 3,677,355 Mixed Use 2 5,315 320 4,167,385 313,632 5,315 320 4,167,385 313,632 Commercial
General
Commercial NA NA 18,825,761 1,398,276 NA NA 18,825,761 1,398,276 Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-11 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table 5-3. Comparison of Development Capacity of the
Reduced Density Alternative and Proposed General Plan Update Land Use
Designations
Reduced Density Alternative Proposed Project2
Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage
City SOI City SOI City SOI City SOI
Industrial
Light Industrial NA NA 8,804,565 567,805 NA NA 8,804,565 567,805 Heavy Industrial NA NA 6,733,287 NA NA NA 6,733,287 NA
Public/Institutional/Open Space
Public/Institutional NA NA 529,907 252,866 NA NA 529,907 252,866 Open Space NA 101 NA NA NA 101 NA NA
Greenway/Utility
Corridor NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Specific Plan
Specific Plan 7,909 605 7,252,423 0 7,909 605 7,252,423 0 Total 41,039 10,413 36,183,124 6,209,914 63,395 10,413 36,183,124 6,209,914 Notes: SOI = sphere of influence
Buildout assumptions for 2045 are inferred from SCAG’s 2020 Final CONNECT SoCal Demographic and Growth Forecast (September 3, 2020).
1 Residential Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 80 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element). 2 Average density is lower than the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay density range to account for existing low density residential that was developed at the lower density.
3 Mixed Use Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 67 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element).
Impact Analysis
Air Quality
Similar to the project, the Reduced Density Alternative would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the MDAQMD attainment plan. In addition, similar to the project, the Reduced Density Alternative would include the proposed Environmental Justice Element that includes policies that focus on reducing the health risk of disadvantaged communities, such as reducing pollution exposure and improving air quality in the region.
The Reduced Density Alternative would result in the development of 22,356 fewer dwelling units compared to the project and would result in reduced impacts related to an increase in criteria pollutants from construction activities and operation, exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, and other emissions that could adversely affect a substantial number of people. However , it cannot be guaranteed that site -specific analysis and associated reduction measures would fully reduce construction and operational impacts. Therefore, temporary increases in criteria pollutant emissions associated with construction and permanent increases in criteria pollutant emissions from project operation would be significant and unavoidable . Similar to the project, this alternative has the potential to result in odor emissions during operation of some future projects because development under this alternative could place sensitive receptors near an Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-12 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
existing odor source, such as industrial opera tions or wastewater treatment plant and would also accommodate new industrial land uses that would have the potential to produce objectionable odors during industrial processes and manufacturing. Mitigation measures identified for the project would be appl icable to this alternative , although impacts to criteria source pollutants and TAC emissions during operation would not be fully mitigated. Overall, the Reduced Density Alternative would result in reduced air quality impacts compared to the project, but impacts to criteria source pollutants and TAC emissions during operation would remain significant and unavoidable.
Biological Resources
The Reduced Density Alternative would result in the development of 22,356 fewer dwelling units compared to the project due to the removal of the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay .
However, development in the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay area would still occur in accordance with the designated land use including commercial, residential, and public and institutional and the potential for impacts to biological resources would still occur from development of these uses . Mitigation measures identified for the project to reduce impacts to biological resources such as pre-construction nest surveys, and preparation of aquatic resource delineation would be applicable to this alternative. Furthermore, the open space and park areas would remain similar under this alternative, compared to the project. Therefore, under the Reduced Density Alternative, imp acts to biological resources would be slight reduced compared to the project but would be reduced to a less than significant level with the incorporation of mitigation measures similar to the project.
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Cultural resourc e impacts are primarily associated with potential ground disturbance and development of previously undisturbed areas, or impacts to potential historic structures (building additions, demolition, etc.). Development under the Reduced Density Alternative would result in the development of 22,356 fewer dwelling units compared to the project due to the removal of the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay . The potential to impact archaeological resources would be similar as development would still occur in accordance with the designed land uses including commercial, residential, and public and institutional . In addition, similar to the project, this alternative would have the potential to impact historic buildings as a re sult of redevelopment and those impacts would remain significant and unavoidable as mitigation measures would not adequately replace the demolished structures and would not reasonably mitigate the impacts of the demolition to less than significant because it would no longer convey its historical significance .
Therefore, under the Reduced Density Alternative, impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources would be the reduced slightly compared to the project and those impacts would be reduced but impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-13 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Under the Reduced Density Alternative , operation of the land uses would result in less GHG emissions from direct sources including emission during construction and operation emissions including vehicle emissions , due to the development of 22,356 fewer residential dwelling units compared to the project. Similar to the project, the Reduced Density Alternative would include an update to Land Use Element that promotes more sustainable land use patterns. The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on the importance of adopting a local CAP that meets the criteria specified in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15183.5(b), to be considered a qualified CAP that may be used for determining the significance of project GHG impacts under CEQA. The City does not have an adopted qualified CAP, which is a tool to evaluate the consistency of new growth with statewide emissions reduction standards or effectively enforce feasible mitigation. Similar to the project, the Reduced Density Alternative would be inconsistent with the CAP component of the 2022 Scoping Plan and would not be able to demonstrate consistency with this requirement. The impact would remain significant and unavoidable under this alternative. Therefore, overall GHG impacts would be reduced under the Reduced Density Alternative, compared to the project, but impacts associated with consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan would remain significant and unavoidable.
Noise
Under the Reduced Density Alternative, impacts related to an increase in permanent ambient noise levels as a result of vehicular traffic and infrastructure improvements would be less relative to the project due to the reduction in dwelling units compared to the project in the City center from removal of the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay. However similar to the project, future development throughout the City would have the potential to result in a significant permanent increase in vehicle noise levels. Implementation of mitigation measures identified for the project would reduce impacts from vehicle noise by implementing noise reduction measures where feasible, but impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.
Similar to the project, implementation of the Reduced Density Alternative would have the potential to result in a potentially significant impact related to ambient noise and groundborne noise during construction. Implementation of mitigation measures identified for the project would reduce impacts during construction. However, feasible alternative construction methods may not be available to reduce vibration levels to below the applicable threshold and this temporary impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
Similar to the project, implementation of the Reduced Density Alternative could resu lt in the operation of industrial facilities, which could generate groundborne vibration associated with heavy mechanical equipment and place vibration sensitive receptors near freight operations, which would result in a significant impact. Implementation of mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant, similar to the project.
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-14 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
In addition, similar to the project, the Reduced Density Alternative Planning Area is located within the airport noise contour for the SCLA. Future development would be required to comply with both the SCLA Specific Plan and the Victorville General Plan 2030 compatibility policies and would not expose people residing or working in the Planning Area to excessive noise during construction activities or operational activities resulting from aircraft noise. Therefore, noise impacts would be reduced under the Reduced Density Alternative, compared to the project, and would remain significant and unavoidable for excessive vehicular noise and construction vibration.
Transportation
Similar to the project, future development under the Reduced Density Alternative would be consistent with applicable goals and policies outlined in the current Circulation Element and impacts would be less than significant. Future total VMT per service population would be slighting higher under the Reduced Density Alternative due to the reduction in residential dwelling units in the City core . Similar to the project, the Reduced Density Alternative would not allow development of incompatible uses that present hazards to travel on local roadways and would not result in inadequate emergency access. Future development would be required to comply with the Circulation Element goals and policies to reduce hazards, p romote design features for local roadways consistent with City standards and accommodate projected traffic at local intersections and would be subject to City regulations regarding street design, site access, and internal emergency access. Therefore, transportation impacts would be greater under the Reduced Density Alternative, compared to the project.
Ability to Meet Project Objectives
The Reduced Density Alternative would not meet Project Objective 4 because the removal of the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay would not provide the City the opportunity to incentivize infill housing on vacant lands in order to provide additional housing opportunities and affordability levels as part of the statutory requirements of the Housing Element . The Reduced Density Alternative would include an update to the Land Use Element that would guide and accommodate future growth in Victorville in a manner that achieves the community’s vision, enhances our community’s quality of life however without the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay it would not provide a mix of land uses that promote sustainability and economic vitality (Project Objective 1). In addition, the Reduced Density Alternative would create a balanced land use pattern to accommodate Victorville’s comm erce, industry, recreation and open space, education, employment, social, and health needs but not its future housing needs with the removal of the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay (Project Objective 2) and create an aesthetically pleasing community by promoting a distinctive identity for Victorville ( Project Objective 3). In addition, the Reduced Density Alternative would include the creation of the Environmental Justice Element and create strategies to separate sources of pollution from sensitive la nd uses to reduce pollution exposure and improve regional air quality ( Project Objective 5) and promote access to public Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-15 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
facilities and services by developing complete streets concepts throughout Victorville ( Project Objective 6). In addition, the Reduced Density Alternative would include the update to the Safety Element and policies to protect Victorville against natural and human -made disasters by emphasizing hazard reduction through land use and development restrictions and promoting accident prevention (Project Objective 7).
5.4.3 Alternative 3: Increased Conservation Alternative The Increased Conservation Alternative would increase open space and greenways by removing portions of heavy and light industrial land uses in the northern areas of the City and designating those areas as open space (Figure 5-3, Increased Conservation Alternative). Table 5-4, Comparison of Development Capacity of the Increased Conservation Alternative and Proposed General Plan Update, provides a summary of the development capacity under the Increased Conservation Alternative compared to the project. The Increased Conservation Alternative would result in 803.48 acres of additional open space in the City and 42.01 acres of additional open space in the SOI compared to the project. As shown in Table 5-4, the increase in open space would result in a reduction of 4,515,648 square feet of light and heavy industrial uses. The Increased Conservation Alternative would also include preparation of proposed new Environmental Justice Element and updated Safety Element, similar to the project.
Table 5-4. Comparison of Development Capacity of the
Increased Conservation Alternative and Proposed General Plan Update Land Use
Designations
Increased Conservation Alternative Proposed Project2
Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage
City SOI City SOI City SOI City SOI
Residential1
Very Low
Density
Residential
3,715 4,420 NA NA 3,715 4,420 NA NA
Low Density
Residential2 8,387 4,534 NA NA 8,387 4,534 NA NA
Low Density
Residential in
Low Density
Residential Infill
Overlay
22,356 NA NA NA 22,356 NA NA NA
Low-Medium
Density
Residential
2,338 NA NA NA 2,338 NA NA NA
Medium Density
Residential 10,657 52 NA NA 10,657 52 NA NA
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-16 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table 5-4. Comparison of Development Capacity of the
Increased Conservation Alternative and Proposed General Plan Update Land Use
Designations
Increased Conservation Alternative Proposed Project2
Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage
City SOI City SOI City SOI City SOI
Mixed Density
Residential 700 NA NA NA 700 NA NA NA
High Density
Residential 1,274 NA NA NA 1,274 NA NA NA
Mixed Use3
Mixed Use 1 744 402 1,701,454 3,677,355 744 402 1,701,454 3,677,355 Mixed Use 2 5,315 320 4,167,385 313,632 5,315 320 4,167,385 313,632 Commercial
General
Commercial NA NA 18,825,76
1 1,398,276 NA NA 18,825,76
1 1,398,276
Industrial
Light Industrial NA NA 8,165,322 265,716 NA NA 8,804,565 567,805 Heavy Industrial NA NA 3,158,971 NA NA NA 6,733,287 NA
Public/Institutional/Open Space
Public/Institutional NA NA 529,907 252,866 NA NA 529,907 252,866 Open Space NA 101 NA NA NA 101 NA NA
Greenway/Utility
Corridor NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Specific Plan
Specific Plan 7,909 605 7,252,423 0 7,909 605 7,252,423 0 Total 63,395 10,413 31,969,565 5,907,825 63,395 10,413 36,183,124 6,209,914 Notes:
Buildout assumptions for 2045 are inferred from SCAG’s 2020 Final CONNECT SoCal Demographic and Growth Forecast (September 3, 2020).
1 Residential Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 80 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element). 2 Average density is lower than the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay density range to account for existing low density residential that was developed at the lower density.
3 Mixed Use Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 67 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element).
Impact Analysis
Air Quality
Similar to the project, the Increased Conservation Alternative would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the MDAQMD attainment plan. In addition, similar to the project, the Increased Conservation Alternative would prepare the Environmental Justice Element that includes policies that focus on reducing the health risk of disadvantaged communities, such as reducing pollution exposure and improving air quality in the region.
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-17 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
The Increased Conservation Alternative would result in a reduction of heavy and light industrial land uses in the northern areas of the City, compared to the project. The Increased Conservation Alternative would result in reduced impacts related to an increase in criteria pollutants from construction activities and operation, exposing sensitive receptors to substantia l pollutant concentrations, and resulting in other emissions that could adversely affect a substantial number of people due to the reduction in industrial development, which is known to result in stationary sources of pollutant emissions. While these impacts would be reduced, air quality impacts would remain significant and unavoidable because it cannot be guaranteed that site-specific analysis and associated reduction measures would fully reduce construction and operational impacts and impacts from siting new receptors near existing facilities would remain significant because not all potential sources of TAC emissions would be subject to new source review. In addition, similar to the project, this alternative has the potential to result in odor emissions du ring operation of some future projects , similar to the project. Mitigation measures identified for the project would be applicable to this alternative; however, impacts associated with criteria source pollutants and TAC emissions during operatio n would not be fully mitigated to less than significant. Therefore, the Increased Conservation Alternative would result in reduced air quality impacts compared to the project; however, air quality impacts associated with criteria source pollutants and TAC emissions during operation would remain significant and unavoidable.
Biological Resources
The Increased Conservation Alternative would result in an increase of 803.48 acres of open space in the City and an increase of 42.01 acres of open space in the SOI. As shown in Table 5 -4, the increase in open space would result in 4,515,648 fewer square feet of light and heavy industrial uses. A number of special -status plant species and special -status wildlife species are known to occur within or immediately adjacent to the City and SOI or are known to occur in the region based on historical data. Sensitive riparian communities and jurisdictional wetlands are also found within the City and SOI. Impacts to these biological resources would be reduced under the Increased Conservation Alternative due to reduced industial development and increased open space areas in the City and SOI. Federal and state regulations would require future development projects to assess and mitigate potential biological resources impacts. Mitigation measures identified for the project would be applicable to this alternative. Therefore, under the Increased Conservation Alternative, impacts to biological resources would be reduced due to reduced industial development and increased open space areas in the City and SOI , compared to the project. Impacts would be less than significant with the incorporation of mitigation measures, similar to the project.
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
The Increased Conservation Alternative would result in an increase of 803.48 acres of open space in the City and an increase of 42.01 acres of open space in the SOI. As shown in Table 5 -4, the increase in open space would result in 4,515,648 fewer square feet of light and heavy industrial Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-18 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
uses. Cultural resource impacts are primarily associated with potential ground disturbance and development of previously undisturbed areas, or impacts to potential historic structures (building additions, demolition, etc .). Impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources would be reduced under the Increased Conservation Alternative due to reduced industial development and increased open space areas in the City and SOI, which would result in less ground disturbance. In addition, similar to the project, this alternative would have the potential to impact cultural and tribal cultrual resources as a result of redevelopment and those impacts would be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of available mitigation meas ures. Similar to the project, this alternative would have the potential to impact historic buildings as a result of redevelopment and those impacts would remain significant and unavoidable as mitigation measures would not adequately replace the demolished structures and would not reasonably mitigate the impacts of the demolition to less than significant because it would no longer convey its historical significance even with implementation of available mitigation measures. Therefore, under the Increased Conservation Alternative, impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources would be the reduced compared to the project but would remain significant and avoidable.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Under the Increased Conservation Alternative, additional open space (803.48 acres in the City and
42.01 acres in the SOI) would be added to the northern portion of the City and 4,515,648 fewer square feet of light and heavy industrial uses would be developed, compared to the project. Under this alternative, operation of proposed land uses would result in less GHG emissions from direct sources including motor vehicles and truck trips, due to the decrease in industrial uses and increase in open space compared to the project. Similar to the project, the Increased Conservatio n Alternative would include an update to the Land Use Element that promotes more sustainable land use patterns and would result in a similar GHG emissions per capita compared to the project. The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on the importance of adopting a loc al CAP that meets the criteria specified in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15183.5(b), to be considered a qualified CAP that may be used for determining the significance of project GHG impacts under CEQA. The City does not have an adopted qualified CAP which is a tool to evaluate the consistency of new growth with statewide emissions reduction standards or effectively enforce feasible mitigation. Similar to the project, the Increased Conservation Alternative would be inconsistent with CAP requirement of the 2022 Scoping Plan and would not be able to demonstrate consistency with this requirement .
The impact would be significant and unavoidable under this alternative, similar to the project.
Therefore, GHG impacts would be reduced under the Increased Co nservation Alternative compared to the project; however, impacts associated with conformance with the 2022 Scoping Plan would remain significant and unavoidable.
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-19 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Noise
Under the Increased Conservation Alternative, impacts related to an increase in permanent ambient noise levels as a result of vehicular traffic and infrastructure improvements would be less relative to the project due to the reduction industrial uses compared to the project. However, similar to the project, future development in other areas o f the City would have the potential to result in a significant permanent increase in vehicle noise levels. Implementation of mitigation measures would reduce impacts from vehicle noise by implementing noise reduction measures where feasible, but impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.
Similar to the project, implementation of the Increased Conservation Alternative would have the potential to result in a significant impact related to ambient noise and groundborne noise during construction. Implementation of mitigation measures identified for the project would reduce impacts during construction. However, feasible alternative construction methods may not be available to reduce vibration levels to below the applicable threshold and this temporary impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
Under the Increased Conservation Alternative, groundborne vibration impacts associated with heavy mechanical equipment at industrial facilities would be reduced compared to the project due to the reduction in industrial land uses . However, similar to the project, the Increased Conservation Alternative could place vibration sensitive receptors near freight operations. Similar to the project, implementation of mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant.
In addition, similar to the project, the Increased Conservation Alternative Planning Area is located within the airport noise contour for the SCLA. Future development would be required to comply with both the SCLA Specific Plan and the Victorville General Plan 2030 land use compatibility policies and would not expose people residing or working in the Planning Area to excessive aircraft noise during construction activities or operational activities. Therefore, overall noise impacts would be reduced compared to the project, reduced under the Increased Conservation Alternative compared to the project; however, impacts to vehicular noise and construction vibration would remain significant and unavoidable.
Transportation
Similar to the project, future development under the Increased Conservation Alternative would be consistent with applicable goals and policies outlined in the current Circulation Element and impacts would be less than significant. In addition, future total VMT per service population would be reduced under the Increased Conservation Alternative due to the reduction in industrial uses and associated truck trips. Similar to the project, the Increased Conservation Alternative does not propose incompatible uses that present hazards to travel on local roadways and would not result in inadequate emergency access. Future development would be requ ired to comply with applicable Circulation Element goals and policies to reduce hazards, promote design features for local Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-20 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
roadways consistent with City standards, accommodate projected traffic at local intersections, and would be subject to City regulatio ns regarding street design, site access, and internal emergency access. Therefore, transportation impacts would be reduced under the Increased Conservation Alternative, compared to the project. Impacts would be less than significant.
Ability to Meet Project Objectives
The Increased Conservation Alternative would not meet Project Objective 1 as it would not, to the same degree as the project, provide a mix of land uses that promote economic vitality due to the reduction in industrial development capacity. The Increased Conservation Alternative would also not meet Project Objective 2, as it would not create a balanced land use pattern to accommodate Victorville’s future housing, commerce, industry, recreation and open space, education, employment, social , and health needs due to the reduction in industrial development capacity within the Planning Area compared to the project.
The Increased Conservation Alternative would cr eate an aesthetically pleasing community by promoting a distinctive identity for Victorville (Project Objective 3) and would meet new statutory requirements identified in the Housing Element Update and ensure opportunities for a variety of housing types and affordability levels (Project Objective 4).
In addition, the Increased Conservatio n Alternative would include the creation of the Environmental Justice Element and create strategies to separate sources of pollution from sensitive land uses to reduce pollution exposure and improve regional air quality ( Project Objective 5) and promote ac cess to public facilities and services by developing complete streets concepts throughout Victorville (Project Objective 6). In addition, the Increased Conservation Alternative would include the update to the Safety Element and policies to protect Victorville against natural and human-made disasters by emphasizing hazard reduction through land use and development restrictions and promoting accident prevention (Project Objective 7).
5.5 Environmentally Superior Alternative
An EIR is required to identify the environmentally superior alternative, which is the alternative having the potential for the fewest environmental impacts, from among the range of reasonable alternative that are evaluated. Table 5-5, Comparison of Potenti ally Significant Impacts for Alternatives to the Project, provides a summary comparison of the alternatives with the project to highlight if each alternative would result in a similar, increased or decreased impact compared to the project. In addition, Tab le 5-6, Ability of Project Alternative to Meet the Project Objectives , provides a summary comparison of the alternatives with the project to determine if each alternative would meet the objectives of the project.
As shown in Table 5 -5, the level of environ mental impacts associated with the Increased Conservation Alternative is overall less than the project. This alternative would reduce impacts to Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-21 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Noise and Transportation. Therefore, the Increased Conservation Alternative would be considered the environmentally superior alternative, although it would only meet five of the seven project objectives.
Table 5-5. Comparison of Potentially Significant Impacts for Alternatives to the Project
Impact
Proposed Project Alternatives
Without
Mitigation With Mitigation
No Project/
Existing 2008
General Plan
Reduced
Density
Increased
Conservation
Section 3.1, Air Quality
Threshold 1: Consistency with
Applicable Air Quality Plan LS LS = = =
Threshold 2: Cumulative
Increase in Criteria Pollutant
Emissions
PS SU > < <
Threshold 3: Sensitive
Receptors PS SU > < <
Threshold 4: Odors PS LS > < <
Section 3.2, Biological Resources
Threshold 1: Candidate,
Sensitive, or Special-Status
Species
PS LS > < <
Threshold 2: Riparian Habitat
and Other Sensitive Natural
Communities
LS LS = < <
Threshold 3: Jurisdictional
Aquatic Resources PS LS > < <
Threshold 4: Native Resident or
Migratory Fish or Wildlife
Species
PS LS > < <
Threshold 5: Conflict with Tree
Preservation Policy or
Ordinance
LS LS = = =
Threshold 6: Conflict with
Habitat Conservation Plan LS LS = = =
Section 3.3, Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Threshold 1: Historical
Resources PS SU > < <
Threshold 2: Archaeological
Resources PS LS > < <
Threshold 3: Human Remains PS LS > < <
Threshold 4: Tribal Cultural
Resources PS LS > < <
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-22 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table 5-5. Comparison of Potentially Significant Impacts for Alternatives to the Project
Impact
Proposed Project Alternatives
Without
Mitigation With Mitigation
No Project/
Existing 2008
General Plan
Reduced
Density
Increased
Conservation
Section 3.4, Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Threshold 1: Generation of
Greenhouse Gas Emissions LS LS > < <
Threshold 2: Conflict with
Applicable Plan PS PS = = =
Section 3.5, Noise
Threshold 1: Exceedance of
Noise Standards PS
LS
(Construction
and Noise
Sensitive Land
Use)
SU (Vehicular
Noise)
> < <
Threshold 2: Excessive
Groundborne Vibration or Noise PS
LS (Vibration
from Industrial
Operation and
Railroad
Vibration).
= < <
Threshold 3: Aircraft Noise LS LS = = =
Section 3.6, Transportation
Threshold 1: Circulation System
Performance LS LS = = =
Threshold 2: Induction of
Substantial Vehicle Miles
Traveled
LS LS > < <
Threshold 3: Hazardous Design
Features LS LS = = =
Threshold 4: Inadequate
Emergency Access LS LS = = =
Notes: LS = Less than Significant Impact; NI = No Impact; PS = Potentially Significant Impact; SU = Significant and Unavoidable
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-23 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table 5-6. Ability of Project Alternative to Meet the Project Objectives Project Objectives
Ability of Alternatives to Meet the Project Objectives
No Project/Existing 2018
General Plan Reduced Density Increased Conservation
Guide and accommodate future
growth in Victorville in a manner that
achieves the community’s vision,
enhances our community’s quality
of life, and provides a mix of land
uses that promote sustainability and
economic vitality.
No Partial No
Create a balanced land use pattern
to accommodate Victorville’s future
housing, commerce, industry,
recreation and open space,
education, employment, social, and
health needs.
No Partial No
Create an aesthetically pleasing
community by promoting a
distinctive identity for Victorville.
Yes Yes Yes
Meet new statutory requirements
identified in the Housing Element
Update and ensure opportunities for
a variety of housing types and
affordability levels.
No No Yes
Create strategies to separate sources
of pollution from sensitive land uses to
reduce pollution exposure and
improve regional air quality.
No Yes Yes
Promote access to public facilities
and services by developing
complete streets concepts
throughout Victorville.
No Yes Yes
Protect Victorville against natural and
human-made disasters by
emphasizing hazard reduction through
land use and development restrictions
and promoting accident prevention.
No Yes Yes
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-24 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
This page intentionally left blank.
Date: 8/18/2022 - Last saved by: Randy.Deodat - Path: C:\GIS\Projects\City of Victorville\GeneralPlanUpdate\Map Docs\EIR\Section 5\F igure5_1_NoProjectAlt.mxd UV18
£¤395
§¨¦15
£¤66
Victorville General Plan Update
City of Victorville
Victorville Sphere of Influence
GPLU
Very Low Density Residential (up to 2 ud/ac)
Low Density Residential (2.1-5 du/ac)
Low Medium Density Residential (6-12 du/ac)
Medium Density Residential (12.1-20 du/ac)
High Density Residential (20.1-30 du/ac)
Mixed Density Residential (1-15 du/ac)
Mixed-Use
Commercial
Light Industrial
Heavy Industrial
Open Space
Public/Institutional
Specific Plan
No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative
Source: City of Victorville 2022. ESRI 2022.
Figure 5-1
±
0 21
Miles
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-26 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
This page intentionally left blank.
Date: 8/18/2022 - Last saved by: Randy.Deodat - Path: C:\GIS\Projects\City of Victorville\GeneralPlanUpdate\Map Docs\EIR\Section 5\F igure5_2_ReducedDensity.mxd Adelanto
Hesperia
UV18
£¤395
§¨¦15
£¤66
Victorville General Plan Update
City of Victorville
Victorville Sphere of Influence
GPLU Overlays
Health & Wellness Overlay (up to 30
GPLU
Very Low Density Residential (up to 2
Low Density Residential (2.1-5 du/ac)
Low Medium Density Residential (6-12
Medium Density Residential (12.1-20
High Density Residential (20.1-30
Mixed Density Residential (1-15 du/ac)
Mixed-Use 1 (up to 15 du/ac)
Mixed-Use 2 (15.1-30 du/ac)
Commercial
Light Industrial
Heavy Industrial
Open Space
Greenway/Utility Corridor
Greenway/Utility Corridor PC
Public/Institutional
Specific Plan
Reduced Density Alternative
Source: Draw Tap GIS 2022. ESRI 2022.
Figure 5-2
±
0 21
Miles
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-28 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
This page intentionally left blank.
Date: 8/18/2022 - Last saved by: Randy.Deodat - Path: C:\GIS\Projects\City of Victorville\GeneralPlanUpdate\Map Docs\EIR\Section 5\F igure5_3_ConservationAlt.mxd UV18
£¤395
§¨¦15
£¤66
Victorville General Plan Update
City of Victorville
Victorville Sphere of Influence
GPLU Overlays
Low Density Residential Infill Overlay (up to 9 du/ac)
Health & Wellness Overlay (up to 30 du/ac)
GPLU
Very Low Density Residential (up to 2 ud/ac)
Low Density Residential (2.1-5 du/ac)
Low Medium Density Residential (6-12 du/ac)
Medium Density Residential (12.1-20 du/ac)
High Density Residential (20.1-30 du/ac)
Mixed Density Residential (1-15 du/ac)
Mixed-Use 1 (up to 15 du/ac)
Mixed-Use 2 (15.1-30 du/ac)
Commercial
Light Industrial
Heavy Industrial
Open Space
Greenway/Utility Corridor
Greenway/Utility Corridor PC
Public/Institutional
Specific Plan
Increased Conservation Alternative
Source: Draw Tap GIS 2022. ESRI 2022.
Figure 5-3
±
0 21
Miles
Chapter 5: Alternatives
Draft PEIR 5-30 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
This page intentionally left blank.
Chapter 6: List of Preparers and Agencies Consulted
Draft PEIR 6-1 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Chapter 6 List of Preparers and Agencies Consulted
This chapter lists the lead agency and consultants who prepared this Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) and technical reports and the agencies that provided information used in the preparation of this PEIR.
6.1 Environmental Impact Report Preparation
6.1.1 Lead Agency
City of Victorville
Scott Webb, City Planner
Alex Jauregui, Senior Planner
Melissa Nelson
6.2 Lead Consultant
Harris & Associates
Dima Galkin, Senior Project Manager
Nathaniel Cayabyab, Analyst
Michael Rupić, Sustainability Analyst
Irlanda Martinez, Project Manager
CityPlace Planning, Inc.
Claudia Tedford, AICP, Principal
Patricia Bluman, Senior Associate
6.2.1 Environmental Planning
Harris & Associates
Ryan Binns, PMP, ENV SP, Project Director/Technical Reviewer Kristin Blackson, PMP, Senior Project Manager
Kelsey Hawkins, Associate/Deputy Project Manager
Esther Daigneault, Senior Environmental Analyst
Emily Mastrelli, Senior Biologist
Chapter 6: List of Preparers and Agencies Consulted
6-2 September 2022 Draft PEIR
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Katie Laybourn, Biologist/Environmental Analyst
Sharon Toland, Senior Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Noise Specialist Randy Deodat, GIS Analyst
Lindsey Messner, Technical Editor
6.2.2 Technical Consultants
Red Tail Environmental
Shelby Castells, Senior Project Manager
Spencer Bietz, Senior Archaeologist
Chen Ryan Associates
Monique Chen, PE, Principal
Jonathan Sanchez, PE, Traffic Engineer
Phuong Nguyen, PE, Senior Traffic Engineer
Chapter 7: References
Draft PEIR 7-1 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Chapter 7 References
Chapter 1: Introduction
City of Victorville. 2008. Victorville General Plan 2030 Environmental Impact Report.
Chapter 2: Project Description
City of Victorville. 2008. Victorville General Plan 2030. October 21.
Section 3.1: Air Quality
CARB (California Air Resources Board). 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. April.
CARB. 2022a. “Inhalable Particulate Matter and Health (PM2.5 and PM10).” Accessed September 2022. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/inhalable-particulate-matter-and-health.
CARB. 2022b. “Top 4 Summary.” iADAM Air Quality Data Statistics. Accessed September 2022. https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfour1.php.
County of San Bernardino. 2019. San Bernardino Countywide Draft Plan Draft Program EIR. June.
OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration ). 2013. Hazard Alert – Diesel Exhaust/Diesel Particulate Matter. January.
SCAQMD (South Coast Air Quality Management District). 2015. Amicus Curiae Brief of South Coast Air Quality Management District. April. Accessed September 2022. https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/9-s219783-ac-south-coast-air-quality-mgt-dist- 041315.pdf.
SJVAPCD (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District). 2015. Amicus Curiae Brief of San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District. April. Accessed September 2022. https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/7-s219783-ac-san-joaquin-valley-unified-air- pollution-control-dist-041315.pdf.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2016. “Basic Information About Carbon Monoxide (CO) Outdoor Pollution.” Last updated September 8. Accessed September 2022. https://www.epa.gov/co-pollution/basic-information-about-carbon-monoxide-co-outdoor- air-pollution#What%20is%20CO.
USEPA. 2019a. “Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Pollution.” Last updated June 13. Accessed September 2022. https://www.epa.gov/no2-pollution.
USEPA. 2019b. “Sulfur Dioxide Basics.” Last updated April 2. Accesse d September 2022 . https://www.epa.gov/so2-pollution/sulfur-dioxide-basics#what%20is%20so2.
USEPA. 2021. “Ground-Level Ozone Basics.” Last updated January 14. Accessed September 2022. https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/ground-level-ozone-basics#formation.
Chapter 7: References
Draft PEIR 7-2 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Section 3.2: Biological Resources
BLM (Bureau of Land Management). 1980. The California Desert Conservation Area Plan, as amended. Accessed September 2022. https://eplan ning.blm.gov/public_projects/lup/ 66949/82080/96344/CDCA_Plan.pdf.
BLM. 2004. Environmental Impact Report and Statement for the West Mojave Plan – A Habitat Conservation Plan and California Desert Conservation Area Plan Amendment, Volumes 1 and 2. Final. B LM/CA/ES-2004-005 + 1790 -1600. Accessed September 2022. https://eplanning.blm.gov/public_projects/lup/72544/97517/117675/wemo_plan _vol-1_2004.pdf.
Calflora. 2022. “Information on Wild California Plants.” Database. Accessed September 2022. https://www.calflora.org/.
CDFW. 2022a. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), RareFind 5, commercial version.
Accessed September 2022. https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps-and-Data.
CDFW. 2022b. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS). Database. Accessed September 2022. https://apps.wildlife.ca.gov/bios/.
City of Victorville. 2008. Victorville General Plan 2030. October 21.
CNPS (California Native Plant Society). 2022. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California.
Online edition, v9-01 1.5. Accessed September 2022. http://www.rareplants.cnps.org.
Holland, Robert F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. California Department of Fish and Game. October.
USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2022. National Wetlands Inventory Wetlands Mapper.
Accessed September 2022. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html.
Section 3.3: Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources City of Victorville. 2008. Victorville General Plan 2030. October 21.
National Park Service (NPS). 2022. Roots of the National Historic Landmarks Program. Accessed September 2022. https://www.nps.gov/articles/roots -of-the-national-historic-landmarks- program.htm.
NPS. 2022. National Register Bulletin 15.
Sutton, Mark Q., Mark E. Basgall, Jill K. Garnder, and Mark W. Allen. 2007. Advances in Understanding Mojave Desert Prehistory. In California Prehistory Colonization, Culture, and Complexity. Edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar. Alta Mira Press, Plymouth, U.K.
Section 3.4: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
BAAQMD (Bay Area Air Quality Management District). 2022. Justification Report: CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts From Land Use Projects and Plans. April.
Chapter 7: References
Draft PEIR 7-3 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
CARB (California Air Resources Board). 2014. First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan:
Building on the Framework Pursuant to AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. May.
CARB. 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Sacramento, CA. November 2017.
CARB. 2022. Draft 2022 Scoping Plan Update. Sacramento, CA. May 10, 2022.
City of Victorville. 2015. City of Victorville Climate Action Plan. September.
City of Victorville. 2020. Southern California Logistics Airport (SCLA) Specific Plan Amendment (PLAN19-00004) Subsequent Program Environmental Impact Report. December 2020.
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2020. 2025 -2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy – Connect SoCal. September 3.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2022. “Overview of Greenhouse Gases”. Last updated on May 16, 2022. Accessed September 2022. https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/ overview-greenhouse-gases#CO2-references.
Section 3.5: Noise
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. September.
City of Escondido. 2012. Escondido General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report. Final.
April 23. Accessed March 2021. https://www.escondido.org/general-plan-update.aspx.
City of Victorville. 2008. Victorville General Plan 2030. October 21.
City of Victorville. 2021. Southern California Logistics Airport Specific Plan. February.
FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). 2008. Roadway Construction Noise Model. Version 1.1.
FTA (Federal Transit Administration). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. FTA Report No. 0123. Prepared by John A. Volpe, National Transportation Systems Center. September. Accessed September 2022 . https://www.transit.dot.gov /sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration- impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf.
Gordon Bricken & Associates. 2012. Acoustical Analysis for the Bundy Canyon Si te, City of Wildomar. January 17.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1974. Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety. 550/9-74-004. March.
USEPA. 2020. Laws and Regulations – Summary of the Noise Control Act. Page last updated July 31.
Accessed September 2022. https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-noise-control-act.
Chapter 7: References
Draft PEIR 7-4 September 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Section 3.6: Transportation
City of Victorville. 2008. Victorville General Plan 2030. October 21.
Chapter 5: Alternatives
City of Victorville. 2008. Victorville General Plan 2030. October 21.
PLAN21-00034 Draft Program
Environmental Impact Report (PEIR)
PEIR Appendix A, B, C, D, & E, and
the Notice of Availably are located at the following location:
https://www.victorvilleca.gov/government/city-
departments/development/planning/environmental-review-notices
City Council
Resolution No. 22-124
Exhibit “B”
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding
Considerations
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement
of Overriding Considerations
City of Victorville General Plan Update
SCH No. 2021100136
November 2022
Prepared for:
City of Victorville
14343 Civic Drive
Victorville, California, 92392
Contact: Scott Webb
Prepared by:
600 B Street, Suite 2000
San Diego, California 92101
(619) 236-1778
Contact: Kristin Blackson, PMP
This page intentionally left blank.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR i November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 Section 1 Project Description ................................................................................................ 3
1.1 Project Location ............................................................................................... 3
1.2 Project Objectives ............................................................................................ 3
1.3 Project Components ........................................................................................ 4
1.3.1 Land Use Element Update ................................................................... 4
1.3.2 Proposed Land Use Designations ....................................................... 4
1.3.3 Safety Element Update ...................................................................... 11
1.3.4 Environmental Justice Element ......................................................... 11 Section 2 Environmental Procedures .................................................................................. 13
2.1 Lead Agency .................................................................................................. 13
2.2 Environmental Impact Report ........................................................................ 13
2.3 Public Participation ........................................................................................ 13
2.4 Record of Proceedings .................................................................................. 13 Section 3 Findings Under CEQA .......................................................................................... 15
3.1 Purpose ......................................................................................................... 15
3.2 Terminology ................................................................................................... 15
3.3 Legal Effect .................................................................................................... 17
3.4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ............................................... 17
3.5 Certification of the Final PEIR ....................................................................... 17 Section 4 Findings Regarding Direct, Indirect, or Cumulative Significant or Potentially Significant Effects ............................................................................. 19
4.1 Air Quality ...................................................................................................... 19
4.1.1 Threshold 2: Cumulative Increase in Criteria Pollutant ...................... 19
4.1.2 Threshold 3: Sensitive Receptors ...................................................... 20
4.1.3 Threshold 4: Odors ............................................................................ 21
4.2 Biological Resources ..................................................................................... 22
4.2.1 Threshold 1: Candidate, Sensitive, or Special-Status Species .......... 22
4.2.2 Threshold 3: Wetlands ....................................................................... 22
4.3 Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources ....................................... 23
4.3.1 Threshold 1: Historical Resources ..................................................... 23
4.3.2 Threshold 2: Archaeological Resources ............................................ 24
4.3.3 Threshold 3: Human Remains ........................................................... 26
4.3.4 Threshold 4: Tribal Cultural Resources ............................................. 26
4.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions .......................................................................... 27
4.4.1 Threshold 2: Conflict with Applicable Plan ......................................... 27 CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR ii November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
4.5 Noise ............................................................................................................. 29
4.5.1 Threshold 1: Excessive Noise Levels ................................................ 29
4.5.2 Threshold 2: Excessive Groundborne Vibration or Noise .................. 30
4.5.3 Cumulative Considerable Excessive Noise Levels ............................ 32 Section 5 Findings Regarding Project Alternatives ........................................................... 33 Section 6 Statement of Overriding Considerations ........................................................... 43 Tables
Table 1. Proposed Victorville General Plan Update Land Use Designations ............................... 5 Table 2. Victorville General Plan Update Land Use Distribution ................................................... 9 Table 3. Proposed Victorville General Plan Update Development Capacity .............................. 10 Table 4. Comparison of Existing 2008 General Plan and Proposed General Plan Update ........ 11 Table 5. Comparison of Development Capacity of 2008 General Plan and Proposed General Plan Update ....................................................................................................... 34 Table 6. Comparison of Development Capacity of the Reduced Density Alternative and Proposed General Plan Update ...................................................................................... 37 Table 7. Comparison of Development Capacity of the Increased Conservation Alternative and Proposed General Plan Update ...................................................................................... 39 Attachments
Attachment 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 1 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Introduction
The City of Victorville (Victorville or City) hereby makes the following Findings concerning the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (Final PEIR) (SCH No. 2021100136) for the proposed City of Victorville General Plan Update (project), pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code , Section 21000 et seq. ) and its implementing regulations, the CEQA Guidelines (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15000 et seq.).
The Final PEIR prepared for the project consists of an Errata summarizing corrections and revisions made to the Draft PEIR, comments received on the Draft PEIR and the City’s responses to those comments, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 2 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
This page intentionally left blank.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 3 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Section 1 Project Description
1.1 Project Location
The City is in the southwestern portion of the County of San Bernardino in the geographic sub-region of the southwestern Mojave Desert (known as Victor Valley or the High Desert), within the Inland Empire area, as shown on Figure 2 -1, Regional Location, in the Draft PEIR. The City is considered the largest metropolitan area in the Mojave Dese rt. Victorville is approximately 90 miles northeast of the City of Los Angeles, 35 miles northeast of the City of San Bernardino, and north of the San Bernardino Mountains at the edge of the Mojave Desert. The Mojave River runs through the City toward the Mojave Desert. Areas surrounding the City’s Planning Area are largely undeveloped and contained within the unincorporated County of San Bernardino boundaries.
The City is within Victor Valley, often referred to as the “High Desert” due to its approx imate elevation of 2,900 feet above mean sea level. The Victor Valley is separated from other urbanized areas in Southern California by the San Bernardino and San Gabriel Mountains. The City and its sphere of influence (SOI) are accessible via Interstate 15, U.S. Route 395, State Route 18, and historic U.S. Route 66 (Figure 2-2, Project Location, in the Draft PEIR).
1.2 Project Objectives
The City’s project objectives for the project are as follows:
1. Guide and accommodate future growth in Victorville in a manner that achieves the community’s vision, enhances our community’s quality of life, and provides a mix of land uses that promote sustainability and economic vitality.
2. Create a balanced land use pattern to accommodate Victorville ’s future housing, commerce, industry, recreation and open space, education, employment, social, and health needs.
3. Create an aesthetically pleasing community by promoting a distinctive identity for Victorville.
4. Meet new statutory requirements identified in the Housing Element Update and ensure opportunities for a variety of housing types and affordability levels.
5. Create strategies to separate sources of pollution from sensitive land uses to reduce pollution exposure and improve regional air quality.
6. Promote access to public facilities and services by developing com plete streets concepts throughout Victorville.
7. Protect Victorville against natural and human -made disasters by emphasizing hazard reduction through land use and development restrictions and promoting accident prevention.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 4 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
1.3 Project Components
The project prop oses updates to the Land Use and Safety Elements and the creation of a new Environmental Justice Element as a stand-alone chapter in the Victorville General Plan 2030. Each project component is described below.
1.3.1 Land Use Element Update
The Land Use Element of the General Plan provides long -term goals and policies that guide the City’s future housing, commerce, industry, recreation and open space, education, employment, social, and health needs. The update would promote land use and development pract ices that are consistent with Smart Growth principles to conserve natural resources and reduce pollution and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The update would encourage economic development strategies by providing an appropriate mix of land uses to allow growth and employment to support the City as a major regional center for business and commerce in the Victor Valley. It would encourage development within proximity to the City center and commercial corridors and near underutilized commercial centers and aim to minimize the expansion of infrastructure. The updated Land Use Element would include a significant increase in open space with the addition of the Greenway/Utility Corridor (GUC). The proposed update would provide a clear guide for future growth identified in the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update (2021), which the City prepared in a separate, independent process from this General Plan Update. The Land Use Element Update would ensure equitable policies and opportunities for a vari ety of housing types and affordability levels in the City. It would expand the types of housing in Victorville to accommodate people of all ages, socioeconomic statuses, family sizes, and abilities.
1.3.2 Proposed Land Use Designations
As shown in Table 1 , Proposed Victorville General Plan Update Land Use Designations , the proposed Land Use Element Update would include changes to the existing land use designations, which establish the general pattern of land uses in the Planning Area and would identify maximum permitted land use densities and intensities. The Land Use Element Update would establish 16 land use designations (14 primary land use designations and two overlay designations) that govern land uses in the Planning Area as shown in Table 1. These designations apply density and intensity requirements, use characteristics, and land use policies to individual parcels.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 5 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table 1. Proposed Victorville General Plan Update Land Use Designations Land Use Designations Definition Density/Intensity Standards1 Residential
Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) Generally characterized by single- family detached homes on lots with a
minimum area of one-half acre, which
allows for a maximum of two dwelling
units per acre.
Density: 0–2 du/ac
Low Density Residential (LDR) Generally characterized by single- family detached residential
development.
Density: 0–5 du/ac
Low-Medium Density Residential
(LMDR)
Generally typified by single-family
detached units; duplex, triplex, and
fourplex structures; patio homes,
cottage/bungalow court housing, and
attached townhomes.
Density: 5.1–12 du/ac
Medium Density Residential (MDR)2 Generally characterized by cottage/bungalow court housing,
attached townhomes, and garden
apartments.
Density: 12.1–20 du/ac
High Density Residential (HDR) Generally typified by garden apartments and low- to mid-rise multi-
family buildings.
Density: 20.1–30 du/ac
Mixed Density Residential (MXDR) Intended to facilitate single-family infill development in the event that
extraordinary developmental
constraints, such as a lack of required
sewer infrastructure, make the
continued development of the permitted
high-density uses impractical or
infeasible. Residential development in
the Mixed Density Residential land use
category ranges from single-family
detached units to multi-family attached
units, such as apartments. The MXDR
zone district corresponds to this
General Plan land use designation.
Density: 1–15 du/ac for infill
Mixed Use
Mixed Use 1 (MU-1)2 Provides for a mix of neighborhood- and community-serving commercial,
service, and other complementary and
supportive uses with a variety of lower
to medium density housing to
encourage infill development and/or
revitalization of existing areas. “Big box”
retailers prohibited. Mix of uses can be
vertical or horizontal. MU-1 allows
mixed-use, stand-alone commercial,
and stand-alone residential.
Density: 0–15 du/ac
Non-Residential FAR: 0.5
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 6 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table 1. Proposed Victorville General Plan Update Land Use Designations Land Use Designations Definition Density/Intensity Standards1 Mixed Use 2 (MU-2)2 Provides for a mix of neighborhood- and community-serving commercial,
service, and other complementary and
supportive uses with a variety of
medium- to high-density housing to
encourage infill development and/or
revitalization of existing areas. Provides
flexibility to support changing land use
trends. “Big box” retailers prohibited.
Accommodates lower-income Regional
Housing Needs Allocation default
density. Mix of uses can be vertical or
horizontal. MU-2 allows mixed-use,
stand-alone commercial, and stand-
alone residential.
Density: 15.1–30 du/ac
Non-Residential FAR: 1.0
Commercial
General Commercial (GC) Provides for a wide range of retail commercial, service commercial, and
office commercial activities, as well as
large-scale planned shopping districts
serving the local and regional area and
population, “big box” retailers,
motels/hotels, and public assembly
uses.
FAR: 2.0 (Note: Certain uses, such as
hotels and convention centers, may be
increased on a case-by-case basis.)
Industrial
Light Industrial (LI) This category of land use is
characterized by industrial development
either in industrial and/or business
parks or in mixed industrial/business
park use areas. The main feature of
industrial activities in this category is
that they do not require any significant
site or structure requirements that are
so specialized that would limit future
use of the structures and/or site by
another industrial activity.
FAR: 1.0
Heavy Industrial (HI) The Heavy Industrial land use category refers to industrial and manufacturing
uses that are more specialized in nature
and require special consideration in terms
of use of the property as well as impacts
on adjacent properties.
FAR: 1.0
Public/Institutional/Open Space
Public/Institutional (P-I) Refers to those land uses and activities that are predominately used for public
purposes or owned or operated by a
public entity. Activities within this category
include city and county buildings, public
and private schools, colleges, and public
utilities and city yards.
FAR: Development intensity determined
on a case-by-case basis
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 7 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table 1. Proposed Victorville General Plan Update Land Use Designations Land Use Designations Definition Density/Intensity Standards1 Open Space (OS) Refers to land that is to remain
undeveloped due to severe
development constraints, lake or river
bodies and floodplains, and reserved
public open space in parks, golf
courses, or other lands with an open
space character that protect public
safety and/or conserve public
resources. The purpose of this district is
to provide for the protection of the
public health, safety, and general
welfare in those areas of the City that,
under present conditions, are subject to
periodic flooding and accompanying
hazards and to conserve natural
resources of benefit to the general
public interest.
FAR: NA
Minimum Density: 1 du/5 ac on property
outside the floodplain
Greenway/Utility Corridor (GUC)2 Areas outside the floodplain are permitted one single-family dwelling on
a 5-acre minimum lot and agricultural
uses.
FAR: NA
Overlays
Low Density Residential Infill Overlay
(LDRIO)2
Applies to VLDR and LDR properties in
the area included within the overlay.
Allows increase in density in core area
of the City to:
• Encourage infill and promote
efficient use of existing infrastructure
• Provide additional housing
opportunities
0–9 du/ac3
Health and Wellness Overlay (HWO)2
Promotes health and wellness for all
segments of the community, (local and
regional-serving), including those who
are ill, those who are aging, and health-
conscious individuals of all ages.
Applies to existing and proposed
hospitals/medical facilities.
Allows public and private hospitals,
medical centers and supportive offices,
emerging medical facilities, healthcare
clinics, community centers, extended
care and nursing facilities, pharmacies,
24/7 centers (e.g., imaging, dialysis,
etc.), senior housing, daycare (adult,
child, specialized), Alzheimer’s care
and living, restaurants and juice bars,
grocery stores, other support retail,
gyms and fitness studios, and
recreation/trails.
Density: 20–30 du/ac
FAR: 2.0
(Note: Density and FAR may be
modified based on approval of an
implementing planned unit
development.)
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 8 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table 1. Proposed Victorville General Plan Update Land Use Designations Land Use Designations Definition Density/Intensity Standards1 Allows a range of housing integrated
into the development.
Functions as a sustainability hub,
promoting active transportation, green
infrastructure, open space, electric
vehicle charging stations, edible
landscaping, and composting.
Requires an integrated development via
a planned unit development to use
overlay.
Specific Plan
Specific Plan The Land Use Element provides for a
number of Specific Plans within the
City. The Specific Plans identify the
location, extent, and density of new
development and also indicate specific
development standards that are
applicable.
All land uses, densities, other
regulations, and development
standards shall be those as set forth in
the adopted Specific Plan.
Notes: du = dwelling unit; FAR = floor area ratio
1 Denotes new land use designation.
2 Density, expressed as dwelling units per acre (du/ac), refers to the allowable residential density range for a stand-alone residential or the residential portion of a mixed -use project, not including any density bonus as allowed per California Government Code , Sections 65915–65918, and the Victorville Zoning Code. Intensity, expressed as FAR, refers to the maximum non-residential square footage allowed on a site including Mixed Use designations, unless otherwise approved by the applicable City reviewing author ity. 3 Maximum allowable density may be reduced to 7 du/ac unless certain design/amenity benchmarks are met, pursuant to the Zoning Code.
A new High Density Residential land use designation was added to accommodate default density for affordable housing to implement the 6th Cycle Housing Element. The Land Use Element removes the existing Mixed Use-High Density land use designation and added two new Mixed Use designations. The added designations would provide housing in proximity to resident-serving uses and close to transit, provide greater flexibility in types of uses to be responsive to market change, encourage revitalization in underutilized areas of Victorville , and coordinate with the Housing Element to provide designations to accommodate the Regional Housing Needs Allocation. In addition, the Land Use Element removes the Office Professional designation and redesignates those properties to other designations. The Land Use Element also adds new land use categories such as the Greenway/Utility Corridor (GUC) and Health and Wellness Overlay (HWO). The new Greenway/Utility Corridor (GUC) is along the City’s key public utility corridors to promote the creation of continuous trails and multiple public access points. The new Health and Wellness Overlay (HWO) is intended to promote health and wellness for all segments of the community. The Health and Wellness Overlay (HWO) applies to existing and proposed hospitals/medical facilities ; allows a full range of medical uses and specialized care facilities ; allows complementary uses such as restaurants, grocery stores, support retail, gyms/fitness studios, and recreation/trails; allows a range of housing integrated into the development ; and functions as CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 9 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
a sustainability hub, promoting active transportation, green infrastructure, open space, and electric vehicle charging stations.
As shown in Table 2, Victorville General Plan Update Land Use Distribution, the largest land use in the Planning Area would be residential, and the next largest would be commercial.
Table 2. Victorville General Plan Update Land Use Distribution Land Use Designations City of Victorville (acres) Sphere of Influence (acres) Residential
Very Low Density Residential 3,096.40 4,604.43
Low Density Residential 13,976.14 2,518.49
Low-Medium Density Residential 487.28 0
Medium Density Residential 1,902.74 12.49
Mixed Density Residential 106.07 0
High Density Residential 59.49 0
Mixed Use
Mixed Use 1 372.37 401.77
Mixed Use 2 1,063.43 160.04
Commercial
General Commercial 4,116.31 428.12
Industrial
Light Industrial 2,694.16 78.70
Heavy Industrial 1,144.56 0
Public/Institutional/Open Space
Public/Institutional 810.70 773.68
Open Space 2,789.13 10,076.16
Greenway/Utility Corridor 1,075.07 0
Specific Plan
Specific Plan 13,181.14 630.43
Total Acreage 46,874.92 19,684.31
Overlays
Low Density Residential Infill Overlay 15,439.85 0
Health and Wellness Overlay 289.20 0
Buildout of land in the City and SOI would result in approximately 73,808 dwelling units to house approximately 339,613 residents and would support 42,393,038 non-residential square feet. These parameters can be used to identify the anti cipated levels of development allotted by the project throughout the Planning Area. Table 3, Proposed Victorville General Plan Update Development Capacity, details the proposed densities of residential and intensity of non-residential development that would occur with implementation of the land use policies in the General Plan Update.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 10 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table 3. Proposed Victorville General Plan Update Development Capacity Land Use
Designations
City of Victorville
(du)
Sphere of Influence
(du)
City of Victorville
(square feet)
Sphere of Influence
(square feet)
Residential1
Very Low Density
Residential
3,715 4,420 NA NA
Low Density
Residential2
8,387 4,534 NA NA
Low Density
Residential in Low
Density Residential
Infill Overlay
22,356 NA NA NA
Low-Medium Density
Residential
2,338 NA NA NA
Medium Density
Residential
10,657 52 NA NA
Mixed Density
Residential
700 NA NA NA
High Density
Residential
1,274 NA NA NA
Mixed Use3
Mixed Use 1 744 402 1,701,454 3,677,355
Mixed Use 2 5,315 320 4,167,385 313,632
Commercial
General Commercial NA NA 18,825,761 1,398,276
Industrial
Light Industrial NA NA 8,804,565 567,805
Heavy Industrial NA NA 6,733,287 NA
Public/Institutional/Open Space
Public/Institutional NA NA 529,907 252,866
Open Space NA 101 NA NA
Greenway/Utility
Corridor
NA NA NA NA
Specific Plan
Specific Plan 7,909 605 7,252,423 0
Total 63,395 10,434 48,014,782 6,209,934
Notes: du = dwelling unit
Buildout assumptions for 2045 are inferred from the Southern California Association of Governments’ (SCAG’s) 2020 Final CONNECT SoCal Demographic and Growth Forecast (September 3, 2020). 1 Residential Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 80 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element). 2 Average density is lower than the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay density range to account for existing low density residential that was developed at the lower density.
3 Mixed Use Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 67 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element).
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 11 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table 4, Comparison of Existing 2008 General Plan and Proposed General Plan Update, compares the estimated level of residential and non -residential development and population for the City under the existing 2008 General Plan and existing 2022 baseline conditions compared to the General Plan Update.
Table 4. Comparison of Existing 2008 General Plan and Proposed General Plan Update Location Number of Dwelling Units Total Population1
Non-Residential
Square Feet
Existing General Plan (2008 Buildout)
City of Victorville 84,746 266,102 17,730,215
Sphere of Influence 23,411 73,511 33,628,525
Existing Conditions (2022 Baseline)
City of Victorville 36,195 130,771 27,991,000
Sphere of Influence 5,137 6,922 596,000
Proposed General Plan Update2
City of Victorville 63,395 199,060 48,014,782
Sphere of Influence 10,434 32,801 6,209,934
Net Change (2022 Baseline – Proposed General Plan Update) City of Victorville 27,200 68,289 8,192,124
Sphere of Influence 5,276 15,879 5,613,914
Notes:
1 Population estimates are inferred from SCAG’s 2020 Final CONNECT SoCal Demographic and Growth Forecast (September 3, 2020). 2 The number of dwelling units is based on average density at buildout, not maximum density. 3 Average density is lower than the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay density range to account for existing low density residential that was developed at the lower density; Residential Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 80 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element); Mixed Use Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 67 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element).
1.3.3 Safety Element Update
The Safety Element Update wou ld identify and, when possible, reduce the impact of natural and human-made hazards that may threaten the health, safety, and property of the residents living and working in the Planning Area. The Safety Element Update would emphasize hazard reduction through land use and development restrictions in susceptible areas and promote accident prevention. The Safety Element Update would integrate public health and safety into development and planning policies to emphasize responses and to maintain optimal emergency preparedness in accordance with recently adopted state laws.
1.3.4 Environmental Justice Element
The Environmental Justice Element would be prepared as a new chapter in the Victorville General Plan. Preparation of an Environmental Justice Element is required under Senate Bill 1000 for jurisdictions with disadvantaged communities. It will reflect the City ’s commitment to reducing environmental burdens and ensuring all residents have the opportunity to access public goods and services that improve their quality of life. The Environmental Justice Element would focus on CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 12 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
objectives and policies that aim to reduce pollution exposure; improve access to public facilities and services; improve access to healthy foods; promote access to physical activity and recreation; improve access to safe, sanitary, and affordable housing; reduce exposure to climate hazards; and improve civic engagement in the public decision-making process.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 13 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Section 2 Environmental Procedures
2.1 Lead Agency
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines , Section 15367, the City is the lead agency for preparing the environmental review required by CEQA. The environmental review prepared by the City will be used by the City Council regarding its decisions to certify the PEIR and approve the project.
2.2 Environmental Impact Report
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15080 et seq., the City prepared a PEIR to analyze the potential impacts of the project on the environment. The Final PEIR contains the information required by CEQA Guidelines, Section 15132, including the Draft PEIR and the appendices to the Draft PEIR.
2.3 Public Participation
Environmental review of the project began on October 6, 2021, with the publication of the Notice of Preparation of the PEIR and a minimum 30 -day public review period. The City held a public scoping meeting on October 20, 2021. The Notice of Preparation public comment period ended on November 8, 2021 . The Draft PEIR was completed , and the Notice of Availability f or public review was posted on September 2, 2022. A 45-day public review period for the Draft PEIR began on September 2, 2022, and ended on October 17, 2022. Two comment letters were received.
These comments and the City’s responses to them are included in the Final PEIR as required by CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15088 and 15132. The Final PEIR, including an Errata and the City’s responses to comments, was completed. A public hearing concerning the certification of the Final PEIR will be held by City Council on December 6, 2022, at which time interested agencies, organizations, and individuals will be given an opportunity to comment on the Final PEIR and the project.
2.4 Record of Proceedings
For the purposes of CEQA and the Findings as follows, the administrative record of the City’s decision concerning certification of the Final PEIR for the project includes the following:
• Draft PEIR (September 2022)
• Final PEIR, including the Errata (November 2022)
• Appendices to the Draft PEIR and the Final PEIR
• All documents and other materials listed as references or incorporated by reference in the Draft PEIR and Final PEIR, including but not limited to the materials identified in the Chapter 7, References, of the Draft PEIR
• All reports, applications, memoranda, maps, letters, and other documents prepared by the City’s staff and consultants for the project, which are before the City Council as determined by the County Clerk
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 14 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
• All notices issued by the City to comply with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, or any other law governing the processing and approval of the project • Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project • All documents or other materials submitted by interested people and public agencies in connection with the Draft PEIR and the Final PEIR
• Minutes, recordings, and verbatim transcripts, if any, of the public hearing to be held on December 6, 2022, concerning the Final PEIR and the project • All Findings and resolutions adopted by City Council in connection with the project (including these Findings) and all documents cited or referred to therein • Any documentary or other evidence submitted to the City at information sessions, public meetings, and public hearings concerning the Final PEIR and the project • Any other materials required to be in the record of proceedings by California Public Resources Code, Section 21167.6(e)
• Any other written materials relevant to the City ’s compliance with CEQA and its decision on the merits of the project, including documents that have been released for public review and copies of reports, studies , or other documents relied on in any environmental documentation for the project and either made available to the public during the public comment period or included in the City’s files The custodian of the documents and other materials composing the administrative record o f the City’s decision concerning certification of the Final PEIR is the City Clerk. The location of the administrative record is Victorville City Hall , 14343 Civic Drive , Victorville, California 92392 (California Public Resources Code, Section 21081.6[a][2]).
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 15 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Section 3 Findings Under CEQA
3.1 Purpose
California Public Resources Code, Section 21002, states that “public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects.” The same section states that the procedures required by CEQA “are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects.” Section 21002 also states that “in the event [that] specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects.” California Public Resources Code, Section 21002, is implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies adopt written Findings before approving projects (California Public Resources Code, Section 21081; CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091). Specifically, CEQA requires the City to make written Findings of Fact for each significant environmental impact identified in the Final PEIR (CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15091, 21081).
In accordance with CEQA, the purpose of the Findings is to systematically restate the significant effects of the project on the environment and to determine the feasibility of mitigation measures and alternatives identified in the Final PEIR that would avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects. These Findings set forth the reasons and evidence in support of the City’s determinations.
3.2 Terminology
A “Finding” is a written statement made by the City that explains how the City dealt with each significant impact and alternative identified in the Final PEIR. Each Finding contains a conclusion regarding each significant impact, substantial evidence supporting the conclusion, and an explanation of how the substantial evidence supports the conclusion.
For each significant effect identified in the Final PEIR, the City is required by CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a), to make a written Finding reaching one or more of the following conclusions:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the Finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 16 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
A mitigation measure or an alternative is considered “feasible” if it is capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reas onable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors ( California Public Resource s Code, Section 21061.1; CEQA Guidelines, Section 15364; see also Citizens of Goleta Valley v.
Board of Supervisors [Goleta II] [1990] 52 Cal.3d 553, 565) . The concept of “feasibility” also encompasses the question of whether a particular alternative or mitigation measure promotes the underlying goals and objectives of a project (City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego [1 982] 133 Cal.App.3d 410, 417) . “Feasibility under CEQA encompasses ‘desirability’ to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and technological factors” (City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego [1982] 133 Cal.App.3d 410, 417; see also Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn. v. City of Oakland [1993] 23 Cal.App.4th 704, 715).
CEQA also requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives, where feasible, to substantially lessen or avoid significant environmental impacts that would otherwise occur. The CEQA Guidelines do not define the difference between “avoiding” a significant environmental effect and “substantially lessening” such an effect. Therefore, the City must glean the meaning of these terms from other contexts in which the terms are used. California Public Resources Code, Section 21081, on which CEQA Guidelines , Section 15091, is based, uses the term “mitigate” rather than “substantially lessen. ” Therefore, t he CEQA Guidelines equate “mitigating” with “substantially lessening. ” Such an understanding of the statutory term is consistent with the policies underlying CEQA, which include the policy that “public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects ” (California Public Resources Code, Section 21002). For the purposes of these Findings, the term “avoid” refers to the effectiveness of one or more mitigation measures to reduce an otherwise significant effect to a less than significant level.
With respect to a project for which significant impacts a re not avoided or substantially lessened either through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures or a feasible alternative, a public agency, after adopting proper Findings, may nevertheless approve the project if the agency adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations setting forth the specific reasons why the agency found that the project’s benefits rendered acceptable its unavoidable adverse environmental effects (CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15093 and 15043[b]; California Public Resources Code, Section 21081[b]).
The California Supreme Court has stated that “the wisdom of approving . . . any development project, a delicate task which requires a balancing of interests, is necessarily left to the sound discretion of the local offi cials and their constituents who are responsible for such decisions. Th e law as we interpret and apply it simply requires that those decisions be informed, and th erefore balanced” (Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors [1990] 52 Cal.3d 553, 576).
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 17 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
A Statement of Overriding Considerations is required for the approved project because, despite implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, the project as approved would have significant impacts on air quality, cultural resources and Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs), GHG emissions, and noise that could not be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level.
3.3 Legal Effect
To the extent that these Findings conclude that mitigation measures identified in the Final PEIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded, or withdrawn, the City hereby binds itself and any other responsible parties to implement these mitigation measures. These Findings are not merely informational but constitute a binding set of obligations for the City and responsible parties, which will take effect if and when the City adopts a resolution certifying the Final PEIR and resolutions approving the project.
3.4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
In adopting these Findings, the City also adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program pursuant to California Public Resources Code , Section 21081.6, and CEQA Guidelines , Section 15097. This program is designed to ensure that the project complies with the feasible mitig ation measures identified below during implementation of the project. The program is set forth in the City of Victorville General Plan Update Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which is adopted by the City concurrently with these Findings, is incorporated herein by reference , and is included as Attachment 1 to these Findings.
3.5 Certification of the Final PEIR
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15090, the City further finds and certifies that:
• The Final PEIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA. • The Final PEIR has been presented to the City Council, which constitutes the decision- making body of the lead agency, and the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final PEIR before approving the project. • The Final PEIR reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 18 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
This page intentionally left blank.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 19 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Section 4 Findings Regarding Direct, Indirect, or Cumulative Significant or Potentially Significant Effects
The project would result in direct and indirect significant and potentially significant environmental effects regarding air quality, biological resources, cultural resources and TCRs, GHG emissions, and noise. These significant environmental effects and the mitigation measures identified to avoid or substantially lessen them are discussed in detail in Draft PEIR Section 3.1, Air Quality; Section
3.2, Biological Resources; Section 3.3, Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources; Section
3.4, Greenhouse Gas Emissions ; and Section 3.5, Noise. A summary of significant impacts and mitigation measures for the project is included in the Executive Summary of the Draft PEIR.
Below are the Findings regarding the potential direct , indirect, or cumulative significant environmental effects of the project. The Findings incorporate by reference the discussion of potentially significant impacts and mitigation measures in the Final PEIR. The Final PEIR, which includes the Draft PEIR and appendices, is referred to below as the “PEIR.”
4.1 Air Quality
4.1.1 Threshold 2: Cumulative Increase in Criteria Pollutant Potentially Significant Impact: The PEIR identifies a potentially significant impact and a cumulatively considerable contribution to a cumulatively significant impact on Air Quality Threshold 2 associated with emissions from construction activities and project operation that would potentially exceed the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD) thresholds. Detailed information and analysis regarding the potentially significant impact are provided in PEIR Section 3.1.5.2.
Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the approved project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect on air quality identified as an impact on Air Quality Threshold 2 in the PEIR, and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(3), specific legal, economic, social, technological, or other considerations make other mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the PEIR infeasible.
Fact in S upport of Finding: The potentially significant impacts of the project on Air Quality Threshold 2 are analyzed in PEIR Section 3.1.5.2. Impacts would result in significant increases in criteria pollutant emissions during construction and operation.
The potentially significant impacts on Air Quality Threshold 2 would be mitigated by implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1. Mitigation Measure AIR -1 is set forth in full in Table ES-3, Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures, of the PEIR Executive Summary. Mitigation Measure AIR-1 requires future development projects pursuant to the General CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 20 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Plan Update to demonstrate compliance with the MDAQMD thresholds and to implement emissions reduction measures to the extent necessary to reduce emissions. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR -1 would reduce criteria pollutant emissions related to construction activities and operation.
In addition, Mitigation Measures GHG -1 and GHG-2 would reduce criteria pollut ant emissions during construction and operation by requiring the implementation of a qualified CAP Climate Action Plan (CAP) to identify GHG emissions reduction strategies that would achieve the City’s fair-share contribution to achieving statewide emissions reduction goals and for future projects to implement the California Air Resources Board ’s 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan GHG emissions reduction strategies. However, because site-specific emissions have not been quantified, it cannot be guaranteed that compliance with the reduction measures would fully reduce impacts.
Therefore, despite the incorporation of Mitigation Measures AIR -1, GHG-1, and GHG -2, the impact on Air Quality Threshold 2 is considered significant and unavoidable, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093, is required.
4.1.2 Threshold 3: Sensitive Receptors
Potentially Significant Impact: The PEIR identifies a potentially significant impact on Air Quality Threshold 3 related to the potential to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations as a result of exposure to a carbon dioxide (CO2) hotspot and toxic air contaminants (TACs) during project operation. Detailed information and analysis regarding the potentially significant impact are provided in PEIR Section 3.1.5.3.
Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the approved project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect on air quality resources identified as an impact on Air Quality Threshold 3 in the PEIR, and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(3), specific legal, economic, social, technological, or other considerations make other mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the PEIR infeasible.
Fact in Support of Finding : The potentially significant impacts of the project on Air Quality Threshold 3 are analyzed in PEIR Section 3.1.5.3. Impacts would result in exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollution concentrations.
The potentially significant impacts on Air Quality Threshold 3 would be mitigated by implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2. Mitigation Measure AIR-2 is set forth in full in Table ES-3 of the PEIR Executive Summary. Mitigation Measure AIR-2 would require the preparation of a Health Risk Assessment for future projects that would generate TACs (such as diesel particulate matter) in the General Plan Update Planning Area or that would locate a new sensitive receptor within the applicable screening level distance identified in the MDAQMD CEQA and Federal CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 21 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Conformity Guidelines. The Health Risk Assessment would demonstrate that the project would not pose a significant health risk to nearby sensitive receptors. If a potentially significant health risk is identified, the Health Risk Assessment shall identify appropriate measures, such as upgrading building ventilation systems, to reduce the potential health risk to below a significant level, or the sensitive receptor or proposed facility shall be sited in another location. However, impacts from siting new receptors near existing facilities would remain significant because not all potential sources of TAC emissions would be subject to new source review. Therefore, despite the incorporation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2, the impact on Air Quality Threshold 3, exposure to TAC emissions, is considered significant and unavoidable, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093, is required.
4.1.3 Threshold 4: Odors
Potentially Significant Impact: The PEIR identifies a potentially significant impact on Air Quality Threshold 4 associated with new industrial la nd uses that would have the potential to produce objectionable odors during industrial processes and manufacturing or places sensitive -receptor development near an existing odor source. Detailed information and analysis regarding the potentially significant impact are provided in PEIR Section 3.1.5.4.
Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the approved project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect on Air Quality Threshold 4 as identified in the PEIR.
Fact in Support of Finding: The potentially significant impacts of the project on Air Quality Threshold 4 are analyzed in PEIR Section 3.1.5.4. Impacts would have the potential to result in odor emissions during operation of future projects or place sensitive -receptor development near an existing source.
The potentially significant impacts on Air Quality Threshold 4 would be mitigated by implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-3. Mitigation Measure AIR -3 is set forth in full in Table ES -3 of the PEIR Executive Summary. Mitigation Measure AIR-3 requires that if a discretionary project has the poten tial to emit nuisance odors beyond the property line, an odor management plan shall be prepared and submitted by the project applicant prior to project approval to ensure compliance with the MDAQMD Rule 402 for projects in the Planning Area . Control technologies identified in the odor management plan shall be identified as mitigation measures in the environmental document and/or incorporated into the site plan. With implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-3, the impact related to objectionable odors would be reduced to a less than significant level.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 22 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
4.2 Biological Resources
4.2.1 Threshold 1: Candidate, Sensitive, or Special-Status Species Potentially Significant Impact: The PEIR identifies a potentially significant impact on Biological Resources Threshold 1 associated with the construction of future development that could result in the loss or destruction of plant and wildlife species and nesting birds identified as candidate, sensitive, or special -status spe cies. Detailed information and analysis regarding the potentially significant impact are provided in PEIR Section 3.2.4.1.
Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines , Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the approved project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect on Biological Resources Threshold 1 as identified in the PEIR.
Fact in Support of Findi ng: The potentially significant impacts of the project on Biological Resources Threshold 1 are analyzed in PEIR Section 3.2.4.1. Impacts would result in the direct and indirect physical impacts on nesting birds and raptors.
The potentially significant impacts on Biological Resources Threshold 1 would be mitigated by implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1. This mitigation measure is set forth in full in Table ES- 3 of the Executive Summary in the PEIR. Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would require pre-construction nesting bird and raptor surveys for projects in the Planning Area with vegetation supporting nesting birds and raptors for construction activities during the general bird and raptor nesting season (January 15 through September 15). If active nests of bird species covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act are detected, construction activities shall stay outside a 300-foot buffer around the active nest and shall expand to 500 feet for raptors. It is recommended that a biological monitor be present to delineate the boundaries of the buffer. With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, impacts on candidate, sensitive, or special-status species would be less than significant.
4.2.2 Threshold 3: Wetlands
Potentially Significant Impact: The PEIR identifies a potentially significant impact on Biological Resources Threshold 3 associated with the construction of future development projects. Detailed information and analysis regarding the potentially significant impact are provided in PEIR Section
3.2.4.3. Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the approved project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect on Biological Resources Threshold 3 as identified in the PEIR.
Fact in Support of Finding: The potentially significant impact of the project on Biological Resources Threshold 3 is analyzed in PEIR Section 3.2.4.3. Implementation of the project could have potentially significant direct and indirect impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 23 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
The potentially significant impacts on Biological Resources Threshold 3 would be mitigated by implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2 and BIO-3. Mitigation Measures BIO-2 and BIO-3 are set forth in full in Table ES -3 in the PEIR Executive Summary. Mitigation Measure BIO -2 requires future projects within or adjacent to the Mojave River or other aquatic resources that have the potential to impact sensitive aquatic resources to conduct an aquat ic resources delineation following the methods outlined in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the Regional Supplement to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region to map the extent of we tlands and non -wetland waters, determine jurisdiction, and assess potential impacts. The aquatic resources shall be conducted by a qualified biologist. The results shall be incorporated into the C EQA documents required for approval and permitting of the project. If impacts were to occur, Mitigation Measure BIO-3 requires that permits and authorizations be obtained from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board before the start of construction. The regulatory agencies ’ authorizations would include specific avoidance and minimization measures and mitigation measures for impacts on jurisdictional resources and may include monetary contributions to a mitigation bank or habitat creation, restoration, or enhancement. With implementati on of Mitigation Measure s BIO-2 and BIO -3, impacts on jurisdictional aquatic resources would be less than significant.
4.3 Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
4.3.1 Threshold 1: Historical Resources
Potentially Significant Impact: The PEIR identifies a potential ly significant impact on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 1 associated with the physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of a historical resource or its immediate surroundings such that a substantial adverse change to the historic al resource would result pursuant to C EQA Guidelines, Section 21084.
Detailed information and analysis regarding the potentially significant impact are provided in PEIR Section 3.3.4.1.
Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the approved project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect on cultural resources identified as an impact on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 1 in the PEIR, and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(3), specific legal, economic, social, technological, or other considerations make other mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the PEIR infeasible.
Fact in Support of Finding: The potentially significant impact of the project on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 1 is analyzed in PEIR Section 3.3.4.1. An impact on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 1 would occur because future development or redevelopment activity that would be CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 24 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
accommodated by the General Plan Update could result in the physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of a historical resource; therefore, the impact would be potentially significant.
Potentially significant impacts on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 1 would be mitigated by implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2. Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2 are set forth in full in Table ES -3 in the PEIR Executive Summary. Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would require the identification and evaluatio n of built environment resources if built environment resources that meet the age threshold for eligibility would be located on a future development site. If needed, the resource shall be evaluated in accordance with the California Office of Historic Prese rvation guidelines to identify any previously unrecorded potential historical resources. If avoidance or preservation in place of a built environment resource is not possible, Mitigation Measure CUL-2 requires that the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties shall be used to the maximum extent possible. The application of the standards shall be overseen by a qualified architectural historian or historic architect meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualified Standards. Before any construction activities that may affect the historical resource, a report identifying and specifying the treatment of character-defining features and construction activities shall be provided to the City. If a project would result in the demolition or significant alteration of a historical resource, Mitigation Measure CUL-2 would require the preparation of a Historic American Buildings Survey, Historic American Engineering Record, or Historic American Landscape Survey documentation. Documentation shall include an architectural and historical narrative, photographs, and supplementary information, such as building plans and elevations and/or historical photographs.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL -1 and C UL-2 would reduce potential impacts associated with historical resources. However, if a project would result in the demolition or significant alteration of a historical resource, implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2 would not adequately replace the demolished structures and would not reasonably mitigate the impacts of the demolition to a less than significant level because it would no longer convey its historical significance. Therefore, despite the incorporation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2, the impact on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 1 is considered significant and unavoidable, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093, is required.
4.3.2 Threshold 2: Archaeological Resources
Potentially Significant Impact: The PEIR identifies a potentially sign ificant impact on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 2 associated with construction activities that could result in the damage or destruction of previously unknown subsurface archaeological resources. Detailed information and analysis regarding the potentially significant impact are provided in PEIR Section 3.3.4.2.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 25 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)( 1), changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the approved project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 2 as identified in the PEIR.
Fact in Support of Finding: The potentially significant impact of the project on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 2 is analyzed in PEIR Section 3.3.4.2. An impact on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 2 would occur because construction activities associated with future development proposed under General Plan Update could cause damage to or destruction of previously unknown subsurface archaeological resources; therefore, impacts would be significant.
Potentially significant impacts on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 2 would be mitigated by implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-3, CUL-4, and CUL-5. Mitigation Measures CUL-3, CUL-4, and CUL-5 are set forth in full in Table ES-3 in the PEIR Executive Summary. Mitigation Measure CUL-3 would require a Cultural Resources Study and evaluation of resources. If resources are identified during the site-specific archaeological survey, a Phase II evaluation of the resources to the California Register of Historical Resources would be conducted to determine if the resources are significant under CEQA and would be adversely impacted by the project. If potentially significant archaeological resources are identified during the Phase I or Phase II assessments and impacts on these resources cannot be avoided as described in Mitigation Measure CUL-3, then appropriate site- specific mitigation measures shall be established and undertaken . If no significant resources are found, but if there is a potential for unknown archaeological resources or TCRs to be uncovered during specific project activities, an archaeological and Native American monitoring program is recommended. Mitigation Measure CUL -4 requires the avoidance and preservation of cultural resources. Avoidance of cultural resources and TCRs can be accomplished through a project redesign. Preservation in place can include planning construction to avoid significant resources; planning parks, green space, or other open space to preserve cultural resources; or “capping” or covering archaeological sites with a layer of soil before building. Mitigation Measure CUL-5 would require the creation of an archaeological and Native American monitoring program for future development that would conduct new ground disturbance in areas identified as having a potential for unknown archaeological resources or TCRs. The archaeological and Native American monitoring program shall consist of the full -time presence of a qualified archaeologist and traditionally and culturally affiliated Native American monitor during ground-disturbing activities. The Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Department shall be contacted regarding any pre-contact and/or historic-era finds and be provided information after the archaeologist makes their initial assessment of the nature of the find so as to provide Tribal input with regard to significance and treatment. With implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-3, CUL-4, and CUL-5, impacts on archaeological resources would be less than significant.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 26 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
4.3.3 Threshold 3: Human Remains
Potentially Significant Impact: The PEIR identifies a potentially significant impact on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 3 associated with construction activities including excavation, which could disturb unknown human remains . Detailed information and analysis regarding the potentially significant impact are provided in PEIR Section 3.3.4.3.
Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the approved project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 3 as identified in the PEIR.
Fact in Support of Finding: The potentially significant impact of the project on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 3 is analyzed in PEIR Section 3.3.4.3. An impact on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 3 would occur because construction activities including excavation could result in the disturbance of unknown human remains, and therefore, impacts would be significant.
Potentially significant impacts on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 3 would be mitigated by implementation o f Mitigation Measures CUL-3, CUL -4, CUL -5, and CUL -6. Mitigation Measures CUL-3, CUL -4, CUL-5, and CUL -6 are set forth in full in Table ES -3 in the PEIR Executive Summary. To reduce potential impacts on human remains from the construction activities, Mitigation Measures CUL-3, CUL-4, and CUL-5 would be required, as detailed under Threshold 2. In addition, Mitigation Measure CUL-6 would require that construction activities be immediately halted in the event that human remains, possible human remains, and/or grave goods are encountered within 100 feet of the remains. The project proponent shall then inform the County Coroner and the City. If human remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the applicant shall comply with the state relating to the disposition of Native American burials that fall within the jurisdiction of the Native American Heritage Commission (Californi a Public Resources Code, Section 5097). The County Medical Examiner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission to determine the most likely descendant. The most likely descendant shall inspect the site as needed and make recommendations or preferences for treatment of the remains within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The disposition of the remains shall be overseen by the most likely descendant to determine the most appropriate means of treating the human remains and any associated grave artifacts. The specific locations of Native American burials and reburials will be proprietary and not disclosed to the general public. With implementation o f Mitigation Measures CUL-3, CUL-4, CUL-5, and CUL-6, impacts on human remains would be less than significant.
4.3.4 Threshold 4: Tribal Cultural Resources
Potentially Significant Impact: The PEIR identifies a potentially significant impact on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 4 associated with grading and construction activities of undeveloped areas or redevelopment that requires more intensive soil excavation than in the past CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 27 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
could potentially cause disturbance to TCR s. Detailed information and analysis regarding the potentially significant impact are provided in PEIR Section 3.3.4.4.
Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the approved project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect on cultural resources and TCRs as identified in the PEIR.
Fact in Support of Finding: The potentially significant impact of the project on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 4 is analyzed in PEIR Section 3.3.4.4. Impacts on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 4 would result because of the potential disturbance to TCRs.
Potentially significant impacts on Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 4 would be mitigated by implementation of Mitigation Measure s CUL-3, CUL-4, CUL-5, CUL-6, and CUL-7. These mitigation measures are set forth in full in Table ES-3 in the PEIR Executive Summary. Mitigation Measures CUL-3, CUL-4, and CUL-5 would be required as detailed under Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 2. Mitigation Measure CUL -6 would be required as detailed under Cultural Resources and TCRs Threshold 3. Mitigation Measure CUL-7 would require that the Yuhaaviatam be contacted in regards to any pre-contact and/or historic-era cultural resources discovered during project implementation and be provided information regarding the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. Should th e find be deemed significant, a cultural resource Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be created by the archaeologist, in coordination with Yuhaaviatam, and all subsequent finds shall be subject to this Plan. With implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-3, CUL-4, CUL-5, CUL-6, and CUL-7, impacts associated with TCRs would be less than significant.
4.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
4.4.1 Threshold 2: Conflict with Applicable Plan
Potentially Significant Impact: The PEIR identifies a potentially significant impact on GHG Emissions Threshold 2 associated with the exceedance of the 20 22 Scoping Plan per -capita emissions targets and inconsistencies with applicable reduction measures in the 2022 Scoping Plan.
In addition, GHG emissions are cumulative by nature because emissions contribute, on a cumulative basis, to global climate change. The General Plan Update would also have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative GHG impact. Detailed information and analysis regarding the potentially significant impact are provided in PEIR Section 3.4.4.1.
Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the approved project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect on GHG emissions identified as an impact on GHG Emissions Threshold 2 in the PEIR, and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(3), specific legal, economic, CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 28 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
social, technological, or other considerations make other mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the PEIR infeasible.
Fact in Support of Finding: The potentially significant impact of the project on GHG Emissions Threshold 2 is analyzed in PEIR Section 3.4.4.1. Impacts on GHG Emissions Threshold 2 would result in exceedance of the 20 22 Scoping Plan per -capita emissions targets and inconsistencies with applicable reduction measures in the 2022 Scoping Plan.
Potentially significant impacts on GHG Emissions Threshold 2 would be mitigated by implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-1 and GHG-2. Mitigation Measures GHG-1 and GHG-2 are set forth in full in Table ES -3 in the PEIR Executive Summary. Mitigation Measure GHG-1 would require implementation of a qualified Climate Action Plan to identify GHG emissions reduction strategies that would achieve the City ’s fair-share contribution to achieving statewide emissions reduction goals. The program shall include an inventory of existing community GHG emissions; establish GHG emissions reduction targets consistent with Senate Bill 32, Executive Order S-03-05, and Executive Order B-55-18; identify GHG emissions reduction measures to achieve reduction targets ; and establish a program to monitor progress . In addition, the plan will establish a level, based on substantial evidence, below which the contribution to GHG emissions from activities covered by the plan would not be cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measure GHG-2 would require that until a local qualified Climate Action Plan is in place, and before the issuance of a building permit, a new project shall submit to the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments documentation showing that the project is consistent with the applicable and feasible recommendations for new development in Table 1, Priority GHG Reduction Strategies for Local Government Climate Action, in Appendix D to the California Air Resources Board California ’s Draft 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan , or implement project-specific GHG mitigation measures as outlined in any required CEQA document (e.g., Mitigated Negative Declaration, EIR ). Additionally, residential development shall be required to demonstrate consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan recommended attributes as feasible unless otherwise addressed via project-specific GHG mitigation measures as outlined in any required CEQA document.
Implementation of Mi tigation Measures GHG -1 and GHG-2 would reduce GHG emissions compared to business-as-usual conditions; however, emissions reductions cannot be quantified at this time due to the uncertainty of future projects under the General Plan Update. The level of effectiveness of measures would vary from project to project and depend on the individual project site, including location, size of development, access to transit, type of development, and existing site characteristics. Additionally, it is currently unknown what proportion of existing development would be replaced with new development that would implement reduction features. Therefore, despite the incorporation of Mitigation Measures GHG -1 and GHG-2, the impact on GHG CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 29 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Emissions Threshold 2 is considered significant and unavoidable, and a Sta tement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093, is required.
4.5 Noise
4.5.1 Threshold 1: Excessive Noise Levels
Potentially Significant Impact: The PEIR identifies a potentially significant impact on Noise Threshold 1 associated with the permanent increase in vehicle noise and the exposure of new sensitive receptors to excessive vehicle nois e. Detailed information and ana lysis are provided in PEIR Section 3.5.5.1.
Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the approved project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect on noise identified as an impact on Noise Threshol d 1 in the PEIR, and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(3), specific legal, economic, social, technological, or other considerations make other mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the PEIR infeasible.
Fact in Support of Finding: The potentially significant impact of the project on Noise Threshold 1 is analyzed in PEIR Section 3.5.5.1. Impacts on Noise Threshold 1 would result from perman ent increases in vehicle noise and the exposure of new sensitive receptors to excessive vehicle noise.
Temporary impacts due to construction activities would also be a potential source of substantial noise.
Potentially significant impacts on Noise Threshold 1 would be mitigated by implementation of Mitigation Measures NOI-1, NOI-2, and NOI-3. Mitigation Measures NOI-1, NOI-2, and NOI-3 are set forth in full in Table ES -3 in the PEIR Executive Summary. Mitigation Measure NOI -1 would require future development or redevelopment to implement noise reduction measures where feasible. Reduction measures would include but are not limited to alternative road design, reduced speeds, alternative paving, building retrofits to provide additional noise at tenuation, and setbacks or buffers before berms and walls. The project applicant shall submit plans to the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments for review and approval before the start of any construction. Mitigation Measure NOI -2 would re quire that new development demonstrate consistency with the General Plan Noise Element Table N-3, Victorville Land Use Compatibility Standards, through the preparation of a site-specific acoustical analys is. If a potentially incompatible exterior noise lev el is identified, the project shall incorporate noise attenuation features, such as enhanced windows or insulation, to provide interior noise levels of 45 decibel (dBA) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) or below. The project applicant shall submit the analysis to the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments for review and approval before the start of any construction. These plans shall demonstrate that the proposed noise reduction measures would reduce interior noise exposure to 45 dBA CN EL or less. Mitigation CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 30 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Measure NOI-3 would require the construction contractor of a project to demonstrate that best management practices would be implemented during construction, as applicable. Best management practices shall be documented on the project’s grading or other construction plan and submitted to the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments for review and approval before the start of any construction.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI -1 would reduce impacts from vehicle noise by implementing noise reduction measures where feasible. However, roadway noise buffers and additional noise reduction measures would not necessarily be feasible in all circ umstances throughout the City and SOI. For example, for a permanent noise barrier to be effective, the barriers would need to be continuous across multiple properties. Because multiple City roadways include existing cross streets and driveways, noise walls would not necessarily be effective to reduce traffic noise. Implementation of retrofits of existing residences would require approval from private homeowners. Future projects put forward through implementation of the General Plan Update would continue to be subject to results according to the noise standards under CEQA and the Noise Element but cannot be determined to be less than significant at this time. Therefore, permanent increases in vehicle noise because of the General Plan Update would remain significant and unavoidable.
Impacts related to operation of new development and siting of new sensitive receptors would be less than significant with implementation of existing regulation and Mitigation Measure NOI -2.
Temporary nuisance impacts due to constru ction activities would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-3.
Therefore, despite the incorporation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1, the impact on permanent increases in vehicle noise is considered significant and unavoidable, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093, is required.
4.5.2 Threshold 2: Excessive Groundborne Vibration or Noise Potentially Significant Impact: The PEIR identifies a potentially significant impact on Noise Threshold 2 associated with the generation of excessive groundborne vibration levels during construction activities, operation of industrial equipment, or siting of vibration-sensitive receptors near freight operations. Detailed information and analysis are provided in PEIR Section 3.5.5.2.
Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the approved project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect on GHG emissions identified as an impact on Noise Threshold 2 in the PEIR, and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(3), specific legal, economic, social, technological, or other considerations make other mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the PEIR infeasible.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 31 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Fact in Support of Finding: The potentially significant impact of the project on Noise Threshold 2 is analyzed in PEIR Section 3.5.5.2. Impacts on Noise Threshold 2 would result from the exposure of people to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels generated during construction activities, operation of industrial equipment, or siting of vibration - sensitive receptors near freight operations.
Potentially significant impacts on Noise Threshold 2 would be mitigated by implementa tion of Mitigation Measures NOI-4, NOI-5, and NOI-6. Mitigation Measures NOI-4, NOI-5, and NOI-6 are set forth in full in Table ES -3 in the Executive Summary i n the PEIR. Mitigation Measure NOI-4 would require future development projects to demonstrate that vibration would not exceed the applicable Federal Transit Administration threshold (65 vibration decibels for vibration-sensitive land uses o r 75 vibration decibels for other daytime land uses) or to identify best management practices to be implemented by the construction contractor to reduce vibration levels to below the applicable threshold. The best management practices may include but not be limited to the use of only properly maintained equipment with vibratory isolators, operation of equipment as far from sensitive receptors as possible, and use of rubber-tired vehicles as opposed to tracked vehicl es. Mitigation Measure NOI -5 would requir e future projects to complete a site-specific analysis to determine if proposed sources of vibration would result in a significant vibration at nearby land uses prior to issuance of permit approval. If significant vibration levels are identified, the analysis shall identify vibration reduction measures to the extent feasible to reduce vibration levels at affected receptors, such as relocating equipment. The project applicant shall submit the analysis to the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments for review and approval before the start of any construction. Mitigation Measure NOI-6 would require future project applicants developing vibration-sensitive land uses near a railroad to conduct an acoustic analysis that includes a vibration analysis for potential impacts from vibration generated by operation of the rail line. If levels of vibration are detected that exceed the applicable Federal Transit Administration threshold, the acoustic analysis shall recommend site design features, such as setbacks and trenches, and/or required building improvements, such as harder building materials (e.g., steel framing vs. wood framing), to eliminate the potential for train operations to result in levels of vibration that would interfere with proposed operation. The site design features shall be identified on the Final Site Plan and in associated CEQA documents as applicable to the satisfaction of the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments.
With implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI -4, groundborne vibration impacts during construction would be reduced . However, feasible alternative construction methods may not be available to reduce vibration levels t o below the applicable threshold, particularly for vibration - sensitive equipment in buildings adjacent to construction zones . T herefore, impacts would be significant and unavoidable. However, vibration impacts would be temporary and would cease following construction. Mitigation Measure NOI -5 would reduce impacts from industrial operations to a less than significant level by establishing a performance standard for new CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 32 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
permanent vibration sources. Mitigation Measure NOI -6 would reduce impacts from freight operations to a less than significant level by requiring rail vibration to be considered in the design of new vibration-sensitive uses. Therefore, impacts related to groundborne vibration would be less than significant.
4.5.3 Cumulative Considerable Excessive Noise Levels
Potentially Significant Impact: The PEIR identifies a potentially significant cumulative impact on noise associated with increases in traffic that would cumulatively increase traffic noise from the buildout of the General Plan Update in combination with future regional growth. Detailed information and analysis are provided in PEIR Section 3.5.6, Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation.
Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines , Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the approved project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect on cumulative traffic noise in the PEIR, and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section15091(a)(3), specific legal, economic, social, technological, or other considerations make other mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the PEIR infeasible.
Facts in Support of Findings: The potentially significant cumulative impact of the project on noise is analyzed in PEIR Section 3. 5.6.1. Buildout of the General Plan Update, along with future regional growth, would result in increases in traffic that would cumulatively increase traffic noise.
The potentially significant cumulative impact associated with traffic noise would be reduced with implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1. Mitigation Measure NOI -1 is set forth in Table ES-3 in the PEIR Executive Summary. Mitigation Measure NOI -1 is previously described in PEIR Section 3.5.6.1. While this mitigation measure would reduce the General Plan Update ’s incremental contribution to the cumulative impact to the extent feasible, the General Plan Update would have the potential to result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a cumulatively significant impact related to traffic noise . Mitigation Measure NOI -1 would reduce impacts but not to below a cumulatively considerable level. This impact would be cumulatively considerable and unavoidable, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA Guidelines , Section 15093, is required.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 33 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Section 5 Findings Regarding Project Alternatives
Because the project would cause one or more unavoidable significant environmental effects, the City must make Findings with respect to the alternatives to the project considere d in the Final PEIR, evaluating whether these alternatives could feasibly avoid or substantially lessen the project’s unavoidable significant environmental effects while achieving most of its objectives (listed in Section 4, Findings Regarding Direct, Indirect, or Cumulative Significant or Potentially Significant Effects).
The City, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final PEIR and the Record of Proceedings, and pursuant to California Public Resource Code, Section 21 081(a)(3), and CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(3), makes the following Findings with respect to the alternatives identified in the Final PEIR.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations of the prov ision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the Final PEIR as described below. “Feasible” is defined in Section 15364 of the CEQA Guidelines to mean “capable of bei ng accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors. ” The CEQA statute (Section 21081) and CEQA Guidelines (Section 15019[a][3]) also provide that “other” considerations may form the basis for a Finding of infeasibility. Case law makes clear that a mitigation measure or alternative can be deemed infeasible on the basis of its failure to meet project objectives or on related public policy grounds.
The PEIR examined a range of reasonable alternatives to determine whether they could meet the project objectives while avoiding or substantially lessening one or more of the project’s significant impacts. These Findings also considered the feasibility of each alternative. In determining the feasibility of alternatives, the City considered whether the alternatives could be accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time in light of economic, environmental, social, and technological factors (CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15126[d][5][A], 15364).
The PEIR analyzed three alternatives to the project: (1) No Project /Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative, (2) Reduced Density Alternative, and (3) Increased Conservation Alternative. Detailed information and analysis concerning these alternatives are in PEIR Chapter 5, Alternatives.
This section of the Findings summarizes these alternatives and their feasibility and effectiveness in avoiding or substantially lessening any of the significant impacts associated with the project.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 34 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
a. Alternative 1: No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative Consistent with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(e), the discussion of the No Project Alternative must examine the existing conditions and reasonably foreseeable future conditions that would exist if the project were not approved. The No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would leave the existing 2008 General Plan Land Use Element in place and assume that development would occur as designated in the 2008 General Plan land use map. Table 5, Comparison of Development Capacity of 2008 General Plan a nd Proposed General Plan Update , provides a summary of the development capacity under the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative compared to the project. As shown in Table 5, future development under the existing No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would result in 21,381 more dwelling units in the City and 43,361 more units in the SOI. In addition, the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would result in 18,452,909 fewer square feet of non-residential development in the City but 39,087,464 more square feet in the SOI. The No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative does not include the proposed High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation or the Greenway/Utility Corridor (GUC) and Health and Wellness Overlay (HWO). In addition, the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative maintains the existing Mixed Use -High Density land use designation and would not incorporate two new Mixed Use designations compared to the project. This alternative would also not update the Safety Element and would not include the creation of the new Environmental Justice Element consistent with current state requirements.
Table 5. Comparison of Development Capacity of
2008 General Plan and Proposed General Plan Update
Land Use
Designations
Existing 2008 General Plan1 Proposed Project2
Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage
City SOI City SOI City SOI City SOI
Residential1
Very Low Density
Residential 3,071 4,624 NA NA 3,715 4,420 NA NA
Low Density
Residential2 26,151 25,381 NA NA 8,387 4,534 NA NA
Low Density
Residential in
Low Density
Residential Infill
Overlay
N/A NA NA NA 22,356 NA NA NA
Low-Medium
Density
Residential
N/A NA NA NA 2,338 NA NA NA
Medium Density
Residential 2,212 0 NA NA 10,657 52 NA NA
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 35 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table 5. Comparison of Development Capacity of
2008 General Plan and Proposed General Plan Update
Land Use
Designations
Existing 2008 General Plan1 Proposed Project2
Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage
City SOI City SOI City SOI City SOI
Mixed Density
Residential 183 0 NA NA 700 NA NA NA
High Density
Residential 15,742 98 NA NA 1,274 NA NA NA
Mixed Use3
Mixed Use 715 8,549 32,927 1,407,692 NA NA NA NA
Mixed Use 1 NA NA NA NA 744 402 1,701,454 3,677,355
Mixed Use 2 NA NA NA NA 5,315 320 4,167,385 313,632
Commercial
General
Commercial NA NA 7,164,574 9,547,516 NA NA 18,825,761 1,398,276 Office
Professional NA NA 470,541 0 NA NA NA NA
Industrial
Light Industrial NA NA 2,078,061 4,044,158 NA NA 8,804,565 567,805 Heavy Industrial NA NA 2,067,592 2,062,951 NA NA 6,733,287 NA Public/Institutional/Open Space
Public/Institutional NA NA 1,081,239 1,068,766 NA NA 529,907 252,866 Open Space NA NA NA 101 NA NA
Greenway/Utility
Corridor NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Specific Plan
Specific Plan 36,674 15,220 4,835,282 7,166,297 7,909 605 7,252,423 0 Total 84,748 53,872 17,730,215 45,297,378 63,395 10,434 48,014,782 6,209,934 Source: City of Victorville 2008.
Note: SOI = sphere of influence
1 Existing 2008 General Plan capacity estimates both the maximum amount of dwelling units and employment square footage that could occur.
2 Average density is lower than the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay density range to account for existing low density residential that was developed at the lower density; Residential Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 80 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element); Mixed Use Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 67 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element).
3 Mixed Use Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 67 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element).
The potential impacts of the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative are discussed in detail in Section 5.4.1, Alternative 1: No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative, in PEIR Chapter 5. Relative to the project, the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan would not have any reduced impact. It would result in greater impacts on air quality, biological resources, cultural resources and TCRs, GHG emissions, noise, and transportation.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 36 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
The No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would not avoid or substantially lessen the potentially significant impact and unavoidable impacts on air quality, cultural resources, GHG emissions, and noise. In addition, the City finds this alternative infeasible because it does not address topics and issues pursuant to state requirements that have been adopted since the existing 2008 General Plan was approved in 2008. These include environmental justice and transportation issues, such as assessing vehicle miles traveled and analyzing transportation systems more holistically (e.g., complete streets ). In addition, the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would make it infeasible to comply with the statutory requirements identified in the Housing Element Update and would ensure opportunities for a variety of housing types and affordability levels (Project Objective 4).
Furthermore, the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would neither update the Land Use Element to guide and acco mmodate future growth in Victorville in a manner that achieves the community ’s vision, enhances quality of life, and provides a mix of land uses that promote sustainability and economic vitality (Project Objective 1) nor create a balanced land use pattern to accommodate Victorville ’s future housing, commerce, industry, recreation and open space, education, employment, social, and health needs (Project Objective 2). In addition, it would not include policies to create an aesthetically pleasing co mmunity by promoting a distinctive identity for Victorville (Project Objective 3).
Finally, t he No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative would not include an Environmental Justice Element. Without an Environmental Justice Element, the No Project/2008 Existing General Plan Alternative would not be able to ensure that strategies are created to separate sources of pollution from sensitive land uses to reduce pollution exposure and improve regional air quality (Project Objective 5) and promote access to public facilities and services by developing complete streets concepts throughout Victorville (Project Objective 6). In addition, the No Project/Existing 2008 General Plan Alternative does not include an update to the Safety Element and would not be able to ensure protection of Victorville against natural and human-made disasters by emphasizing hazard reduction through land use and devel opment restrictions and promoting accident prevention (Project Objective 7).
For the potentially significant impacts that cannot be avoided or mitigated to a level below significance, the City adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section 6 of these Findings pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093.
b. Alternative 2: Reduced Density Alternative
The Reduced Density Alternative would remove the proposed Low Density Residential Infill Overlay. Development in the Low Densi ty Residential Infill Overlay area would still occur in accordance with the designated land use and would not result in an increase in density in the core area of the City. Table 6, Comparison of Development Capacity of the Reduced Density CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 37 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Alternative and Proposed General Plan Update, provides a summary of the development capacity under the Reduced Density Alternative compared to the project. As shown in Table 6, future development under the Reduced Density Alternative would result in 22,356 fewer dwelling units in the core area of the City. The Reduced Density Alternative would also include preparation of proposed new Environmental Justice Element and updated Safety Element, similar to the project.
Table 6. Comparison of Development Capacity of the
Reduced Density Alternative and Proposed General Plan Update Land Use
Designations
Reduced Density Alternative Proposed Project2
Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage
City SOI City SOI City SOI City SOI
Residential1
Very Low
Density
Residential
3,715 4,420 NA NA 3,715 4,420 NA NA
Low Density
Residential2 8,387 4,534 NA NA 8,387 4,534 NA NA
Low Density
Residential in
Low Density
Residential Infill
Overlay
0 NA NA NA 22,356 NA NA NA
Low-Medium
Density
Residential
2,338 NA NA NA 2,338 NA NA NA
Medium Density
Residential 10,657 52 NA NA 10,657 52 NA NA
Mixed Density
Residential 700 NA NA NA 700 NA NA NA
High Density
Residential 1,274 NA NA NA 1,274 NA NA NA
Mixed Use3
Mixed Use 1 744 402 1,701,454 3,677,355 744 402 1,701,454 3,677,355 Mixed Use 2 5,315 320 4,167,385 313,632 5,315 320 4,167,385 313,632 Commercial
General
Commercial NA NA 18,825,761 1,398,276 NA NA 18,825,761 1,398,276 Industrial
Light Industrial NA NA 8,804,565 567,805 NA NA 8,804,565 567,805 Heavy Industrial NA NA 6,733,287 NA NA NA 6,733,287 NA
Public/Institutional/Open Space
Public/Institutional NA NA 529,907 252,866 NA NA 529,907 252,866 Open Space NA 101 NA NA NA 101 NA NA
Greenway/Utility
Corridor NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 38 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table 6. Comparison of Development Capacity of the
Reduced Density Alternative and Proposed General Plan Update Land Use
Designations
Reduced Density Alternative Proposed Project2
Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage
City SOI City SOI City SOI City SOI
Specific Plan
Specific Plan 7,909 605 7,252,423 0 7,909 605 7,252,423 0 Total 41,039 10,434 36,183,124 6,209,934 63,395 10,434 48,014,782 6,209,934 Notes: SOI = sphere of influence
Buildout assumptions for 2045 are inferred from SCAG’s 2020 Final CONNECT SoCal Demographic and Growth Forecast (September 3, 2020).
1 Residential Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 80 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element). 2 Average density is lower than the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay density range to account for existing low density residential that was developed at the lower density.
3 Mixed Use Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 67 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element).
The potential impacts of the Reduced Density Alternative are discussed in detail in Section 5.4.2, Alternative 2: Reduced Density Alternative, in PEIR Chapter 5. Relative to the project, the Reduced Density Alternative would have reduced impacts on air quality, biological resources, cultural resources and TCRs, GHG emissions, noise, and transportation ; however, air quality, cultural resources and TCRs, GHG emissions, and noise impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.
The City finds that implementation of the Reduced Density Alternative would slightly reduce the project’s significant impacts on air quality, biological resources, cultural resources and TCRs, GHG emissions, noise, and transportation. However, impacts on air quality, cultural resources and TCRs, GHG emissions, and noise would remain significant and unavoidable.
Further the City finds that the Reduced Density Alternative would not meet Project Objective 4 because the removal of the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay would not provide the City the opportunity to incentivize infill housing on vacant lands in order to provide additional housing opportunities and affordability levels as part of the statutory requirements of the Housing Element.
The Reduced Density Alternative would include an update to the Land Use Element that would guide and accommodate future growth in Victorville in a manner that achieves the community ’s vision and enhances the community’s quality of life . However, without the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay, it would not provide a mix of land uses that promote sustainability and economic vitality (Project Objective 1). In addition, the Reduced Density Alternative would create a balanced land use pattern to accommodate Victorville’s commerce, industry, recreation and open space, education, employment, social, and health needs but not its future housing needs with the removal of the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay (Project Objective 2), and would not create an aesthetically pleasing community by promoting a distinctive identity for Victorville (Project Objective 3). In addition, the Reduced Density Alternative would include the creation of the Environmental Justice Element and would create strategies to separate sources of pollution from CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 39 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
sensitive land uses to reduce pollution exposure and improve regional air quality (Project Objective 5) and promote access to public facilities and services by developing complete streets concepts throughout Victorville (Project Objective 6). In addition, the Reduced Density Alternative would include the update to the Safety Element and policies to protect Victorville against natural and human-made disasters by emphasizing hazard reduction through land use a nd development restrictions and promoting accident prevention (Project Objective 7).
For the potentially significant impacts that cannot be avoided or mitigated to a level below significance, the City adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Se ction 6 of these Findings pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093.
c. Alternative 3: Increased Conservation Alternative
The Increased Conservation Alternative would increase open space and greenways by removing portions of heavy and light industrial land uses in the northern areas of the City and designating those areas as open space. Table 7, Comparison of Development Cap acity of the Increased Conservation Alternative and Proposed General Plan Update , provides a summary of the development capacity under the Increased Conservation Alternative compared to the project. The Increased Conservation Alternative would result in 803.48 acres of additional open space in the City and 42.01 acres of additional open space in the SOI compared to the project. As shown in Table 7, the increase in open space would result in a reduction of 4,515,648 square feet of light and heavy industrial uses. The Increased Conservation Alternative would also include preparation of the new Environmental Justice Element and updated Safety Element, similar to the project.
Table 7. Comparison of Development Capacity of the
Increased Conservation Alternative and Proposed General Plan Update Land Use
Designations
Increased Conservation Alternative Proposed Project2
Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage
City SOI City SOI City SOI City SOI
Residential1
Very Low
Density
Residential
3,715 4,420 NA NA 3,715 4,420 NA NA
Low Density
Residential2 8,387 4,534 NA NA 8,387 4,534 NA NA
Low Density
Residential in
Low Density
Residential Infill
Overlay
22,356 NA NA NA 22,356 NA NA NA
Low-Medium
Density
Residential
2,338 NA NA NA 2,338 NA NA NA
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 40 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Table 7. Comparison of Development Capacity of the
Increased Conservation Alternative and Proposed General Plan Update Land Use
Designations
Increased Conservation Alternative Proposed Project2
Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage Dwelling Units
Non-Residential
Square Footage
City SOI City SOI City SOI City SOI
Medium Density
Residential 10,657 52 NA NA 10,657 52 NA NA
Mixed Density
Residential 700 NA NA NA 700 NA NA NA
High Density
Residential 1,274 NA NA NA 1,274 NA NA NA
Mixed Use3
Mixed Use 1 744 402 1,701,454 3,677,355 744 402 1,701,454 3,677,355 Mixed Use 2 5,315 320 4,167,385 313,632 5,315 320 4,167,385 313,632 Commercial
General
Commercial NA NA 18,825,761 1,398,276 NA NA 18,825,761 1,398,276 Industrial
Light Industrial NA NA 8,165,322 265,716 NA NA 8,804,565 567,805 Heavy Industrial NA NA 3,158,971 NA NA NA 6,733,287 NA
Public/Institutional/Open Space
Public/Institutional NA NA 529,907 252,866 NA NA 529,907 252,866 Open Space NA 101 NA NA NA 101 NA NA
Greenway/Utility
Corridor NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Specific Plan
Specific Plan 7,909 605 7,252,423 0 7,909 605 7,252,423 0 Total 63,395 10,434 31,969,565 5,907,845 63,395 10,434 48,014,782 6,209,934 Notes:
Buildout assumptions for 2045 are inferred from SCAG’s 2020 Final CONNECT SoCal Demographic and Growth Forecast (September 3, 2020).
1 Residential Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 80 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element). 2 Average density is lower than the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay density range to account for existing low d ensity residential that was developed at the lower density.
3 Mixed Use Land Use designations—realistic capacity factor: 67 percent assumed capacity (from Housing Element).
The potential impacts of the Increased Conservation Alternative are discussed in detail in Section
5.4.3, Alternative 3: Increased Conservation Alternative, in PEIR Chapter 5. The City finds that implementation of the Increased Conservation Alternative would slightly reduce the project’s significant impacts on air qual ity, biological resources, cultural resources and TCRs, GHG emissions, noise, and transportation. However, impacts on air quality, cultural resources, GHG emissions, and noise would remain significant and unavoidable.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 41 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
The Increased Conservation Alternative would not meet Project Objective 1 because it would not provide a mix of land uses that promote economic vitality due to the reduction in industrial development capacity to the same degree as the project . The Increased Conservation Alternative would also not meet Project Objective 2 because it would not create a balanced land use pattern to accommodate Victorville ’s future housing, commerce, industry, recreation and open space, education, employment, social, and health needs due to the reduction in industrial development capacity in the Planning Area compared to the project.
The Increased Conservation Alternative would create an aesthetically pleasing community by promoting a distinctive identity for Victorville (Project Objective 3) and would meet new statutory requirements identified in the Housing E lement Update and ensure opportunities for a variety of housing types and affordability levels (Project Objective 4).
In addition, the Increased Conservation Alternative would include the creation of the Environmental Justice Element and create strategies to separate sources of pollution from sensitive land uses to reduce pollution exposure and improve regional air quality (Project Objective 5) and promote access to public facilities and services by developing complete streets concepts throughout Victorville (Project Objective 6). In addition, the Increased Conservation Alternative would include the update to the Safety Element and policies to protect Victorville against natural and human-made disasters by emphasizing hazard red uction through land use and development restrictions and promoting accident prevention (Project Objective 7).
For the potentially significant impacts that cannot be avoided or mitigated to a level below significance, the City adopts the Statement of Overri ding Considerations in Section 6 of these Findings pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 42 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
This page intentionally left blank.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 43 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Section 6 Statement of Overriding Considerations
The project would have a significant, unavoidable environmenta l impact on the following area s, which is described in detail in Chapter 3, Environmental Analysis, in the PEIR:
• Air quality
• Cultural resources and TCRs
• GHG emissions
• Noise
The City has adopted all feasible mitigation measures regarding the significant, un avoidable environmental impacts. Although in some instances the mitigation measures may substantially lessen the unavoidable environmental impact, adoption of the mitigation measures would not fully avoid the impact. In addition, the City analyzed a reasonable range of alternatives to the project.
Based on this analysis, the City has determined that none of these alternatives meet the objectives of the project or are feasible and environmentally preferable to the project as approved.
Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15043 and 15093, the City must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations to approve the project. A Statement of Overri ding Considerations allows a lead agency to determine that specific economic, social, or other expected benefits of a project outweigh its potential unavoidable, significant environmental risks. The City has weighed the benefits of the project against its potentially significant environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093, the City hereby finds that the project would have the following benefits and that each of the following benefits is sufficient on its own to justify adoption of the project:
• The City ’s General Plan Update would guide and accommodate future growth in Victorville in a manner that achieves the community ’s vision, enhances the community’s quality of life, and provides a mix of land uses that promote sustainability and economic vitality.
• The City ’s General Plan Update would create a balanced land use pattern to accommodate Victorville’s future housing, commerce, industry, recreation and open space, education, employment, social, and health needs. • The City ’s General Plan Update would promote infill development to encourage efficient land development patterns to spur economic revitalization. • The City’s General Plan Update would ensure opportunities for a variety of housing types and affordability levels.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Final PEIR 44 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
• The City’s General Plan Update would promote access to public facilities and services by developing complete streets concepts throughout Victorville. • The City ’s General Plan Update would protect Victorville against natural and human-made disasters by emphasizing hazard reduction through land use and development restrictions and promoting accident prevention. • The City’s General Plan Update would create strategies to separate sources of pollution from sensitive land uses to reduce pollution exposure and improve regional air quality.
Attachment 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
This page intentionally left blank.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final PEIR MMRP-1 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Victorville General Plan Update Mitigation Measure No. Measure Person(s) to Verify
Timing of Verification
Responsible Party
Completed
Completed Pre-Const. During Const. Post-Const. Initials Date Air Quality
AIR-1 Site-Specific Air Quality Analysis. Before the issuance of a grading or construction permit and in conjunction with any required California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review, the project applicant shall submit to the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments documentation that the project is consistent with the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD)
significance thresholds contained in the MDAQMD CEQA and Federal Conformity Gui delines. A project -specific Air Quality Analysis quantifying the potential air emissions of project construction shall be prepared by a qualified air quality professional.
This Air Quality Analysis shall demonstrate that criteria pollutant emissions are below the MDAQMD significance thresholds outlined in the MDAQMD CEQA and Federal Conformity Guidelines (2020).
If the Air Quality Analysis cannot demonstrate that the project is below the MDAQMD significance thresholds before mitigation, project applicant shall provide documentation to the City detailing the measures that would be implemented and that mitigated emissions would be below MDAQMD significance thresholds.
Development Department X City, Project Applicant,
Air Quality Professional
AIR-2 Health Risk Assessment. A Health Risk Assessment shall be prepared by a qualified air quality professional for future projects that would generate toxic air contaminants (such as diesel particulate matter) in the General Plan Update Planning Area or that would locate a new sensitive receptor within the following screening-level distances identified in the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD) CEQA and Federal Conformity Guidelines (2020): any industrial project within 1,000 feet; a distribution center (40 or more trucks per day) within 1,000 feet; a major transportation project within 1,000 feet; a dry cleaner using perchloroethylene within 500 feet; and a gasoline dispensing facility within 300 feet. A project shall not be considered for approval until a Health Risk Assessment has been completed and approved by the MDAQMD. The methodology for the Health Risk Assessment shall follow the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment guidelines for the preparation of Health Risk Assessments. If a potentially significant health risk is identified, the Health Risk Assessment shall identify appropriate measures, such as upgrading building ventilation systems, to reduce the potential health risk to below a significant level, or the sensitive rece ptor or proposed facility shall be sited in another location.
Development Department X City, Air Quality
Professional
AIR-3 Odor Management Plan. If it is determined during project -level environmental review that a discretionary project has the potential to emit nuisance odors beyond the property line, an odor management plan shall be prepared and submitted by the project applicant prior to project approval to ensure compliance with the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD) Rule 402 for projects in the Planning Area. The following types of projects with the specified buffer distances from sensitive receptors have the potential to generate substantial odors:
wastewater treatment plant (2 miles), sanitary landfill (1 mile), Development Department X City, Project Applicant
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final PEIR MMRP-2 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Victorville General Plan Update Mitigation Measure No. Measure Person(s) to Verify
Timing of Verification
Responsible Party
Completed
Completed Pre-Const. During Const. Post-Const. Initials Date transfer station (1 mile), composting facility (1 mile), petroleum refinery (2 miles), asphalt batch plant (1 mile), chemical manufacturing (1 mile), fiberglass manufacturing (1 mile), painting/coating operations (1 mile), food processing facility (1 mile), feed l ot/ dairy (1 mile), and rendering plant (1 mile). The odor management plan prepared for these facilities shall identify control technologies that will be utilized to reduce potential odors to acceptable levels, including appropriate enforcement mechanisms. Control technologies may include but are not limited to scrubbers (e.g., air pollution control devices) at an industrial facility. Control technologies identified in the odor management plan shall be identified as mitigation measures in the
environmental document and/or incorporated into the site plan.
Biological Resources
BIO-1 Pre-Construction Nesting Bird and Raptor Surveys . To the extent feasible, grubbing, trimming, or clearing of vegetation from the Planning Area shall not occur during the general bird and raptor nesting season (January 15 through September 15). If grubbing, trimming, or clearing of vegetation cannot feasibly occur outside the general bird and raptor nesting season, a qualified biologist shall perform a pre-construction nesting bird and raptor survey in sites in the Planning Area with vegetation supporting nesting birds and raptors. Nesting bird and raptor surveys shall occur within 10 days before the start of vegetation clearing or grubbing to determine if active bird nests are present. If no active bird nests are identified on a site or within a 300-foot buffer of the site, no further mitigation is necessary. If active nests of bird species covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act are detected on sites in the Planning Area during the 10-day pre-construction survey, construction activities shall stay outside a 300-foot buffer around the active nest. For raptor species, this buffer shall be expanded to 500 feet. It is recommended that a biological monitor be present to delineate the boundaries of the buffer area and to monitor the active nest to ensure that nesting behavior is not adversely affected by construction activity. Once the young have fledged and a qualified biologist has determined the nest is inactive, normal construction activities can occur.
Development Department X X City, Qualified Biologist
BIO-2 Aquatic Resources Delineation . Future projects within or adjacent to the Mojave River or other aquatic resources that have the potential to impact sensitive aquatic resources shall be required to conduct an aquatic resources delineation following the methods outlined in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the Regional Supplement to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region to map the extent of wetlands and non -wetland waters, determine jurisdiction, and assess potential impacts. The aquatic resources shall be conducted by a qualified biologist. The results of the delineation shall be presented in an Aquatic Resources Delineation Report and be incorporated into the California Environmental Quality Act documents required for approval and permitting of the proposed project.
Development Department X City, Qualified Biologist
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final PEIR MMRP-3 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Victorville General Plan Update Mitigation Measure No. Measure Person(s) to Verify
Timing of Verification
Responsible Party
Completed
Completed Pre-Const. During Const. Post-Const. Initials Date BIO-3 Aquatic Resources Permitting . Future projects within or adjacent to Mojave River or other aquatic resources that have been determined through Mitigation Measure BIO -2 to have a significant impact to sensitive aquatic resources shall obtain required permits and authorizations from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board. The regulatory agency authorizations shall include impact avoidance and minimization measures and mitigation measures for unavoida ble impacts. Specific avoidance and minimization measures and mitigation measures for impacts to jurisdictional resources shall be determined through discussions with the regulatory agencies during the proposed project permitting process and may include monetary contributions to a mitigation bank or habitat creation, restoration, or enhancement.
Development Department X City, Qualified Biologist,
Regulatory Agencies
Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
CUL-1 Identification and Evaluation of Built Environment Resources. For future development projects with the potential to impact built environment resources, the evaluation of built environment resources shall be performed by an architectural historian or historian who meets the P rofessionally Qualified Standards in architectural history or history as determined by the City of Victorville. If built environment resources have been identified that meet the age -threshold for eligibility then the qualified architectural historian or hi storian shall conduct a reconnaissance-level and/or intensive-level survey in accordance with the California Office of Historic Preservation guidelines to identify any previously unrecorded potential historical resources that may be potentially affected by the project. Pursuant to the definition of a historical resource under the California Environmental Quality Act, potential historical resources shall be evaluated under a developed historic context.
Development Department X City, Qualified Architectural Historian
CUL-2 Additional Mitigation for Built Environment Resources . If avoidance or preservation in place of a built environment resource is not possible then appropriate site-specific mitigation measures shall be established and undertaken. To ensure that projects requiring the relocation, rehabilitation, or alteration of a historical resource do not impair its significance, the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatments of Historic Properties shall be used to the ma ximum extent possible. The application of the standards shall be overseen by a qualified architectural historian or historic architect meeting the Professionally Qualified Standards set by the City of Victorville. Prior to any construction activities that may affect the historical resource, a report identifying and specifying the treatment of character -defining features and construction activities shall be provided to and approved by the City of Victorville.
If the project would result in the demolition or significant alteration of a historical resource, the project shall record the resource prior to construction activities . Recordation shall take the form of Development Department X City, Qualified Architectural Historian
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final PEIR MMRP-4 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Victorville General Plan Update Mitigation Measure No. Measure Person(s) to Verify
Timing of Verification
Responsible Party
Completed
Completed Pre-Const. During Const. Post-Const. Initials Date Historic American Buildings Survey, Historic American
Engineering Record, or Historic American Lands cape Survey documentation and shall be performed by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Professionally Qualified Standards set by the City of Victorville. Documentation shall include an architectural and historical narrative; photographs; and supplementary information such as building plans and elevations, and/or historic photographs. Documentation shall be reproduced on archival paper and placed in appropriate local, state, or federal institutions. The specific scope and details of documentation shall be developed at the project level.
CUL-3 Site-Specific Cultural Resources Study and Evaluation of Resources. Future projects that would disturb previously undeveloped areas or areas containing known archaeological resources shall complete a Cultural resource assessment performed under the supervision of an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professionally Qualified Standards as determined by the City of Victorville. Assessments shall include a California Historical Resources Information System records search at the South Central Coast Information Center and a search of the Sacred Lands Files maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission. A Phase I pedestrian survey shall be undertaken in areas that are undeveloped to locate any surface cultural materials and/or a built environment resources survey shall be conducted. If resources are identified during the site -specific archaeological survey, then a Phase II evaluation of the resources to the California Register of Historical Resources shall be conducted to determine if the resource is significant under the California Environmental Quality Act, and would be adversely impacted by the project. A Native American monitor from a culturally affiliated Tribe shall be present during any archaeological excavations involving prehistoric cultural resources. The evaluation of built environment resources shall be performed by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Professionally Qualified Standards in architectural history or history.
If no significant resources are found, and site conditions are such that there is no potential for further discoveries, then no further action is required. All resources should be documented on the appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation site forms and results of all assessments should be documented in a technical report.
If potentially significant archaeological resources are identified during the Phase I or Phase II assessments, and impacts to these resources cannot be avoided, then appropriate site -specific mitigation measures shall be established and undertaken as described in Mitigation Measure CUL-4.
If no significant resources are found, but there is potential for unknown archaeological resources or Tribal Cultural Resources to be uncovered during specific project activities, then Mitigation Measure CUL-5 (archaeological and Native American monitoring program) shall be implemented.
Development Department X City, Qualified
Archaeologist, Native
American Monitor
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final PEIR MMRP-5 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Victorville General Plan Update Mitigation Measure No. Measure Person(s) to Verify
Timing of Verification
Responsible Party
Completed
Completed Pre-Const. During Const. Post-Const. Initials Date CUL-4 Avoidance and Preservation of Cultural Resources. The preferred alternative for mitigating impacts to cultural resources and Tribal Cultural Resources is avoidance or preservation in place. If avoidance or preservation is demonstrated to be infeasible, then alternative measures shall be required depending on site conditions and guided by the recommendations of an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professionally Qualified Standards. Avoidance of cultural resources and Tribal Cultural Resources may be accomplished through a project redesign. Preservation in place may include planning constructio n to avoid significant resources; planning parks, green space, or other open space to preserve cultural resources; or “capping” or covering archaeological sites with a layer of soil before building. Alternatively, a Phase III data recovery program may be i mplemented by a qualified
archaeologist and performed in accordance with the Office of Historic Preservation’s Archaeological Resource Management Reports: Recommended Contents and Format (1990) and
Guidelines for Archaeological Research Designs (1991).
Development Department X X City, Qualified
Archaeologist
CUL-5 Archaeological and Native American Monitoring Program.
Because there is always a potential for encountering cultural resources during excavation, the implementation of an
archaeological and Native American monitoring program is recommended for future development that would conduct new ground disturbance in ar eas identified as having a potential for unknown archaeological resources or Tribal Cultural Resources.
The archaeological and Native American monitoring program shall consist of the full-time presence of a qualified archaeologist and traditionally and culturally affiliated Native American monitor during ground -disturbing activities, or an alternative frequency approved by the qualified archaeologist and the Native American monitor. If an archaeological and Native American monitoring program is implemented, the program shall include the following:
1. The requirement for the archaeological and Native American monitoring to be noted on applicable construction
documents, including plans.
2. The archaeologist and Native American monitor shall attend the pre-construction meeting with the contractor and/or the City.
3. The archaeologist shall maintain ongoing collaborative consultation with the Native American monitor during all ground-disturbing or altering activities, as identified above.
4. In the event that cul tural resources are discovered during project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60 -foot buffer) shall cease and a qualified
archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during this assessment period. Additionally, the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Department shall be
contacted regarding any pre-contact and/or historic-era finds Development Department X X City, Qualified
Archaeologist,
Native American Monitor
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final PEIR MMRP-6 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Victorville General Plan Update Mitigation Measure No. Measure Person(s) to Verify
Timing of Verification
Responsible Party
Completed
Completed Pre-Const. During Const. Post-Const. Initials Date and be provided information after the archaeologist makes his/her initial assessment of the nature of the find so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment.
5. Archaeological isolates and non-significant materials shall be minimally documented in the field and ground disturbance shall be allowed to resume.
6. The avoidance and protection of discovered unknown and significant cultural resources and/or unique archaeological resources is the preferable mitigation for the proposed project. If significant pre-contact and/or historic-era cultural resources, as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (as amended, 2015), are discovered and avoidance cannot be
ensured, the archaeologist shall develop a Monitoring and Treatment Plan, the drafts of which shall be provided to the Yuhaaviatam for review. The archaeologist shall monitor the remainder of the project and implement the plan accordingly.
7. Prior to the conclusion of each project, a Monitoring Report and/or Ev aluation Report, which describes the results, analysis and conclusions of the archaeological and Native American monitoring program (such as, but not limited to, a data recovery program) shall be submitted by the
archaeologist, along with the Native Americ an monitor’s notes and comments, to the City of Victorville for approval.
CUL-6 Identification and Treatment of Human Remains. In the event that human remains (or possible human remains) are
encountered, all ground disturbance within 100 feet of the remains shall halt and California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, Section 15064. 5, subdivision (e); California Public Resource Code, Section 5097.98; and California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5, shall be followed, including informing the County Medical Examiner and City of Victorville. If human remains are determined to be o f Native American origin, the applicant shall comply with the state relating to the disposition of Native American burials that fall within the jurisdiction of the Native American Heritage Commission (California Public Resources Code, Section 5097). The Medical Examiner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission to determine the most likely descendant.
The most likely descendant shall inspect the site as needed and make recommendations or preferences for treatment of the remains within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The disposition of the remains shall be overseen by the most likely descendant to determine the most appropriate means of treating the human remains and any associated grave artifacts. The specific locations of Na tive American burials and reburials is proprietary and shall not be disclosed to the general public. If Native American remains are discovered, the remains shall be kept in situ (in place), or in a secure location, as approved by the most likely descendant until the repatriation process can be completed. According to California Health and Safety Code, six or more human burials at one location constitute a cemetery (Section 8100), and disturbance of Native American cemeteries is a felony.
Development Department X X City, Construction
Contractor, Qualified
Archaeologist,
Native American Monitor
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final PEIR MMRP-7 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Victorville General Plan Update Mitigation Measure No. Measure Person(s) to Verify
Timing of Verification
Responsible Party
Completed
Completed Pre-Const. During Const. Post-Const. Initials Date CUL-7 Contact of the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Department. The Yuhaaviatam shall be contacted, as detailed in Mitigation Measure CUL -5, regarding any pre - contact and/or historic -era cultural resources discovered during project implementation and be provided information regarding the nature of the find so as to pr ovide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. Should the find be deemed significant, as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (as amended, 2015), a cultural resource Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be created by the archa eologist, in coordination with the Yuhaaviatam, and all subsequent finds shall be subject to this plan. This plan shall allow for a monitor to be present that represents the Yuhaaviatam for the remainder of the project, should the Yuhaaviatam elect to place a monitor on site.
Any and all archaeological/cultural documents created as a part of the project (isolate records, site records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the applicant and lead agency for dissemination to the Yuhaaviatam. The lead agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with the Yuhaaviatam throughout the life of the project.
Development Department X X City, Construction
Contractor, Qualified
Archaeologist,
Native American Monitor
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GHG-1 City-Wide Sustainability Program. The City of Victorville will complete and adopt a Climate Action Plan that meets the criteria specified in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15183.5(b), to be considered a qualified CAP. It is assumed that the adop ted Climate Action Plan will demonstrate how the City of Victorville shall implement its fair share of greenhouse gas emissions reductions to achieve statewide emissions reduction goals. The plan will be adopted in a public process following environmental review. The program shall include an inventory of existing community greenhouse gas emissions; establish greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets consistent with Senate Bill 32, Executive Order S -03-05, and EO B -55-18; identify greenhouse gas emissions reduction measures to achieve reduction targets; and establish a program to monitor progress. In addition, the plan will establish a level, based on substantial evidence, below which the contribution to greenhouse gas emissions from activities covered by th e plan would not be cumulatively considerable.
Greenhouse gas emissions reduction measures may include but not be limited to the recommendations in Table 1, Priority GHG Reduction Strategies for Local Government Climate Action, in Appendix D to the Califor nia Air Resources Board California’s Draft 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan.
Development Department X City
GHG-2 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Features for Individual Projects.
Until a local qualified Climate Action Plan is in place, and before the issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall submit to the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments documentation showing that the proposed project is consis tent with the applicable and feasible recommendations for new development in Table 1, Priority GHG Reduction Strategies for Development Department X City, Project Applicant
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final PEIR MMRP-8 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Victorville General Plan Update Mitigation Measure No. Measure Person(s) to Verify
Timing of Verification
Responsible Party
Completed
Completed Pre-Const. During Const. Post-Const. Initials Date Local Government Climate Action, in Appendix D to the California Air Resources Board California’s Draft 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan, provided in Table 3.4-5, 2022 Scoping Plan Priority GHG Reduction Strategies for Local Government Climate Action, of the PEIR; or implement project specific greenhouse gas mitigation measures as outlined in any required CEQA document (e.g. Mitigated Negative Declaration, EIR, etc.). Additionally, residential development will be required to demonstrate consistency with the following 2022 Scoping Plan recommended attributes, as feasible unless otherwise addressed via project specific greenhouse gas miti gation measures as outlined in any required CEQA document:
• At least 20 percent of the units are affordable to lower-income residents;
• Result in no net loss of existing affordable units;
• Utilize existing infill sites that are surrounded by urban uses, and reuse or redevelop previously developed, underutilized land presently served by existing utilities and essential public services (e.g., transit, streets, water, sewer);
• Include transit-supportive densities (minimum of 20 residential dwelling units/acre), or are in proximity to existing transit (within ½ mile), or satisfy more detailed and stringent criteria specified in the adopted RTP/SCS for SCS consistency that would go further to reduce emissions;
• Do not result in the loss or conversion of the state ’s natural and working lands;
• Use all -electric appliances, without any natural gas connections, and would not use propane or other fos sil fuels for space heating, water heating, or indoor cooking;
• Provide EV charging infrastructure at least in accordance with CALGreen Tier 2 standards; and
• Relax parking requirements by:
o Eliminating parking requirements or including maximum allowable parking ratios.
o Providing residential parking supply at a ratio of <1 parking space per unit.
o Unbundling residential parking costs from costs to rent or lease.
Noise
NOI-1 Roadway Noise Measures. Before the approval of building permits and in conjunction with any required California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review for new projects that would result in increased vehicular traffic, project applicants shall be required to complete a site -specific Noise Technical Study to determine if the project would result in a significant increase in traffic noise. A qualified acoustical analyst shall prepare the Noise Technical Study.
Development Department X City, Project Applicant,
Qualified Acoustical
Analyst, Qualified
Acoustical Engineer
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final PEIR MMRP-9 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Victorville General Plan Update Mitigation Measure No. Measure Person(s) to Verify
Timing of Verification
Responsible Party
Completed
Completed Pre-Const. During Const. Post-Const. Initials Date If a significant increase in vehicle noise level is identified because of project implementation, the project shall incorporate buffers or other noise reduction measures to the extent feasible to reduce noise levels at affected sensitive receptors to a normally acceptable noise level. Reduction measures that shall be considered include but are not limited to alternative road design, reduced speeds, alternative paving, building retrofits to provide additional noise attenuation, and setbacks or buffers before berms and walls. A qualified acoustical engineer shall design the noise reduction measures. Where noise reduction measures in the public right -of-way are infeasible, the project applicant shall conduct outreach to potentially affected sensitive receptors to determine the feasibility of noise reduction measures on pri vate property, including a noise barrier or building retrofits. Based on affected receptor response, a qualified acoustical engineer shall determine the feasibility of a noise barrier on private property and/or the extent of required building retrofits. Th e project applicant shall submit plans to the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments for review and approval before the start of any construction. These plans shall demonstrate that the proposed noise reduction measures would reduce traffic noise exposure at sensitive receptors to the extent feasible.
NOI-2 New Noise Sensitive Land Use. Before the approval of building permits an d in conjunction with any required California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review for new noise-sensitive projects that are not subject to General Plan Noise Element Implementation Measure 2.1.1.1, project applicants shall be required to complete a sit e-specific Noise Technical Study to determine if the project would be exposed to exterior noise levels that exceed the applicable normally acceptable noise compatibility standard in General Plan Noise Element Table N-3, Victorville Land Use Compatibility Standards. If a potentially incompatible exterior noise level is identified, the project shall incorporate noise attenuation features, such as enhanced windows or insulation, to provide interior noise levels of 45 dBA CNEL or below. The project applicant shall submit the analysis to the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments for review and approval before the start of any construction. These plans shall demonstrate that the proposed noise reduction measures would reduce interior noise exposure to 45 dBA CNEL or less.
Development Department X City, Project Applicant,
Qualified Acoustical
Analyst
NOI-3 Construction Noise Best Management Practices. Prior to approval of a grading permit for new development requiring use of heavy construction equipment, the construction contractor shall demonstrate that the following best management practices would be implemented during construction, as applicable. Best management practices shall be documented on the project’s grading or other construction plan and submitted to the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments for review and approval before the start of any construction.
1. Limit hours of construction to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday.
Development Department X X City, Construction
Contractor
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final PEIR MMRP-10 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Victorville General Plan Update Mitigation Measure No. Measure Person(s) to Verify
Timing of Verification
Responsible Party
Completed
Completed Pre-Const. During Const. Post-Const. Initials Date
2. The construction contractor shall provide written notification to the noise sensitive uses within 500 feet of construction activities at least 3 weeks prior to the start of construction activities informing them of the estimated start date and duration of construction activities.
3. Construction activities that could generate high noise levels, such as pile driving, shall be scheduled during times that would have the least impact on sensitive receptor locations.
4. Stationary construction noise sources, such a s temporary generators, shall be located as far from nearby noise - sensitive receptors as possible.
5. Trucks shall be prohibited from idling along streets serving the construction site where noise-sensitive receptors are located.
6. Outfit construction equ ipment with properly maintained, manufacturer-approved or recommended sound abatement
means on air intakes, combustion exhausts, heat dissipation vents, and the interior surfaces of engine hoods and power train enclosures.
7. Position (to the extent practi cal) construction laydown and vehicle staging areas as far from noise -sensitive land uses as feasible.
8. If feasible and determined to be an effective option, install temporary noise barriers around the perimeter of the
construction area to minimize construction noise.
NOI-4 Vibration Best Management Practices. Before the start of construction activities that would involve use of a vibratory roller (or equivalent equipment) within 235 feet of a vibration-sensitive land use or within 110 feet of other land uses or the use of typical (not vibratory) construction equipment within 135 feet of a vibration-sensitive land use or within 65 feet of other land uses, the project applicant shall retain a qu alified acoustician to demonstrate that vibration would not exceed the applicable FTA threshold (65 VdB for vibration-sensitive land uses or 75 VdB for other daytime land uses), or shall identify best management practices to be implemented by the construct ion contractor to reduce vibration levels to below the applicable threshold. The best management practices shall be included in project construction documents, including the Grading Plan and contract with the construction contractor. Practices may include but not be limited to the following:
• Use only properly maintained equipment with vibratory isolators • Operate equipment as far from sensitive receptors as possible • Use rubber-tired vehicles as opposed to tracked vehicles Development Department X X City, Project Applicant,
Qualified Acoustician,
Construction Contractor
NOI-5 Vibration from Industrial Operation. Before the approval of building permits, project applicants for future development projects that would include vibration -generating equipment shall be required to complete a site -specific analysis to determine if proposed sources of vibration would result in a significant vibration at nearby land uses. The analysis shall identify the Development Department X City, Project Applicant
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final PEIR MMRP-11 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Victorville General Plan Update Mitigation Measure No. Measure Person(s) to Verify
Timing of Verification
Responsible Party
Completed
Completed Pre-Const. During Const. Post-Const. Initials Date potential sources of vibration, equipment specifications, and evaluate whether vibration would exceed the applicable FTA threshold at surrounding land uses. If significant vibr ation levels are identified, the analysis shall identify vibration reduction measures to the extent feasible to reduce vibration levels at affected receptors, such as relocating equipment. The project applicant shall submit the analysis to the City of Vict orville Planning and Building Departments for review and approval before the start of any construction.
NOI-6 Railroad Vibration. Prior to approval of building permits and in conjunction with any required California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review, if new vibration -sensitive land uses are in close proximity to the railroad, the project applicant shall retain an acoustical engineer to conduct an acoustic analysis that includes a vibration analysis for potential impacts from vibration generated by operation of the rail line. If levels of vibration are detected that exceed the applicable FTA threshold, the acoustic analysis shall recommend site design features, such as setbacks and trenches, and/or required building improvements, such as harder building materials (e.g., steel framing vs. wood framing), to eliminate the potential for train operations to result in levels of vibration that would interfere with proposed operation. The site design features shall be identified on the Final Site Plan and within associated CEQA documents as applicable to the satisfaction of the City of Victorville Planning and Building Departments.
Development Department X City, Project Applicant,
Acoustical Engineer
Notes: City = City of Victorville
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final PEIR MMRP-12 November 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
This page intentionally left blank.
City Council
Resolution No. 22-124
Exhibit “C”
Land Use Element
2045 LAND USE ELEMENT
Public Review Draft
September 2, 2022
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................1
1.1 PURPOSE OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT .................................................................................................1
1.2 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS ...............................................................................................................3
1.3 SCOPE AND CONTENT .........................................................................................................................3
1.4 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS ...........................................................................4
1.5 RELATED PLANS AND PROGRAMS ........................................................................................................4
1.6 COMMUNITY OUTREACH ......................................................................................................................6
2. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES ............................................................................................. 10
2.1 BALANCED GROWTH ......................................................................................................................... 10
2.2 ECONOMIC PROSPERITY ................................................................................................................... 18
2.3 QUALITY OF LIFE ............................................................................................................................... 19
2.4 COMMUNITY CHARACTER .................................................................................................................. 23
3. LAND USE PLAN .................................................................................................................................. 25
3.1 OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................................................... 25
3.2 TERMINOLOGY ................................................................................................................................. 25
3.3 LAND USE POLICY MAP AND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM....................................................................... 27
3.4 LAND USE DESIGNATIONS ................................................................................................................ 32
3.5 DEVELOPMENT FOCUS AREAS .......................................................................................................... 44
3.6 RELATIONSHIP WITH ZONING ............................................................................................................ 53
3.7 ACCOMMODATING FUTURE GROWTH ................................................................................................ 55 Figures
FIGURE LUE-1: VICINITY MAP .............................................................................................................................2 FIGURE LUE-2: ILLUSTRATION OF FAR ............................................................................................................. 27 FIGURE LUE-3: LAND USE MAP ........................................................................................................................ 28 FIGURE LUE-4: DEVELOPMENT FOCUS AREA MAP ............................................................................................ 45 Tables
TABLE LUE-1: LAND USE DESIGNATION SUMMARY ............................................................................................ 29 TABLE LUE-2: RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING DISTRICTS ................................ 54 TABLE LUE-3: 2045 LAND USE ELEMENT BUILD-OUT PROJECTIONS .................................................................. 55
This page intentionally left blank
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................1
1.1 PURPOSE OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT .................................................................................................1
1.2 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS ...............................................................................................................3
1.3 SCOPE AND CONTENT .........................................................................................................................3
1.4 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS ...........................................................................4
1.5 RELATED PLANS AND PROGRAMS ........................................................................................................4
1.6 COMMUNITY OUTREACH ......................................................................................................................6
2. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES ............................................................................................. 10
2.1 BALANCED GROWTH ......................................................................................................................... 10
2.2 ECONOMIC PROSPERITY ................................................................................................................... 18
2.3 QUALITY OF LIFE ............................................................................................................................... 20
2.4 COMMUNITY CHARACTER .................................................................................................................. 23
3. LAND USE PLAN .................................................................................................................................. 26
3.1 OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................................................... 26
3.2 TERMINOLOGY ................................................................................................................................. 26
3.3 LAND USE POLICY MAP AND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM....................................................................... 28
3.4 LAND USE DESIGNATIONS ................................................................................................................ 33
3.5 DEVELOPMENT FOCUS AREAS .......................................................................................................... 47
3.6 RELATIONSHIP WITH ZONING ............................................................................................................ 56
3.7 ACCOMMODATING FUTURE GROWTH ................................................................................................ 58 Figures
FIGURE LUE-1: VICINITY MAP .............................................................................................................................2 FIGURE LUE-2: ILLUSTRATION OF FAR ............................................................................................................. 28 FIGURE LUE-3: LAND USE MAP ........................................................................................................................ 29 FIGURE LUE-4: DEVELOPMENT FOCUS AREA MAP ............................................................................................ 48 Tables
TABLE LUE-1: LAND USE DESIGNATION SUMMARY ............................................................................................ 30 TABLE LUE-2: RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING DISTRICTS ................................ 57 TABLE LUE-3: 2045 LAND USE ELEMENT BUILD-OUT PROJECTIONS .................................................................. 58
This page intentionally left blank
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 1
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose of the Land Use Element
State law requires all jurisdictions in California to prepare and adopt a General Plan as a tool to manage growth and development. The Land Use Element is a mandatory element of the General Plan. The primary purpose of the Land Use Element is to establish the policy foundation that will direct future land use decision-making for Victorville and its Sphere of Influence (SOI) to achieve the community’s long-range goals. It functions as a guide to policy makers, decision makers, the general public, and planners in the City regarding the desired pattern of land use and development through the 2045 planning period.
To assist local governments in preparing general plans and the public in participating in that process, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) is required to develop and adopt guidelines for the preparation and content of the mandatory elements in general plans (Gov. Code § 65040.2) and periodically revises them. OPR adopted a comprehensive update of the guidelines in 2017, upon which this update is based. The General Plan Guidelines provide an excellent synopsis of the purpose of a Land Use Element and its long-term value to a community.
The Land Use Element requirements provide an opportunity to determine the future of a community. By ensuring thoughtful, equitable, and accessible distribution of different densities, intensities, and land uses and by aligning with other General Plan elements, the Land Use Element can address long term environmental issues such as climate change and air quality; enhance local economies; reduce infrastructure costs; facilitate healthy lifestyles; increase transportation choices; and create community resilience. It also can address emerging developments in technology, such as connected and autonomous vehicles and resulting changes in land use, and promote quality housing for all residents of the community. (OPR General Plan Guidelines, pg. 53)
The Victorville Land Use Element is required to plan for future development both within the City’s legal boundary as well as its sphere of influence. A "sphere of influence" (SOI) is a plan for the probable ultimate physical boundaries and service area of a local governmental agency, as determined by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) in accordance with State law. SOIs are determined and amended solely at the discretion of LAFCo. Note that Victorville’s SOI has been amended since the last update of the Land Use Element. Figure LUE-1 shows Victorville in proximity to adjacent communities as well as its location within the region.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 2
Figure LUE-1: Vicinity Map
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 3
1.2 Statutory Requirements
California Government Code Section 65302(a) states that a land use element must designate the proposed general distribution, location, and extent of land uses for:
Housing (including sites identified in the Housing Element to meet the City’s fair share of regional housing needs at all income levels), business, and industry Open space, including agriculture, natural resources, recreation, and enjoyment of scenic beauty
Recreation facilities and opportunities
Educational facilities
Public buildings and grounds
Future solid and liquid waste disposal facilities
Greenways (as defined in Section 816.52 of the Civil Code) Timberland Preserve Zone lands, if applicable
Areas subject to flooding, identified by either flood plain mapping prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) or the Department of Water Resources or mapped flood areas adopted by the local community on Flood Insurance Rate Maps
Military land use compatibility and impacts to military readiness, if applicable Other categories of public and private uses of land
The Land Use Element also must include a statement of the standards of population density and building intensity recommended for the various districts and other territory covered by the plan.
1.3 Scope and Content
The City of Victorville Land Use Element complies with the requirements for land use elements mandated in Government Code Section 65302(a) and the General Plan Guidelines. The Land Use Element is comprised of three chapters: 1) Introduction, 2) Issues and Citywide Goals and Policies, and 3) the Land Use Plan, which includes the Land Use Policy Map that graphically identifies the planned land uses within Victorville and the SOI for the 2045 planning period.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 4
1.4 Relationship to Other General Plan
Elements
State law requires internal consistency among the various elements of the General Plan. As a part of this project, the Safety Element is being updated and a new Environmental Justice Element is being prepared in accordance with Government Code Section 65302(h)(2). The policies and plans for both documents have been directly coordinated with the update of the Land Use Element.
Government Code Section 65581 requires every city and county to prepare a Housing Element as part of its General Plan to adequately “plan” to meet the housing needs of everyone in each jurisdiction at all income levels. Each jurisdiction must demonstrate land use capacity to accommodate its share of the region’s housing needs—this “share” is called the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Housing Elements are required to be updated according to a state-mandated schedule, commonly referred to as “cycles.” The City adopted its 6th Cycle Housing Element on January 18, 2022. While not a component of this General Plan update, the timing of updating the Land Use Element provided the City with the opportunity to coordinate the update of the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element with the Land Use Element to accommodate the City’s share of the RHNA in a manner that ensures new residential development occurs in a sustainable manner and incorporates environmental justice policies.
The existing Circulation Element was not updated as part of the 2022 General Plan update.
However, the impacts of the new Land Use Element were considered as part of the preparation of the EIR for the General Plan update project. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that was prepared for the 2022 General Plan update (the EIR “proposed project”) concluded that implementation of the proposed project would increase traffic volumes and demand for public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, which would require the improvement and expansion of the circulation system. However, the Circulation Element incorporates goals, objectives, policies, and implementation measures to achieve the vision of the Circulation Element and to guide the City’s efforts to continue to build and maintain an efficient transportation and circulation infrastructure to support the community development policies.
1.5 Related Plans and Programs
There are a number of related plans and programs that are considered in the formulation, adoption, and implementation of local land use policy; although not an exhaustive list, key plans and programs are summarized below.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 5
1.5.1 California Environmental Quality Act
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is a state statute that requires state and local agencies to identify the significant environmental impacts of their actions and to avoid or mitigate those impacts, if feasible. CEQA applies to certain activities of state and local public agencies. A public agency must comply with CEQA when it undertakes an activity defined by CEQA as a "project." A project is an activity undertaken by a public agency or a private activity which must receive some discretionary approval from a government agency which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect change in the environment.
Most proposals for physical development in California are subject to the provisions of CEQA, as are many governmental decisions which do not immediately result in physical development (such as adoption of a general or specific plan). Every development project which requires a discretionary governmental approval will require at least some environmental review pursuant to CEQA unless an exemption applies.
1.5.2 Southern California Association of Governments
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is a Joint Powers Authority under California state law, established in 1965 as an association of local governments and agencies that voluntarily convene as a forum to address regional issues. SCAG is responsible for the regional planning in Southern California, within the SCAG region of counties, which provides a framework for coordinating local and regional decisions regarding future growth and development. An important component of this process is the preparation of growth forecasts and growth policies at intervals
The SCAG region encompasses six counties (Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura) and 191 cities in an area covering more than 38,000 square miles.
Under federal law, SCAG is designated as a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and under state law as a Regional Transportation Planning Agency and a Council of Governments.
The agency develops long-range regional transportation plans, including the region’s Sustainable Communities Strategy, growth forecasts and growth policies for the SCAG region, regional transportation improvement programs, regional housing needs allocations for the Housing Element, and a portion of the Mojave Desert Air Quality management plans.
SCAG adopted the 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS)—a plan know as Connect SoCal—in September 2020. Connect SoCal sets the framework for how transportation tax dollars will be spent in the SCAG region over the coming years and decades.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 6
1.5.3 City Plans
The following existing City plans were considered as a part of this update.
1.5.3.1 Parks and Recreation Master Plan (2008)
A Parks and Recreation Master Plan, which was prepared in 2008, calls for parks and recreational facilities to be within ½-mile of residential uses and includes the standard of five acres/1,000 residents. Based on SCAG’s population projection of 194,500 residents by 2045, with a parks/recreation standard of five acres per 1,000 residents, the City will need to provide for approximately 972.5 acres of parks and recreation facilities over the next 23 years. The Land Use Element includes policies for creative and innovative methods to provide parks, recreation, open space, and public gathering spaces to more than double the existing number of parks and recreational space in the city by 2045.
1.5.3.2 Climate Action Plan (2015)
The Climate Action Plan (CAP) for the city of Victorville provides greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories, identifies the effectiveness of California initiatives to reduce GHG emissions, and identifies local measures that were selected by the City to reduce GHG emissions under the City’s jurisdictional control to achieve the City’s identified GHG reduction target. The Land Use Element promotes land use and development patterns, policies, and practices that are sustainable and consistent with smart growth principles, conserve natural resources, and reduce pollution and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
1.5.3.3 Non-Motorized Transportation Plan (2010)
The Non-Motorized Transportation Plan provides a safe network of facilities for pedestrians, hikers, bicyclists, wheelchair users, and health enthusiasts that will link public facilities such as parks, open spaces, golf courses, the Victor Valley Transportation Center, the Old Town Specific Plan area, the Victor Valley Community College, the Mojave Narrows Regional Park and other destinations. The goals, objectives, and policies of the Land Use Element, as well as the newly designated Greenway/Utility Corridor, are all intended to support implementation of the Non-Motorized Transportation Plan.
1.6 Community Outreach
Community outreach is an important component of the development of the General Plan, and especially critical to the preparation of the Land Use Element. In order to reach a broad spectrum of residents and stakeholders, the approach to engaging the community was varied and included a project website, social media posts, focus group meetings and four community City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 7
workshops. To ensure the efforts were inclusive, project materials were translated into Spanish and interpretation services were offered for the public workshops.
1.6.1 Project Website
The General Plan Update website was accessible on the City’s website. A flyer explaining “What is a General Plan” was placed on the front page, in both English and Spanish. A link to the Land Use Element page provided basic information such as what a Land Use Element is and why it was being updated, the difference between the Land Use Element and the Zoning Ordinance, definitions of common terminology, and announcements of public meetings and opportunities to get information and provide input.
1.6.2 Social Media
Notices of community workshops were sent using the City’s social media networks, including Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, with posts in both English and Spanish. The City live- streamed the community workshops from the City’s website and Facebook page.
1.6.3 Community Workshops
The Planning Commission adopted the role of advisory body for the General Plan update. Since the Planning Commission is an established advisory body familiar with General Plan and land use and housing issues, they were the ideal host for the community workshops, and having the Community Workshops during Planning Commission meetings increased community participation. All workshops were virtual Zoom meetings that featured a PowerPoint presentation and allowed participants to provide comments and ask questions during the meeting. The Planning Commission hosted four community workshops. Real time Spanish interpretation was offered for most of the meetings, and positive feedback was received from the public who benefitted from the interpretation services. Full video of the four community workshops was available on the website until the adoption hearings for the Land Use Element were completed.
1.6.31. Land Use Element Workshop #1, February 24, 2021 The purpose of the first Land Use Element workshop was to introduce the Land Use Update to Planning Commission and public. At the time of the first Land Use Element workshop, the Housing Element was also in the beginning stages of preparation, so the connection between the Land Use Element and Housing Element was explained. The various housing types were discussed, including the housing types not found in Victorville. Workshop #1 concluded with a Visioning Exercise which polled the residents of Victorville, asking what makes Victorville unique; what they like the most about their City and would like to stay the same; what is missing that they would like to have in 2045; and what they would like to see changed. Residents City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 8
expressed a strong interest in seeing more mixed-use development in their City in the future.
Many stated that Victorville’s parks are an important asset to the community, and the City’s central location in the state is both unique and desirable. Others said they appreciate that more people can afford a single-family home with a yard in Victorville than in most other parts of California. Some residents did not like parking in front yards in the City, and thought better code enforcement was needed. Traffic congestion was also noted as something residents would like to see changed and improved.
1.6.3.2 Land Use Element Workshop #2, May 26, 2021
Proposed land use strategies were presented and discussed at the second Land Use Element Workshop. Strategies considered included expanding the list of residential land use designations, adding mixed-use designations, adding a Health & Wellness Overlay, and encouraging infill development in the core of the City before expanding into less developed areas. The Sites Inventory for the Housing Element was reviewed, and nine Opportunity Areas were presented as areas where future potential change could or should occur as the City continues to grow and prosper. Residents, developers, and the Planning Commissioners voiced support for the flexibility provided by the mixed-use land use designation. There was general agreement that higher density residential development should locate in proximity to commercial development. Participants stated support for the Health & Wellness Overlay and there were requests to expand the overlay to encompass additional areas. Input was received that the Land Use Plan needs to include guidelines for quality development, especially for infill projects.
1.6.3.3 Land Use Element Workshop #3, September 29, 2021 The primary topics of discussion for the third Land Use Element Workshop were the possible repeal of the Desert Gateway Specific Plan (DGSP), and a replacement land use plan consisting of a combination of prior and new land uses. The Planning Commission and residents were polled during the Workshop and asked for specific feedback regarding the proposal. In general, positive feedback was received in favor of repealing the DGSP, with participants recognizing that it would make future development easier.
The proposed small lot subdivision overlay was discussed at Workshop 2; however additional discussion was held over to Workshop 3. Specifically, the increase in density from 0-7 dwelling units per acre to 0-9 dwelling units per acre in the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay was further considered. Examples of development at both densities were presented. The majority of the comment was in favor of raising the density in the overlay to 0-9 dwelling units per acre.
Several developers in attendance shared that the smaller lots can result in a greater diversity of housing types, more affordable home prices, and homeowner associations that provide amenities. Some participants were reluctant to increase the density, citing problems with residents parking cars and motorhomes in their front yards and lack of design guidance.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 9
1.6.3.4 Land Use Element Workshop #4, May 11, 2022
The final Land Use Element Workshop (#4) entailed a discussion of the Goals, Objectives, and Policies and a presentation of the final revisions to land use designations and the land use map for input, discussion, and direction. The four focus areas of the Land Use Element were presented, developed from the input received, including: Balanced Growth, Economic Prosperity, Quality of Life, and Community Character, along with the associated goals, objectives and sample policies. The proposed changes to each of the Opportunity Areas were reviewed, and changes made to the land use plan as a result of requests from members of the public were presented. A range of feedback was heard including comments and questions regarding landscape maintenance in the City and how it gets funded; the need to improve aesthetics along the I-15 freeway corridor and beautification city-wide; positive feedback for greening the utility corridors and turning them into walking/biking paths; and support for mixed use development and the flexibility it provides.
1.6.4 Focused Input Sessions
One focused session was held with representatives from the Building Industry Association (BIA). The BIA representatives expressed interest in the City allowing smaller lot subdivisions with higher densities. BIA members are seeing demand for this type of development in other cities in the region and think it would benefit Victorville.
A separate focused session was held with a representative of Providence Health. Providence Health owns vacant land in Victorville and is considering building a new campus. Discussion centered on creating a complete community around a new hospital, focused on health and wellness so that the surrounding land uses can support and encourage healthy lifestyles.
Preliminary ideas for the area include the hospital building, senior housing, a mix of housing types including those that would serve the future employees, commercial office, retail, and medical offices. The discussion prompted the creation of the new Health and Wellness Overlay.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 10
2. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES
The goals, objectives, and policies provide the framework for the Land Use Element and guide future decision-making for the planning period.
Goals are general statements of desired outcomes that reflect the community’s aspirations for the future of Victorville. Objectives are more specific statements of purpose, while policy actions provide a bridge between goals and objectives and implementation actions.
This chapter has been organized by topic, including:
Balanced Growth
Economic Prosperity
Quality of Life
Community Character
Each topic includes a summary of associated issues and opportunities, followed by related goals, objectives, and policies that have been established to address these issues and opportunities at the citywide level. The issues, opportunities, goals, objectives, and policies have been developed based on background research and public, Planning Commission, and City Council input received through workshops and stakeholder discussions.
2.1 BALANCED GROWTH
The Victorville Land Use Element provides a diverse mix of residential, commercial, industrial, mixed use, public and civic, and park, recreation, and open space opportunities for people to live, work, shop, and play. As a growing city, achieving and maintaining the ideal balance of these land uses to achieve the community’s overall vision is a fundamental goal of the Land Use Element.
A diverse range of land use types is necessary to generate public revenues to ensure the City’s fiscal stability and provide needed public services and facilities, while creating a healthy, aesthetically pleasing community that meets the social and economic needs of Victorville’s residents. For example, an appropriate balance of land uses allows people to live and work in the same community (also known as a jobs/housing balance). Not only does this improve residents’ quality of life and reduce the cost burden of a long commute, but it also reduces travel time, which in turn reduces the level of air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG).
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 11
Goal 1: A balanced land use pattern to accommodate
Victorville’s future housing, commerce, industry,
recreation and open space, education, employment,
social, and health needs.
LU Objective A: Achieve and maintain an appropriate balance, variety, and distribution of commercial uses that provide for the retail, business, professional, medical/dental, and other commercial and service needs of the City’s residents and will attract customers and visitors from the region and beyond.
Policies:
LU-A.1: Maintain Victorville as the regional destination for shopping, entertainment, and tourism and hospitality for the Victor Valley.
LU-A.2: Encourage the development of local-serving commercial uses in proximity to adjacent residential neighborhoods to serve the day-to-day needs of Victorville’s residents.
LU-A.3: Maintain and enhance the role that Old Town Victorville plays in distinguishing the City’s uniqueness through implementation of the Old Town Victorville Specific Plan and other policies and strategies that capitalize on its strengths and embrace its opportunities.
LU-A.4: Prioritize infill commercial development before redesignating non-commercial property to commercial land uses.
LU-A.5: Monitor commercial land use trends during the planning period and adjust as necessary to position Victorville to remain strategic, flexible, and responsive regarding the type, quantity, and location of commercially designated land to support Victorville’s economic prosperity and fiscal strength.
LU Objective B: Achieve and maintain an appropriate balance, variety, and distribution of industrial uses support the City’s economy and provide employment opportunities.
Policies:
LU-B.1: Ensure that industrial land use designations accommodate a variety of traditional, innovative, and creative industrial land uses, including manufacturing, City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 12
warehousing and distribution, aviation/airport, technological land uses, with standards and incentives that enable Victorville to attract new jobs and revenues without compromising the environment or negatively impacting quality of life. LU-B.2: Provide an appropriate amount of industrially designated land to ensure long- term opportunities for a range of employment options that support a diverse economy and provide well-paying job opportunities.
LU-B.3: Promote the development of small-scale and artisan manufacturing uses that support entrepreneurship.
LU-B.4: Allow the integration of compatible uses that complement the industrial uses and serve the needs of employees, such as restaurants, health clubs, business service uses, and other similar supportive uses as secondary uses in industrial areas. LU-B-5: Continue to implement the Southern California Logistics Airport Specific Plan and encourage new airport, aviation, industrial, and commercial uses to locate there. LU-B-6: Prohibit the development of manufacturing uses that operate in a manner or use materials that may impose a danger on adjacent uses or are harmful to the environment.
LU Objective C: Accommodate a range of housing opportunities that allow people of all ages, socio-economic status, family size, and abilities to live in Victorville.
Policies:
LU-C.1: Encourage a wide variety of residential development at a range of densities and price points to meet the housing needs of
all economic segments of the community,
accommodate anticipated growth, and
implement the Housing Element.
LU-C.2: Expand the types of housing in
Victorville, including, but not limited to, single-
family attached and detached units,
accessory dwelling units, duplexes, triplexes,
quadplexes, townhomes, and multi-family developments.
LU-C.3: Encourage applicants of new residential Specific Plans to provide a range of housing types and a mix of incomes within the development, rather than limiting the developments to single-family residential projects. Consider providing incentives to promote mixed density and mixed income developments.
“Diversity in housing types for homeowners is needed.” Comment from member of the public during a workshop City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 13
LU-C.4: Provide housing that attracts a broad range of income levels. LU-C.5: Promote opportunities for both ownership and rental housing. LU-C.6: Implement the new Low Density Residential Infill Overlay (LDRIO) land use designation to provide new options for smaller lot single-family residential housing in the City’s developed core. The City will implement the LDRIO via updating the Zoning Code.
To utilize the allowances of the LDRIO the developer shall provide design elements/amenities in accordance with the Zoning Code as revised and that are privately maintained (e.g., HOA) as opposed to City maintained, as applicable. LU-C.7: Facilitate housing for seniors and special needs groups, including the developmentally disabled, by allowing a diverse and flexible range of housing configurations that are Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant. LU-C.8: Encourage the development of housing for seniors in areas that are accessible to public transit, commercial service, and health and community facilities. LU-C.9: Promote development of housing types that support multi-generational households and opportunities to age in place.
LU-C.10: Address the special needs of persons experiencing homelessness. LU-C.11: Encourage housing in areas and along corridors designated for mixed-use to provide for a variety of housing opportunities within proximity of employment centers, resident-serving uses, and transit.
LU Objective D: Expand and encourage opportunities for mixed use centers and corridors within Victorville to provide development flexibility, respond to recent development trends, foster sustainable land use practices supported by alternative modes of transportation, encourage revitalization of certain areas, and implement housing policies and programs.
Policies:
LU-D.1: Encourage Opportunity Areas identified as mixed-use centers to be developed as integrated, multi-use areas that provide a variety of residential, commercial, service, civic, open space/recreational, and other supportive land uses in an integrated, human- scale, walkable environment.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 14
LU-D.2: Encourage development of local, citywide and regional mixed-use centers that address different community needs and market sectors, and that compliment and are well-integrated with surrounding
neighborhoods.
LU-D.3: Encourage mixed-use development
as a strategy to revitalize underutilized or
under-performing commercial areas and
corridors in the City, such as the 7th Street
Corridor.
LU-D.4: Require that streets, sidewalks, parking lots, building setbacks, building facades, and landscaping within mixed use centers and corridors are designed to create human-scaled, walkable environments while still accommodating cars, loading, and similar necessities.
LU-D.5: Promote linkages within and around mixed-use projects and areas using a multi-modal circulation network, including transit, pedestrian sidewalks, paths and paseos, and bicycle and trail networks, to ensure safe, convenient access between uses and to minimize vehicular traffic.
LU-D.6: Encourage flexibility of design in development by allowing both a vertical and/or horizontal mix of uses.
LU-D.7: Ensure that gathering areas or plazas are incorporated within mixed-use projects and areas to allow for social interaction and community activities.
LU Objective E: Provide land for parks, recreational facilities, open space and bikeways and trails to serve the current and future needs of the community.
Policies:
LU-E.1: Maintain and expand parks, recreational trails, bikeways, and pedestrian corridors and linkages throughout the City in accordance with the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
LU-E.2: Promote recreational use through the development of a system of trails (per Objective 3.5 of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan) within Victorville and between the city and adjacent municipalities.
LU-E-3: Pursue use of utility and other easements to implement the Greenway Utility Corridor.
“Mixed-use developments could include opportunities for jobs, parks, biking and walking trails.” Comment from member of the public during a workshop City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 15
LU-E-4: Ensure that new development contributes its fair share toward the establishment and maintenance of parks, bikeways and recreational trails, and recreational facilities and provides integrated pedestrian and bicycle linkages to the City’s bicycle/trails network.
LU-E-5: Encourage new developments to incorporate plazas and other flexible outdoor spaces that provide opportunities for gathering, outdoor dining, pop-up retail, and music venues. Incorporate amenities such as shade structures, shade trees, seating, and community art.
LU-E.6: Work closely with the school districts serving Victorville to encourage the joint use of facilities as centers for recreation and cultural activities for the City’s residents.
Goal 2: An efficient, fiscally responsible, and sustainable growth strategy.
LU Objective F: Direct and control growth within the City boundary to maximize the efficient use of public roadways, infrastructure, services, and facilities.
Policies:
LU-F.1: Encourage infill development, redevelopment of underutilized sites and reuse of existing commercial and industrial buildings before expanding in undeveloped areas within Victorville to enhance community character, optimize infrastructure investments, support increased transit use, promote non-motorized transportation, and enhance commercial viability.
LU-F.2: When considering requests to amend
the Land Use Map within the City boundary,
discourage “leapfrog development,” which is
characterized by proposals for development
in areas which are functionally separated from
developed portions of the City by lack of
infrastructure (including roads and utilities)
and services (such as police and fire);
expanses of vacant land; significant
topographic, jurisdictional, or other barriers;
or other similar constraints.
LU-F.3: Encourage residential infill in the Low-Density Residential Infill Overlay.
Discourage small-lot single-family residential development in areas of Victorville that are Leapfrog Development A discontinuous pattern of urbanization, resulting in unsustainable infrastructure costs, lack of public services, inconsistency with VMT requirements, and negative environmental impacts.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 16
not already served by municipal facilities and services, unless they are proposed as part of a mixed density Specific Plan.
LU-F.4: Consider providing incentives to encourage infill development, especially in Opportunity Areas. Examples include reduction of fees, expedited permit processing, improvement bonding, grants, and other economic development strategies. LU-F.5: Plan and manage expansion of the City’s infrastructure to support growth of businesses and commerce.
LU-F.6: Facilitate residential, industrial, and business growth in those areas where public infrastructure and services are available, including Opportunity Areas. LU-F.7: Provide mechanisms through which development can fund the cost of City services related to public safety (police and fire) and infrastructure maintenance needs (e.g., parks, landscaping, streets and drainage facilities.) Pursue a variety of funding strategies, such as Community Facilities Districts (CFDs), assessment districts, and other finance strategies, to cost-effectively support ongoing safety and maintenance needs, as deemed necessary by the City Council.
LU-F.8: Discourage speculation in the undeveloped portions of the City. LU-F.9: Continue to utilize Specific Plans to ensure that new development achieves carefully planned comprehensive communities with a number and variety of amenities, is sustainable, provides a multi-modal transportation network, and incorporates and integrates appropriate General Plan goals, objectives, and policies.
LU Objective G: Consider annexation of land within the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) where it can be determined to be in the City’s interest to promote orderly development, implement goals and objectives, and /or to expedite facilities and services.
Policies:
LU-G.1: Encourage infill development within the City boundary before annexing property from the City’s SOI to the extent feasible to make efficient use of land and existing facilities and services.
LU-G-2: Consider annexation of land within the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) only where it can be determined to be in the City’s interest to promote orderly development, implement goals and objectives, and /or to expedite facilities and services, and that such expansion of the city will not have unacceptable adverse fiscal or environmental impacts to existing city services or residents.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 17
LU-G.3: Coordinate with the County and Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) during review and development of projects within the City’s SOI to ensure that new development is compatible with existing development and occurs in appropriate locations when adequate public services and facilities are or can be made available. LU-G.4: Ensure that all undeveloped property that is annexed to the City pays for costs associated with providing required public improvements and services, to the satisfaction of the City, unless the City determines there are demonstrated benefits to the City that outweigh some or all the associated costs.
LU Objective H: Promote land use and development patterns, policies, and practices that are sustainable and consistent with Smart Growth principles, conserve natural resources, and reduce pollution and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Policies:
LU-H.1: Coordinate the land use and mobility plans and policies to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and emphasize walking, biking, use of transit, and other types of low- emission, local-use modes of transportation as viable and affordable alternatives to the use of the personal automobile.
LU-H.2: Encourage the provision of multi-modal access to activity centers, such as public and civic facilities, commercial centers and corridors, employment centers, schools, parks and recreation facilities, tourist attractions, and transit stops. LU-H.3: Incorporate sustainable and Smart Growth principles in all new developments and when updating existing developments to the extent possible, to minimize adverse impacts of development on air quality, traffic, open space, water quality, energy, and other resources and optimize walkability, quality of life, and community vitality. LU-H.4: Encourage new industrial development to use best available control technology to limit GHG emissions from stationary sources.
LU-H.5: Ensure that development projects are designed to divert waste from landfills to the extent possible, such as providing adequate space to accommodate sufficient storage for recycling, green waste, and food waste (as appropriate). LU-H.6: Incentivize new buildings to maximize energy conservation designs to promote passive solar energy generation, natural ventilation, effective use of daylight, and on- site electricity generation.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 18
LU-H.7: Identify opportunities to expand green infrastructure and encourage implementation of environmentally-friendly development techniques through the development review process to protect natural resources, reduce GHGs, and promote a climate-resilient community.
LU-H.8: Support water-efficient landscaping (xeriscaping) in all publicly owned and maintained landscaping projects and encourage use of xeriscaping for all private developments.
2.2 ECONOMIC PROSPERITY
Economic prosperity refers to a city’s economic growth, security and competitiveness.
Economic prosperity is a key element of quality of life and is also necessary for Victorville to be competitive in the regional economy.
This Land Use Element update considers recent economic issues and trends that could affect land use and addresses them via goals, objectives and policies, and changes to the Land Use Plan. The intent is to promote a healthy and diverse local economy and help the City maintain a reliable revenue base. For example, the Land Use Element encourages economic growth with land use policies that retain and expand existing businesses; promote the emergence of new businesses, both small and large, in locations that provide optimal benefits to the community while protecting the environment; encourages entrepreneurship; and capitalizes on Victorville’s unique character and history by promoting cultural tourism.
Goal 3: A thriving and resilient economy with a range
of well-paying employment opportunities and a
diversified and sustainable tax base.
LU Objective I: Support Victorville as a major regional center for business, commerce, employment, and entertainment.
Policies:
LU-I.1: Encourage development of land uses and infrastructure to support growth of businesses and commerce.
LU-I.2: Support Victorville’s economic development strategies by providing an appropriate mix of land uses that supports existing industries, attracts growth sectors in the Victor Valley, and provide jobs for those who choose to both live and work within the city.
LU-I.3: Ensure that land uses are flexible enough to respond to changes in market conditions and can accommodate new desirable uses.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 19
LU-I.4: Balance the need to support existing businesses and encourage infill and reuse of existing underutilized or vacant properties within Victorville with need to position the City to attract new commercial, industrial, and tourism-focused uses. LU-I.5: Maintain Victorville as the commercial center for the Victor Valley. LU-I.6: Promote development and expansion of
logistic operations at the Southern California
Logistics Airport (SCLA) and leverage economic
opportunities.
LU-I.7: Encourage the revitalization of existing
commercial areas and consider developing programs to incentivize building upkeep and maintenance, signage, and façade improvements, especially for small locally owned businesses.
LU-I.8: Repeal the Desert Gateway Specific Plan and rezone the area to implement the revised land use designations.
LU-I.9: Support new technologies that may increase business opportunities in the City. LU-I.10: Promote cultural tourism by incorporating the city’s history, arts, culture, and entertainment into Victorville’s economic development strategy. LU-I.11: Encourage continued development of tourist related activities. LU-I.12: Conduct periodic economic analyses to ensure that land use plans and policies are aligned with local, regional, national, and international economic factors. LU-I.13: Foster opportunities for small-scale manufacturing and the “maker economy” to grow local entrepreneurship and small businesses, develop or enhance new and existing economic sectors, and revitalize key Opportunity Areas. LU-I.14: Provide and maintain a variety of outdoor recreational opportunities and venues and encourage tourism.
LU-I.15: Consider annexations which will improve the City’s economic base and contribute to quality development.
LU-I.16: Ensure adequate and appropriately designated and zoned land to support large tax generating uses, such as the Victorville Auto Park, large retailers, etc.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 20
2.3 QUALITY OF LIFE
Quality of life entails a number of important factors, including the opportunity for a healthy lifestyle, to live in a safe and secure community, and a place where opportunities for lifelong learning are available to all. The impact of the COVID 19 pandemic, which began during the update process of the General Plan, illustrates how significant an impact community health has on the well-being of residents and how so many facets of community life can be disrupted quickly, including medical services, education, employment, the availability of food and other goods necessary for day-to-day living, and gathering together to socialize, celebrate, play, and worship.
Issues related to equity and environmental justice, and mitigation of adverse environmental effects also have an impact on the quality of life, health, and safety of the community. The Land Use Plan is usually associated with development; however, the goals, objectives, policies, and Land Use Plan have direct impacts on the qualities that make Victorville a desirable place to live and work, and the degree to which the residents feel connected to and safe in their community.
Goal 4: A safe city where community members have a
high quality of life and healthful lifestyle, and where equity is routinely considered in land use policies and decision-making.
LU Objective J: Promote a community environment that supports the overall health and well-being of those who live and work in Victorville and Victor Valley.
Policies:
LU-J.1: Ensure that there is adequate land for
state-of-the-art medical facilities to support
the needs of the population as it grows and
changes over time.
LU-J.2: Facilitate the implementation of new
Health and Wellness Overlay Districts that
integrate medical facilities with housing and
other supportive uses to create planned districts that encourage and promote community health.
“We need more hospital beds in our community.” Comment from member of the public during a workshop City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 21
LU-J.3: Encourage the incorporation of
healthy community design principles in all
new private and public development.
LU-J.4: Support a community-based
approach to improve community health and
well-being for all segments of the community
and provide opportunities for people to make
healthful lifestyle choices.
LU-J.5: Encourage the creation and
operation of community gardens, especially in
neighborhoods that do not have convenient
access to grocery stores. Encourage large-
scale projects to include open space for
edible gardens.
LU-J.6: Encourage the development of
facilities and venues for arts and
entertainment.
LU Objective K: Ensure that equity and environmental justice are considered when making and implementing land use policies.
Policies:
LU-K.1: Ensure that public facilities, services, and infrastructure are available to serve the needs of the community in an equitable manner as the City grows. LU-K.2: Periodically monitor and respond to the changing needs of the population, including age, family composition, economic and social factors, health, and environmental impacts as they relate to land use policies. LU-K.3: Ensure that the housing, transportation, health, education, and social needs of vulnerable populations (e.g., the economically disadvantaged, racial and ethnic minorities, the elderly, the homeless, and those with chronic health conditions) are considered in land use policies and decision-making.
LU-K.5: Consider and promote equitable access to open space and recreation, venues for community events, and other opportunities in land use decision-making, subdivision design, and development to facilitate involvement in healthful activities and social interactions.
Healthy Community Design Principles Mix of land uses—homes, shops, schools, work—that are close together Availability of medical facilities Developments that are pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly Availability of public transit Housing for different incomes, preferences, and stages of life Green spaces that are safe and easy to walk or bike to Fresh, healthy food outlets Community spaces to gather for social interaction and connectivity City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 22
LU-K.6: Encourage the development of grocery stores and other healthful food establishments in food deserts (neighborhoods that have limited access to affordable and nutritious food) and in areas with a high concentration of fast-food restaurants, convenience stores, and liquor stores.
LU-M.7: Implement the objectives, strategies, and policies in the Environmental Justice Element to further promote equity and environmental justice when making and implementing land use policies.
LU Objective L: Encourage and support opportunities for lifelong learning for people of all ages and income ranges in Victorville.
Policies:
LU-L.1: Allow for and encourage the development of land uses that provide educational opportunities for the City’s residents.
LU-L.2: Continue to require that new residential development contributes toward providing adequate educational facilities to support the demand created by new housing.
LU-L.3: Encourage vocational schools and colleges to locate in Victorville.
LU Objective M: Continue to protect the public’s safety by evaluating land use and environmental constraints prior to development and requiring that projects mitigate potential negative environmental and safety impacts.
Policies:
LU-M.1: Provide a wide range of accessible public facilities and community services, including fire and police protection; flood control and drainage; educational, cultural, and recreational opportunities; and other governmental and municipal services to meet the current and future needs of the community.
LU-M.2: Implement goals, objectives, and policies in the Safety Element to protect persons and property from potential safety hazards.
LU-M.3: Emphasize public safety considerations for existing and proposed public and private projects, including lighting, keeping vegetation trimmed (e.g., keeping tree canopies trimmed up and shrubs trimmed low for improved visibility), and require the incorporation of CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) safety design techniques in all new and renovated developments.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 23
LU-M.4: Incorporate methods to provide
shade and help mitigate heat impacts in
public and private development and facilities
to the extent possible.
LU-M.5: Require land uses and
developments to be sited and designed to
mitigate potential health and safety impacts
related to odors, dust, noise, chemicals,
hazardous materials and wastes, and other
negative externalities on adjacent uses, with
special consideration for sensitive receptors
(e.g., hospitals, schools, daycare facilities,
senior housing and convalescent facilities,
etc.) and vulnerable populations.
LU-M.6: Ensure that future development in
areas impacted by aircraft operations is
consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Compatibility Plan (CLUP) for the Southern California Logistics Airport (SCLA).
LU-M.7: All relevant land use policies of the SCLA Specific Plan and the CLUP for the SCLA, as well as any future updates, are hereby incorporated into the Land Use Element by reference.
LU-M.8: Improve the climate resiliency and energy efficiency of new and existing buildings, site design, and public infrastructure and develop adaptation strategies for areas vulnerable to climate change-related impacts.
LU-M.9: Continue to encourage greener, more efficient and climate resilient construction practices locally.
2.4 COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Community character refers to the distinct identity of a place. How a community looks, from its neighborhoods and businesses to its streets, sidewalks, parks, and civic spaces, contributes to the collective impression a neighborhood or City makes on its residents and visitors, and has an impact on its livability and ability to attract investment. While health and safety issues take precedence, ensuring that a community is attractive, well-maintained, and distinctive, with a strong “sense of place,” is also an important consideration as these factors reflect the community’s history and traditions, and encourage residents to take pride in their city. Quality design also supports economic development in many ways, such as encouraging private investment and promoting tourism. The Land Use Element recognizes the importance that Providing Shade and Thermal Comfort in a Desert Climate
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 24
aesthetics, design and community character have on strengthening Victorville’s uniqueness in the Victor Valley.
Goal 5: An aesthetically pleasing community.
LU Objective N: Promote a distinctive identity and image for Victorville with high quality design of the built environment to increase its desirability as an attractive place to live, work and play.
Policies:
LU-N.1: Promote high standards of building
design, site planning, landscaping and
hardscaping, and signage that reflect the character
of Victorville and strengthen the City’s economic
vitality.
LU-N.2: Promote the development of high-quality
regional and freeway-serving land uses that are
adjacent to and in the vicinity of the I-15 corridor to generate a sense of place and arrival into
Victorville, particularly at the key interchanges with
I-15.
LU-N.3: Consider development and
implementation of a coordinated gateway,
wayfinding, and streetscape program for the City
that incorporates design features that highlight
Victorville’s unique identity and history, including
design themes developed for key corridors, key
areas near interchanges with I-15, and Opportunity
Areas. Incorporate public art to the extent feasible,
such as using as metal sculpture in lieu of or in
addition to vegetation.
LU-N.4: Work with Caltrans to develop and
implement design specifications for the State
Highway System improvements (on I-15, SR 395,
and SR 18) and on-going maintenance that
promote an attractive, high quality, and distinctive
identity and image for Victorville. Utilize walls
instead of chain link fencing. Consider unique
“Cities gain value through public art – cultural, social, and economic value.” (https://www.americansforthearts.org/ sites/default/files/PublicArtNetwork_ GreenPaper.pdf)
Metal Joshua trees provide unique, memorable, and locally identifiable public art Mural in Old Town, Victorville, by Evan
Meyer (Photo Credit—Rene Ray De La Cruz,
The Daily Press)
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 25
design features for walls, overpasses, entrance and exit ramps, landscaping, hardscape, etc.
LU-N.5: Ensure that new development is sensitive to natural features, including washes, views of the mountains, and surrounding desert areas and preserves and protects Joshua trees.
LU-N.6: Encourage public art installations on public and private property and incorporate it in the City’s capital improvement projects. LU-N.7: Ensure properties are adequately maintained, both for safety and aesthetic reasons, by encouraging voluntary compliance whenever possible, and utilizing Code enforcement as necessary.
LU-N.8: Ensure City-maintained Landscape Maintenance Assessment Districts (LMADs) are funded appropriately for the long-term. Include escalator clauses in all new LMADs and seek methods to fund existing LMADs that do not have escalator clauses.
LU Objective O: Protect existing development from intrusion by new incompatible land uses.
Policies:
LU-O.1: Ensure that the integrity of each land use district is maintained. LU-O.2: Require that new development in higher-density and intensity centers and corridors provide appropriate transitions in the scale and massing and that building height and bulk are sensitive to the physical and visual character of lower density adjoining neighborhoods.
LU-O.3: Require developments to mitigate impacts on adjacent residential uses, such as making sure the uses and scale are compatible, installing vegetation and/or block walls at property lines, using setbacks, and ensuring site and building design mitigates potential noise generation.
LU-O.4: Utilize vegetation to help mitigate the impact of air pollution, including wind- born pollution and particulates. Require the installation of trees and/or vegetative buffers along the property lines of new development that is between existing areas of incompatible uses, and in and near activity areas where people gather.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 26
3. LAND USE PLAN
3.1 Overview
A wide range of factors provided the framework for the update of the Victorville Land Use Plan, including community and Planning Commission input, the nature and character of existing development, Victorville’s setting within the larger region, environmental considerations, and correlation with the public infrastructure, with a focus on the interrelationship of land use and mobility. The Land Use Plan establishes clear and logical patterns of land use as well as provides direction to guide future development in a manner that will preserve and enhance Victorville’s quality of life and enhance its economic viability. The Land Use Plan addresses future development within Victorville’s legal boundary as well as in its SOI.
The Land Use Plan includes the following sections:
3.2 Terminology
3.3 Land Use Policy Map and Classification System
3.4 Land Use Designations
3.5 Development Focus Areas
3.6 Relationship with Zoning
3.7 Accommodating Future Growth
3.2 Terminology
The land use designations depicted on the Land Use Policy Map identify the type and nature of development allowed for a particular location. The land use designations, which are described in greater detail in Section 3.3, use certain urban planning terminology to define the extent to which the land use types can be developed—they are described by the terms density and intensity.
3.2.1 Density
Density is used for residential uses and refers to the development capacity of residential land.
Within the Land Use Element, density is described in terms of dwelling units per acre of land (du/ac), inclusive of existing and proposed streets and rights-of-way. For example, 50 dwelling units occupying 5 acres of land is a density of 10 dwelling units per acre. The density that is applied to the various land use designations controls the number of dwelling units that can be City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 27
constructed on a parcel. Where a density range is provided, the larger number controls the maximum number of parcels while the smaller number controls the minimum number of parcels that can be constructed on the property. It is also used to describe the population capacity of land by multiplying the density by the average number of persons per household.
3.2.2 Intensity
Intensity is used for non-residential development and refers to the extent of building square footage within a development on a lot. Although most often used to describe non-residential development levels, in a broader context, intensity also can be used to describe overall levels of both residential and non-residential development types. In this Land Use Element, floor area ratio (defined below) and building floor area square footage are used as measures of non- residential development intensity.
3.2.3 Floor Area Ratio
Floor area ratio (FAR) expresses the intensity of development on a lot. FAR is expressed as a ratio between the total gross floor area (total square footage) of all buildings on a lot by the total land area of that lot. For example, a 20,000 square foot building on a 40,000 square foot lot yields an FAR of 0.5:1. The FAR standard controls the maximum floor area allowed regardless of the number of stories in the building. For example, a 1:1 FAR describes a single-story building that covers the entire lot, a two-story building covering 50 percent of the lot, or a four-story building covering 25 percent of the lot (see Figure LUE-2). Other development standards in the Zoning Code, such as maximum lot coverage, minimum setbacks, and maximum building height, will dictate how the allowable FAR is translated in the building’s form.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 28
Figure LUE-2: Illustration of FAR
3.3 Land Use Policy Map and Classification
System
The Land Use Policy Map (Figure LUE-3) illustrates the intended use and distribution of land in the Victorville Planning Area, which includes all property within both the city limit and the SOI, during the planning period of this Land Use Element. The parcel-based Land Use map can be found at: https://www.victorvilleca.gov/government/city-departments/development/planning/land-use-plans The color-coded land use designations on the Land Use Policy Map are organized via a classification system that has 14 land use designations and two overlay designations. This classification system provides an ordered approach to land use development and maintenance of public uses and open space by identifying the types and nature of uses and development allowed in particular locations throughout the Planning Area.
The land use designations are grouped according to the following general categories:
Residential, Mixed Use, Commercial, Industrial, Public/Institutional/Open Space, Overlays, and Specific Plans. Each land use designation provides general categories of permissible uses and development densities and/or intensities allowed. The maximum allowable development on
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) An Example of 1.0:1 FAR
1 Story (100% lot coverage)
4 Story (25% lot coverage)
2 Story
(50% lot coverage)
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 29
Figure LUE-3: Land Use Map
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 30
individual parcels is governed by these indicators of density and/or intensity (as described in Section 3.2), which provide policy-level guidance for future development within the city and SOI.
A summary of the land use designations with their corresponding density/intensity indicators is provided in Table LUE-1. Section 3.4 describes the land use designations within the Victorville Planning Area in greater detail.
Table LUE-1: Land Use Designation Summary
Land Use Designation Summary
LAND USE
DESIGNATIONS
SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF LAND USE
DESIGNATIONS1
DENSITY/INTENIS
Y STANDARDS2
Residential Land Uses:
Very Low Density
Residential (VLDR)
Generally characterized by single-family
detached homes located on lots with a minimum
area of one-half acre, which allows for a
maximum of two (2) dwelling units per acre.
Density: 0-2 du/ac
Low Density
Residential (LDR)
Generally characterized by single-family
detached residential development.
Density: 0-5 du/ac
Low-Medium Density
Residential (LMDR)
Generally typified by single-family detached
units; duplex, tri-plex, and fourplex structures;
patio homes, cottage/bungalow court housing,
and attached townhomes.
Density: 5.1-12
du/ac
Medium Density
Residential (MDR)
Generally characterized by cottage/bungalow
court housing, attached townhomes, and garden
apartments.
Density: 12.1-20
du/ac
High Density
Residential (HDR)
Generally typified by garden apartments and
low- to mid-rise multi-family buildings.
Density: 20.1-30
du/ac
Mixed Density
Residential (MXDR)
Intended to facilitate single-family infill
development in the event that extraordinary
developmental constraints, such as a lack of
required sewer infrastructure, make the
continued development of the permitted high-
density uses impractical or infeasible.
Density: 1-15 du/ac
for infill
Mixed Use Land Uses:
Mixed Use 1 (MU-1) Provides for a mix of neighborhood- and community-serving commercial, service, and
other complementary and supportive uses with a
variety of lower to medium density housing to
Density: 0-15 du/ac
Non-Residential
FAR: 0.5
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 31
encourage infill development and/or
revitalization of existing areas.
MU-1 allows mixed use, stand-alone
commercial, and stand-alone residential
Mixed Use 2 (MU-2) Provides for a mix of community- and regional- serving serving commercial, service, and other
complementary and supportive uses with a
variety of medium- to high-density housing to
encourage infill development and/or
revitalization of existing areas.
MU-2 allows mixed use, stand-alone
commercial, and stand-alone residential
Density: 15.1-30
du/ac
Non-Residential
FAR: 1.0
Commercial Land Uses:
General Commercial
(GC)
Provides for a wide range of retail commercial,
service commercial, and office commercial
activities, as well as large-scale planned
shopping districts serving the local and regional
area and population, “big box” retailers,
motels/hotels, and public assembly uses.
FAR: 2.0
(Note: FAR of
certain uses, such
as hotels,
convention centers,
etc., may be
increased on a
case-by-case basis)
Industrial Land Uses:
Light Industrial (LI) This category of land use is characterized by industrial development either located in
industrial and/or business parks or in mixed
industrial/business park use areas. The main
feature of industrial activities in this category is
that they do not require any significant site or
structure requirements that are so specialized
that would limit future use of the structures
and/or site by another industrial activity.
FAR: 1.0
Heavy Industrial (HI) The Heavy Industrial land use category refers to industrial and manufacturing uses that are more
specialized in nature and require special
consideration in terms of use of the property as
well as impacts on adjacent properties.
FAR: 1.0
Public/Institutional/Open Space Land Uses:
Public/Institutional
(P-I)
Refers to those land uses and activities that are
predominately used for public purposes or
owned or operated by a public entity. Activities
within this category include city and county
buildings, public and private schools, colleges,
and public utilities and city yards.
Minimum Density:
N/A
FAR: Development
intensity determined
on a case-by-case
basis
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 32
Open Space (OS) Refers to land that is to remain undeveloped due to severe development constraints, lake or river
bodies and floodplains; and reserved public
open space in parks, golf courses, or other lands
with an open space character that protect public
safety and/or conserve public resources.
Minimum Density:
1 du/5 ac on
property outside the
flood plain
FAR: N/A
Greenway/Utility
Corridor (GUC)
A designation along the City’s utility corridors.
Intended to promote the creation of continuous
trails and multiple public access points, whether
or not the land is owned by a public entity, a
nonprofit, or is made available by private owners
through a voluntary conservation easement or
other mechanism.
Minimum Density:
N/A
FAR: N/A
Overlays:
Low Density
Residential Infill
Overlay (LDRIO)
Applies to VLDR and LDR properties in the area
included within the overlay
0-9 du/ac3
Health and Wellness
Overlay (HWO)
Promotes health and wellness for all segments of
the community, (local & regional-serving),
including those who are ill, those who are aging,
and health-conscious individuals of all ages
Applies to existing and proposed
hospitals/medical facilities
Density: 20-30 du/ac
Non-Residential
FAR: 2.0
(Note: Density and
FAR may be
modified based on
approval of an
implementing PUD)
Specific Plan:
Specific Plan The land use policy provides for a number of specific plans within the city. The specific plans
identify the location, extent, and density of new
development and also indicate specific
development standards that are applicable.
All land uses,
regulations, and
development
standards shall be
those as set forth in
the adopted specific
plan.
1 Refer to Section 3.4 for a more detailed description of each land use designation 2 Density, expressed as dwelling units per acre (du/ac), refers to the allowable residential density range for a stand- alone residential or the residential portion of a mixed-use project, not including any density bonus as allowed per California Government Code Sections 65915 – 65918 and the Victorville Zoning Code.
Intensity, expressed as floor area ratio (FAR), refers to the maximum non-residential square footage allowed on a site including Mixed Use designations, unless otherwise approved by the applicable City reviewing authority. 3 Maximum allowable density may be reduced to 7 du/ac unless certain design/amenity benchmarks are met, pursuant to the Zoning Code.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 33
3.4 Land Use Designations
3.4.1 Residential Land Use Designations
The Victorville Land Use Plan provides for a wide variety of housing types, densities, and affordability options to meet the personal and financial needs of Victorville’s existing and future residents. The Land Use Plan includes six residential land use designations and one overlay, which are geographically indicated on the Land Use Policy Map. The residential designations range from the lowest density single-family residential designation allowing a maximum density of two dwelling units per acre to a high density multi-family residential land use designation that allows up to 30 dwelling units per acre.
In addition to identifying the distribution of residential uses in Victorville, the residential land use designations also implement housing policy in the City’s Housing Element, which should be considered in association with the Land Use Element. Note that wherever residential uses are allowed, maximum density may be exceeded in accordance with density bonus provisions of Section 65915 of California Government Code and Article IV, Division 4, of Title 29 of the ECMC). The residential designations are described below.
Very Low Density Residential (VLDR)
Description: The Very Low Density Residential
designation is characterized by single-family
detached homes located on lots with a minimum
area of one-half acre. This is the lowest density
land use designation in Victorville and supports a
more rural or estate type of residential
neighborhood. Properties with this designation are
scattered throughout the city, although the
majority of properties are located within
Victorville’s SOI.
Density: 0-2 dwelling units per acre. Maximum
allowable density may be exceeded in accordance
with Section 65852.21 of the Government Code and Section 66411.7 (per SB 9, which became effective on January 1, 2022).
Allowable Land Uses: Uses are primarily single-family residential. Uses such as accessory dwelling units, guest houses, workshops, second garages, pool houses, family day care homes, public facilities, churches, schools, and other uses which are determined to be compatible with and oriented toward serving the needs of rural, low-density neighborhoods, also may be allowed.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 34
Low Density Residential (LDR)
Description: The LDR designation is
characterized by single-family detached
residential development on lots and within
neighborhoods that are typical of conventional
suburban neighborhoods.
Density: 0-5 dwelling units per acre
Allowable Land Uses: In addition to detached
single-family residences, uses such as accessory
dwelling units, guest houses, family day care
homes, public facilities, churches, schools, and
other uses which are determined to be compatible
with and oriented toward serving the needs of suburban low-density neighborhoods, also may be allowed.
Low-Medium Density Residential (LMDR)
Description: The LMDR designation is
characterized by single-family detached and
attached units; duplex, tri-plex, and fourplex
structures; patio homes; cottage/bungalow court
housing; and attached townhomes. The intent of
the LMDR land use designation is to provide
opportunities for a wider range and type of
residential units that provide alternatives to single-
family residential units, also known as “Missing
Middle” housing.
Density: 5.1-12 dwelling units per acre
Allowable Land Uses: In addition to a range of attached and detached residences, uses such as accessory dwelling units, guest houses, family day care homes, public facilities, churches, schools, and other uses which are determined to be compatible with and oriented toward serving the needs of lower-density neighborhoods, also may be allowed.
Medium Density Residential (MDR)
Description: The MDR designation is characterized by patio homes, cottage/bungalow court housing, attached townhomes, and garden apartments. The
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 35
intent of the MDR land use designation is to provide a transition from suburban-style single-family residential neighborhoods to neighborhoods that provide greater opportunities for a wide range and type of
“Missing Middle” housing than are provided for
in the LMDR designation. Residential
developments at this density support moderate-
income units as provided for in the Housing
Element, as well as for households of any
income who may not desire a typical single-
family dwelling.
Density: 12.1-20 dwelling units per acre
Allowable Land Uses: In addition to the range
and type of units noted above, uses such as
accessory dwelling units, guest houses, family
day care homes, public facilities, churches, schools, and other uses which are determined to be compatible with and oriented toward serving the needs of moderate density neighborhoods, also may be allowed.
High Density Residential (HDR)
Description: The HDR designation is
characterized by garden apartments and low-
to mid-rise multi-family buildings. The intent of
the HDR land use designation is to provide
opportunities for multi-family residential
development that supports moderate- and
lower-income units as provided for in the Housing Element, as well as for households of any income who may not desire a typical single-family dwelling.
Density: 20.1-30 dwelling units per acre
Allowable Land Uses: In addition to the range and type of units noted above, uses such as accessory dwelling units, guest houses, family day care homes, public facilities, churches, schools, and other uses which are determined to be compatible with and oriented toward serving the needs of moderate density neighborhoods, also may be allowed.
Mixed Density Residential (MXDR)
Description: The MXDR designation is intended to facilitate single-family infill development in the event that extraordinary developmental constraints, such as a
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 36
lack of required sewer infrastructure, make the continued development of the permitted high-density uses impractical or infeasible. Residential development in the Mixed Density Residential land use category ranges from single-family detached units to multi-family attached units, such as apartments.
Density: 1-15 dwelling units per acre for infill
Allowable Land Uses: In addition to the range and type of units noted above, uses such as accessory dwelling units, guest houses, family day care homes, public facilities, churches, schools, and other uses which are determined to be compatible with and oriented toward serving the needs of moderate density neighborhoods, also may be allowed.
3.4.2 Mixed-Use Land Use Designations
The City has two designations—Mixed Use 1 and Mixed Use 2—to provide for and encourage mixed-use development within Victorville. They are applicable within key activity centers and along certain transportation corridors. These
designations promote creative mixes of commercial
retail, office, housing, civic, institutional, and
entertainment uses that vary in composition and
intensity based upon location, accessibility, and the
surrounding development context.
Mixed-use land use designations allow and
encourage a variety of compatible residential and
non-residential land uses in close proximity to create
or reactivate vibrant areas for living, working,
shopping, and recreating. Mixed use principles serve
four key purposes in Victorville:
First, they have generally been applied to
actively developing areas, some with vacant
parcels, which allows the benefits of mixed
use to create well-integrated projects.
Second, they have been applied to existing
underperforming areas and corridors to
provide an incentive for redevelopment and
revitalization; the introduction of residential
uses is intended to further activate the areas
Mixed Use Development “Mixed-use makes for three-dimensional, pedestrian-oriented places that layer compatible land uses, public amenities, and utilities together at various scales and intensities. This variety of uses allows for people to live, work, play and shop in one place, which then becomes a destination for people from other neighborhoods.” Source: http://www.placemakers.com/2013/04/04/mixed-up-on-mixed-use/
Horizontal Mixed Use
Vertical Mixed Use
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 37
and support multi-modal transportation options.
Third, mixed use land use designations provide flexibility to support changing land use trends.
Finally, they provide sites identified in the Housing Element that support opportunities for moderate- and lower-income housing in proximity to transit, employment, and goods and services needed by households on a daily basis.
The typical land uses are a combination of residential with retail and service commercial, artisan industrial, civic, and civic/public/quasi-public uses. The mix of uses can occur within a single structure, on a single parcel but not within a single structure, or within an area of multiple individually owned parcels, such as along a corridor or in an existing or new activity center.
Mixed use development may be vertical (residential above non-residential uses) or horizontal (residential behind or beside non-residential uses).
Note that each parcel is not required to include a specified percentage of a mix of uses— instead, the mixed-use designations allow for mixed use, stand-alone residential, and stand- alone non-residential on any parcel. The intent is to achieve a center or corridor that functions as a mixed-use area. All uses and development will be evaluated for land use compatibility with adjacent uses. Design should support walkability within an individual project and/or throughout the mixed use development, corridor, or activity center, with an emphasis on facilitating pedestrian, bicycle, and transit connections. Refer to LU Objective D regarding policies that provide further guidance as to how these mixed-use areas should be developed.
Mixed-Use 1 (MU-1)
Description: The MU-1 designation provides
for a mix of neighborhood- and community-
serving commercial, service, and other
complementary and supportive uses with a
variety of lower to medium density housing to
encourage infill development in certain
undeveloped or developing areas or revitalization of existing areas. The intent is to encourage an active, neighborhood- and local-serving corridor, area, or activity center. Because mixed use development includes both residential and non- residential uses, the designation includes both density and intensity standards, as follows.
Density: Up to 15 du/ac
FAR: Non-residential FAR: 0.5
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 38
Allowable Land Uses: The MU-1 designation allows a mix of non-residential and multi-family residential uses on the same parcel or in the same development. In addition to mixed-use development, stand-alone multi-family residential development is permitted, as is stand-alone non-residential development. The MU- 1 designation allows smaller-scale commercial uses that serve and are compatible with residential neighborhoods, such as retail, grocery stores, pharmacies, financial institutions, cafés and restaurants, offices, personal service uses, and dry cleaners / laundromats. Outdoor gathering spaces are encouraged, as is outdoor dining.
Artisan manufacturing and small motels/hotels also may be appropriate. “Big box” retail is prohibited. A variety of housing options along a continuum of low-medium to medium densities are allowed to provide a range of housing types for a variety of household needs and income levels.
Mixed-Use 2 (MU-2)
Description: The Mixed Use 2 designation
provides for a mix of community- and regional-
serving commercial, service, entertainment,
and other complementary and supportive uses
with a variety of medium- to high-density
housing to encourage infill development and/or
revitalization of existing areas. Accommodates lower income RHNA default density as provided for in the Housing Element, as well as for households of any income who may prefer higher density housing in proximity to goods, services, and transit.
The intent is to encourage an active, community- and regional-serving corridor, area, or activity center. Because mixed use development includes both residential and non-residential uses, the designation includes both density and intensity standards, as follows.
Density: 15.1-30 du/ac
FAR: Non-residential FAR: 1.0
Allowable Land Uses: The Mixed Use 2 designation allows a mix of multi-family residential and non-residential uses on the same parcel or in the same development, including live/work units. In addition to mixed-use development, stand-alone multi- family residential development is permitted, as is stand-alone non-residential development. The mix of uses in a mixed-use development can be vertical or horizontal. A variety of housing options along a continuum of medium to high densities are encouraged to provide a range of housing types for a variety of household needs and income levels. The MU-2 designation provides for larger-scale commercial uses that serve surrounding residential neighborhoods and the larger
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 39
community, such as general retail, business, and consumer services; cafes and restaurants; entertainment venues; and national chain motels/hotels. Outdoor gathering spaces are encouraged, as is outdoor dining. “Big box” retail is prohibited.
3.4.3 Commercial Land Use Designation
One commercial land use designation (described below) is provided for in the Land Use Element and geographically indicated on the Land Use Policy Map.
During the past decade, Victorville has been the dominant retail center for the Victor Valley.
This dominance is attributable to the City’s strategic location along Interstate 15, state routes, and major arterials, and its large residential and employment population. To maintain this dominance in the future, commercial development continues to be concentrated at key nodes along major arterial roadways, particularly at arterial intersections and near freeway interchanges. The Land Use Element also continues to provide for a variety of commercial uses along key corridors, although the introduction of mixed uses (discussed above) along previously commercial-only corridors is intended to mitigate the impacts that commercial uses have on traffic and air quality.
General Commercial (GC)
Description: The General Commercial land use
designation provides for a wide range of
commercial uses to serve the day-to-day needs
of Victorville residents, as well as to support the
City’s economy by attracting and serving the
regional population and long-distance travelers
and tourists.
FAR: 0.5 (Note: Certain uses, such as hotels, convention centers, and entertainment venues, may be increased on a case-by-case basis)
Allowable Land Uses: The General Commercial land use designation allows retail, office, and professional and personal services. It also may allow small- to large- scale planned shopping centers and districts, “big box” retailers, motels/hotels, restaurants, entertainment venues, and public assembly uses in accordance with the City’s Development Code.
3.4.4 Industrial Land Use Designations
The Industrial category includes two land use designations: Light Industrial and Heavy Industrial, which are geographically defined on the Land Use Policy Map. Industrially
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 40
designated land provides employment opportunities and supports long-term economic viability and revenue generation.
Light Industrial (LI)
Description: The Light Industrial land use
designation is characterized by industrial
development either located in industrial and/or
business parks or in mixed industrial areas. The
main feature of industrial activities in this
category is that they do not require any
significant site or structure requirements that
are so specialized that would limit future use of
the structures and/or site by another industrial
activity.
FAR: 1.0
Allowable Land Uses: The Light Industrial land use designation allows industrial uses that include the fabrication, manufacturing, assembly, or processing of materials that are in refined form and which do not, in their transformation, create smoke, gas, odor, dust, noise, vibration of earth, soot, or lighting to a degree that is impactful or produce products that pose a danger when located in proximity to nearby non-industrial uses. Also provides for warehouses and warehouse distribution centers and breweries and distilled spirits manufacturers. This designation also allows for other employment-intensive uses, such as campus-style research and development and business parks, and makerspaces, co-workspaces, and incubator spaces. Most operations within this designation are conducted within enclosed buildings.
Heavy Industrial (HI)
Description: The Heavy Industrial land use
category refers to industrial and manufacturing
uses that are more specialized in nature than
light industrial uses and require special
consideration in terms of use of the property as
well as impacts on adjacent properties.
FAR: 1.0
Allowable Land Uses: The Heavy Industrial land use designation allows industrial uses that include the fabrication, manufacturing, assembly, or processing of
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 41
materials that are either in or not in refined form and which may, in their transformation, create smoke, gas, odor, dust, noise, vibration of earth, soot, or lighting to a degree that is impactful on non-industrial uses. As a result, the Heavy Industrial designation is applied in suitable locations for certain less restricted types of manufacturing and industrial uses.
3.4.5 Public/Institutional/Open Space Land Use Designations The Public/Institutional/Open Space land use category includes three land use designations— Public/Institutional, Open Space, and Greenway Utility Corridor. They are described below.
Public/Institutional (P-I)
Description: The Public/Institutional land use
designation refers to those land uses and
activities that are predominately used for public
purposes or owned or operated by a public
entity.
FAR: Development intensity determined on a
case-by-case basis
Allowable Land Uses: Allowable uses within this land use designation include city and county buildings, public and private schools, colleges, and public utilities and city yards.
Open Space
Description: The Open Space land use
designation provides for the preservation of
natural resources, managed production of
resources, outdoor recreation, and public
health and safety in those areas of the city
which, under present conditions, are subject to
periodic flooding and accompanying hazards and to conserve natural resources of benefit to the general public interest.
Density: 1 dwelling unit per minimum 5 acres, only for areas outside the flood plain FAR: Not applicable
Allowable Land Uses: Open Space refers to land that is to remain open (undeveloped) due to severe development constraints, lake or river bodies and floodplains; and reserved public open space in parks, golf courses, or other lands
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 42
with an open space character that protect public safety and/or conserve public resources. (The Open Space land use designation also supports the Parks and Recreation Master Plan.) Areas outside the flood plain are permitted one single family dwelling on a five-acre minimum lot and agricultural uses.
Greenway Utility Corridor (GUC)
Description: The Greenway Utility Corridor is a
designation along the City’s utility corridors.
Intended to promote the creation of continuous
trails and multiple public access points, whether
or not the land is owned by a public entity, a
nonprofit, or is made available by private
owners through a voluntary conservation
easement or other mechanism.
Density: Not applicable
FAR: Not applicable
Allowable Land Uses: Public utility
transmission line towers, non-motorized
(walking and biking) paths/trails, nurseries,
public art, xeriscape landscaping and xeriscape landscaping demonstration projects, and other similar uses determined by the utility and Community Development Director to be similar and compatible.
3.4.6 Overlay Designations
An overlay designation is a designation that is applied over another “base” or underlying land use designation to promote or encourage certain uses and/or types of developments identified in the particular overlay. The Victorville Land Use Plan has two overlays (Figure LUE-3): the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay (LDRIO) and the Health and Wellness Overlay (HWO).
The overlays will be implemented by new sections in the Victorville Development Code.
Students in Germany transform a transmission line tower into a “lighthouse” along a trail (Photo Credit: Julija Nėjė) City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 43
Low Density Residential Infill Overlay (LDRIO)
Description: The Low Density Residential Infill
Overlay designation provides for an increase in
density in the core area of the city to encourage
infill, promotes the efficient use of existing
infrastructure, and provides additional housing
opportunities for those desiring a detached
single-family residential housing type but who
are willing to have or want smaller lots. Applies
to the VLDR and LDR designated properties
within the LDRIO.
Density: Up to 9 dwelling units per acre, except
that the maximum allowable density may be
reduced to 7 dwelling units per acre unless
certain design and/or amenity benchmarks are
met pursuant to the Victorville Development
Code.
Allowable Land Uses: Allows uses in the Very Low Density Residential and Low Density Residential land use designations. Also allows recreational, open space, and other uses and amenities as provided for in the Victorville Development Code.
Health and Wellness Overlay (HWO)
Description: The Health and Wellness Overlay designation has been established to provide a unique opportunity to integrate “healthy community” land uses and design principles in a manner that promotes health, wellness, and equity for all segments of the community, (local & regional-serving), including those who are ill, those who are aging, and health-conscious individuals of all ages. One of the features is to encourage the development of multi-family residential development within the Health and Wellness to expand housing options for health care workers, seniors, and others who may benefit from living in close proximity to health care facilities. The HWO also functions as a sustainability hub, promoting active transportation, green infrastructure, open space, EV charging stations, edible landscaping, composting, and other amenities that support a healthy and sustainable lifestyle.
Density: 15.1-30 dwelling units per acre
Allowable Land Uses: Allows public and private hospitals, medical centers and supportive offices, emerging medical facilities, healthcare clinics, community Residential infill with common recreational
amenities
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 44
centers, extended care and nursing facilities, pharmacies, 24/7 centers (e.g., imaging, dialysis, etc.), senior housing, day care (adult, child, specialized), Alzheimer’s care and living, restaurants/cafes and juice bars, markets/grocery stores, other support retail, gyms and fitness studios, and other uses determined by the Zoning Administrator to be similar and supportive. Allows a range of housing integrated into the development.
Requires an integrated development via a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to utilize overlay except as otherwise provided for in the Development Code.
3.4.8 Other Land Use and Development Tools
3.4.8.1 Specific Plans
A specific plan is a tool allowed for by State law (Government Code Section 65450-65457) that establishes a link between implementing policies of the General Plan and individual development proposals in a defined area covered by the General Plan. The specific plan process provides for a more comprehensive planning process for the target area and improved correlation between land use and mobility; ensures that site design is sustainable and incorporates and integrates appropriate General Plan goals and policies; and allows for flexibility in the design of development plans while addressing unique site issues and opportunities. Due to their unique qualities and implementing regulations, Specific Plans have a special land use designation on the Land Use Policy Map.
The City encourages developers to utilize Specific Plans to maximize the efficient use of public roadways, infrastructure, services, and facilities (see Policy LU-F.9). In the event that a Specific Plan is proposed for an area which exceeds existing residential densities or introduces changes in land use designations not provided for on the Land Use Policy Map, a General Plan amendment will be required to designate the area as ‘Specific Plan’ and to establish the development limits for the Specific Plan.
Victorville currently has 13 Specific Plans governing land use development in designated areas throughout the City, which are listed below. Note that the Desert Gateway Specific Plan is being repealed as a part of the adoption of the updated Land Use Element and is not included in the list below—see the following discussion regarding its repeal.
Victorville Specific Plans:
Brentwood Specific Plan
Crossings Specific Plan
Foxfire Ranch Specific Plan
Mesa Verde Specific Plan
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 45
Mojave Vista Specific Plan
Old Town Specific Plan
Parkview Specific Plan
Rancho Tierra Specific Plan
Southern California Logistics Airport (SCLA) Specific Plan Talon ranch Specific Plan
Vista Verde Specific Plan
West Creek Specific Plan
Civic Center Specific Plan
Repeal of the Desert Gateway Specific Plan (DGSP):
This Land Use Element update includes the repeal of the existing Desert Gateway Specific Plan (see Policy LU-I.8). The DGSP was originally adopted in 2010. Its purpose was to establish a transit-oriented plan for the future high speed rail station that was to be located within its boundaries. At the time the plan was prepared, nearly all the DGSP was in a defined redevelopment area; however, the State of California abolished redevelopment agencies in late 2011. A single developer funded the preparation of the DGSP.
The reasons for repealing the DGSP are many and varied. The location of the planned high speed rail station has changed and has been relocated to the east of the I-15 corridor, out of the DGSP area. The land use plan for the Specific Plan area does not follow parcel boundaries which would make it a challenge to develop.
Implementation would require a single developer, and there has been no expressed interest in building out the DGSP as it is currently planned. Further, the plan includes a large area that is in the City’s Sphere of Influence and outside City boundaries, which means multiple jurisdictions would be involved in any plan to develop the DGSP. The plan was aggressive in that it would develop over 26,000 housing units in an area not well served by utilities. Finally, developers have expressed interest in developing according to the land use plan that was in place prior to the DGSP, which is a further justification to repeal the existing plan. Please see Section 3.5.4 (DFA4:
Desert Gateway) for an overview of the land use changes for this area.
The DGSP includes area in the SOI in the central to the northeastern portion of the map. As part of the update of this Land Use Element, it has reverted to the land uses shown in the San Bernardino County General Plan. Much of the land in the SOI is City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 46
owned by the federal government and is identified as very low density residential, Bureau of Land Management property, San Bernardino County lands, or other federal government land. A future super arterial, as identified in the Circulation Element, is shown passing through this area roughly paralleling the I-15 Freeway, along with connecting future roadways and interchanges. An open space corridor along Stoddard Wells Road extends northeast to the interchange with I-15 just northeast of the City boundary.
3.4.8.2 Planned Unit Developments
The City’s Development Code allows the use of Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) to provide an opportunity for developments that are unique, alternative, and superior to those that can be accomplished through the rigid standards, yet remain consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan and further those goals and objectives beyond that in the inflexible zone districts. It is intended to be applied only to areas which are sufficiently large to allow for overall planning and design in detail so as to secure to the community, the future occupants and the developer, values and amenities greater than those likely to be achieved by the relatively inflexible provisions necessary to regulate the successive development of individual lots by numerous different owners. To offset flexibility in development standards, PUDs may required to incorporate amenities and features not normally required of standard residential developments.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 47
3.5 Development Focus Areas
Development Focus Areas (DFAs) identify locations where key changes to the Land Use Map have occurred as a part of the Land Use Element update, representing areas where the City wants or anticipates land use change or growth to occur during the planning period (see Figure LUE-4). They do not represent the only areas of expected future development; instead, they identity: 1) areas of existing development that can benefit from targeted planning to help guide transformation, and 2) property that either has not yet been developed and/or where growth is expected or proposed to occur. DFAs include one or more of the 11 Opportunity Areas (OAs) that were identified and considered during the public outreach portion of the update process for the Land Use and Housing Elements (see Section 1.6).
This section provides a description of each DFA, including an overview, a vision, and proposed actions to guide future planning. They emphasize and support the Land Use Element goals, objectives, and policies, emphasizing the principles of “smart growth”/sustainability, community identity and design, and creating physical and social connections. A key element of each DFA is the correlation of land use and site design with proposed improvements to the circulation infrastructure in the Circulation Element and promoting multi-modal transportation options. The DFAs also support the open space and recreation goals identified in the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 48
Figure LUE-4: Development Focus Area (DFA) Map with Opportunity Areas
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 49
3.5.1 DFA 1: Palmdale Road/395
Overview
The Palmdale Road/395 DFA is located on the south side of Palmdale Road (also known as California State Route 18) generally from the west boundary of Victorville to Cobalt Road and the east side of the intersection with U.S. Route 395 (see Figure LUE-4).
It includes OAs 1, 2, and 3, all three of which include residential sites on the City’s 2021-2029 Housing Element Sites Inventory for lower income, moderate+ income, and mixed income households (see Figure 8.1 in the Housing Element). It functions as a key gateway to Victorville on the west side of the city. There are several residential Specific Plans to the south of Palmdale Road, as well a considerable amount of vacant land with both residential and commercial land use designations. The northeast corner of the Palmdale Road/395 intersection is developed with a Walmart Supercenter, fast food restaurants, other retail establishments, and a service station. The northwest corner of the intersection is located in Adelanto and is developed with a grocery store and retail uses. Changes to land use designations in the Land Use Element update include introduction of the new Mixed Use 2 land use designation and High Density Residential. The new Greenway/Utility Corridor crisscrosses this DFA.
Vision
The Palmdale Road/395 DFA provides the City the opportunity to guide expected growth in a manner that promotes an integrated activity center/node that provides commercial uses to serve the surrounding residential neighborhoods while integrating a wide range of housing types and affordability levels into what had been a typical commercial corridor. The introduction of the Mixed Use 2 land use designation provides property owners and developers flexibility for future development. The new Greenway/Utility Corridor serves as a new recreational amenity while providing enhanced non-motorized connections through Victorville. The Palmdale Road/395 DFA also serves as an important gateway to Victorville.
Proposed Actions
Revise the Zoning Map and the Development Code as necessary to provide consistency with the Land Use Map.
Consider adding gateway monument signage.
Consider developing a streetscape plan for the area.
Consider incorporating public art in streetscape/entry plans in the public right-of-way and encourage its inclusion in private development.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 50
Encourage multi-modal connections throughout the area, and especially between residential and non-residential uses.
Ensure that all new development that is in proximity to the Greenway/Utility Corridor integrates access to it from within the project.
Seek grants and other funding and/or partnerships to develop active trails along the Greenway/Utility Corridor.
3.5.2 DFA 2: 7th Street Corridor
Overview
The 7th Street Corridor (DFA 2) runs along 7th Street from the intersection of 7th Street and Green Tree Boulevard to Mojave Drive, where it abuts the southwestern edge of the Old Town Specific Plan (see Figure LUE-4). Seventh Street is also Historic Route 66, which an original main route across the United States prior to the construction of Interstate Highways. It started in Chicago and ran approximately 2,000 miles to its terminus in Los Angeles. It is now designated Historic Route 66. The 7th Street Corridor continues into the Old Town Specific Plan, which was significantly revised and expanded in 2018. One of the changes was to include the northerly portion of 7th Street as the main street of Old Town that serves both tourists and locals.
Due to its history, the 7th Street Corridor was a key original commercial corridor in Victorville prior to the City’s growth and expansion. As such, it has many older properties and locally owned businesses.
Also indicative of the age of the corridor, many properties are smaller than those desired by national chains. As Victorville grew, new commercial development was attracted to new and larger arterials that have larger properties and better access to the I-15. This has resulted in a mix of older properties in various states of maintenance, vacant buildings and vacant sites, and new development. In order to encourage reinvestment and revitalization, the new Mixed Use 2 land use designation has been applied to the entire 7th Street Corridor.
Vision
The 7th Street Corridor is reimagined as a lively, unique area with a mix of new residential uses and commercial uses that attracts both locals and visitors alike. It reflects and celebrates Victorville’s history and the “cachet” of being on Historic Route 66. The new Mixed Use 2 land use designation provides both the flexibility and incentive for underutilized properties to recycle into mixed use, commercial, or residential developments. The introduction of housing invigorates the corridor by bringing new residents to the area who appreciate the area’s uniqueness and its proximity to Old Town. Local businesses thrive, and entrepreneurs and artisans are attracted to the new opportunities to live and work in the same building or on the same property. The look and feel of the 7th Street corridor expresses the corridor’s heritage as Historic Route 66.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 51
Proposed Actions
Revise the Zoning Map and the Development Code as necessary to provide consistency with the Land Use Map.
Consider establishing design guidelines to encourage and support a theme for the corridor that promotes interesting and unique building and site design and a contemporary take on the city’s historic Route 66 heritage.
Consider methods to incentivize revitalization of existing sites in accordance with the vision, mix of uses, and theme for the corridor.
Encourage public art in both the public rights-of-way and on private property. Continue the median/streetscape theme already established in the southwest portion of DFA 2 through the remainder of the 7th Street Corridor, or consider transitioning to a theme that celebrates the corridor’s heritage as Historic Route 66 as the corridor enters Old Town.
3.5.3 DFA 3: Medical Center Health and Wellness District Overview
The Medical Center Health and Wellness District DFA is located just to the west of I-15 at the south entrance to Victorville, one of the City’s primary gateways (see Figure LUE-4). It was identified as an Opportunity Area (OA-4) during the Land Use Element update process because a single health care provider has expressed interest in developing a new medical center on the property, with supporting land uses that would benefit from close proximity to the medical center to create a comprehensive health and wellness hub.
The new Health and Wellness Overlay (HWO) is applied on this site to facilitate its development focus. Section 3.4.6 has a comprehensive description of the type of development anticipated within the HWO. A Planned Unit Development (PUD) is required to allow for an integrated development to incorporate the important varied components of the HWO. The site is vacant and the underlying land uses are designated commercial for most of the area with Mixed-Use 2 at the north end. The new Greenway/Utility Corridor passes through the area in a diagonal alignment from southeast to northwest, offering a unique opportunity for non-motorized transportation and recreation connections throughout the City. Adjacent land uses to the west and north are intended to support the Health and Wellness District and include high density residential, Mixed-Use 1 and Mixed-Use 2, and commercial land uses extend to the northeast along the freeway corridor.
Vision
The Medical Center Health and Wellness District is a master planned, walkable neighborhood that presents a vibrant entrance to the City along the I-15 corridor. A new medical center campus is the City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 52
core of the area and medical offices and supportive service are within walking distance. A range of housing is available for families, older adults, medical workers, those with disabilities, and those who are ill that especially benefit from the proximity to health care services. The campus is a sustainability hub and incorporates opportunities for outdoor physical activity due to its recreational amenities and trail connections to and from the greenway utility corridor. Supportive commercial and service uses promote healthy lifestyles and include establishments that sell fresh, local produce, restaurants with healthful offerings, gyms and fitness studios, and pharmacies. A weekly Farmer’s Market may be offered to serve the local residents and also as a draw for the broader community.
Proposed Actions
Revise the Zoning Map and the Development Code as necessary to provide consistency with the Land Use Map.
Consider adding gateway monument signage.
Implement the Health and Wellness Overlay.
Incorporate the Greenway/Utility Corridor and connections as part of the overall site planning. Ensure the development incorporates trees for shade and other landscaping appropriate to the local environment.
Ensure that all new development that is in proximity to the Greenway/Utility Corridor integrates access to it from within the project.
Seek grants and other funding and/or partnerships to develop active trails along the Greenway/Utility Corridor.
3.5.4 DFA 4: Desert Gateway
Overview
The Desert Gateway DFA (the portion of OA-11 that is within the jurisdictional boundary of Victorville, excluding the SOI) is located in the northeast portion of Victorville, from northeast of the Mojave River to the northeast jurisdictional boundary of Victorville (see Figure LUE-4). The city’s northernmost intersection with the I-15 (Exit 153) is included in this DFA. The Desert Gateway DFA is located within the City boundary of the former Desert Gateway Specific Plan, which is repealed as part of this Land Use Element update—see discussion of the repeal of the Desert Gateway Specific Plan in Section
3.4.7.2. The reimagined land use plan for the Desert Gateway area builds on the land uses in place prior to 2010, with additional modifications based on more current property owner and developer interests, future open space corridors, future Circulation Element planned roadways, the City’s economic City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 53
development goals, objectives, and strategies, and City interest in updating the land use configurations.
A substantial portion of the land in the Desert Gateway DFA is designated for light industrial development, buffered from residential areas, and with good freeway access. One area of heavy industrial is a current recycling plant and reflects their expansion plans. Mixed-use is designated to provide flexibility in areas with existing residential and commercial development. Two roughly parallel open space corridors, one a utility corridor and the other a wash just west of Stoddard Wells Road, are designated in a southwest to northeast direction. Future Circulation Element interchanges are also identified.
Low density residential land uses are planned for the northwestern portion of the area, and also for an existing residential development along Stoddard Wells Road. Grady Trammel Park may be relocated to the east side of Stoddard Wells Road to better serve the residential development in that area. Dante Street is proposed to be extended to the north to provide better access to existing residential uses, the relocated park, and the planned mixed-use land uses.
Vision
The Desert Gateway DFA and its easy freeway access offer excellent opportunities to develop the area in a manner that responds to the growing demand for warehouse and distribution facilities and other light industrial uses. This supports the City’s economic development goals, including new employment opportunities. The new mixed use designation provides flexibility to allow a range of commercial uses to support future demand from both new businesses and residential uses, as well as from the traveling public, while offering new higher density residential choices in proximity to commercial services and employment. The open spaces protect natural resources and support the city’s goals for passive and active recreational opportunities, including the continuation of greenway corridors within and through the Desert Gateway. As another gateway into Victorville, this area also provides the City the opportunity to enhance Victorville’s branding and identity through monument signage, streetscape components, and public art.
Proposed Actions
Revise the Zoning Map and the Development Code as necessary to provide consistency with the Land Use Map.
Consider adding gateway monument signage within Victorville from I-15, Stoddard Wells Road, and Route 66.
Consider developing a streetscape plan for the area as part of future implementation of the proposed Circulation Element improvements proposed for the area. Seek grants and other funding and/or partnerships to develop active trails along the Greenway/Utility and open space corridors.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 54
3.5.5 DFA 5: Eastern Bear Valley Road Corridor
Overview
Two Opportunity Areas, OAs 7 and 8, are located along the eastern Bear Valley Road Corridor on the Victorville side of Bear Valley Road (north side) as shown in Figure LUE-4. The land uses along this corridor can be characterized as a mix of residential and commercial uses with intermittent vacant sites. The south side of this corridor is entirely in the City of Hesperia and the land uses are similar to those in Victorville. A focus for continued development along this corridor can include infill development, landscaping, street furniture and signage that identify Victorville and contribute to its community identity.
OA-7 is a mostly vacant site along the eastern portion of the Bear Valley Road corridor, just west of Victor Valley College. The parcels fronting along Bear Valley Parkway are designated commercial and are not a part of OA-7. The parcels immediately to the north are part of this DFA and were given a new MU-1 designation because the previous land use designation of Office-Commercial was deleted in this update. The MU-1 zone allows flexibility so that new development can be all residential, all commercial or a mix of uses. In the northeastern portion of OA-7 is an area redesignated public institutional to identify an existing school.
OA-8 is the existing Desert Valley Hospital, plus vacant parcels to the east and north of the hospital.
The Health and Wellness Overlay (HWO) is applied to the portion of area that includes the hospital and parcels immediately north of the hospital. Section 3.4.6 has a comprehensive description of the type of development anticipated within the HWO. The vacant parcels west of the hospital are designated MU-2 which allows flexibility of uses, and the entire OA abuts single-family residential, and commercial uses along Bear Valley Parkway. Although this area is included in the Low Density Residential Infill Overlay, more intensive uses are permitted by the HWO and MU-2 zoning designations.
Vision
Bear Valley Road is a major mixed-use corridor that has a combination of both new infill development around Desert Valley Hospital and Victor Valley College, and well-maintained older retail uses. The corridor is well-served by transit that provides service between the Mall of Victor Valley at the west end of the corridor, and Victor Valley College at the east end, and to Desert Valley Hospital which is roughly in the middle. New housing—perhaps senior housing and supportive health-related services and commercial opportunities—are located in proximity to the hospital. Distinctive street signage and transit benches are designed to identify the City of Victorville, to bolster community identity, and a common landscaping theme is present along the corridor. Further east along the corridor, new infill lower-density mixed use development supports Victor Valley College and existing residential and commercial uses. Housing appropriate for students may locate here.
Proposed Actions
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 55
Revise the Zoning Map and the Development Code as necessary to provide consistency with the Land Use Map
Implement the Health and Wellness Overlay
Consider adopting a landscape, street furniture and signage plan to develop a common landscape theme, and distinctive transit benches and street signage that clearly identify the City of Victorville.
Encourage public art in both the public rights-of-way and on private property.
3.5.6 DFA 6: Bear Valley Road/I-15
Overview
DFA 6 generally encompasses the area of Victorville that is in proximity to the intersection of Bear Valley Road and I-15. As one of the most prominent intersections in the city, it attracts “big box” retailers and other national retailers of all sizes, as well as regional and local commercial businesses.
Many regional and national chain restaurants are located in the area as well. Due to the variety and concentration of commercial uses and its proximity to I-15, it draws local and regional customers as well as the traveling public. Because it is divided by I-15, it is not an integrated DFA. However, it provides significant growth potential because of its regional draw and the amount of vacant land that is ripe for development.
The Bear Valley Road/I-15 DFA includes OAs 5 and 9 (see Figure LUE-4). OA 5, which is at the southeast intersection of Bear Valley Road and Amethyst Road, just west of the Lowe’s Home Improvement Center, has been redesignated to Mixed Use 2. It has been identified as a mixed income site for housing in the 2021-2029 Housing Element. Surrounding uses include single-family residential development on the west, and vacant land that is designated for single-family development to the south, and the new Greenway/Utility Corridor is nearby to the west.
OA 9 is on the east side of I-15 at the intersection of Pahute Avenue and Balsam Road. OA-9 was given the Commercial land use designation because the previous land use designation of Office- Commercial was deleted in this update. The Commercial land use designation also supports the trend in this area to develop with local and regional-serving commercial uses.
Vision
The Bear Valley Road/I-15 DFA is developed with uses that support both the City’s economic development goals and desire to provide flexibility for property owners to respond to current conditions. The west side of the freeway will see new projects with uses compatible to adjacent development according to market forces, which could be all commercial, but more likely all residential or a mix of uses. Mixed income high density residential development provides new housing opportunities for those who like to live within walking distance to goods, services, and entertainment.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 56
New development is sensitive to adjacent land uses, particularly residential development, and features both pedestrian and vehicular connectivity between different types of development. Special consideration is paid to the Oro Grande Wash, ensuring appropriate buffers are maintained from sensitive environmental features. The nearby Greenway/Utility Corridor provides connections to the City’s recreational trail system. The east side of the freeway is developed with regional-serving commercial uses, such as restaurants, retail, entertainment, and/or a hotel, that requires a large site and good freeway access. New development features a buffer along its frontage with Balsam Road to ensure compatibility with adjacent residential neighborhoods.
Proposed Actions
Revise the Zoning Map and the Development Code as necessary to provide consistency with the Land Use Map
Ensure site design includes connectivity both within and through sites for pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles
Incorporate principles of sustainability into site design wherever possible and include EV charging stations, bike parking, solar panels in parking lots for shade, and other contemporary energy conservation methods.
3.6 Relationship with Zoning
Zoning is the primary regulatory instrument for implementing a jurisdiction’s Land Use Element.
Zoning divides a community into zoning districts (zones) that specify the permitted, special, and prohibited uses within those zones. Land uses in each zone can be regulated according to type, density, height, lot size, placement, building bulk, and other development standards.
The Land Use Plan is implemented through the City’s Development Code (Title 16 of the Victorville Municipal Code). Under California law (Cal. Gov't Code § 65860), zones are required to be consistent with General Plan land use designations. Table LUE-2 shows the relationship between the land use designations in the Land Use Element and the existing Zoning Map. Adoption of this Land Use Element will require updates to the Zoning Code and Zoning Map for consistency and implementation.
Table LUE-2 identifies new zones that will be required, while other changes to the Zoning Code may be needed to implement certain policies.
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 57
Table LUE-2: Relationship between Land Use Designations and Zoning Districts Relationship between Land Use Designations and Zoning Districts Land Use Designations (Land Use Element) Zoning Districts (Development Code) Residential Land Use Designations: Residential Zoning Districts:
Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) (0-2 du/ac) Exclusive Agricultural (AE) (No maximum density) Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) (0-2 du/ac) Agricultural-Residential (A) (No maximum density) Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) (0-2 du/ac) (S-R) (Up to 2 du.ac) Low Density Residential (LDR) (0-5 du/ac) (R-1) (Up to 5 du/ac) Low-Medium Density Residential (LMDR) (5.1-12 du/ac) (R-2) (Up to 8 du/ac) Medium Density Residential (MDR) (12.1-20 du/ac) (R-3) (Up to 15 du/ac) / (R-4) (Up to 20 du/ac) High Density Residential (HDR) (20.1-30 du/ac) To Be Determined (Implementation Program) Mixed Density Residential (MXDR) (1-15 du/ac for infill) Mixed Density Residential (MDR) (Up to 15 du/ac) Mixed Use Land Use Designations: Mixed Use Zoning Districts:
Mixed Use 1 (MU-1) (0-15 du/ac; 0.5 non-residential FAR) To Be Determined (Implementation Program) Mixed Use 2 (MU-2) (15.1-30 du/ac; 1.0 non-residential FAR) To Be Determined (Implementation Program) Commercial Land Use Designation: Commercial Zoning Districts:
Commercial (2.0 FAR) Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) (40% Lot Coverage) Commercial (2.0 FAR) General Commercial (C-2/C-4) (60% Lot Coverage) Commercial (2.0 FAR) Administrative Professional Office (C-A) (50% Lot Coverage)
Commercial (2.0 FAR) Commercial Manufacturing (C-M) (60% Lot Coverage) Industrial Land Use Designations: Industrial Zoning Districts:
Light Industrial (1.0 FAR) Industrial Park (IPD) (60% Lot Coverage) Light Industrial (1.0 FAR) Light Industrial (M-1) (60% Lot Coverage) Heavy Industrial (1.0 FAR) Heavy Industrial (M-2) (60% Lot Coverage) Public/Institution/Open Space Land Use Designations: Special/Other Zoning Districts:
Public/Institutional (P-I) Public and Civic (P-C)
Open Space (OS) (1 du/5 ac minimum) Public and Civic (P-C) Open Space (OS) (1 du/5 ac minimum) Conservancy and Flood Plan (FP) Greenway/Utility Corridor (GUC) To Be Determined (Implementation Program) Overlays: Overlays:
Low Density Residential Infill Overlay (LDIO) (0-9 du/ac, except as otherwise provided for)
To Be Determined (Implementation Program)
Health and Wellness Overlay (HWA) To Be Determined (Implementation Program) Other: Special/Other Zoning Districts:
Specific Plan Specific Plan
City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 58
3.7 Accommodating Future Growth
Impacts of growth on communities are typically evaluated using projections based on potential build- out of the community’s land use plan. Land Use Elements are required provide build-out projections, including the projected number of housing units, projected population (using the potential number of dwelling units multiplied by persons per household), and the projected square footage of non- residential development. Table LUE-3 provides the estimated build-out projections for the 2045 planning period based on build-out assumptions. Note that total build-out of the Land Use Plan at maximum capacity is not expected during the planning period. For planning purposes, build-out assumptions were made to calculate potential development capacity, including average density, average FAR, and percent acreage build-out by land use designation.
Table LUE-3: 2045 Land Use Element Build-Out Projections
Land Use Designations Number of
Dwelling Units1
Non-Residential
Square Feet2
City SOI City SOI
Residential
Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) (0-2 du/ac) 3,715 4,420 --- --- Low Density Residential (LDR)3 (0-5 du/ac) 8,387 2,519 --- --- Low-Medium Density Residential (LMDR) (5.1-12 du/ac) 2,338 --- --- --- Medium Density Residential (MDR) (12.1-20 du/ac) 10,657 13 --- --- High Density Residential (HDR) (20.1-30 du/ac) 1,274 --- --- --- Mixed Density Residential (MXDR) (1-15 du/ac for infill) 700 --- --- --- Commercial
Commercial --- --- 18,826 1,398
Industrial
Light Industrial --- --- 8,805 568
Heavy Industrial --- --- 6,733 ---
Mixed Use
Mixed Use 1 (MU-2) 744 402 1,701 3,677
Mixed Use 2 (MU-2) 5,315 320 4,167 314
Public/Institutional/Open Space
Public/Institutional (P-I0 --- --- 530 253
Open Space --- --- --- ---
Greenway/Utility Corridor --- --- --- ---
Overlays
Single-Family Neighborhood Overlay3 22,356 --- ---
Health and Wellness Overlay --- --- --- ---
Specific Plans
Specific Plans 7,909 --- 7,252 ---
Notes: City = City of Victorville; SOI = Sphere of Influence; NA = Not Applicable 1 Shown in dwelling units per acre (du/ac). Number of dwelling units based on average density at build-out, not maximum allowable density City of Victorville General Plan Update
Land Use Element
Victorville Land Use Element (Public Review Draft, September 2, 2022) 59
2 Shown in thousands of square feet. The non-residential development square footage based on average intensity (average FAR) at build- out, not maximum allowable intensity
3 Not including Low Density Residential Infill Overlay
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-1
APPENDIX A: FISCAL AND ECONOMIC
IMPACT ANALYSIS
Executive Summary
This fiscal and economic impact analysis (“F&EIA”) report (“Report”) presents the findings from a projection of fiscal and economic impacts fr om the build out of the 2045 Land Use Element update (“Build Out Projections”) for the City of Victorville (“City”). The Build Out Projections are based on updated land use designations and estimates of new development through 2045.
The F&EIA estimates the increases in re venues and expenditures based on new households and new commercial square footage represented in th e Build Out Projections. The findings of this Report are summarized in Table A-1.
Table A-1. Summary of Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis Findings
As shown in the table, this Report projects that the Build Out Projections will increase the City’s General Fund and Measure P Fund revenues by a total of approximately $48,989,000 and expenditures by approximately $53,265,000, a defic it of approximately $4,276,000. These Total Impacts Direct Impacts
Indirect and
Induced
Impacts
General Fund Impacts
Increased Revenue 39,453,000
Increased Expenditures (41,534,000)
Measure P Imapcts
Increased Revenue 9,536,000
Increased Expenditures (11,731,000)
Total Fiscal Impacts
Increased Revenue 48,989,000
Increased Expenditures (53,265,000)
Net Fiscal Impacts (4,276,000)
Economic Impacts
Increased Jobs 37,749 36,979 771 Increased Labor Income 2,413,645,597 2,367,930,755 45,714,842 Increased Economic Output 8,322,818,832 8,154,204,682 168,614,150 Notes:
1. See Report for explanation of Build Out Projections, methodology, and limiting conditions.
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-2
estimates are based on continuing the current level of service, which is higher than in previous years due to Measure P revenue. It is also important to note that the City can take steps to reduce or eliminate this deficit while maintaining the level of service by increasing revenues and finding additional funding sources. The Analysis and Options secti on of this Report elaborates on these options.
Table A-1 also shows the estimated economic impacts of the Build Out Projections. As summarized in Table A-1, the Build Out Projections are associated with 37,749 new jobs, more than $2.4 billion in increased labor income, and more than $8.3 billion in increased economic output.
Methodology and Assumptions
This F&EIA estimates the impacts of anticipated development under the 2045 Land Use Element update on the City’s General Fund and Measure P Fund budgets and local economy relative to existing conditions. Specifically, the analysis proj ects the City’s expected increase in General Fund and Measure P Fund revenues resulting from new development and the expected increase in General Fund and Measure P Fund expenditures due to associated public service costs.
There are factors outside of the scope of this analys is that will affect the City’s budget (e.g., national economic trends). This analysis uses assumptions based on current conditions to provide a projection of impacts most closely associated with the Build Out Projections.
Fiscal impacts measure effects on the operating budget, i.e., revenues and expenditures. Most fiscal impact analyses for cities focus on the G eneral Fund. Typically, cities deposit all general tax revenues and pay most of their operating expenses from the General Fund. All city budgets include other funds besides th e General Fund, but these othe r funds typically represent revenues restricted to specific expenditures. Furthermore, these other funds are often based on user charges billed to customers for service. As a result, cities can adjust the user charges to balance revenues and expenditures, and new developm ent is less likely to create deficits in these other funds.
The General Fund, in contrast, offers the City less control over key revenues—such as property, sales, and transient occupancy taxes—due to state constitution and other regulatory limits. That said, the City does have some influence over General Fund revenues, and there are some charges for services included therein. Examples of City funds excluded from the F&EIA include Enterprise Funds—such as the Sanitary Fund, t he Southern California Logistics Authority Fund, and the Victorville Water Funds—and Special Revenue Funds—such as the City Housing Asset Successor, Development Impact Fee Funds, the Fueling Station Fund, and Gas Tax Funds.
In contrast, this Report includes the Measure P Fund. On November 3, 2020, City residents voted to enact Measure P, a one-cent sales tax measure to fund a higher level of City services.
Fiscal Year 2021-22 was the first fu ll year of Measure P revenues. While Measure P funding is
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-3
kept in a separate fund, revenues come almost entirely from sales taxes and the types of expenditures are not restricted in any way.
The Report uses the City’s Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget as a baseline to measure fiscal impacts. A review of the budget suggests that lingering effects of t he COVID-19 pandemic on the City’s revenues and expenditures are minima l, if any. Therefore, no COVID-19-related adjustments are necessary.
In addition to using the City’s General Fund and Measure P F und budgets, the Report incorporates demographic, land use, assessment roll, and market data from a variety of sources to customize the methodology and findings fo r the City. Additional assumptions and the methodology for the fiscal impact analysis are described further below.
Economic impacts measure effects on the local economy, i.e., jobs, labor income, and economic output. The economic impacts are estimated using the IMPLAN model. Additional details on the model are provided in the Economic Impact Methodology section.
Service Population
For a complete fiscal impact analysis, it is important to consider both residents and workers. The two groups place a demand on City services, though to different degrees. Therefore, the analysis starts by calculating the City’s Full-Time Equivalent (or FTE) “Service Population,” which adjusts for the different demands on City services created by residents and workers.
Weighting of the service populati on is intended generally to approxim ate the share of time that people spend within the City. Re sidents employed outside of t he City are weighted 67%.
Residents employed in the City are split between the resident an d worker categories, totaling 100% weighting between the two. All other residents are weighted 100%. The remaining category is people who live outside of the City and work within it, and the category is weighted 33%. Visitors are not included in the service population. This Report estimates that demands for City services from visitors are generally offset by residents traveling outside of the City. Data for residents and workers, including place of work, is based on US Census data, including the 2020 Decennial Census, the American Community Survey, and OnTheMap.
Table A-2 illustrates the City’s service populati on calculation. This calculation accounts for workers who commute into the City and residents who work outside of the City. Per US Census data, the City has 134,810 residents and 36,980 workers, for a to tal FTE Service Population of 131,106. This figure is used to understand a significant portion of the City’s revenues and all of its expenditures on a per-service population basis.
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-4
Table A-2. Victorville Service Population Estimate
Current and Projected Land Uses
The Report focuses on five land use categor ies with corresponding units to measure development:
1. Single-family residential (households)
2. Multifamily residential (households)
3. Retail (1,000s of square feet)
4. Office (1,000s of square feet)
5. Industrial (1,000s of square feet)
These five land use categories are the most common in fiscal and economic impact analyses.
Table A-3 lists the relevant conditions for each land use category. #% Weight 2 FTE Service
Population
Employment Status of Victorville Residents 1
Not in Labor Force / Unemployed 86,607 64.2% 100% 86,607 Employed in the City 3 14,268 10.6% 50% 7,134
Employed outside of the City 33,935 25.2% 67% 22,736 Total Residents 134,810 100.0% 116,477
Residence Status of Victorville Workers 1
Live in the City 3 14,268 38.6% 50% 7,134
Live outside of the City 22,712 61.4% 33% 7,495
Total Workers 36,980 100.0% 14,629
FTE Service Population Calculation
Attributable to Residents 116,477 88.8%
Attributable to Workers 14,629 11.2%
Total FTE Service Population 131,106 100.0%
Notes:
1. Total Residents based on 2020 Decennial Census. Residents' labor force status based on American Community Survey 2020 5-year estimates. Non-resident employee data based on OnTheMap (a US Census product) 2019 estimates.
2. Harris estimates of various residents' and workers' demand for City services, roughly corresponding to time of day spent in the City.
3. Residents who work in the City and workers who live in the City are the same people. This group is reflected in two categories with their weight split evenly.
Sources: US Census Bureau (LEHD OnTheMap 2019, Decennial Census 2020, American Community Survey 2020)
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-5
Table A-3. Current Land Use Conditions
Data for current land use conditions is estimated using data from the US Census, the Fiscal Year 2022-23 assessment roll, Zillow.c om, and ParcelQuest. US Census data is used to estimate residents per single-family and multifamily hous ehold, as well as workers per thousand square feet for each of the non-residentia l categories. Property market values are based on the Zillow home value index, and ParcelQuest data on rece nt sales. Assessed values, provided for comparison, usually lag behind market values due to California’s Proposition 13, which limits annual growth in assessed value to 2% or less, except in the case of new construction or a property sale. New construction can be expected to add its own market value to the total assessed value. Though market values can fluctuat e, this analysis uses current market values for simplicity.
The data show average household sizes of 3.47 in single-family homes and 3.59 in multifamily homes. Based on the full-time equivalency of residents, these household sizes correspond to service populations of 3.00 and 3.10 per single-family and multifamily household, respectively.
Further, the data show 1.67, 10.03, and 0.63 workers per thousand square feet of retail, office, and industrial land uses, respectively. Based on t he full-time equivalency of workers, these numbers correspond to service populations of 0.66, 3.97, and 0.25 per thousand square feet of the respective non-residential land uses. Mark et values are estima ted at $404,000 per single- family home, per the Zillow Home Value Index, and $119,000 per multifamily home, per recent property sales. Market values for the non-re sidential uses are estimated at $116,000, $70,000, and $39,000 per thousand square feet of retail, office, and industrial building area, respectively.
Land Use
Category Unit
Residents /
Workers
per Unit 1
Service
Population
per Unit
Estimated
Unit
Assessed
Value
Estimated
Unit Market
Value
Residential
Single-Family 1 household 3.47 3.00 235,000$ 404,000 $ Multifamily 1 household 3.59 3.10 74,000$ 119,000 $ Non-residential
Retail 1,000 square feet 1.67 0.66 34,000$ 116,000 $ Office 1,000 square feet 10.03 3.97 29,000$ 70,000 $ Industrial 1,000 square feet 0.63 0.25 7,000 $ 39,000 $ Notes:
Sources: American Community Survey 2020, San Bernardino County Assessment Roll (FY 2022-23), Zillow.com, ParcelQuest
1. Estimates are based on American Community Survey Housing Characteristics and occupational data by industry.
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-6
According to UrbanFootprint, a proprietary pl atform for complex land use-based data analysis, current land use development totals 36, 195 residential units and 27,990,000 non-residential square feet. Table A-4 identifies these households and non-residential square feet by land use designation, as analyzed in the UrbanFootprint platform.
Table A-4. Current Development by Land Use Designation
Table A-5 shows current development for each of the five land use categories previously identified. For this analysis, the data is cat egorized by merging American Community Survey data and commercial real estate market data fr om JLL and Avison Young for consistency with the UrbanFootprint estimates.
Land Use Designation Households Non-residential Square Feet Very Low Density Residential 3,204 172,000 Low Density Residential 18,193 2,036,000
Low Medium Density Res. 1,440 166,000
Medium Density Residential 4,493 441,000 High Density Residential - -
Mixed Density Residential 313 50,000 Commercial 195 8,225,000
Light Industrial 74 1,548,000
Heavy Industrial 7 3,468,000
Mixed-Use 1 101 188,000
Mixed-Use 2 140 1,439,000
Public/Institutional 1 2,184,000 Open Space 45 130,000
Greenway/Utility Corridor 4 50,000 Greenway/Utility Corridor PC 82 11,000 Specific Plan 7,903 7,882,000
TOTAL 36,195 27,990,000
Source: Urban Footprint, July 2022
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-7
Table A-5. Current Development by Land Use Category
Single-family residential use makes up approximately 84% of existing City households. It is worth distinguishing here between land use category (single family vs. multifamily) and tenure type (owner vs. renter). The City’s home ownership rate of 56% is lower than the rate of single-family homes, indicating there are more single-fami ly home renters than multifamily home (e.g., condominium) owners. Industrial land use makes up 65% of the City’s total non-residential land use square feet, retail makes up 31%, and office is the remaining 4%.
Projected development by land use designation is based on the Build Out Projections. As shown in Table A-6, the projections include a to tal of 63,395 households and more than 48 million square feet of non-residential land use. The projections notably show no households or non- residential development in land use designations that do not permit these types of land uses, in keeping with land use regulations. In contrast, the current development by land use designation (Table A-4) shows small amounts of such development. The non-c onforming developments could include “grandfathered” development (i.e., structures bu ilt before a land use designation was changed) and structures built with a variance or other exemption from land use regulations.
Regardless, these types of developments represent a relati vely small portion of total development, and their effect on the analysis is eliminated by the use of the five land use categories.
Residential Households
Single Family 1 30,449
Multifamily 5,746
TOTAL Households 36,195
Non-Residential
Non-residential
Square Feet 2
Retail 8,682,000
Office 1,091,000
Industrial 18,217,000
TOTAL Non-residential Square Feet 27,990,000
Notes:
2. Estimated by modifying JLL and Avison Young 2020 and 2021 market data for consistency with Urban Footprint data.
Sources: Urban Footprint, July 2022; American Community Survey 2020; JLL 2019; Avison Young 2020 & 2021
1. Includes mobile homes and "other type of housing," as defined in American Community Survey data.
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-8
Table A-6. Projected Development by Land Use Designation
Projected development is summarized by land use category based on the Build Out Projections.
Table A-7 shows an overall increase of 27,200 households, equivalent to an increase of 75% of existing households, split almost evenly among si ngle-family and multifamily households. This reflects the City’s increasing emphasis on multifamily development, including at densities above 30 dwelling units per acre , as required for the 2021-2029 Housing Element update. The projections also include an overall increase of more than 20 million non-residential square feet, equal to approximately 71% of existing non-residential development. The latter increase is anticipated to be greatest in the retail and industrial land use categories, with the office land use category lagging mostly due to changes in office space demand related to an upward work-from- home trend following the COVID-19 pandemic.
Land Use Designation Households Non-residential Square Feet Very Low Density Residential 3,715 N/A
Low Density Residential 30,743 N/A
Low Medium Density Res. 2,338 N/A
Medium Density Residential 10,657 N/A
High Density Residential 1,274 N/A
Mixed Density Residential 700 N/A
Commercial N/A 18,825,761
Light Industrial N/A 8,804,565
Heavy Industrial N/A 6,733,287
Mixed-Use 1 744 1,701,454
Mixed-Use 2 5,315 4,167,385
Public/Institutional N/A 529,907
Open Space N/A N/A
Greenway/Utility Corridor N/A N/A
Greenway/Utility Corridor PC N/A N/A
Specific Plan 7,909 7,252,423
TOTAL 63,395 48,014,782
Source: Cit
y of Victorville 2045 Land Use Element
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-9
Table A-7. Projected Development by Land Use Category
Fiscal Impact Analysis
With current conditions and underlying assumptions identified, the F&EIA begins to estimate the fiscal impacts of new land use deve lopment with an overview of the City’s Fiscal Year 2022-23 budgeted (“Current”) General Fund and Measure P Fund. Tables A-8 and A-9 summarize the General Fund and Measure P Fund current revenues, how the revenues are expected to change in response to new development, and the projected additional revenues resulting from the 2045 Land Use Element built-out projections.
Residential Total Households Increase in Households
Single Family 1 43,248 12,799
Multifamily 20,147 14,401
TOTAL Households 63,395 27,200 Non-Residential Total Non-residential
Square Feet 2
Increase in Non-residential
Square Feet 2
Retail 15,248,439 6,566,439
Office 1,526,826 435,826
Industrial 31,239,517 13,022,517
TOTAL Non-residential Square Feet 48,014,782 20,024,782 Notes:
1. Includes mobile homes and "other type of housing," as defined in American Community Survey data.
Sources: Urban Footprint, July 2022; American Community Survey 2020; JLL 2019; Avison Young 2020 & 2021
2. Estimated by modifying JLL and Avison Young 2020 and 2021 market data for consistency with Urban Footprint data.
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-10
Table A-8. General Fund Revenue Summary and Projection
Table A-9. Measure P Fund Revenue Summary and Projection
Total revenues of approximately $91.7 milli on and $29.5 million in the General Fund and Measure P Fund are projected to increase by approximately $39.5 million and $9.5 million. The increases are driven primarily by property tax and sales tax revenues.
Tables A-10 and A-11 summarize the General Fund and Measure P Fund current expenditures, how the expenditures are expected to change in response to new development, and the projected additional expenditures resulting from the Build Out Projections.
Revenue Category FY 22/23 General
Fund Revenues Impact Estimating Factors
Projected
Additional
Revenues with
2045 Build-Out
Projections
General Property Tax 19,291,500 $ 15.88% of 1% of assessed value 12,998,000$ General Property Transfer Tax 628,750 $0.55 per $1,000 in assessed value 196,000 General Sales Tax 31,418,055 1.00% of estimated taxable sales 1 9,092,000
Transient Occupancy Tax 1,787,700 7% of gross room revenue 1,242,000 Franchise Fees 4,247,500 $32.40 per service population 2,993,000 Licenses & Permits 3,813,000 $29.08 per service population 2,686,000 Fines & Forfeitures 82,177 $0.63 per service population 58,000 Intergovernmental 112,500 Not impacted - Charges for Services 6,096,398 $46.50 per service population 4,295,000 Investment Income 393,875 Not impacted - Cost Allocations Received 9,175,278 Not impacted - Miscellaneous Revenue 3,223,611 Not impacted - Pass Throughs 7,360,225 12% of 60% of 1% assessed value 5,893,000 Transfers In 4,100,491 Not impacted -
Total Revenues 91,731,060 $ 39,453,000 $
1. The City receives 2% of taxable sales. However, 1% of taxable sales is received per Measure P and is recorded in a City fund separate from the General Fund.
Revenue Category FY 22/23 General
Fund Revenues Impact Estimating Factors
Projected
Additional
Revenues with
2045 Build-Out
Projections
Sales Taxes 28,582,686 $ 1.00% of estimated taxable sales 1 9,092,000$ Licenses & Permits 192,803 $1.47 per service population 136,000 Intergovernmental 4,202 Not Impacted - Charges for Services 436,927 $3.33 per service population 308,000 Miscellaneous Revenues 297,254 Not Impacted - Total Revenues 29,513,872 $ 9,536,000 $
1. 1% of taxable sales is received per Measure P and is recorded in a City fund separate from the General Fund.
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-11
Table A-10. General Fund Expenditure Summary and Projection
Table A-11. Measure P Fund Expenditure Summary and Projection
Expenditures by
Department
FY 22-23
Budget Variable Calculation Variable
Amount
Per Service
Population
Estimated Additional
Expenditures with 2045
Build-Out Projections
City Manager 5,572,402 $ 10% variable 557,240 $ 4.25 $ 393,000$ Finance 3,710,858 20% variable 742,172 5.66 523,000 Human Resources 1,763,487 20% variable 352,697 2.69 248,000 Information Technology 6,649,343 20% variable 1,329,869 10.14 937,000 Recreation & Library 3,802,434 60% recovery, 80% variable 1,216,779 9.28 857,000 Code Compliance 2,313,738 10% recovery, 80% variable 1,665,891 12.71 1,174,000 Planning 1,851,818 10% recovery, 50% variable 833,318 6.36 587,000 Building 4,925,793 80% recovery, 50% variable 492,579 3.76 347,000 Police 33,626,758 5% recovery, 95% variable 30,348,149 231.48 21,382,000 Fire 17,312,110 10% recovery, 95% variable 14,801,854 112.90 10,429,000 Engineering 1,219,465 40% recovery, 90% variable 658,511 5.02 464,000 Public Works & Water 8,817,684 10% recovery, 75% variable 5,951,937 45.40 4,193,000 Economic Development 126,745 0% variable - - - General 503,666 0% variable - - - Total 92,196,301 41,534,000
Expenditures by
Department
FY 22-23
Budget Variable Calculation Variable
Amount
Per Service
Population
Projected Additional
Expenditures with 2045
Build-Out Projections
City Management 95,399 $ 16% variable 15,264 $ 0.12 $ 11,000$ Recreation & Library 4,048,210 60% recovery, 80% variable 1,295,427 9.88 913,000 Code Compliance 2,428,318 10% recovery, 80% variable 1,748,389 13.34 1,232,000 Planning 7,171,464 10% recovery, 50% variable 3,227,159 24.61 2,274,000 Building 661,440 80% recovery, 50% variable 66,144 0.50 47,000 Police 6,432,659 5% recovery, 95% variable 5,805,475 44.28 4,090,000 Fire 4,728,024 10% recovery, 95% variable 4,042,461 30.83 2,848,000 Public Works & Water 665,403 10% recovery, 75% variable 449,147 3.43 316,000 General 5,146,733 0% variable - - - Total 31,377,650 11,731,000$
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-12
Total expenditures of approximately $92.2 mill ion and $31.4 million in the General Fund and Measure P Fund are projected to increase by approximately $41.5 million and $11.7 million. The expenditures are driven primar ily by police and fire departm ent expenditures. Based on maintaining the current level of service and wit hout any additional steps taken by the City, the Build Out Projections are expected to increase General Fund and Measure P Fund expenditures by approximately $4,276,000 more than their incr ease to corresponding revenues. This result accounts for maintenance of the City’s higher level of service than in prior years made possible by Measure P funding, including setting aside funds from the annual operating budget for future capital purchases. And there are st eps the City can take to redu ce or eliminate this potential shortfall, discussed later in this Report. The rest of this section elaborates on the methodology used for specific revenues and expenditures.
General Property Tax
The property taxes that accrue to a City are a function of the assessed value of real property and the City’s share of the total property tax. Property in Califo rnia is subject to a base 1% property tax rate, which is shared among local jurisdictions including the County, City, and special districts. In addition to the base 1% tax rate, additiona l taxes and special assessments apply to most properties to pay for local vote r-approved debt or other special purposes. These additional taxes and charges vary by location and are restricted for specific uses. The Report evaluates impacts to the City’s General Fund operating budget, which receives a share of the base 1% property tax, but does not receiv e revenue from additi onal taxes and special assessments. The City’s share of the 1% base property tax rate averages 15.88% Citywide. The Report uses the market value of new development to represent projected assessed value.
General Property Transfer Tax
The property transfer tax is a one-time assessment on property at the time of sale. The standard rate is $1.10 per $1,000 of sa le price, split evenly between t he City and the County. Because this tax is assessed only at the time of sale , the Report assumes that new development that occurs due to the Build Out Projections will se ll an average of one time during the projection period and that divides the to tal anticipated transfer tax re venue by 23 to estimate an annual revenue resulting from 23 years of property sales.
General Sales Tax
Taxable transactions that take place in the City are subject to an 8.75% sales tax. This rate includes the statutory 1% Bradley-Burns sales tax that accrues to the City and the 1% Measure P sales tax rate. The former accrues to the General Fund, while the latter accrues to the Measure P Fund. The Report uses household expenditure data from the Americ an Community Survey and weekly worker spending data from the International Council of Shopping Centers to estimate total spending from new househ olds and workers. The Report then assumes conservative
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-13
estimates for how much of that spending will be local and taxable (50% for households, 85% for workers) to calculate total, taxable expenditures.
Transient Occupancy Tax
Transient occupancy taxes (“TOT”) are charged on the rental of hotel/m otel rooms and other lodging rentals of less than 30 days. The City does not have many hotels and motels, and its TOT rate is 7%. The Report assu mes that the increase in hotels and motels in the City will be proportional to the increase in retail and office land uses, because hotels can generally be built in areas designated for office and retail land uses.
Pass Throughs
Pass through revenues are distributions received by the City that would have gone to the former Victorville Redevelopment Agency prior to the 2012 dissolution of redevelopment agencies.
Since 2012, cities, counties, school districts, and other special districts have received the share of property tax revenues in former redevelopm ent project areas that would have gone to the redevelopment agencies, but is not needed for the former redevelopment agency’s financial obligations. The City contains areas in th e project areas of tw o redevelopment agencies:
Victorville and Victorville Valley Economic Development Authority. The former is expected to have all obligations paid before 2045, while the latter is expected to have debt service obligations through 2055.
After all obligations are paid of f, the revenues technically reve rt to a standard property tax distribution. For simplicity, the Report categorizes the associated revenues as “Pass Throughs” even if they will not be categorized that way in 2045. Approximately 60% of the City’s assessed value is located in the former redevelopment project areas. The City’s share of pass throughs as distributed by the County is approximately 12%. These factors are used to estimate the City’s share of Pass Throughs resulting from the Build Out Projections.
Other Revenues
Franchise fees, licenses & permits, fines & forfei tures, and charges for services are estimated on a per service population-basis. Other revenues ar e projected not to be impacted directly by the Build Out Projections. These include intergov ernmental transfers, investment income, cost allocations, “miscellaneous” revenue, and transfers.
Expenditures
Growth in expenditures is estimated by applying two factors: recovery potential and variability.
Recovery potential is estimated using the revenues by department data in the City’s budget. The more a department can generate rev enue from things like charges for services or licenses and permits, the more of its expenditures it can reco ver without general tax revenues. Variability is estimated based on the nature of each department. For example, the Build Out Projections would
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-14
not result in a significant increase in the need for administrative services, like the City Manager, Finance, Human Resources, or Information Technology departments. These departments have relatively low variability. In c ontrast, the services provided by the Police and Fire Departments generally scale very closely to growth and developm ent, resulting in relatively high variability.
Each department’s recovery potential and variability led to an estimated variable cost per service population. These amounts are mult iplied by the new service populat ion to estimate additional expenditures under the Build Out Projections.
Economic Impact Analysis
In addition to impacts to the City’s operating budget, the Build Out Projections will grow the local economy. The economic impacts are estimated using the IMPL AN model. IMPLAN is an economic input-output modeling application, which allows one to estimate the potential economic impacts of certain activities or development.
To estimate the Build Out Projections, Projected Development by Land Use Category (see Table A-7) was adapted to fit the IMPLAN “Event” types. The 27,200 projected new households were allocated at different income levels based on t he City’s current distribution of households by income level (taken from the American Community Survey). New workers, estimated based on new non-residential development and data on workers per thousand square feet were allocated to IMPLAN industries based on current employment in the City, as identified by IMPLAN.
Inputting the new households and workers as de scribed above resulted in the IMPLAN results shown in Table A-12. Over the course of th e Land Use Element time period (from the present through 2045), the Build Out Projections are antic ipated to involve the creation of 37,749 jobs, including the 36,979 directly associated with the non-residential development. Labor income is estimated at more than $2.4 billion. The value added by the economic activity associated with the Build Out Projections is estimated at almost $3.8 billion. Economic output is estimated at more than $8.3 billion.
Table A-12. Economic Impact Results and Analysis
Analysis and Options
The land use projections underlying the F&EIA ar e taken from the City’s concurrent 2045 Land Use Element update. The projected increase in residential land use and the corresponding increase in households are notably high due to the City’s 2021-2029 Housing Element update and Regional Housing Needs Assessment, whic h required the City to plan for 8,165 new Impact Employment Labor Income Value Added Output
Direct 36,979 2,367,930,755$ 3,673,398,528 $ 8,154,204,682 $ Indirect 357 25,361,179 48,004,825 101,591,537 Induced 414 20,353,662 45,103,611 67,022,613 Total 37,749 2,413,645,597$ 3,766,506,963 $ 8,322,818,832 $
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-15
residential units by 2029. Residential land uses ar e more likely than commercial uses to result in lower or negative net fiscal impacts to cities. Th is is due in part to re sidents typically placing a higher demand on City services than businesses do, while certain City revenues (most notably, sales taxes) are driven more directly by commercial land uses.
In proactively analyzing and identifying the proj ected negative net fiscal impacts, the City can take action so that the Build Out Projection is net neutral in its budgetary effects. In addition, the revenue and expenditure projections in this Report assume no change in the City’s current level of service. To maintain the current level of service while also balancing the City’s budget, the City can pursue several options, including the formation of Community Facilities Districts (“CFDs”), increasing tax rates, and pursuing gr ants and other funding sources to cover City costs.
Revising impact fees and user fees is generally another option for cities to increase operational revenues. However, the City adopted a new impact fee master schedule and updated user fees in 2022. These updated fees were incorporated into the Analysis.
Community Facilities Districts
CFDs, also known as Mello-Roos Di stricts, are special tax district s, by which either registered voters (generally for developed areas) or property owners (generally for new development) in an established geographic area agree to impose a tax on property within the area to fund services, public improvements or infrastructure. CFDs requi re a local agency sponsor, such as the City.
The City could pursue creating CFDs on dev eloped area(s) or on new development to supplement operational revenues and to continue pr oviding its current level of service. The amount of revenue that could be generated by CFDs depends on the size of the CFD areas. The City would have a broad level of discretion in setting the special tax levy for the CFD, as long as the City could get the CFD approved by the voters or property owners.
Tax Rates
The City could consider increasing certain tax rates. Measure P increased the sales tax rate effective in 2021. An additional increase to the sales tax rate may not be supported. However, the City’s transient occupancy tax rate of 7% is relatively low. Two of the City’s neighbors (Adelanto and Hesperia) have rates of 10%. T he Countywide average is 9.2%, and 13 of the County’s 24 cities have a rate of 10% or higher.
Another tax option for the City is the utility us er tax (“UUT”), which the City currently does not have. The UUT is imposed on the consumption of utility services, including electricity, gas, water, sewer, telephone (including cell phone and long distance), sanitation, and cable television. Cities can impose the UUT on some or all utility servic es and can set the rates. Five cities in San Bernardino County impose UUT, ranging from 2.5% to 9.0%.
2045 Land Use Element
Appendix A. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
A-16
Outside Funding Sources
The City has restricted fund accounts for local, state, and federal grants. Being restricted, these funds cannot directly offset General Fund expenditures. However, they may be used for expenses that would otherwise hav e to be covered by the General Fund. In this way, outside grants may help to reduce the strain on the General Fund budget.
City Council
Resolution No. 22-124
Exhibit “D”
Safety Element
2021–2029 SAFETY ELEMENT
August 2022
i
This page intentionally left blank.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
CITY COUNCIL
Debra Jones, Mayor
Leslie Irving, Mayor Pro Tem
Elizabeth Becerra, Council Member
Blanca Gomez, Council Member
PLANNING COMMISSION
Rob Kurth, Chair
Rob Harriman, Vice-Chair
Kenneth Cook-Askins, Jr., Commissioner
Kimberly Mesen, Commissioner
Bill Thomas, Commissioner
EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT
Keith Metzler, City Manager
Sophie Smith, Deputy City Manager
Jenele Davidson, Deputy City Manager
CITY STAFF
Scott Webb, City Planner
Alex Jauregui, Assistant City Planner
Sue Jones, Public Information Officer
Charlene A. Johnson, Secretary
CONSULTANT TEAM
Harris & Associates
iii
This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................... iv 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Purpose of this Element ............................................................................................. 1
1.2 State Law ................................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Relationship to Other General Plan Elements and Other Plans ................................. 3
1.4 Vision ......................................................................................................................... 4 2 Potential Hazards ............................................................................................................... 5
2.1 Geologic and Seismic Hazards (GC § 65302(g)(1)) ................................................... 5
2.2 Flood Hazards (GC § 65302(g)(2)) .......................................................................... 17
2.3 Fire Hazards (GC § 65302(g)(3)) ............................................................................. 25
2.4 Vulnerability Assessment ......................................................................................... 29
2.5 Extreme Heat ........................................................................................................... 31
2.5.1 Exposure .............................................................................................................. 32
2.5.2 Sensitivity ............................................................................................................. 37
2.5.3 Potential Impact ................................................................................................... 41
2.5.4 Adaptive Capacity ................................................................................................ 42
2.5.5 Vulnerability ......................................................................................................... 42
2.6 Wildfire ..................................................................................................................... 43
2.6.1 Exposure .............................................................................................................. 43
2.6.2 Sensitivity ............................................................................................................. 43
2.6.3 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 47
2.6.4 Adaptive Capacity ................................................................................................ 47
2.6.5 Vulnerability ......................................................................................................... 48
2.7 Extreme Precipitation ............................................................................................... 49
2.7.1 Exposure .............................................................................................................. 49
2.7.2 Sensitivity ............................................................................................................. 51 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
v
2.7.3 Potential Impact ................................................................................................... 51
2.7.4 Adaptive Capacity ................................................................................................ 51
2.7.5 Vulnerability ......................................................................................................... 52
2.8 Drought .................................................................................................................... 53
2.8.1 Exposure .............................................................................................................. 53
2.8.2 Sensitivity ............................................................................................................. 55
2.8.3 Potential Impact ................................................................................................... 55
2.8.4 Adaptive Capacity ................................................................................................ 56
2.8.5 Vulnerability ......................................................................................................... 57
2.9 Hazardous Materials ................................................................................................ 58
2.10 Aircraft Mishap ......................................................................................................... 58
2.11 Safety Zones ............................................................................................................ 59 3 Emergency Planning and Preparedness .......................................................................... 63
3.1 Emergency Planning ................................................................................................ 63
3.1.1 Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment ......................................................... 63
3.1.2 Hazard Mitigation ................................................................................................. 64
3.1.3 Emergency Response and Action ........................................................................ 67
3.2 Fire Protection .......................................................................................................... 72
3.3 Police Services ......................................................................................................... 72
3.4 Emergency Medical Response ................................................................................. 73
3.5 Evacuation Routes ................................................................................................... 73
3.6 Minimum Road Widths and Clearances Around Structures ..................................... 74
3.7 Peak Load Water Supply Requirements .................................................................. 75 4 Goals, Policies, and Implementation ................................................................................ 77 Goal 1: Protection from Hazards – Protect the Community against Natural and Human-Made Hazards .......................................................................................................... 78 Goal 2: Protection of Public Health and Safety – Integrate Public Health and Safety Issues into Planning and Development Policies ............................................................................. 82 Goal 3: Increase Resilience to the Impacts of Climate Change .......................................... 85 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
vi
Appendix A. Critical Facilities .................................................................................................. 90 Appendix B. Evacuation Analysis .......................................................................................... 100
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
vii
This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
1 1 INTRODUCTION
The City of Victorville is committed to protecting the health and safety of the community by addressing and mitigating risk from natural and public safety hazards. The Safety Element is an analysis of the City’s risk to natural hazards, suc h as fire, flood, seismic and geologic, and climate change, and identifies actions to reduce th ose risks through goals, objectives, and policies. In compliance with California Government Code Section 65302 (g), the goal of the Safety Element is to reduce the potential short and long-term risk of death, injuries, property damage, and economic and social dislocation resulting from fires, floods, droughts, earthquakes, landslides, climate change, and other locally-relevant hazards.
1.1 Purpose of this Element
The Safety Element is one of the General Plan eleme nts mandated by California Government Code Section 65302 (g). It is intended to identify and, whenever possible, reduce the impact of natural and human-made hazards that may threaten th e health, safety, and property of the residents living and working in the Victorville Planning Area. It emphasizes hazard reduction and mitigation, accident prevention, and emergency resp onse and management. In addition, the Safety Element emphasizes the importance of policie s that reduce risk, prevent disasters, and increase preparedness.
Natural hazards addressed in the Safety Element include flood, fire, seismic risk and seismically induced surface rupture, ground shaking, subsidence , ground failure, and liquefaction, along with slope instability leading to mudslides and landslides. Threats of tsunami and seiche hazards do not occur in the Planning Area. The Safety Element has been updated to comply with SB 379 by addressing the impacts of climate change and strategies to adapt and mitigate climate-related hazards. In addition to natural and climate change hazards, the Safety Element evaluates human-made hazards, evacuation routes, and emergenc y services and response. Maps are provided to identify locations of known natural hazards, critical facilities, and primary evacuation routes. Peak load water supply requirements, minimu m road widths and clearances around structures are discussed, as these pertain to identified fire and geologic hazards.
1.2 State Law
The Safety Element was prepared to meet State Gener al Plan requirements for safety, with a focus on reducing the potential short and long-term risk of death, injuries, property damage, and economic and social dislocation resulting from fire , floods, geologic and seismic, and climate change hazards. California Government Code Section 65302 (g) includes the requirements that should be addressed in a community's general plan Safety Element.
In 2015, SB 379 revised Section 65302(g)(4) to requ ire that cities and counties update their Safety Elements to address climate adaptation and r esiliency strategies applicable to their jurisdiction. The updates are required at the next update of their local hazard mitigation plan (LHMP) on or after January 1, 2017. Local jurisdict ions without an LHMP must update their 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
2 Safety Elements beginning on or before January 1, 2 022. The Safety Element update must include:
1. A vulnerability assessment identifying the risks that climate change poses to the local jurisdiction.
2. A set of goals, policies, and objectives based o n a vulnerability assessment for the protection of the community.
3. A set of feasible implementation strategies to c arry out the goals, policies, and objectives. The City’s LHMP was updated in 2020–2021 and is referenced throughout the Safety Element.
The Safety Element was prepared in accordance with the requirements of California Government Code 65302(g) and is organized to follow the code’s required subdivisions, as follows:
1. 65302(g)(1) identifies the hazards that should b e addressed in the Safety Element, including unreasonable risks associated with the effects of seismically induced surface rupture, ground shaking, ground failure, tsunami, seiche, and dam failure; slope instability leading to mudslides and landslides; subsidence; li quefaction, and other geologic hazards; flooding; and wildland and urban fires; evacuation routes, military installations, peak load water supply requirements, and minimum road widths and clearances around structures, as those items relate to identified fire and geologic hazards.
2. 65302 (g)(2) identifies the requirements for upd ating the Safety Element with flood hazard information and mapping, as well as establis hing goals, policies, and objectives for the protection of risk of flood.
3. 65302 (g)(3) addresses the risk of fire for land classified as state responsibility areas, as defined in Section 4102 of the Public Resources Code, and land classified as very high Fire Hazard Severity Zones.
4. 65302 (g)(4) identifies the requirements for upd ating the Safety Element to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies.
5. 65302 (g)(5) identifies the requirements for ide ntifying residential developments in any hazard area identified in the Safety Element that do not have at least two emergency evacuation routes.
6. 65302 (g)(6) requires revisions to the Safety El ement upon each revision of the housing element or LHMP to incorporate new informat ion relating to flood and fire hazards and climate adaptation and resiliency strategies that was not available during the previous revision of the Safety Element.
7. 65302 (g)(7) allows the use of flood plain manag ement ordinances that have been approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) or equivalent provisions that substantially comply with this sect ion by reference into the Safety Element, specifically showing how each requirement of this subdivision has been met. 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
3 8. 65302 (g)(8) requires consultation with the Cali fornia Geological Survey of the Department of Conservation, the Central Valley Floo d Protection Board, if the city or county is located within the boundaries of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Drainage District, as set forth in Section 8501 of the Water Code, and the Office of Emergency Services for the purpose of including information k nown by and available to the department, the agency, and the board required by this subdivision.
9. Allows cities to adopt that portion of the count y’s Safety Element that pertains to the city’s planning area in satisfaction of the requirement imposed by this subdivision.
AB 747 requires upon the next revision of a LHMP on or after January 1, 2022, or beginning on or before January 1, 2022, if a local jurisdiction has not adopted a LHMP, would require the Safety Element to be reviewed and updated as necessary to identify evacuation routes and their capacity, safety, and viability under a range of emergency scenarios. The bill would authorize a city or county that has adopted a LHMP, emergency o perations plan, or other document that fulfills commensurate goals and objectives to use t hat information in the Safety Element to comply with this requirement by summarizing and inc orporating by reference that other plan or document in the Safety Element.
1.3 Relationship to Other General Plan Elements
and Other Plans
The Safety Element identifies hazards and hazard abatement provisions to guide local decisions related to zoning, subdivisions, and land use entit lement permits. The Safety Element was developed in coordination and integration with the Land Use, Housing, and Environmental Justice Element updates.
The Safety Element is also complementary to and ref erences the City’s adopted Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP). The LHMP for the City of Vi ctorville planning area was developed in accordance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) and followed FEMA’s 2011 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan guidance. The LHMP inc orporates a process where hazards are identified and profiled, the people and facilities at risk are analyzed, and mitigation actions are developed to reduce or eliminate hazard risk. It is a comprehensive analysis of natural hazards, including climate change, flooding, earthquake and seismic-related hazards, fire, and other natural and human-made hazards. The implementation of mitigation actions, which include both short-term and long-term strategies, involve planni ng, policy changes, programs, projects, and other activities. The Local Hazard Mitigation Plan can be found at this location:
https://www.victorvilleca.gov/government/city-departments/emergency-services/emergency- management
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
4 1.4 Vision
The City of Victorville Safety Committee met twice during the planning process to set the vision of the Safety Element, update the hazard profiles and re-establish goals, policies, and objectives to protect the community from such risks. The goals , objectives, policies, and implementation measures of the Safety Element envision a Victorville that has all of the following characteristics:
• Protects the community from natural and human-made hazards, • Protects public health and safety,
• Maintains optimal emergency preparedness,
• Fosters interagency cooperation and coordination, and • Increases resilience to the impacts of climate change.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
5 2 POTENTIAL HAZARDS
2.1 Geologic and Seismic Hazards (GC §
65302(g)(1))
Earthquakes and their induced effects have the pote ntial to impact the City and its residents.
The LHMP and the Safety Element evaluate the geologic and seismic hazards with the greatest potential to impact people and property, which incl ude earthquake, landslides, surface rupture, ground shaking, ground failure, and damages to local dams, subsidence, liquefaction, and other hazards. Surface rupture, tsunami, and seiche were considered by the committee but were determined to have a low likelihood of occurrence, so no further analysis was not conducted.
Earthquake. Like other areas of California, Victorville is susceptible to the effects of earthquakes from nearby faults. An earthquake is a sudden motion or trembling caused by a release of energy accumulated within or along the edge of the earth’s tectonic plates. The effects of an earthquake can be felt far beyond the epicenter (i.e., where the earthquake originates). Earthquakes usually occur without warning and can cause massive damage and extensive casualties in just a few seconds.
The City is located within the seismically active Southern California region, probably best known for the San Andreas Fault, which stretches from the Mexican border to San Francisco. Though there are no known or suspected fault traces within the planning area, there are five nearby fault systems that could produce earthquakes and earthquake induced hazards. The five nearby fault systems located outside of the planning boundary in clude San Andreas (24 miles south of the planning area), Helendale (9 miles northeast), San Jacinto fault (26 miles south), North Frontal (5.5 miles southeast), and Landers (50 miles southe ast). The San Andreas Fault is considered most likely to produce a major earthquake within the planning period, though the Helendale Fault could also be responsible for a moderate earthquake with a Richter magnitude of approximately
5.9. The North Frontal fault zone of the San Bernardino Mountains has the potential to produce a moderate earthquake with a Richter magnitude of 6 .2. The Landers Fault was discovered as a result of a 7.4 Richter magnitude sized earthquak e on June 28, 1992. Although the epicenter (i.e., a surface point directly above the earthquak e's focus) was approximately fifty miles from the Planning Area, intense local ground shaking occ urred. However, no substantial damage to buildings or facilities in the Planning Area was reported (Figure 1, Seismic Hazards).
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
6 This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
7 Figure 1. Seismic Hazards
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
8 This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
9 Earthquakes can induce other hazards like ground sh aking, slope instability and landslides, surface rupture, ground failure, liquefaction, subsidence, dam failure, tsunami, and seiche. The extent and severity of earthquake-induced hazards depend on several factors, including soil and slope conditions, proximity to the fault, earthquak e magnitude and depth, and the type of earthquake. When a fault ruptures, seismic waves radiate and cause the ground to vibrate. The severity of the vibration increases as the amount o f energy released increases and decreases with distance from the fault or epicenter. Earthquake-induced hazards of concern to the Planning Area are analyzed and described below:
Ground shaking: Ground shaking is the motion felt on the earth's su rface caused by seismic waves from an earthquake. It is the primary cause o f earthquake damage. The strength of ground shaking depends on the magnitude of the eart hquake, the type of fault, and distance from the epicenter. Buildings on poorly consolidate d and thick soils will typically see more damage than buildings on consolidated soils and bedrock.
There are no fault systems located within the Plann ing Area, so the majority of the City would experience low to moderate shaking potential in the event of an earthquake on a nearby fault system. The areas with the highest shaking potentia l are located in the southern-southwestern portions of the City in the direction of the fault systems. Ground shaking potential is analyzed using the State probabilistic earthquake hazard map. Earthquake probabilities are calculated by projecting earthquake rates based on earthquake his tory and fault slip rates. The result is expressed as the probability that an earthquake of a specified magnitude will occur on a fault or within an area.
During moderate to strong earthquake-induced ground shaking, unreinforced masonry construction may be hazardous to life and property as a result of partial or complete structure collapse. To mitigate this hazard, the City has adopted Chapter 15.38 of the Victorville Municipal Code, in compliance with State law (California Government Code Section 8875), which promotes public safety and welfare by reducing the risk of death or injury that may result from such structural damage. The provisions of the chapter set minimum s tandards for structural seismic resistance established to reduce the risk of life, loss, or injury, but will not necessarily prevent these hazards.
Generally, most unreinforced masonry structures are located in the Old Town area of the City, where buildings were constructed before modern buil ding codes were developed to require design with respect to seismic safety consideration s. The City has been actively pursuing funding sources, such as Community Development Bloc k Grant funds, to financially assist property owners with seismic retrofit requirements (Figure 2, Earthquake Shaking Potential).
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
10 This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
11 Figure 2. Earthquake Shaking Potential
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
12 This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
13 Ground failure: ground failure refers to earthquake-triggered land slides and liquefaction, analyzed in more detail below. Landslide may impact the Planning Area, but there haven’t been any detailed studies performed by the State or local agencies that identify the risk.
Slope instability and earthquake-induced landslides : The topography within the Victorville Planning Area varies considerably from gently sloping topography occasionally dissected by an intermittent stream channel, to nearly vertical slo pes adjacent to the Mojave River. The major environmental factors controlling stability of the steeper hillsides include precipitation, topography, geology, soils, vegetation, and human-m ade modifications to the natural topography.
The portions of the Planning Area found to have slo pe gradients of greater than 15% are identified on Figure 3, Slope Hazards. Slope of 15% or higher are consider steep. If plant cover is removed, the slope is highly susceptible to eros ion or gully formation. If the gradient is 50% or more, construction activities could cause widespread slope failure. The City’s LHMP identifies earthquakes as an exacerbating hazard to landslides . Earthquake-induced landslides are secondary earthquake hazards that occur from ground shaking. They can destroy the roads, buildings, utilities, and other critical facilities necessary to respond and recover from an earthquake and are common in areas with steep slopes.
Development on hillside areas when steep slopes are present can increase rates of erosion and exacerbate landslide hazards which may threaten str uctures. If the City’s Building Official determines there is a probability that development in the hillside areas can increase rates of erosion and exacerbate landslide hazards which coul d threaten structures, a geotechnical investigation will be required in accordance with t he 2007 California Building Code (Sections 1805.3 to 1805.3.5). Additionally, the Victorville Municipal Code contains a “slope protection combining district” as part of the zoning regulatio ns, to require landscaping on manufactured slopes greater than five feet high as a way to minimize erosion potential.
Liquefaction: Liquefaction occurs when ground shaking causes wet granular soils to change from a solid state to a liquid state. This results in the loss of soil strength and the soil's ability to support weight. Buildings and their occupants are at risk when the ground can no longer support these buildings and structures. Portions of the Pla nning Area, especially those areas along the Mojave River, may be susceptible to liquefaction, though it is usually not considered a hazard if the groundwater table is greater than fifty feet in depth. Detailed studies have not been prepared to indicate the precise location of areas prone to liquefaction; therefore, the extent of potential impact cannot be stated conclusively at this time. In any case, geologic studies can detect liquefaction problems prior to the construction of any new building. If the City’s Building Official determines there is a significant probability that a site is susceptible to liquefaction, a geotechnical investigation is required in accordanc e with the 2007 California Building Code, Section 1802.2.7.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
14 This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
15 Figure 3. Slope Hazards
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
16 This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
17 Surface rupture: Surface rupture is not anticipated to be a hazard since there are no known or suspected fault traces within the Planning Area. Surface rupture occurs when movement on a fault breaks through to the surface. This displacement creates a visible offset on the ground’s surface.
Dam failure: The California Department of Water Resources’ Divi sion of Safety of Dams (DSOD) provides oversight to the design, construction, and maintenance of over 1,200 dams in California. DSOD periodically reviews the stability of dams as well as findings regarding earthquake hazards and hydrologic estimates in Cali fornia. In the event of a major earthquake, critical damage may occur to buildings and infrastr ucture, including those that provide critical services, such as water, gas, power, sewer, and sto rm drainage. A major earthquake could induce damage causing a dam to fail. The area downs tream of the dam that would be flooded in the event of a failure is called the inundation area. DSOD reviews and approves dam inundation maps. Dam failure, seismically-induced or otherwise, has not affected the City in the past. Dam inundation is further analyzed in the Flo od Hazards section, on pages 17–25. This section includes a map of nearby major dams and waterways.
Subsidence: Subsidence is the gradual or sudden sinking of the ground surface. No areas of subsidence have been identified during the City’s history of community development.
Tsunami and Seiche: Seismically-induced tsunami and seiche (a standing wave, commonly observed on lakes) were deemed not to be hazards of concern and thus not evaluated as part of the LHMP or Safety Element due to the low likeli hood of occurrence. Lakes in the planning area include the Mojave Narrows Regional Park, a County-owned and operated park located in the center of the planning area, with two lakes open to the public for fishing. Spring Valley Lake is located in a private residential community open only to those residents only recreation. As such, the threats of tsunami and seiche hazards do not occur in the Planning Area.
2.2 Flood Hazards (GC § 65302(g)(2))
Flooding is a temporary or persistent condition where normally dry land is partially or completely inundated with water. Flooding is commonly associat ed with riverine overflow, where downstream channels receive more rain or snowmelt f rom their watershed than normal, or a channel is blocked by an ice jam or debris. Excess water overloads the channels and flows out onto the floodplain.
Local hydrology in the Victorville Planning Area is dominated by the Mojave River, which originates in the San Bernardino Mountains and flow s northeast for approximately 80 miles where it empties into Soda Lake. The Mojave River is the principal flood hazard to the developed portions of the Planning Area. The surface flow of the river fluctuates seasonally, though it carries discharges from Lake Arrowhead, Silverwood Lake, an d Mojave Forks Reservoir. There are several intermittent streams that drain the Planning Area and empty into the Mojave River. Two intermittent streams, Ossom Wash and West Fork Osso m Wash, drain a large area of the City west of the I-15 Freeway. Three smaller unnamed intermittent streams drain the areas south of Southern California Logistics Airport. The Bell Mou ntain Wash is located north of the Mojave River and drains a portion of the North Mojave Planning Area. The Oro Grande Wash originates 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
18 in the San Gabriel Mountains near the Cajon Pass, where it parallels I-15 before crossing to the east, just north of La Mesa and Nisqualli Roads.
Figure 4, Flood Hazards, depicts the City’s 100-year and 500-year flood zones. The magnitude of flooding that is used as the standard for floodp lain management in the U.S. is a flood with a probability of occurrence of one percent (1%) in any given year. This flood is also known as the 100-year flood or base flood. The most readily available source of information regarding the 100- year flood, as well as the 500-year flood (i.e., 0.2% probability of occurrence in any given year), is the system of Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) prepared by FEMA.
There is a potential for flooding from these streams in the event of a 100-year flood. In the event of a 100-year flood, flood water will likely be con fined to the river's flood plain. Some of these areas may be subject to flooding in the event of a 100-year flood, assuming base flood elevations on the FIRM are correct. Geospatial analysis used to map the 100-year and 500-year flood zones identified 300 residential parcels located in the 100-year flood zone and 200 residential parcels in the flood zone (County GIS parcel data and Asses sor’s Tax Roll, along with City Land Use GIS data). Flood control improvements, including nu merous levees and the West Fork Dam, reduce the potential for this flooding. The LHMP id entifies past flooding events have inundated roadways near Turner Wash Trunk (north of Mojave Dr ive), Ossum Wash (north of Capistrano Street and south of Rancho Road), and along Eucalyptus Street (east of Cloverly Street). Some of the notable flooding events include:
• August 31, 1998 – Strong thunderstorms fed by inten se heat and humidity under strong high pressure aloft developed as an upper-level low that was over southern Nevada and began drifting toward southern California. A few th understorms reached coastal areas, but most of the flooding and high winds remained farther inland. Flooding was widespread throughout the Victor Valley where one (1) to two ( 2) inches of rain was reported. In Hesperia, water was running half a foot deep over s ome roads, flooding homes and intersections.
• July 7, 2001 – Heavy rains from thunderstorms cause d significant flooding of area roadways near the City. Water was reported to be two (2) feet deep in places. • August 14, 2004 – Flash-flooding in eastern parts o f the City and in the Spring Valley Lake vicinity trapped many vehicles in rapidly risi ng water. Flood waters eight (8) feet deep covered the BNSF railroad tracks and forced a halt to train traffic. The result was a sixty (60) train backup that extended well into the Cajon Pass. • August 26, 2010 – Moist and unstable monsoonal flow triggered scattered showers and thunderstorms across San Diego, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties, a few of which reached severe status with large hail and damaging winds. Localized flash flooding was also reported in a few locations over the two- (2) day event.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
19 Figure 4. Flood Hazards
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
20 This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
21 Dam Failure: According to the City’s LHMP, the term “dam failure” encompasses a wide variety of circumstances. Situations that would constitute a dam failure vary widely, from developing problems to a partial or catastrophic collapse of the entire dam. Potential causes of a dam failure are numerous and can be attributed to deficiencies in the original design of the dam, the quality of construction, the maintenance of the dam, operation of the appurtenances while the dam is in operation, and acts of nature including precipitation in excess of the design, flood, and damage from earthquakes. Water overtopping the dam crest is a common cause of failure in earth dams.
Overtopping will cause erosion and the dam crest an d eventual dam breach. Inundation refers to the specific areas of land that would become flooded and covered with water if a dam fails.
Though dam failure has not affected the City in the past, previous Safety Element planning efforts and the LHMP have identified several dams w ithin the general vicinity of the City:
Amethyst Basin Dam, Cedar Springs Dam (also identif ied as Silverwood Lakes Dam), Mojave Forks Dam, and Arrowhead Lakes Dam, and that failur es of those dams could potentially inundate parts of the City.
Amethyst Basin Dam is located within the City limit s. It has never experienced any high flow issues or flooding of downstream facilities. The Dam is owned and operated by the Department of Public Works, San Bernardino County Flood Control District, who is responsible for activating the Emergency Action Plan (EAP). The purpose of the EAP is to reduce the risk of loss of human life or injury and to minimize property damage in the event of a dam safety emergency or flooding caused by large uncontrolled releases. The Amethyst Basin EAP has never been activated.
The Cedar Springs Dam created the Silverwood Reserv oir in 1971 as part of the State Water Project and is located in nearby Hesperia. Mojave Forks Dam is a flood risk management project located on the Mojave River in San Bernardino Count y, approximately 14 miles south of Victorville. The City’s previous update to the Safe ty Element planning recognizes potential threats of dam inundation to the Planning Area coul d occur if the dams at Arrowhead Lakes failed and emptied into the Mojave River through Deep Creek.
The LHMP acknowledges that dam failure can result f rom natural or human activities, such as earthquakes, internal erosion, improper siting, des ign flaws, or rising floodwaters. However, it did not identify the probability of a dam failure, and though while technically possible, it is unlikely that a dam failure event would happen within the ne xt 10 years. Based on event history, likelihood is less than or equal to ten percent a year (Figure 5, Dams and Major Waterways).
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
22 This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
23 Figure 5. Dams and Major Waterways
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
24 This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
25 Agencies with responsibility for flood protection: The City of Victorville, the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, and San Bernardino County Office of Emergency Services all have responsibilities for flood protection within the planning area. The City Building Official/Floodplain Administrator and the Office of Emergency Services as well as Engineering, Public Works, and Planning departments are involved in implementing a nd maintaining development regulations, permitting requirements, and building code specific ations that identify flood risk and promote mitigation. The Engineering and Planning Department s coordinate land use and flood control planning between City staff, the County Flood Control District, special districts, and cities within the county. Engineering and Public Works implement flood protection and prevention projects.
Planning works to integrate FEMA floodplain and NFIP information with City planning. The City’s LHMP identifies mitigation actions for the agencies involved with flood protection, such as Engineering developing floodplain inundation evacuation plans with County OES.
Titles 15 and 18 of the Victorville Municipal Code establish required methods of preventing and reducing flood hazards, including:
• Restricting or prohibiting uses which are dangerous to health, safety and property due to water or erosion hazards, or which result in damagi ng increases in erosion or flood heights or velocities;
• Requiring that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve such uses, are protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction; • Controlling the alteration of natural flood plains, stream channels, and natural protective barriers which help accommodate or channel floodwaters; • Controlling filling, grading, dredging, and other land altering activities that could increase flood damage; and
• Preventing or regulating the construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally divert floodwaters, or which may increase flood hazards in other areas.
2.3 Fire Hazards (GC § 65302(g)(3))
Wildland and urban fires are fires occurring in suburban or rural areas that contain uncultivated lands, timber, range, watershed, brush, or grasslan ds. This includes areas where there is a mingling of developed and undeveloped lands (General Plan Guidelines). Wildfires can present a significant potential for disaster in the southwest, a region of relatively high temperatures, low humidity and low precipitation during the summer an d spring and moderately strong daytime winds. Combine these severe burning conditions with people or lightning and the stage is set for the occurrence of large, destructive wildfires.
Wildfires are a necessary part of the natural ecosystem in Southern California, but they become a hazard when they extend out of control into devel oped areas, with the resultant of loss of property, injuries, or the loss of life. The wildfi re risk in the United States has increased in the last few decades with the increasing encroachment o f residences and other structures into the 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
26 wild land environment and the increasingly larger n umber of people living and playing in wild land areas.
In compliance with California Government Code Secti on 65302(g)(3), the Planning Area was analyzed to identify land classified as state respo nsibility areas, very high Fire Hazard Severity Zones, and USGS wildfire hazard areas, of which there are none located within City limits. This can be attributed to the City’s location in the low er Mojave section of the Southeastern Deserts Bioregion, an area characterized by isolated, steep-sided mountain ranges separated by broad alluvial basins. About one-third of the desert floor in the Mojave section is devoid of vegetation, limiting amount of surface fuel loads available to burn. Because of the low fuel loads in the City and adjacent areas, wildfires are not expected to o ccur within any year. The probability is less than ten percent (10%) annually, according to the City’s LHMP.
The types of fires more common to Victorville inclu de small vegetation fire and structural fires.
Dozens of small vegetation fires, typically less than one (1) acre in size, are reported in Victorville annually (LHMP). There are a relatively small numbe r of structure fires reported annually in Victorville, but depending on the size, age and occ upancy of the structure, the economic and social losses can be substantial.
Historically, San Bernardino County has experienced 148 days of wildland fires since June 2000 resulting in ten (10) deaths and 157 injuries. The City has had a single wildland fire. On October 1, 2003, a wildfire in the Mojave riverbed consumed ten (10) acres of brush before being contained. Past fires that have occurred in the Cajon Pass have impeded High Desert residents from going to work in population centers south of t he Pass and have disrupted supplies goods shipments and commercial activity due to loss of th is key transportation corridor. Impacts have generally been in the three (3) to five (5) day range (Figure 6, Fire Hazards).
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
27 Figure 6. Fire Hazards
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
28 This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
29 The purpose of the Safety Element is to protect the community from any unreasonable risks associated with seismic and geologic hazards, flood ing, wildland and urban fires, and climate change. Legislation identifies the types of hazards and vulnerabilities the Safety Element should address, including critical facilities. Critical facilities are structures and institutions necessary for a community’s response and recovery from emergencies. Critical facilities must continue to operate during and following a hazard event to reduce the s everity of impacts and accelerate recovery.
This section incorporates the critical facilities identified and analyzed in Section 5.5 of the LHMP.
The LHMP identifies the name and type of critical f acilities, as well as the type of hazard, each facility is vulnerable to (See Appendix A). These f acilities include City Hall, fire stations, police stations, hospitals, community centers, transportation infrastructure, public facilities, and wells.
This analysis incorporated from the LHMP is used by the Safety Committee in order to define goals, policies, and objectives that protect the community from the identified hazards.
2.4 Vulnerability Assessment
The purpose of climate adaptation planning is to reduce vulnerability to projected climate change effects, increase the local capacity to adapt, and build resilience through the adoption of goals and policies. A climate resilient city is one that is prepared for the effects of climate change and is able to provide essential services during and after hazard events.
The City prepared a vulnerability assessment, in co nformance with the Adaptation Planning Guide, which identifies the risks that climate change poses to the City. The Adaptation Planning Guide was designed to ensure that the vulnerability assessment meets Safety Element requirements in California Government Code Section 65302(g)(4), as updated by SB 379 and SB 1035. The vulnerability assessment follows the process outlined in Phase 2 of APG 2.0 and is composed of the following five steps:
1. Exposure: The purpose of this step is to understand existing hazards within the planning area, and how these hazards will change. Climate projection data from Cal- adapt are used to develop projections for how existing hazards are expected to change by mid- and late-century.
2. Sensitivity: This step identifies the location of population groups and critical facilities that are sensitive to localized climate change effects.
3. Potential Impacts: This step seeks to understand how sensitive populations and facilities may be affected by climate change. Potential Impact is a function of exposure and sensitivity.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
30 4. Adaptive Capacity: The
purpose of this step is to
characterize the City’s
current ability to cope with
climate impacts. The ability
of the City to adapt to each
of the identified climate
impacts is determined
through a review of existing
plans, policies, and
programs, and through
stakeholder engagement.
5. Vulnerability Scoring:
Vulnerability is a function of
potential impact and
adaptive capacity. The
vulnerability scoring
method allows the City to
understand which
populations and assets will
potentially face the greatest
threats and where there
are gaps in current
planning efforts. The scoring rubric used to assess the potential impact, adaptive capacity, and overall vulnerability are shown below.
Table A: Potential Impact and Adaptive Capacity Scoring Rubric
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
31 Table B: Vulnerability Scoring Rubric
Source: CalOES, 2020; Adapted by Harris and Associates, 2021 The information provided in the vulnerability asses sment below integrates information provided from the City’s 2021 LHMP with supplemental informa tion collected through the General Plan Update planning process. Specifically, this vulnera bility assessment adopts the LHMP’s definition and categorization of critical facilitie s. Information on historical hazard events was documented in the 2021 LHMP, as was the identificat ion of populations and critical community assets in hazard zones.
The following vulnerability assessment analyzes the potential impact and adaptive capacity of the following asset categories to climate-driven ha zards, including extreme heat, extreme precipitation, drought, and wildfire (Table 1, Sensitive Populations and Critical Facilities):
Table 1. Sensitive Populations and Critical Facilities
ASSET CATEGORY DESCRIPTION
People City residents
Critical Facilities --
City Operations City Hall, City EOC
Public Safety Facilities Fire Stations
Public Health Facilities Hospital
Community Centers Community, Libraries, Activities, and Sports Centers Utility Facilities Water Treatment and Distribution Facilities, Energy utilities Critical Transportation Airport, Bridges, Bus
Schools Educational Facilities
2.5 Extreme Heat
Overall temperatures are expected to rise in California during the 21st century. While the entire state will experience temperature increases, the lo cal impacts will vary greatly. The City of Victorville is already experiencing the effects of rising temperatures. Extreme heat days are defined by days where the daily maximum temperature exceeds a threshold temperature of 103.0°F. Threshold temperatures are defined as the 98th percentile value of historical daily maximum temperatures (from 1961–1990, between April and October) in Victorville .
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
32 2.5.1 Exposure
Average temperatures are projected to increase between 4.3°F and 5.3°F by mid-century (2035– 2064), and between 5.4°F and 9.0°F by end-century ( 2070–2099). In addition, the number of extreme heat days is projected to increase from a h istorical average of 5 days per year to between 27 and 34 days by mid-century and 35 to 62 days by end-century (Cal-Adapt 2021).
Warmer days will also be accompanied by an increasing number of warmer nights.
Heat exposure, however, is not distributed equally throughout the City. “Intra-urban” heat islands refer to areas within a city that are hotter than others due to uneven distribution of heat-absorbing buildings and pavements, and cooler spaces with trees and greenery (EPA 2020) .
In 2019 CAPA Strategies, organized the Urban Heat Watch program in Victorville to understand how urban heat varies across neighborhoods. The Vic torville campaign engaged City staff, researchers, and community members in the collectio n of tens of thousands of measurements of temperature and humidity throughout the region to provide localized data that can be used to map heat distribution for the City. The results for afternoon (3–4pm) sensor readings are shown on Figure 7, Victorville 3–4PM Area-Wide Temperature (°F).
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
33 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
34 Extreme Heat Days
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
35 Figure 7. Victorville 3–4PM Area-Wide Temperature (°F)
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
36 This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
37 2.5.2 Sensitivity
2.5.2.1 People
A number of factors contribute to the sensitivity o f people to extreme heat. Intrinsic factors that contribute to heat-related risk include age (those over sixty-five, infants, and children), and pre- existing medical conditions (e.g., cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and mental illness). Extrinsic factors, or those external to an individual, include neighborhoods with high levels of impervious surfaces and low tree cover, or housing units that lack air conditioning. Immigration status and occupational profession are other significant facto rs that may contribute to an individual’s sensitivity to heat events, particularly farmworker s and warehouse workers who do not have adequate accommodations and protections. The City’s homeless or unsheltered population are among the most sensitive to heat events.
The Heat Health Action Index score is a statistically weighted result of indicators that is intended to represent geographic areas of greater heat sensi tivity (Table 2, Heat Health Action Index Indicators and Description). Figure 8, Heat Health Action Index, shows HHAI scores for Victorville by census tract, providing an overall summary of heat vulnerability for the City. Higher scores indicate greater vulnerability. As shown on Figure 8, populations residing to the southeast of I-15 are most sensitive to extreme heat.
Table 2. Heat Health Action Index Indicators and Description
HHAI INDICATORS INDICATOR DESCRIPTION
Percent Children Percent of population aged 5 years or younger Percent Without a High School Diploma Percent over the age of 25 with a high school diploma or GED Percent 65 Years or Older Percent of population age d 65 years or older Percent Outdoor Workers Percent of people employed and aged > 16 years working outdoors Total Population Number of residents
Percent in Poverty Percent of population whose income in the past year was below the national poverty level
Percent Two or More Races Percent of residents who identify as two or more races Percent Non-White Percent of residents who identify as a race other than White Percent Without a Vehicle Percent of occupied house holds with no vehicle ownership Percent Non-English-Speaking Households A "limited English-speaking household" is one in which no member 14 years old and over (1) speaks only English or (2) speaks a non-English language and speaks English "very well." In other words, all members 14 years o ld and over have at least some difficulty with English
Percent No Transit Access Percent of population res iding within at least 0.5 mile of a major transit s top Asthma Prevalence Asthma emergency department visit s per 10,000 people Percent Low Birth Rate Percent of low weight births (<5.5 lbs) Cardiovascular Disease Rate Heart attacks per 1,000
Percent Ambulatory Disability Percent of population having serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs Percent Cognitive Disability Percent of population having physical, mental, or emotional problem, difficulty remembering, concentrating, or making decisions
PM 2.5 Concentration Annual mean ambient concentrat ion of PM2.5 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
38 Table 2. Heat Health Action Index Indicators and Description
HHAI INDICATORS INDICATOR DESCRIPTION
Percent Impervious Surfaces Percent of the land are a covered by impervious surfaces (population weight ed) Changes in Development Percent change (estimated) of land area from unpave d to paved due to development in 2050. Projections by the Land Use and Carbon Scenar io Simulator by USGS, 2016 Percent No Tree Canopy Percent of area not under tr ee canopy (population weighted) Urban Heat Island Temperature difference from nearb y rural areas Ozone Exceedance Three-year ozone concentration exc eedance above state standard
2.5.2.2 Critical Facilities
To the extent that the City’s electrical infrastructure is sensitive to extreme heat, so are the City’s critical facilities that depend on reliable electricity to power their operations, including hospitals, fire/police stations, schools, and water facilities. Higher temperatures can decrease the capacity of grid components (i.e., power plants, substations , and transmission lines) while increasing electricity demand due to increased cooling needs.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
39 Figure 8. Heat Health Action Index
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
40 This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
41 2.5.3 Potential Impact
2.5.3.1 People
Climate change, particularly extreme heat events, present serious health risks to City residents and workers. Increased temperature or extended periods of elevated temperatures can increase heat-related mortality, cardiovascular-related mort ality, respiratory mortality, and heart attacks while increasing hospital admissions and emergency room visits. Extreme heat can also affect a person’s ability to thermo-regulate, causing heat stress and sometimes leading to death. Heat also intensifies smog and air pollutants that can contribute to and exacerbate respiratory disease and result in more asthma and heart attacks. Furthe rmore, the same areas that are most exposed to extreme heat are the same areas that lack tree canopy and have high concentrations of racial minorities, making extreme heat an issue of environmental justice in addition to community safety. The severity of this potential impact to people is given a high potential impact score in the Table 3, Vulnerability Assessment Results: Extreme Heat.
2.5.3.2 Critical Facilities
Potential impact refers to how incidents of extreme heat will affect sensitive critical facilities.
Extreme heat events do not necessarily have signifi cant impacts on critical facilities, assuming that all facilities maintain their power supply. However, extreme heat events may result in power demand outpacing supply, resulting in power outages. When this happens, Southern California Edison implements California Independent System Ope rator (CAISO) Rotating Outages, wherein SCE rotates the outage across groups of cus tomers throughout the service territory to protect the integrity of the electric system, while limiting the inconvenience to any one customer or community. Loss of power can disrupt essential p ublic facilities and services (i.e., hospitals, water treatment operations, etc.) and pose a public health risk to residents, particularly those who rely on electricity for the provision of healthcare.
In the event of extreme heat that causes power outages, the loss of power would have the most significant impact impacts on utilities, such as el ectricity and water, in addition to public health, public safety, and school facilities. Power outages , without back-up generation, could result in the loss of foundational critical services that are necessary to function: electricity, water, medical care, and police and fire protection services. Loss of services would have wide-reaching impacts for services and community members, especially thos e with medical conditions, those over the age of 65, and children. Water and power are also critical to emergency response to the impacts of extreme heat, which is why the potential impact score is rated high. Community centers serve as cooling centers, providing a key service and mitigation strategy to residents during an extreme heat event. A loss of power to a community center p roviding cooling would decrease its ability to provide this critical service to residents, so i ts potential impact is rated a medium due to its secondary function as a cooling center. Other critical facilities, such as critical transportation and city operations, would be impacted, though the impact of loss of service maybe less severe than at a water utility or hospital.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
42 2.5.4 Adaptive Capacity
2.5.4.1 People
The City has posted its own heat advisories as well as heat advisories announced by the County to its website during past high heat events, partic ularly during the 2017–2018 season. Heat advisories have been posted to the City’s website w ith information directing residents to the designated cooling center at the Victorville City L ibrary, as well as links to other countywide cooling centers and the County’s heat advisory resources posted on the County’s website. The City’s resources and leveraging of the County resou rces results in a medium adaptive capacity score.
2.5.4.2 Critical Facilities
The City’s public libraries operate as designated c ooling centers during extreme heat. Certain community centers such as the Victorville Activities Center and Recreation Center are equipped with evaporative cooling centers, as are schools. The cooling capabilities of libraries, recreation centers, and schools are given medium adaptative ca pacity scores, though there is room to improve reliability by equipping sites with air con ditioning rather than evaporative cooling. The majority of bus stops are equipped with shade structures and parks are equipped with gazebos that provide shade as well as drinking fountains. M ost pedestrian trails have gazebos and drinking fountains located at the trailheads. The City’s Climate Action Plan and Park Master Plan identify strategies to reduce heat impacts, includi ng increasing tree canopy cover and shade structures, though a lack of funding has prevented implementation. At the time of this update, all fire stations and police department buildings are e quipped with back-up generators, though the extent to which it is unknown the extent to which p ublic health and utility facilities are equipped with back-up power so a default score of low is given to those facility categories.
2.5.5 Vulnerability
Extreme heat poses the most significant threat to p eople, especially vulnerable residents. The City provides cooling centers and extreme heat warn ings to help keep residents safe during extreme heat events. Extreme heat may pose minimal threat to buildings themselves, though extreme heat can result in demand for power that ou tpaces supply, causing outages and disruptions. Utilities have the highest vulnerabili ty to losses in water and power, as do public health facilities such as hospitals. City Hall, sch ools, and community centers, such as libraries and the Victorville Activity Center are designated cooling centers, providing capacity to mitigate impacts of extreme heat. Libraries are included in the definition of community centers based on their multi-purpose function to provide resources to the community.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
43 Table 3. Vulnerability Assessment Results: Extreme Heat
ASSET CATEGORY POTENTIAL IMPACT ADAPTIVE CAPACITY SCORE VULNERABILITY SCORE People High Medium 4
Critical Facilities --
City Operations Low Medium 2
Public Safety Facilities High High 3
Public Health Facilities High Low 5
Community Centers Medium Medium 3
Utility Facilities High Low 5
Critical Transportation Low Medium 2
Schools Medium Medium 3
2.6 Wildfire
2.6.1 Exposure
The City’s wildfire risk is profiled in Section 2, Potential Hazards. Climate change can exacerbate the risk of wildfire. Wildfire risk is expected to continue to increase as a result of warmer temperatures, more frequent drought, and the expand ing urban-wildlife interface. While it is difficult to project exactly where and how wildfire s will burn, climate scientists have estimated the annual average area burned in state and federal protection responsibility areas to help inform whether wildfire activity is likely to increase in a given area. However, climate scientists recognize that the data is not complete, and more detailed analyses and projections are needed for local decision-making. The Victorville boundary does not include fire state and federal protection responsibility areas; therefore, the Cit y was excluded from Cal-Adapt wildfire simulations and have no climate projections.
Regardless of the exact extent or location, wildfires can generate significant amounts of smoke.
Wildfire smoke can travel long distances, in some instances spreading across state and national boundaries.
2.6.2 Sensitivity
2.6.2.1 People
Increased wildfire risk could adversely affect popu lations with reduced mobility, including disabled people as well as those who do not have ac cess to a personal vehicle and who may have difficulty evacuating. Outdoor essential workers and individuals with respiratory conditions such as asthma are particularly vulnerable to wildfire smoke. Living conditions and housing types also influence levels of protection from smoke; mob ile homes and older homes with unsealed windows are more sensitive than modern homes that feature airtight windows and air purification systems (Figure 9, Asthma Rate).
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
44 This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
45 Figure 9. Asthma Rate
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
46 This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
47 2.6.2.2 Critical Facilities
As wildfires increase in frequency and intensity, d isruptions in electrical infrastructure are likely to become more common. When there is a high risk fo r a wildfire, Southern California Edison, the City’s electric utility, may temporarily shut o ff power to prevent our electric system from becoming the source of ignition. Electric utility i nfrastructure has historically been responsible for less than ten percent of reported wildfires; ho wever, fires attributed to power lines comprise roughly half of the most destructive fires in Calif ornia history (https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/psps/).
These events, termed Public Safety Power Shutoffs (PSPS), can pose a serious risk for medical- sensitive (those who rely on medication/respirators that requires power generation) and low- income populations.
2.6.3 Potential Impacts
2.6.3.1 People
Wildfire frequency may exacerbate already existing air quality issues in the City, posing a health risk for sensitive populations. Smoke and poor air quality can increase respiratory and cardiovascular hospitalizations, emergency departme nt visits, medication dispensations for asthma, bronchitis, chest pain, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (commonly known as COPD), respiratory infections, and medical visits for lung illnesses (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Climate Health: Wildfires). Those with pre-existing medical conditions, that work outdoors, populations over 65 years of age, and young children maybe at additional risk of poor air quality.
2.6.3.2 Critical Facilities
There are no Fire Hazard Severity Zones within the Planning Area nor are there State Responsibility Areas, where the State would have re sponsibility for wildland fire protection and prevention. Due to low exposure, there is a relativ ely low probability that wildfire will threaten critical facilities or other structures within the City boundaries. However, critical facilities may be impacted by PSPS events, particularly the loss of power can disrupt essential public facilities and services, requiring many to utilize back-up generators to maintain adequate levels of service.
2.6.4 Adaptive Capacity
2.6.4.1 People
Though risk is low, the City has established adapti ve capacity to support its residents. The City has a Memorandum of Understanding with San Bernardi no County regarding use of facilities designated as evacuation centers. In the past, fair grounds, local schools, community sports complexes, and the Victorville Activity Center have been designated evacuation centers. The Emergency Operations Center also maintains a list of facilities, such as city facilities, churches, hotels, schools, and County facilities that are being evaluated as facilities that could be used in the event as an emergency, such as being used to support the mobilization of emergency services.
Air quality is a secondary impact that can impact r esidents. The Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District is located in Victorville and p rovides an Air Quality Index on its website. 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
48 Residents can select their city from a dropdown men u and review the air quality conditions for the current day as well as the forecast for the following day. The Air Quality Index values range from good air quality through hazardous air quality, and also features a map that users can use to view what air quality is in or near their city. Users can also sign up to receive email, phone, or Twitter alerts of the daily air quality forecast. T he MDAQMD website also has tips page for residents to help protect and improve air quality, as well as a wildfire page that links to current smoke advisories, tips to reduce risks to public he alth, and additional air quality and smoke advisory resources.
In the event of a public safety power shutoff (PSPS ), the City’s Public Information Officer can release informational notices and resources to the public on the City’s website.
2.6.4.2 Critical Facilities
Since there are no Fire Hazard Severity Zones withi n the Planning Area, potential impact to critical facilities is likely minimal. Further, the City has a Fire Hazard Abatement Ordinance (Chapter 8 of the Victorville Municipal Code), which requires the abatement of weeds in excess of three inches above the grade in the area of grow th on such portion of the lot or premises within one hundred feet of any structure. Adherence to this ordinance reduces the likelihood of fires on undeveloped lands and on vacant lots in th e developed portions of the Planning Area.
Another protective measure is the California Buildi ng Code, which reduces fire hazards in structures. Measures in the code include use of mat erials, fire separation walls, building separation, fire sprinklers, clearances around stru ctures, and minimum road widths to provide adequate access for fire-fighting equipment.
Though there are no Fire Hazard Severity Zones with in the Planning Area, critical facilities can be impacted by PSPS events. City Hall is equipped with generators and other facilities may have on site back-up generation or energy storage. At th e time of this update, the extent of back-up power capabilities and other fire-prevention methods are unknown. As a result, adaptive capacity was given a default medium score to account for the Fire Code but to also allow for additional mitigation measures.
2.6.5 Vulnerability
Utilities and public health facilities are ranked as having medium impact, due to the critical nature of those services to operate during a wildfire event. Some city operations facilities are equipped with back-up power, earning a high vulnerability sc ore, while the remaining categories were ranked as medium to account for the citywide ordinance and codes in place that help protect the city from wildfire (Table 4, Vulnerability Assessment Results: Wildfire).
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
49 Table 4. Vulnerability Assessment Results: Wildfire
ASSET CATEGORY POTENTIAL IMPACT ADAPTIVE CAPACITY SCORE VULNERABILITY SCORE
People High Medium 3
Critical Facilities --
City Operations Low High 1
Public Safety Facilities Low Medium 2
Public Health Facilities Medium Medium 3
Community Centers Low Medium 2
Utility Facilities Medium Medium 3
Critical Transportation Low Medium 2
Schools Low Medium 2
2.7 Extreme Precipitation
Extreme precipitation may exacerbate riverine flooding (discussed in Section 2.2, Flood Hazards and may result in localized flooding outside of the flood zone.
2.7.1 Exposure
Riverine flooding may be exacerbated by extreme precipitation or storms. In addition to riverine flooding, extreme precipitation may result in localized flooding outside of the flood zone. Severe weather such as more powerful rainstorms are likely to occur as a result of climate change.
Atmospheric rivers which can create flooding throug hout California may occur more frequently due to warmer weather and more moisture in storm sy stems. Climate change has the potential to cause more frequent and more heavy precipitation incidents that result in flood damage. The results could be additional flows into the Silver L ake and Mojave Reservoirs with the potential for overtopping or other dam failure mechanisms. Wh ile major flooding is not likely to occur in Victorville, minor street flooding is possible duri ng any severe summer or winter storms, which can ensue on an annual basis.
While the City is not projected to see average annu al precipitation change significantly in the next 50–75 years, precipitation will likely be deli vered in more intense storms during a shorter period of time. The following figure illustrates the projected maximum daily precipitation amount for each year (i.e., the greatest amount of rain ov er a 24-hour period). Projections indicate that maximum daily precipitation may increase by less than one inch through mid- and end-century.
Therefore, the City’s exposure to extreme precipitation is low. 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
50 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
51 2.7.2 Sensitivity
2.7.2.1 People
Residents living in the floodplain, especially thos e with physical disabilities that limit their mobility, may be vulnerable to extreme precipitatio n events that necessitate evacuation. Even just a few inches of moving water can be unsafe for children and people with disabilities. People experiencing homelessness are at particular risk fr om flooding, especially if encampments are located in or near the floodplain.
2.7.2.2 Critical Facilities
Critical assets in low-lying areas may be sensitive to extreme precipitation. The LHMP identifies the following critical facilities as vulnerable to flood and flash flood hazards: the Victorville Water Wastewater Treatment Plant (Helendale Road), 34 act ive wells, Stoddard Wells Sewer Lift station, and Ground Water Production Well (Peral St reet). These critical facilities are at further risk because extreme precipitation has the potentia l to exacerbate riparian flooding along the Mojave River. More information about critical facil ities sensitive to flood and extreme precipitation can be found in Section 5.5.1 and 5.5.3 of the City’s LHMP.
2.7.3 Potential Impact
2.7.3.1 People
Extreme precipitation events may result in flooding that can threaten human life. Though overall exposure to extreme flood is low within the Plannin g Area, impacts to vulnerable populations could be somewhat likely in a major event and would result in some impacts to public health and safety. Low-income residents without renters’ insur ance may experience significant financial impacts if extreme precipitation events resulted in the flooding of their property. Furthermore, flooded homes may also result in the growth of mold and mildew, which are allergenic and potentially harmful.
2.7.3.2 Critical Facilities
Extreme precipitation events may result in rainfall runoff that overwhelms the stormwater management system, causing water to inundate roads and property. Evacuation personnel may need to be dispatched in order to evacuate homeless populations from the floodplain. Shallow flooding may result in mold and mildew in flooded buildings, the spread of contaminants including gasoline and chemicals, and serve as breeding grounds for mosquitos.
2.7.4 Adaptive Capacity
2.7.4.1 People
Though overall exposure to extreme precipitation is low, the City does have several adaptive measures in the event of a major flood. If a major event were to occur, the City has a Memorandum of Understanding with San Bernardino County regarding use of facilities designated as evacuation centers. In the past, fairgrounds, local schools, community sports complexes, and the Victorville Activity Center have been designated evacuation centers. The Emergency Operations Center also 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
52 maintains a list of facilities, such as city facilities, churches, hotels, schools, and County facilities that are being evaluated as facilities that could be used in the event as an emergency, such as being used to support the mobilization of emergency services.
The City also has rescue capacity in coordination with San Bernardino County. During a previous flood event, the City worked with the San Bernardin o County Fire and San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department to rescue people experiencing homelessness from the floodplain.
The San Bernardino County Flood Control District ha s flood safety information posted on its website for residents, including instructions to do in a flood event, sandbag tips and sandbag availability, real-time weather conditions and rain fall information, flood after fire factsheets, information on the National Flood Insurance Program, and debris and erosion control sheets.
2.7.4.2 Critical Facilities
The City has adopted several programs and policies that provide adaptive capacity to extreme precipitation. The City has existing Safety Element policies to restrict development in areas susceptible to flooding hazards, reducing the number of critical facilities located in flood hazard areas. The City of Victorville has a Master Plan of Drainage and Comprehensive Storm Drain Plan that evaluates existing drainage systems, iden tifies deficiencies, and recommends improvements and new facilities. The San Bernardino Flood Control District oversees an extensive system of facilities, including dams, basins, channels, and storm drains that intercept and convey flood flows through and away major developed areas of the County.
Further, the City of Victorville recently completed a Stormwater Flood Reduction Project that will improve flood control. The newly constructed Amethy st Basin will help capture stormwater and decrease downstream flows, protecting public infrastructure and I-15, which is located near the basin. The 27.4-acre project is designed to provide additional protections to handle a 100-year storm – a flood event that has a one percent chance of exceeding anticipated flood hazards within a given year.
The Mojave River Watershed Group (MRWG) consists of representatives from the City of Victorville, Hesperia, Town of Apple Valley, and Sa n Bernardino County. The MRWG is committed to protecting the Mojave River and its watershed and preventing stormwater pollution.
The MRWG provides stormwater pollution prevention resources for businesses, educators, and residents, including Best Management Practices for local businesses, assemblies, fairs, clean- up events, and tips for home and lawncare, car main tenance, animal care, and landscaping.
These measures help keep the watershed clean and re duce the impact of polluted flood water in the event of a major precipitation event.
2.7.5 Vulnerability
While extreme precipitation events have the potential to threaten critical assets and pose a safety threat to City residents, the projected probability and severity (exposure) is low for most facilities.
The medium score for people reflects the risk poses to people experiencing homelessness and primary and secondary impacts to people and their r esidences. Overall, the City has low to medium vulnerability to extreme precipitation. The City has policies, programs, and projects in 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
53 place to mitigate the impact of extreme precipitati on, however the City can also re-evaluate to ensure vulnerable communities and critical utilities are protected to the extent possible (Table 5, Vulnerability Assessment Results: Extreme Precipitation).
Table 5. Vulnerability Assessment Results: Extreme Precipitation
ASSET CATEGORY POTENTIAL IMPACT ADAPTIVE CAPACITY SCORE VULNERABILITY SCORE People Medium Medium 3
Critical Facilities --
City Operations Low High 1
Public Safety Facilities Low High 1
Public Health Facilities Low High 1
Community Centers Low High 1
Utility Facilities High High 3
Critical Transportation Low High 1
Schools Low High 1
2.8 Drought
2.8.1 Exposure
The Victorville Water District relies on groundwate r to service the City’s drinking water.
Groundwater is naturally stored below the surface o f the ground. Drought events can affect the amount of soil infiltration, through which the water table is recharged.
Droughts are projected to become more frequent and intense in San Bernardino County, and throughout southern California by mid-century. Cal-adapt provides projections on the maximum length of a dry spell, days with precipitation <1mm, for each year through mid- and end-century.
Historically, the City has averaged a 124 day dry s pell for each year between 1961 and 1991.
Dry spells are projected to increase by 9 to 11 day s by mid-century, and 9 to 22 days by end- century, depending on the emissions pathway.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
54 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
55 2.8.2 Sensitivity
2.8.2.1 People
Low-income households, which spend a greater percen tage of their income on basic water service, are particularly sensitive to drought even ts. Water prices are susceptible to rising in response to water shortages. Drought and limited water supply can impact businesses that rely on water, however in Victorville that impact is very likely to be low. Victorville’s largest job sectors are education (30%), retail (20%), and leisure (14%), while agriculture is the smallest sector and comprises less than 1% of the jobs by sector. Manuf acturing and construction are also on the smaller side of the City’s job sectors, comprising 4% and 1% respectively (Southern California Association of Governments, Local Profiles. Califor nia Economic Development Department data, 2018).
2.8.2.2 Critical Facilities
Victorville’s potable water system supplies water s olely from groundwater pumped from the Mojave River Basin. Critical utilities, such as wat er infrastructure, are identified by the City’s LHMP as most susceptible to the impacts of drought. The LHMP lists specific assets and facilities that could be impacted by drought, such as the Vict orville Water District’s treatment facilities, booster stations, pump and pipeline deluge system, water houses, wastewater treatment plant, and 34 wells.
2.8.3 Potential Impact
2.8.3.1 People
The Pacific Institute and Environmental Justice Coalition for Water released a report, accessible on the California Adaptation Clearinghouse’s website, called Drought and Equity in California. It is the first statewide analysis of the impacts of the five-year and ongoing drought on California’s most vulnerable communities. The report identifies impacts of drought on people can include water supply shortages and rising costs, which affects people’s access to safe, affordable water in their homes. Drought can create domestic water shortages, which can cause the cost of water to increase (Drought and Equity in California, Janu ary 2017). Low-income communities often are disproportionately burdened by rising costs. Th is can place pressure on the local economy and low-income households.
2.8.3.2 Critical Facilities
According to the State’s Hazard mitigation Plan, drought is a gradual process and is not usually caused by a year of drought. A city’s water supply can help mitigate the impact of short-term droughts or dry periods. However, prolonged drought can have a greater impact on water supply and may result in reduced surface-water availabilit y and cause a city to rely on greater groundwater pumping. However, the City’s source of drinking water is from groundwater, which is withdrawn from city wells. In this case, drought can trigger an increase demand for water, placing additional demand and stress on the water s ystem to withdraw groundwater and potentially over drafting the groundwater basin. In the event of a severe drought, the State of 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
56 California could declare a statewide drought and mandate that water suppliers reduce demands, as occurred in 2014.
2.8.4 Adaptive Capacity
2.8.4.1 People
The Water Conservation Division of the Public Works and Water Department provides education on water-saving practices and conducts internal ope rations to conserve water. The City posts on its website a water conservation FAQs: Frequently Asked Questions, water-wise landscaping resources, and outdoor watering restrictions.
2.8.4.2 Critical Facilities
The Victorville Water District’s 2020 Urban Water M anagement Plan (UWMP) includes a Drought Risk Assessment for the years 2021–2025 and projections show that Victorville Water District (VWD)’s water supplies are sufficient to meet the demands even during a 5-year drought (Section 7.2, UWMP). VWD is committed to water conservation and to being a good steward of local water resources to preserve supplies for the future due to the probability of experiencing droughts outside of the requirements of the UWMP. In addition to the Drought Risk Assessment, the UWMP includes a Water Shortage Contingency Plan that details how VWD intends to respond to foreseeable and unforeseeable water shor tages. The impacts of drought are not immediately recognized because the region uses the local groundwater basins to simulate a large reservoir for long-term shortage. VWD is able to pump additional groundwater to meet increase demand and has capacity to replenish the basins with imported and local water through regional recharge programs. Overall, VWD does not a nticipate any supply shortage due to a single or consecutive dry years.
The City has a robust water conservation program th at includes water conservation education and workshops and landscaping resources. The Board of Directors of the Victorville Water District (District) adopted a water conservation pr ogram pursuant to Water Code Section 375 and amended the District’s Water Supply Shortage Co ntingency Plan (WSSCP) to comply with emergency regulations adopted by the State Water Re sources Control board pertaining to drought conservation.
The amended WSSCP plan features three water conserv ation stages that determine what measures shall be enforced to reduce the use of wat er (Table 6, Water Conservation and Shortage Stages).
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
57 Table 6. Water Conservation and Shortage Stages
Source: City of Victorville, 2021
The recently completed Amethyst Basin, in addition to capturing stormwater, will also help meet the water needs of the growing Victorville communit y by delivering water from the State Water Project’s California Aqueduct through a pipeline to groundwater recharge basins and ponds in the Oro Grande Wash.
2.8.5 Vulnerability
Climate change is expected to create more frequent and intense droughts. However, the City, including the Victorville Water District is committ ed to water conservation. The City’s Urban Water Management Plan concluded that the District h as adequate water supply to meet demands during average, single-dry, and multiple-dr y years throughout the 25-year planning period. Though drought could increase demand for water, the District’s water supply is sufficient to meet the increased demand (Table 7, Vulnerability Assessment Results: Drought).
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
58 Table 7. Vulnerability Assessment Results: Drought
ASSET CATEGORY POTENTIAL IMPACT ADAPTIVE CAPACITY SCORE VULNERABILITY SCORE People Low High 1
Critical Facilities --
City Operations Low High 1
Public Safety Facilities Low High 1
Public Health Facilities Low High 1
Community Centers Low High 1
Utility Facilities High High 3
Critical Transportation Low High 1
Schools Low High 1
2.9 Hazardous Materials
The Victorville Planning Area is traversed by major transportation arteries including I-15, US Highway 395, State Highway 18, and the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way.
Transportation of hazardous materials along these r outes exposes people to potential for catastrophic events. Hazardous chemicals in the form of solids, liquids or gases may be released accidentally at an industrial site or from railcars or trucks transporting hazardous materials. Such an event could require evacuation for a few hours or several days, depending on the hazard and its severity. The release of hazardous materials re quires an immediate response in order to protect human health and safety, and/or the environment.
Recognizing the potential risks of hazardous materials, the City has adopted Chapter 6.49 of the Victorville Municipal Code, in compliance with Chap ter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code, establishing a hazardous materials release response and inventory program. Additionally, the City of Victorville Fire Department has prepared a Hazardous Materials Incident Emergency Response Plan. This plan is subject to occasional a mendment as new procedures develop or situations warrant. The objectives of this plan are as follows:
• Save lives and protect the environment and property in case of emergency; • Describe the overall emergency response organizatio n within the City of Victorville and its relationship to those of County, State, and Federal organizations; • Establish lines of authority and coordination for hazardous materials incidents; and • Identify and facilitate mutual aid to supplement needs.
2.10 Aircraft Mishap
As the Southern California Logistics Airport develo ps into a commercial aviation center, the possibility of aircraft mishap increases. In response to potential aircraft mishap and in accordance with State law (Public Utilities Code, Section 21670 et seq.) the City of Victorville has prepared a Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP). This plan is necessary because airports present unique public health and safety issues that require special land use planning efforts to ensure protection 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
59 of public welfare. The intent of this plan is to utilize land use control mechanisms (e.g., zoning and subdivision regulations) to reduce the potential for and effects of an accident. The purpose of the CLUP prepared for the Southern California Logistics Airport is to:
• Promote the development of compatible land uses in the area influenced by airport operations;
• Safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants wi thin the vicinity of the airport by minimizing exposure to excessive noise levels;
• Safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants wi thin the vicinity of the airport by minimizing exposure to crash hazards associated with aircraft operations; and • Safeguard the general welfare of aviation activitie s within the vicinity of the airport by imposing appropriate height restrictions for the protection of aircraft operations.
2.11 Safety Zones
Aircraft accidents happen infrequently, and the tim e, place, and consequences of their occurrence cannot be predicted. From the standpoint of airport land use planning, the potential for aircraft accidents weighs heavily into the type s of land uses that are compatible with airport operations. To minimize the risk and reduce the severity of aviation accidents, the SCLA CLUP establishes a combination of six safety zones and a ssociated policies. The CLUP and safety zones are modeled after the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook recommended zones and are intended to limit uses with higher-us e intensity (people per acre) from being developed in high-risk areas. The six safety zones are established according to the type of aircraft using the runways; they are illustrated on Figure 10, Southern California Logistics Airport (SCLA) Safety Zones, and summarized below.
Safety Zone 1: This zone is the Runway Protection Z one (RPZ). For airports with no military operations, this zone is defined by FAA criteria. Because SCLA has military operations, this zone is established using the military’s Air Installatio ns Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ) criteria. The resulting zone covers a portion of land at each run way end. This zone is owned and operated by the airport and allows no residential uses. Only low intensity nonresidential uses may be permitted on the extreme edges of the zone.
Safety Zone 2: This zone is the Inner Approach/Departure Zone. This zone includes land that is over-flown at low altitudes, typically on approach or departure. According to the AICUZ, the Inner Approach/ Departure Zone and the RPZ together encom pass the location of 30–50 percent of near-airport aviation accidents. Residential use is appropriate only on large, agricultural parcels, and only low intensity nonresidential uses may be permitted. Because of the potential for aviation accidents in this zone, schools, daycare centers, h ospitals, nursing homes and above ground fuel storage are not appropriate uses.
Safety Zone 3: Safety Zone 3 is the Inner Turning Z one. This zone primarily applies to general aviation airports. For approaches, this zone covers lands where general aviation aircraft typically 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
60 turn from the base to final approach legs of the standard traffic pattern and continue their descent from the traffic pattern altitude. For departures, this safety zone includes the lands where aircraft are typically turning towards their en-route headin g. Residential uses should be limited to very low density, unless they are not acceptable due to excessive noise. Nonresidential uses should be limited to low intensity uses. Children’s school s, daycare centers, hospitals, and nursing homes are some land uses that should be avoided, as well as aboveground storage of bulk fuel.
Safety Zone 4: This zone is the Outer Approach/Departure Zone. This zone is extended beyond Zone 3 along the centerline of the runway. It is ge nerally used for runways with straight-in approaches, such as the one for Runway 17. Resident ial uses should be limited to very low density, unless they are not acceptable due to exce ssive noise. Nonresidential uses should be limited to low intensity uses. Children’s schools, daycare centers, hospitals, and nursing homes are some land uses that should be avoided, as well as aboveground storage of bulk fuel.
Safety Zone 5: This zone is the Sideline Zone. This safety zone is parallel to the runway and is established for general aviation aircraft in case d irectional control is lost on takeoff. Typically, this area is part of the airport property. Aviation -related structures should be allowed provided they meet the height limit restrictions. Residential uses should be avoided unless they are related to aviation, such as pilots’ quarters. Nonresidenti al uses should be low intensity and structures such as children’s schools, daycare centers, hospitals, and nursing homes should be avoided.
Safety Zone 6: This zone is the Traffic Pattern Zon e. It includes all other parts of the regular traffic patterns and pattern entry routes. Generally, there is a low likelihood of an accident in this zone. Residential uses of all densities are allowed , as well as most nonresidential uses. Uses with very high intensity, such as outdoor stadiums or amphitheaters, should be avoided.
Children’s schools, daycare centers, hospitals, and nursing homes are among the uses that should also be avoided.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
61 Figure 10. Southern California Logistics Airport (SCLA) Safety Zones Source: SCLA CLUP, 2002; Map incorporated as is from SCLA CLUP
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
62 This page intentionally left blank.
2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
63 3 EMERGENCY PLANNING AND
PREPAREDNESS
3.1 Emergency Planning
This section of the Safety Element discusses risk a ssessment and emergency preparedness planning in the event of a major catastrophe. This section serves as a mini-emergency preparedness plan in that appropriate actions and r esponse by City staff and community residents are summarized. Emergency preparedness pl anning, as considered in this Safety Element, consists of three main components: (1) haz ard identification and risk assessment; (2) hazard prevention and abatement; and (3) emergency response and action. The potential hazards section of the Safety Element identifies hazards present in the Victorville Planning Area.
This section focuses on assessing the scope of risk associated with the hazards; emergency preparedness issues are also presented. Additionall y, fire, police, and medical facilities and/or staffing are discussed. An earthquake, or a more lo calized incident such as a chemical spill or flooding, may require evacuation, affecting a few individuals to thousands of people. Thousands of others may require emergency shelter and medical treatment. The Emergency Response and Action section delineates emergency evacuation routes and emergency shelters. An emergency preparedness strategy will assist existing efforts by the public officials in improving public readiness. The emergency operation procedures described in the following sections outline the responsibilities of City and contract County personnel in the event of disaster. As indicated, this information serves as a mini-emergency preparedness plan.
3.1.1 Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
The following section, “Hazard Identification and R isk Assessment,” has been incorporated by reference to the City’s LHMP. 1
Natural and human-made disasters that could impact Victorville Planning Area residents, businesses and property owners are identified in Ta ble 8, Environmental Risk Assessment Framework. The table also identifies the level of risk, the geographical scope of the potential impact area, and the anticipated level of emergency response that would be required. Each potential hazard to the public safety and welfare has been assessed according to the following levels of risk:
• Low Risk – The level of risk below which no specifi c action is deemed necessary. The occurrence of a specific event is unlikely.
• Medium Risk – The level of risk at which specific a ction is required to protect life and property, though the probability of the event taking place is low to moderate.
1 City of Victorville. 2021. “Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.” https://www.victorvilleca.gov/home/showdocument?id= 9601&t=637862370648270000 . 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
64 • High Risk – Risk levels are significant, and occurrence of a particular emergency situation is highly probable or inevitable. One or more actio ns are urgently required to protect life, property and/or the environment.
The "scope of risk" refers to the geographic area t hat could be affected with the occurrence of one of the hazards. The scope of risk also includes three levels:
• Local – The affected geographic area is localized or site specific; • Citywide – The affected area includes a significant portion or all of the City; and • Regional – The affected area includes the entire City of Victorville and the surrounding region.
The State Office of Emergency Services (OES) has es tablished three levels of emergency response to peacetime emergencies, which are based on the severity of the situation and the availability of local resources in responding to th at emergency. The three levels of emergency response include:
• Level 1 – A minor-to-moderate incident wherein loca l resources are adequate in dealing with the current emergency.
• Level 2 – A moderate-to-severe emergency where loca l resources are not adequate in dealing with the emergency and mutual assistance wo uld be required on a regional or statewide basis.
• Level 3 – A major disaster where local resources ar e overwhelmed by the magnitude of the disaster and state and federal assistance are required.
Those hazards of greatest concern to Victorville Pl anning Area residents are localized risk, as identified in Table 8.
3.1.2 Hazard Mitigation
The following section, “Hazard Mitigation,” has bee n incorporated by reference to the City’s LHMP. 2
Hazard mitigation is concerned with the prevention, reduction or elimination of potential damage, injury, hardship, and loss from actual or potential disasters. Federal efforts are primarily concerned with the abatement of hazards in post-dis aster situations. However, to be truly effective, hazard mitigation must be taken in advance of a major disaster. The State of California Office of Emergency Service (OES) provides guidelines concerning hazard mitigation measures that should be implemented in the aftermath of a ma jor disaster. A majority of these mitigation measures can also be applied to hazard prevention/m itigation prior to the occurrence of a local emergency or major catastrophic event. The City of Victorville has prepared a LHMP and an Emergency Plan to comply with OES guidelines. It ap plies to large-scale disasters that pose
2 City of Victorville. 2021. “Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.” https://www.victorvilleca.gov/home/showdocument?id= 9601&t=637862370648270000 . 2021–2029 Safety Element
City of Victorville
65 major threats to life and property. Smaller scale, less urgent emergencies are handled by routine procedures and existing City resources. The Emergency Plan is in conformance with State OES Guidelines and is occasionally updated with new information and procedures.