INITIAL STUDY FOR A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE City of Eastvale Zoning Code Lead Agency: CITY OF EASTVALE 12363 Limonite Avenue, Suite 901 Eastvale, CA 91752 December 9, 2011
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Eastvale Planning Commission will hold a public hearing in February 2012 to consider approval of the proposed City of Eastvale Zoning Code Update. The date of the public hearing will be announced once it is determined. Hearing agendas can be viewed at City Hall, Rosa Parks Elementary School, and the Eastvale Library at the addresses listed below. The project consists of preparation and adoption of an update to the City s Zoning Code. The update would revise the Zoning Code adopted upon City incorporation to make it more specific to the City of Eastvale as well as better organized, more efficient, and more accessible to the reader. The update includes the elimination of unneeded information and standards that currently apply to other areas of unincorporated Riverside County as well as formatting and structural changes, process streamlining, and modifications to entitlements and certain development standards. No changes to the current Zoning Map are proposed. Once scheduled, the public hearing will be held at Rosa Parks Elementary School located at 13830 Whispering Hills Drive, Eastvale, California 92880; the Planning Commission meeting will commence at 6:00 p.m. Any comments directly related to the proposed City of Eastvale Zoning Code project must be received no later than Thursday, December 29, 2011, by 5:00 p.m. Any questions on the project may be directed to Eastvale Planning Director Eric Norris at (951) 361-0900 or enorris@ci.eastvale.ca.us. FURTHER, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Eastvale has completed an Initial Study for the proposed City of Eastvale Zoning Code Update. This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to assess the potential for any significant environmental effects associated with the proposed project. On the basis of the Initial Study, the City's staff has concluded that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment and has therefore recommended preparation of a Negative Declaration. The Initial Study reflects the independent judgment of the City of Eastvale. The proposed project would not involve any properties listed under Government Code Section 65962.5. In accordance with Sections 15072(a) and (b) of the CEQA Guidelines, this Public Notice is posted to officially notify the general public, public agencies, responsible and trustee agencies, and the Riverside County Clerk that the required 20-day public review period will commence on Friday, December 9, 2011, and conclude on Thursday, December 29, 2011. Any written comments (via e-mail or letter) on the draft Initial Study/Negative Declaration must be submitted to Eric Norris, Planning Director, City of Eastvale, no later than Thursday, December 29, 2011, by 5:00 p.m. E-mail comments may be submitted to enorris@ci.eastvale.ca.us, and written comments may be mailed to the City of Eastvale Planning Department located at 12363 Limonite Avenue, Suite 910, Eastvale, California 91752. Copies of the draft Initial Study/Negative Declaration are available for public review at the following three locations: Eastvale City Hall, 12363 Limonite Avenue, Suite 910, Eastvale, California 91752 (Monday Thursday, 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.) Eastvale Library, 7447 Cleveland Avenue, Eastvale, California 92880 (Monday Thursday, 3:00 to 8:00 p.m.; Friday 3:00 to 6:00 p.m.; Saturday 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) Riverside County Clerk-Recorder, 2720 Gateway Drive, Riverside, California 92507 (Monday Thursday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) Published: Friday, December 9, 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION... 1 A. Purpose... 1 B. Technical Studies... 1 II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION... 2 A. Project Background... 2 B. Project Location... 2 A. Background... 6 B. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected... 7 C. Determination... 8 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS... 9 1. Aesthetics.... 9 3. Air Quality.... 13 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.... 15 5. Cultural Resources.... 17 6. Geology and Soils.... 18 7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions.... 20 8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials.... 21 9. Hydrology and Water Quality.... 24 10. Land Use and Planning.... 27 11. Mineral Resources.... 29 12. Noise.... 30 13. Population and Housing.... 32 14. Public Services.... 34 15. Recreation.... 35 17. Utilities and Service Systems.... 38 V. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE... 40 FIGURES Figure 1 Location Map 3 i
I. INTRODUCTION A. PURPOSE This document is an Initial Study for evaluation of environmental impacts resulting from the implementation of the proposed City of Eastvale Zoning Code (proposed project). A more detailed description of the proposed project is found in Section II. B. TECHNICAL STUDIES No technical studies were used in the preparation of this document. 1
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. PROJECT BACKGROUND The City of Eastvale incorporated on October 1, 2010. Also on this date, the City adopted the County of Riverside s General Plan and Municipal Ordinances, including adoption of the Riverside County Zoning Code (also known as Ordinance 348 ). The Zoning Code includes the Zoning Map, which establishes zoning classifications for parcels within the city as well corresponding permitted uses and development standards. B. PROJECT LOCATION The proposed project involves the entire incorporated area within the Eastvale city limits. The City of Eastvale is located in western Riverside County, California, in a region of Southern California known as the Inland Empire. The city is bordered by San Bernardino County and the cities of Ontario and Chino therein to the north and west and the Santa Ana River to the south. The location of the city is shown in Figure 1. 2
FIGURE 1 LOCATION MAP 3
C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project consists of preparation and adoption of an update to the City of Eastvale s Zoning Code. The update would revise the Zoning Code adopted upon incorporation to make it more specific to the City of Eastvale as well as better organized, more efficient, and more accessible to the reader. The update includes the elimination of unneeded information and standards that currently apply to other areas of unincorporated Riverside County as well as formatting and structural changes, process streamlining, and modifications to entitlements and certain development standards. No changes to the City s current Zoning Map are proposed as part of this project. Formatting and Structural Changes The proposed formatting and structural changes to the Zoning Code would include reorganization, elimination of unneeded zoning districts that do not apply to the City of Eastvale, organization of permitted land uses into matrices, and user enhancements (such as the use of graphics, pictures, tables, and diagrams for greater clarity). Streamlining The proposed streamlining changes include removal of the receive and file requirement which requires the City Council to affirm each decision made by the Planning Commission rather than simply providing an opportunity for a Councilmember to appeal any Planning Commission decision. This change would shorten the approval process by several weeks. The proposed streamlining changes would also include allowing the City s Planning Director to approve minor deviations and to approve some types of development projects at a staff level, reducing processing time and costs. Finally, the streamlining changes would consolidate the various types of tract maps. Entitlements The proposed project would include several changes to the City s current entitlement process related to plot plan/design review, use permits, variances, multiple entitlements for one project, public hearings for accessory structures, specific plan standards and adoption, and modifications to previously approved projects. The proposed project would: Consolidate the various categories of plot plans currently described into a single design review process for all development approvals. This change would include the establishment of specific development standards, basic site development concepts, and design guidelines to guide the review process. Provision is also made for staff review of some types of development projects, clarifying the current Code s provisions. Simplify the current conditional use permit (CUP) process, which is too complex and does not fit the needs of the City by eliminating the 3 year time limit, consolidating the public use permit (PUP) into the CUP, and providing better standards and procedures for revocation of a CUP. Establish the Planning Commission as the approval authority for all variances. 4
Clarify and streamline the application process by allowing multiple entitlements for one project to be processed concurrently. Eliminate the requirement for a public hearing for proposed accessory structures. Add clear standards for the content of specific plans as well as direction on how specific plans are to be used to determine development standards. Change the process to modify a previously approved project to provide an administrative process for very minor changes and public review for more significant changes. Development Standards The proposed project would include several minor changes to the City s current development standards. The proposed project would: Consolidate all development standards into one section of the Zoning Code. Update the current development standards to ensure they comply with provisions of state law. Review permitted uses and change some to conditionally permitted uses to better protect adjacent properties. List uses that require special regulations separately (e.g., alcohol sales) to provide additional measures to reduce potential impacts. Develop multimodal development standards to address alternative forms of transportation including pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit. Provide complete and specific development standards for residential uses that are tailored to fit the needs of the City. Improve existing development standards for commercial uses. Examples include the addition of standards related to shielding of new lighting fixtures, trash enclosures, continuous pedestrian paths, and bicycle parking. Provide more detailed standards related to fencing for industrial, commercial, and residential uses including the prohibition or limitation of use of certain types of fencing. 5
III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Project Title: City of Eastvale Zoning Code 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Eastvale; 12363 Limonite Avenue, Suite 901, Eastvale, CA 91752 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Eric Norris, Planning Director; (951) 361 0900 4. Project Location: City of Eastvale 5. Project Sponsor s Name and Address: Not applicable 6. General Plan Designation: Various 7. Zoning: Various 8. Description of Project: The proposed project consists of preparation and adoption of the City of Eastvale s Zoning Code. The project would revise the Riverside County Zoning Code to make it more specific to the City of Eastvale as well as better organized, more efficient, and more accessible to the reader. The project would include the elimination of unneeded information and standards that currently apply to other areas of unincorporated Riverside County as well as formatting and structural changes, process streamlining, and modifications to entitlements and certain development standards. No changes to the City s current Zoning Map or the zoning for any parcels within the city are proposed as part of this project. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Various 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required: 6
B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project involving at least one impact that is a Potentially, as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Potentially significant impacts that are mitigated to impacts are not shown here. Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards/Hazardous Materials Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Hydrology/Water Quality Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance 7
C. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because of the incorporated mitigation measures and revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a potentially significant impact or potentially significant unless mitigated impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Eric Norris Printed Name Date Planning Director Title 8
1. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Issues Potentially With Mitigation Incorporated a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcrops, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? DISCUSSION a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Scenic vistas are defined in the Riverside County General Plan as points, accessible to the general public, that provide a view of the countryside. Within the City of Eastvale, such locations are generally limited to properties adjacent to the Santa Ana River corridor or those properties with clear views of the surrounding mountains. The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development would result from project implementation. The project would result in numerous changes to the City s development standards for future residential, commercial, and industrial development. However, these changes are anticipated to result in beneficial impacts related to aesthetics by bringing the standards into compliance with current state law and establishing more complete and detailed development standards. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. 9
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? There are no highways in the vicinity of the city that have been officially designated or are eligible for designation as a state scenic highway. Further, the proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new or changed development would result from project implementation that could damage scenic resources. There would be no impact. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development would result from project implementation that could create new sources of light and glare. Furthermore, the project proposes to improve the City s standards for future development including requiring lighting fixtures to be shielded and directed downward, which would minimize nuisance light and glare. There would be no impact. STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS MITIGATION MEASURES 10
2. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES. Would the project: Issues Potentially With Mitigation Incorporated a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forestland (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forestland or conversion of forestland to non forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forestland to non forest use? In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. DISCUSSION a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forestland (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? 11
d) Result in the loss of forestland or conversion of forestland to non forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use? The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development would result from project implementation that could conflict with existing zoning or convert agricultural or forestry resources. Further, no changes are proposed to the permitted uses or development standards for the City s existing agriculture related zoning districts. There would be no impact. STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS MITIGATION MEASURES 12
3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: Issues Potentially With Mitigation Incorporated a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? DISCUSSION a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development would result from project implementation. As such, no new air emissions or sources of odor would be generated. Conversely, the proposed project would include the addition of development standards for alternative transportation facilities including pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit, which would improve the aesthetics, function, and usability of these facilities, and as 13
such, could increase use of these facilities and result in fewer vehicles trips and associated air emissions. There would be no impact. STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS MITIGATION MEASURES 14
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Issues Potentially With Mitigation Incorporated a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or specialstatus species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? DISCUSSION a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? 15
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development would result from project implementation that could affect biological resources. As such, there would be no impact to special status species or associated habitat, riparian habitat or wetlands, or migratory corridors. The project would not conflict with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) or any other local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. There would be no impact. STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS MITIGATION MEASURES 16
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Issues Potentially With Mitigation Incorporated a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? DISCUSSION a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development would result from project implementation that could disturb cultural resources. Further, development activities in the city are subject to the provisions of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097.94 et seq., regarding the discovery and disturbance of unanticipated archaeological resources and human remains. There would be no impact. STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS MITIGATION MEASURES 17
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: Issues Potentially With Mitigation Incorporated a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in onor off site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 1 B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? DISCUSSION a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.) 18
ii) iii) iv) Strong seismic ground shaking? Seismic related ground failure, including liquefaction? Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or off site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 1 B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils capable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development would result from project implementation. As no new structures would be constructed as part of this project, no persons would be newly exposed to risks associated with seismic activity or soil instability. Further, the proposed project would not affect the City s current requirements for preparation of soils and geotechnical reports for certain projects or implementation of the state development codes, nor would it affect the City s compliance with the Alquist Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. There would be no impact. STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS MITIGATION MEASURES 19
7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: Issues Potentially With Mitigation Incorporated a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? DISCUSSION a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development would result from project implementation. As such, no new greenhouse gas emissions would be generated. Conversely, the proposed project would include the addition of development standards for alternative transportation facilities including pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit, which would improve the aesthetics, function, and usability of these facilities such that use would increase. This could result in fewer vehicles trips and associated greenhouse gas emissions. There would be no impact. STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS MITIGATION MEASURES 20
8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Issues Potentially With Mitigation Incorporated a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 21
DISCUSSION a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development would result from project implementation. As such, no new hazardous materials would be used or disposed of within the city or transported through the city and no new hazardous emissions would occur. There would be no impact. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? The northwesterly portion of the city is located within the boundaries of the comprehensive land use plan for the Chino Airport. However, the project does not propose any development or any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map. Therefore, no new development would occur in this area and no persons would be newly exposed to risks associated with airport operations. There would be no impact. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The proposed project would not involve any development or changes to Eastvale s existing circulation system and would have no impact on the implementation of the County of Riverside s Emergency Operations Plan. 22
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? The city is located in an urbanized area that is not subject to significant risks involving wildland fires. The proposed project would not involve any development and would not newly expose any persons to risk associated with wildland fires. There would be no impact. STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS MITIGATION MEASURES 23
9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Issues Potentially With Mitigation Incorporated a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100 year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within 100 year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? 24
9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Issues Potentially With Mitigation Incorporated i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? DISCUSSION a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development would result from project implementation. As such, no ground disturbing activities would occur that could result in erosion and sedimentation, no new storm drainage discharges would occur in area surface waters, and no new wastewater would be generated. In addition, the proposed project would have no effect on the City s existing regulations related to erosion and water quality, including the requirements for preparation of a Water Quality Management Plan for all development projects and the preparation of an Erosion Control Plan prior to issuance of a grading permit. The proposed project would have no impact on water quality. b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development would result from project implementation. As such, project implementation would not result in any increase in demand for water supplies and there would be no impact. 25
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site? g) Place housing within a 100 year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development would result from project implementation. As such, project implementation would result in no housing or other structures being located within a 100 year flood hazard area, within the inundation area of a levee or dam, or in an area subject to mudflow. In addition, the city is not located in close proximity to the Pacific Ocean or other large body of water subject to tsunami or seiche waves. Furthermore, the proposed project would have no effect on the City s standards for future development within a flood zone contained in Section 15.80 of the Eastvale Municipal Code. There would be no impact. STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS MITIGATION MEASURES 26
10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: Issues Potentially With Mitigation Incorporated a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? DISCUSSION a) Physically divide an established community? Division of an established community commonly occurs as a result of development and construction of physical features that constitute a barrier to easy and frequent travel between two or more constituent parts of a community. For example, a large freeway structure with few crossings could effectively split a community. The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development or circulation improvements would result from project implementation that could divide the Eastvale community. Conversely, the project proposes to add development standards for future development that would require continuous pedestrian paths and alternative transportation facilities which would serve to better connect areas of the city. There would be no impact. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The proposed City of Eastvale Zoning Code has been developed to be consistent with all applicable land use plans and policies including the City s General Plan, which is currently being publicly reviewed (SCH No. 2011111061) and is anticipated to be adopted in 2012. Neither the proposed 27
project nor the proposed City of Eastvale General Plan propose any changes to permitted land uses within the city. There would be no impact. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? See Subsection 4, Biological Resources. The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development would result from project implementation that could affect biological resources or result in a conflict with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS MITIGATION MEASURES 28
11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Issues Potentially With Mitigation Incorporated a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? DISCUSSION a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Much of Eastvale is designated by the State Mining and Geology Board as Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) 3, which indicates that mineral deposits are likely to exist given the geologic conditions; however, the significance of the deposits is undetermined. The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development would result from project implementation that could affect mineral resources. Further, there are currently no properties in the city zoned for mineral resource production or processing. There would be no impact. STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS MITIGATION MEASURES 29
12. NOISE. Would the project result in: Issues Potentially With Mitigation Incorporated a) The exposure of persons to, or the generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) The exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? DISCUSSION a) Exposure of persons to, or the generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 30
The proposed project does not include any changes to the City s existing Zoning Map; therefore, no new development would result from project implementation that could result in short or longterm increases in noise levels or the generation of groundborne vibration in the city. Further, the project proposes to change several uses that currently permitted within their zoning district to conditionally permitted to better protect adjacent properties from nuisances such as excessive noise. There would be no impact. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? See Subsection 8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials. The northwesterly portion of the city is located within the boundaries of the comprehensive land use plan for the Chino Airport. However, the project does not propose any development or changes in zoning in this area and would have no effect on the development restrictions contained in the airport s Comprehensive Land Use Plan or the City s adopted noise standards. There would be no impact. STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS MITIGATION MEASURES 31
13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Issues Potentially With Mitigation Incorporated a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? DISCUSSION a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? The proposed project would not result in any new development or the extension of roads or other infrastructure. Therefore, the project would not have the potential to induce substantial population growth in the city. There would be no impact. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The proposed project would not involve the demolition of any housing and would not displace any housing or people. There would be no impact. STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS 32
MITIGATION MEASURES 33
14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Issues Potentially With Mitigation Incorporated a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? e) Other public facilities? DISCUSSION a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? e) Other public facilities? See Subsection 13, Population and Housing. The proposed project would not result in any population growth in the city and would not increase demand for any public services or facilities. Further, the project would not result in the construction of any public facilities. There would be no impact. STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS MITIGATION MEASURES 34