HomeMy WebLinkAboutNOP with Initial Study and Environmental Evaluation
21825 Copley Drive • Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178
Steve Tye
Mayor
Jack Tanaka
Mayor Pro Tem
Wen P. Chang
Council Member
Ron Everett
Council Member
Carol Herrera
Council Member
City of Diamond Bar
(909) 839-7000 • Fax (909) 861-3117
www.CityofDiamondBar.com
Notice of Preparation
And
Notice of Public Scoping Meeting
DATE: May 2, 2007
TO: Responsible Agencies
FROM: City of Diamond Bar
SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report
and Notice of Public Scoping Meeting
The City of Diamond Bar will be the Lead Agency and will prepare an
environmental impact report for the proposed project identified below. We need to
know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental
information which is germane to your agency’s statutory responsibilities in
connection with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR
prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the
project.
The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are
contained in the attached materials. A copy of the Initial Study is attached.
Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the
earliest possible date but not later than Monday, June 4, 2007, at 5:00 p.m. (30-
day review period)
Please send your response to the City of Diamond Bar at the address shown
below. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency.
Project Title: Aera Master Planned Community EIR
Project Applicant, if any: Aera Energy LLC
Scoping Meeting: The City of Diamond Bar will hold the following scoping
meetings for stakeholders and the public:
• Wed., May 16, 2007, 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
Diamond Bar Center
Diamond Bar Center is located at 1600 S. Grand Avenue, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
(located inside Summitridge Park at 1425 Summitridge Drive).
Send Responses to: Nancy Fong, AICP, Community Development Director,
City of Diamond Bar, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178. Email:
nancy.fong@ci.diamond-bar.ca.us Telephone: (909) 839-7030. Fax: (909) 861-
3117.
1
ATTACHMENT TO THE NOTICE OF PREPARATION
FOR THE
AERA MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY
1. INTRODUCTION
Aera Energy is proposing the development of a Master Planned Community and, in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be prepared.
This EIR will address the environmental effects associated with development of the Aera Master Planned
Community including, without limitation, a General Plan Amendment, Prezoning, Specific Plan, and
reorganization of territorial jurisdictions in accordance with the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government
Reorganization Act of 2000. The EIR will address the scope of a series of actions and approvals, which may
be considered as one large project and are related either geographically or as logical parts in the chain of
contemplated actions. The EIR will be used to evaluate development of the project site in accordance with the
proposed General Plan Amendment and Prezoning designations for the site. City of Diamond Bar, County of
Los Angeles and County of Orange decision makers will use the EIR as information for their consideration and
final determination of whether to approve the proposed project.
On April 21, 2003, the County of Los Angeles issued a Notice of Preparation for the Aera Master Planned
Community, stating that the County of Los Angeles and the County of Orange would be co-lead agencies
under CEQA. In July 2005, the County of Los Angeles Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
prepared the East San Gabriel Valley Final Municipal Service Review, which recommended that the majority of
the Aera property be annexed to the City of Diamond Bar. Subsequently, the City of Diamond Bar determined
that it may modify its sphere of influence and ultimately annex much of the project area located within
jurisdiction of the County of Los Angeles. Under the CEQA Guidelines and after conferring among
representatives from the City of Diamond Bar, the County of Los Angeles, and the County of Orange, the
City of Diamond Bar is now designated as the lead agency for the proposed project. The City of Diamond
Bar’s status is reasonable since it will be the first local agency to consider the project and because the City will
consider annexing much of the project area proposed for development. Consequently, this revised Notice of
Preparation is being issued by the City of Diamond Bar.
Because the County of Los Angeles and the County of Orange will retain land use jurisdiction over portions of
the overall project area, the City of Diamond Bar is committed to working closely with the two counties in the
preparation of General Plan Amendments, Specific Plan, other land use documents, and the draft EIR. The
City of Diamond Bar will also maintain extensive communication with other responsible agencies, and will
provide numerous opportunities for input from the public.
The EIR will also be used to address the environmental effects of subsequent discretionary approvals for the
Aera Master Planned Community, such as the Development Agreement between the City of Diamond Bar, the
County of Los Angeles, the County of Orange, and the applicant, Aera Energy LLC. The EIR will also be used
for County approvals that will be required to implement the project for areas that will remain outside jurisdiction
of the City of Diamond Bar, such as a General Plan Amendment, Prezoning, Specific Plan, and subdivision
maps (tentative and parcel maps) for areas located within Los Angeles County and Orange County. The EIR
will also be used by other Responsible Agencies for permits and approvals required for project implementation
and development, such as the Los Angeles County LAFCO and Orange County LAFCO, the California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). The EIR
will be prepared to conform with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Diamond Bar CEQA
procedures.
CEQA provides important opportunities for public involvement and participation in the preparation and review
stages of completing an EIR for the proposed Aera Master Planned Community. These opportunities include
a public scoping meeting, public review of the Draft EIR, and consideration of and response to public
2
comments on the Draft EIR prior to action by City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, and County of
Orange decision makers.
2. PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed project site is located on the border of Los Angeles and Orange counties, just west of
San Bernardino County in southern California, as shown in Exhibits 1 and 2. The majority of the 2,935-acre
project site is located within an unincorporated area of Los Angeles County (approximately 2,614 acres) and
the remaining portion is located within unincorporated Orange County (approximately 321 acres). The project
site is generally bounded by the City of Diamond Bar to the northeast, the unincorporated residential
community of Rowland Heights to the north, Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road and the City of La Habra
Heights to the west, the City of Brea to the south, and State Route 57 (SR-57) to the east. Approximately
323 acres of the project site is located east of SR-57 within unincorporated Los Angeles County, south of the
City of Diamond Bar. Surrounding land uses consist primarily of residential communities to the north, west,
and south; undeveloped vacant land to the northwest and east; and oil production lands to the southeast.
3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
As proposed, the project consists of a General Plan Amendment, Prezoning, and Specific Plan to allow for the
phased development of a maximum of 3,600 dwelling units, a golf course and related uses, park uses,
commercial uses, internal greenbelts, and open space preservation areas on a 2,935- acre site, as shown in
Exhibit 3. The housing, commercial, and mixed uses will be clustered on approximately one-half of the project
site. The project site currently consists of an active oil field and cattle grazing uses. These uses will be
phased out, the wells abandoned and facilities removed, and oil-impacted soils will be remediated.
MAJOR PROJECT COMPONENTS
1. Land Use and jurisdictions
a. City of Diamond Bar:
Approximately 1,940 acres of the 2,935-acre project site are proposed to be detached from the County of
Los Angeles and annexed to the City of Diamond Bar, as shown in Exhibit 3. Approximately 323 acres of the
site are currently within Diamond Bar’s Sphere of Influence (SOI), so additional acreage within the project site,
and acreage used by SR-57, will be the subject of a General Plan amendment, SOI change, and prezoning
action preceding the reorganization. The County of Los Angeles Countywide General Plan currently
designates this area site as “R” Non-Urban, “1” Low Density Residential, “O” Open Space, and “SEA”
Significant Ecological Areas. The General Plan Amendment is being proposed to redesignate the site as “SP”
Specific Plan within Diamond Bar’s jurisdiction.
The portion of the project to be located in Diamond Bar will include the construction of up to 2,800 1 residential
units, 200,000 square feet of commercial space, public parks and recreation uses potentially including a sports
park and lands required for recreational use, and public open spaces and related public facilities.
1 Note: Up to 20% of the proposed residential units may be shifted from one jurisdiction to another to
address the potential workforce housing goals of each jurisdiction; however, the total number of residential
units built on the project site will not exceed 3,600 dwelling units.
Aera Master Plan Community NOPNO SCALE
Exhibit 2Local Vicinity MapI
Aera Master Plan Community NOPNO SCALE
Exhibit 3Land Use Concept PlanI
6
b. County of Los Angeles:
Approximately 675 acres within the project site are proposed to remain in unincorporated Los Angeles County.
The County of Los Angeles Countywide General Plan currently designates this portion of the site as “R”
Non-Urban, “1” Low Density Residential, and “O” Open Space. The current zoning for the site includes A-1-5
“Light Agricultural Zone” and A-2-1 “Heavy Agricultural Zone.” A General Plan Amendment is being proposed
to redesignate the site as “SP” Specific Plan within the County’s jurisdiction. This portion of the project site will
include construction of up to 275 residential units, open space uses, and a golf course and related uses.
c. Orange County:
Approximately 321 acres of the project site are located in Orange County. Although this acreage is within the
City of Brea’s SOI, this portion of the site is proposed to remain under Orange County jurisdiction. The County
of Orange General Plan designates this portion of the site as “1B” Suburban Residential. This portion of the
site is currently zoned A-1 “O” “General Agricultural District/Oil Production District.” This area would be
rezoned in a manner that would permit the construction of up to 800 2 residential units, some of which may be
built together with 100,000 square feet of office and/or commercial uses in a mixed-use development. This
portion of the site will also include open space uses, and a golf course and related uses.
2. Open space and water quality
More than half of the project site is proposed to be set aside as open space, which will include wildlife habitat,
parks, trails, greenbelts, golf courses, and scenic preservation areas. Wildlife habitat will be preserved,
enhanced, and restored along the southern slopes of the project facing toward Orange County and within
habitat conservation areas on both sides of SR-57. In addition, the proposed land use concept provides for
habitat restoration and the permanent preservation/enhancement of a wildlife movement corridor extending
from a riparian area at the northwest boundary of the project site to Tonner Creek at the southeast corner of
the project site. A comprehensive water quality program, maximizing the use of natural treatment systems,
including a new riparian corridor and natural treatment water quality wetlands along Berry Creek, will be
provided in accordance with applicable requirements. A conceptual Stormwater Management Plan will
address stormwater, debris flow, and new regulations concerning water quality functions.
3. Circulation and access
Access to the proposed project will be provided by a connection to Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road to the
west, two connections to Brea Canyon Road/Brea Boulevard to the east located near existing SR-57 ramps,
and a collector level connection to Berry Street serving only the southern area of the project site.
Improvement options for existing Brea Canyon Road, the existing Brea Canyon Road/SR-57 Interchange, and
the Tonner Canyon Road/SR-57 Interchange will be evaluated as part of the project traffic study, and
necessary mitigation measures will be proposed. As proposed, the project does not provide for an east-west
connector road between Harbor Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road or any new roads connecting north to
Pathfinder Road. Analysis will be done to evaluate regional infrastructure connection options to the north in
Diamond Bar and Los Angeles County, and to the south in Orange County. These facilities will include
electricity, natural gas, sewer, water, and drainage.
2 Note: Up to 20% of the proposed residential units may be shifted from one jurisdiction to another to
address the potential workforce housing goals of each jurisdiction; however, the total number of residential
units built on the project site will not exceed 3,600 dwelling units.
7
4. Grading
The project will include a conceptual master grading plan to allow for the subsequent construction of
development pads, golf course, parks, and streets consistent with the Specific Plan. The plan will identify
existing and proposed contours and the limits of grading. Approximately 57 million cubic yards of cut and fill
work will be required to implement the project. Grading will occur in multiple phases over the 12- to 15-year
anticipated build-out of the project. The maximum area expected to be impacted by grading, including
remedial grading, is approximately 1,950 acres.
4. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The following objectives have been established for the proposed project and will aid decision makers when
reviewing the project, the project alternatives, and associated environmental impacts:
• Provide for comprehensive planning of the project site through General Plan Amendments, Zone
Changes, Specific Plans, and/or other implementation measures as applicable to allow for the
development of a wide range of housing units, Multi-Use, and Commercial uses, in conformance with
the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, and Orange County General Plans as amended.
• In conjunction with lead agency and future LAFCO review, address modification of the City of
Diamond Bar SOI and reorganization (detachment and annexation) of portions of the proposed project
identified for annexation in the above Project Description. Additionally, because the Orange County
unincorporated area included in the proposed project is located within the SOI of the City of Brea, the
CEQA analysis will consider future jurisdictional reorganizations potentially involving an annexation of
that portion of the proposed project to the City of Brea and other applicable special districts.
• Address public services considerations, including potential provision of services involving the Cities of
Diamond Bar and Brea, and the Counties of Los Angeles and Orange.
• Provide additional anticipated recreational opportunities for public use, including property for a golf
course, parks, trails, sports park, scenic preservation areas, and passive recreation relating to
restored or enhanced native habitat preserves/wildlife movement areas.
• Provide for the aesthetic restoration/enhancement of the project site through oil field remediation and
reclamation while allowing the flexibility to adapt to changing market conditions and the ultimate
phase-out of oil field production. Aesthetic improvements will consist of removing oil field facilities,
providing property for a golf course, parks, scenic preservation areas, restored or enhanced native
habitat preserves/wildlife movement areas, and a master-planned landscape program as part of
project implementation.
• Provide for a wide range of housing opportunities within the community, consistent with the City of
Diamond Bar, Los Angeles, and Orange County Housing Elements and to implement local
government and regional jobs/housing balance policies. Providing a wide range of housing
opportunities would allow the City of Diamond Bar and both counties to help contribute significantly to
jobs/housing balance relative to existing employment centers, while at the same time allowing the
project applicant flexibility in responding to changing market conditions.
• Establish development agreements with the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, Orange
County and the project applicant to allow for the timely commitment of significant public benefits of the
project, including recreation areas and the golf course, circulation improvements, scenic preservation
areas, and restored or enhanced native habitat preserves/wildlife movement areas.
8
• Provide for habitat restoration and the permanent preservation/enhancement of a major wildlife
movement corridor extending from a riparian area at the northwest boundary of the project site to the
confluence of Brea Creek and Tonner Creek at the southeast corner of the project site, to provide
linkage through the project site to dedicated habitat areas to the northwest and southeast of the site.
• Provide for the restoration and enhancement of coastal sage scrub habitat in areas consistently
occupied by the Coastal California gnatcatcher and for creating habitat areas that would further
gnatcatcher movement within the project site and to adjoining habitat areas.
• Preserve substantial areas of higher-density oak and walnut woodlands, enhance lower-density oak
and walnut woodlands, and restore natural long-term regeneration in all preserved woodlands.
• Create oak and walnut woodlands in areas where they have the ability to be self-sustaining and where
the created woodlands will provide both live-in habitat and cover for wildlife movement between
protected habitat areas on-site and off-site.
• Provide for the protection and improvement of water resources, including riparian habitat, through
preparation of a conceptual Stormwater Management Plan and a conceptual Water Quality
Management Plan, which will address stormwater, debris flow, and new regulations concerning water
quality functions (both pollutants of concern and hydrologic conditions of concern), including a new
riparian corridor and stream course enhancements along lower Berry Creek.
• Remove invasive tree species and control other invasive plant species in conjunction with
enhancement and restoration associated with riparian and woodlands mitigation programs.
• Provide for permanent protection of significant regional biological, recreational, and scenic resources
through implementation of a Comprehensive Resource Restoration Management Plan as part of the
required Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which will address enhancement and
restoration plans for impacted native habitats and wildlife movement in furtherance of the above
objectives and in fulfillment of project avoidance, minimization, and mitigation requirements.
• Provide an opportunity for road access into and through a parcel owned by the County of
Los Angeles.
• Provide a comprehensive collector road system and other transportation improvements to minimize
and mitigate transportation impacts on existing communities and to route project-generated traffic
primarily toward arterial roads and state highways and away from adjacent local residential roads as
much as feasible.
5. ADDITIONAL POTENTIALLY RELATED CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITIES UNDER
SEPARATE CONSIDERATION
As a separate project, the City of Diamond Bar is also considering whether to pursue redevelopment of the
existing Diamond Bar Municipal Golf Course site as a mixed-use project. The City’s project would entail
relocating the existing golf course, potentially to a site adjacent to the northern boundary of the Aera site, and
potentially including a portion of the Aera project site.
The Municipal Golf Course project is currently in the conceptual development stages. The City is in the
process of defining the parameters of the project, selecting an environmental consultant for the CEQA review
process, and defining the processing steps and timeline for this City-initiated project. To proceed with a
replacement golf course on land adjoining the Aera property, the City may require acreage from and access
through the Aera property. However, the Municipal Golf Course project is not directly dependent on or a
foreseeable consequence of the Aera Master Planned Community project. Additionally, the consideration and
9
potential approval of the Aera Master Planned Community would not commit the City to any aspect of the
Municipal Golf Course project. For this reason, the City has determined that it is appropriate to conduct
separate CEQA evaluations for each project. Each CEQA evaluation will provide a full cumulative assessment
of the potential effects of all projects under consideration by the City of Diamond Bar and surrounding
jurisdictions in full compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.
10
This page intentionally left blank.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
INITIAL STUDY AND ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
1. Project Title: Aera Master Planned Community
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Diamond Bar, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar,
CA 91765
3. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Aera Energy LLC, 3030 Saturn Street, Suite 101,
Brea, CA 92821.
4. Contact Person and Phone Number: Nancy Fong, AICP, Community Development Director,
(909) 839-7030, nancy.fong@ci.diamond-bar.ca.us.
5. Project Location: The proposed project site is located on the border of Los Angeles and Orange
counties, just west of San Bernardino County in southern California. The majority of the
2,935-acre project site is located within an unincorporated area of Los Angeles County
(approximately 2,614 acres) and the remaining portion is located within unincorporated Orange
County (approximately 321 acres). The project site is generally bounded by the City of Diamond
Bar to the northeast, the unincorporated residential community of Rowland Heights to the north,
Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road and the City of La Habra Heights to the west, the City of Brea to
the south, and State Route 57 (SR-57) to the east.
6. General Plan Designation: Non-urban, low density residential, open space, significant
ecological areas, (Los Angeles County), Suburban Residential (Orange County).
7. Zoning: A-1-5 & A-2-1 (Los Angeles County) and A-1-O (Orange County).
8. Description of Project: Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later
phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its
implementation. (Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
The proposed project consists of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Specific Plan to
allow for the phased development of a maximum of 3,600 residential units, golf course and park
uses, and 300,000 square feet of commercial uses. More than half of the site is proposed to be
devoted to internal greenbelts and open space. The project site currently consists of an active oil
field, though some portions of the site are also used for cattle grazing.
Approximately 2,614 acres of the project site are presently located in unincorporated Los Angeles
County and approximately 321 acres are located in Orange County. The City of Diamond Bar
may modify its Sphere of Influence and annex approximately 1,940 acres of the 2,935-acre
project site. The remaining acreage will be considered for development by the Counties of
Los Angeles and Orange, or a future jurisdictional reorganization may be considered to provide
for possible annexation of a portion of the property to the City of Brea.
9. Existing Land Use: The project site is used primarily for oil production and cattle grazing. An
extensive road system has been developed to support the oil production use, as have numerous
drill rig pads, storage/processing facilities, and field operation structures. High-tension power
lines cross the western and northeastern portions of the project site.
10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is generally bounded by the
unincorporated residential community of Rowland Heights to the north, the City of Diamond Bar
on the northeast, the City of Brea on the south, and the City of La Habra Heights and Harbor
Boulevard/Fullerton Road on the west. Brea Canyon Boulevard and SR-57 divide the property
into east and west sections. Surrounding land uses consist primarily of residential communities
to the north, west, and south; undeveloped vacant land to the northwest and east; and oil
production lands to the southeast.
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.)
• County of Los Angeles
• County of Orange
• Los Angeles County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
• Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
• California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
• Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region
• Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region
• California Department of Conservation
• Army Corps of Engineers
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
• California Department of Fish and Game
2 4/30/2007
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 Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
X Aesthetics X Agriculture Resources X Air Quality
X Biological Resources X Cultural Resources X Geology/Soils
X Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
X Hydrology/Water Quality X Land Use/Planning
X Mineral Resources X Noise X Population/Housing
X Public Services X Recreation X Transportation/Traffic
X Utilities/Service Systems X Mandatory Findings of
Significance
Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency):
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 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.
X
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.
Nancy Fong May __, 2007
Date
Community Development Director City of Diamond Bar
Title For
3 4/30/2007
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question.
A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the
impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault
rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific
factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,
based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist
answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with
mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial
evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact”
entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a
“Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly
explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section
XVII, “Earlier Analyses,” may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process,
an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 1 5063( c)
(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,
and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the
earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or
outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the
statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead
agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s
environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance
4 4/30/2007
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I. AESTHETICS: Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to,
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic
highway?
X
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the
site and its surroundings?
X
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
X
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: 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 Dept. of
Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on
agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
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 non-agricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
X
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their
location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to
nonagricultural use?
X
III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria
established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution
control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality
plan?
X
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
X
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including
releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
X
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? X
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? X
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
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
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
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 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
5 4/30/2007
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
X
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?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinances?
X
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?
X
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource as defined in § 15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
X
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site
or unique geologic feature?
X
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
X
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project?
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.
X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X
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?
X
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?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks
or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste water?
X
6 4/30/2007
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing
or proposed school?
X
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?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
X
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?
X
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
X
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?
X
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
X
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)?
X
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?
X
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 in which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
X
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 and/or generate
NPDES compliance issues pursuant to the following list?
1. Potential impact of project construction on storm water runoff;
X
7 4/30/2007
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
2. Potential impact of project’s post-construction activity on storm
water runoff;
3. Potential for discharge of storm water pollutants from areas of
material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or
equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling,
hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading
docks or other outdoor work areas;
4. Potential for discharge of storm water to affect the beneficial uses
of the receiving waters;
5. Potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of
storm water runoff to cause environmental harm; and
6. Potential for significant increases in erosion of the project site or
surrounding areas.
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X
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?
X
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would
impede or redirect flood flows?
X
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?
X
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project
a) Physically divide an established community X
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
X
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
X
X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that
would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
X
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?
X
XI. NOISE: Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
X
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
X
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
X
8 4/30/2007
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels
in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
X
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?
X
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?
X
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
X
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
X
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES:
a) 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:
Fire Protection? X
Police Protection? X
Schools? X
Parks? X
Other Public Facilities? X
XIV. RECREATION:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
X
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have
an adverse physical effect on the environment?
X
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in
a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the
volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
X
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the county congestion management
agency for designated roads or highways?
X
9 4/30/2007
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
X
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm
equipment)?
X
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? X
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
X
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
X
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects??
X
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects – and/or would the
project include a new or retrofitted storm water treatment control
Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g. water quality treatment
basin, constructed treatment wetlands), the operation of which
could result in significant environmental effects (e.g. increased
vectors and odors)?
X
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed?
X
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity
to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s
existing commitments?
X
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?
X
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
X
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
X
10 4/30/2007
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means
that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
X
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
X
11 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
I. AESTHETICS
a. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project site is approximately 2,935 acres of primarily undeveloped land located along the
southern flank of the Puente Hills. The topography on the project site is characterized by a series of
canyons and ridges, with a large canyon traversing the southwest portion of the site from east to west,
serving as a major wildlife corridor connecting the Puente Hills to Tonner Canyon and the Chino Hills
State Park. Brea Canyon is considered a scenic corridor. Surrounding land uses include residential
development and undeveloped vacant land of the unincorporated community of Rowland Heights to the
north, residential development of the City of Diamond Bar to the northeast, undeveloped vacant land to
the east, residential development of the City of Brea and oil fields to the south, and residential
development of the City of La Habra Heights to the west. Implementation of the proposed project
includes the phased development of a maximum of 3,600 residential units, golf course and park uses,
and 300,000 square feet of commercial uses. More than half of the site is proposed to be devoted to
internal greenbelts and open space. Implementation of the proposed project would alter the visual
appearance of the site, and could have a significant impact on a scenic vista. The Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) will evaluate the potential impact of the proposed project on scenic vistas. (Source: 4, 11,
13)
b. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project is located near State Route 57 (SR-57), which is currently designated as a scenic
highway in the Los Angeles County General Plan, is listed as an Eligible Scenic Highway by the State of
California, and could potentially be designated as such in the future by the California State Scenic
Highway Program. Therefore, further evaluation in the EIR is required to determine the potential impact
of implementing the proposed project within the vicinity of a scenic highway.
The project site contains a variety of scenic resources, including significant stands of California walnut
woodlands, coast live oak woodlands, and mixed coast live oak/California walnut woodlands. Most of
these woodlands resources are concentrated in the central and eastern portions of the project site. The
EIR will include an evaluation of the proposed project’s impact on these scenic resources. (Source: 4, 11,
13)
c. Potentially Significant Impact.
The 2,935-acre project site is currently primarily undeveloped. Implementation of the proposed project
would transform half of the project site from primarily undeveloped land, to a development with up to
3,600 residential units, golf course and park uses, and 300,000 square feet of commercial uses. More
than half of the site is proposed to be devoted to internal greenbelts and open space. The visual
character of the project site would be substantially modified due to the proposed development. As
portions of the site have been degraded due to ongoing oil operations, implementation of the proposed
project could also provide an opportunity for aesthetic enhancement of the site. The EIR will address the
potential for aesthetic changes to adversely impact the area. (Source: 4, 11, 13)
d. Potentially Significant Impact.
Day and nighttime light impacts could result from the proposed commercial and residential building
activities. Lighting from the proposed residential and commercial buildings, street lights, and park lighting
systems for example could be visible from the surrounding neighborhoods, including the residential
communities to the north, west, and south of the project site. The project area is currently minimally
developed with oil and gas extraction operations, which do not require extensive nighttime lighting. Since
the site is largely undeveloped, project implementation would substantially increase nighttime light and
glare within the project site. These new sources of outdoor lighting could substantially change the
12 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
nighttime character of the project site. The potential impacts of new light sources will be analyzed in the
EIR. Glare can also result from daytime reflection of sunlight off building surfaces. The proposed project
would include reflective surfaces (e.g., windows) on building faces. The visual impact of glare created by
the project site will be addressed in the EIR.
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
a. No Impact.
There is no Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, or Unique Farmland located on the
proposed project site. No impact would occur, and no further analysis is required in the EIR. (Source: 2,
12)
b. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project consists of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Specific Plan to allow
for the phased development of a maximum of 3,600 residential units, golf course and park uses, and
300,000 square feet of commercial uses. More than half of the site is proposed to be devoted to internal
greenbelts and open space. Sections of the project site are currently zoned for agricultural use, including
a portion of the project site located in Los Angeles County, zoned for A-1-5 “Light Agricultural Zone” and
A-2-1 “Heavy Agricultural Zone,” and a portion of the site located within Orange County zoned as A-1 “O”
“General Agricultural District/Oil Production District.” The project site is not under a Williamson Act
contract. The EIR will evaluate the potential conflict of the proposed project with existing land zoned for
agricultural use. (Source: 2, 4, 11, 13)
c. No Impact.
The site is currently primarily undeveloped land, used for oil production and cattle grazing. No
environmental changes associated with the proposed project would result in the conversion of farmland to
non-agricultural uses. No impact would occur, and no further analysis of this issue is required in the EIR.
(Source: 2, 12)
III. AIR QUALITY
a. Potentially Significant Impact.
The project as proposed would entail substantial earth movement and construction activities. In addition,
project operation would result in increased vehicular trips in the area. Further evaluation is required to
determine whether this project will conflict with the adopted South Coast Air Quality Management Plan
(AQMP). Therefore, the EIR will address the potential for the proposed project to exceed the South
Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds of significance, which may result in conflict
with the AQMP, as well as any violations of local and regional air quality standards during construction
and operation of the proposed project. (Source: 4, 11, 13, 19)
b. Potentially Significant Impact.
Refer to the discussion in III.a. above. In addition, construction of the proposed project would require soil
grading, the use of mechanical construction equipment, the application of solvents and architectural
coatings, and other construction activities that could result in significant, temporary, short-term impacts to
air quality emissions in the form of fugitive dust, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and construction
equipment emissions. Currently, the nonattainment pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin, which
includes Los Angeles and Orange counties, are ozone (O3) and fine particulate matter (PM10).
Construction-related activities and traffic generated by the long-term operation of the proposed project
13 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
could contribute to these existing violations. The impacts to air quality from project construction and
operation will be evaluated in the EIR. (Source: 4, 11, 13, 19)
c. Potentially Significant Impact.
Refer to the discussion of items III.a. and III.b. above. The proposed project would result in a significant
impact if it would add a cumulatively considerable contribution of a federal or state nonattainment
pollutant. Because the South Coast Air Basin is currently in nonattainment for O3 and PM10, related
projects could exceed an air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality
exceedance. With regard to determining the significance of the proposed project’s contribution, the
SCAQMD neither recommends quantified analyses of cumulative construction or operational emissions,
nor provides methodologies or thresholds of significance to be used to assess cumulative construction or
operational impacts. Instead, the SCAQMD recommends that the project’s potential contribution to
cumulative impacts be assessed utilizing the same significance criteria as those for project-specific
impacts. Further evaluation in the EIR is required to determine the project’s cumulative impact on air
quality. (Source: 4, 11, 13, 19)
d. Potentially Significant Impact.
Project-generated traffic could contribute to decreased levels of service at nearby intersections, resulting
in additional vehicular emissions and longer vehicle idling times at and near intersections. These
circumstances could lead to carbon monoxide hot spots that may affect sensitive receptors on and
adjacent to the project site (e.g., residences, schools). The potential for the project to result in these
substantial pollution concentrations will be addressed in the EIR.
e. Less Than Significant Impact.
The project does not propose, and would not facilitate, uses that are significant sources of objectionable
odors. Potential sources of odor associated with the proposed project may result from construction
equipment exhaust and application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities,
and the temporary storage of solid waste associated with residential and commercial (long-term
operational) uses. The construction odor emissions would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in
nature. It is expected that any project-generated refuse would be stored in covered containers and
removed at regular intervals in compliance with the City’s solid waste regulations. Therefore, odors
associated with the proposed project construction and operation would be less than significant, and no
further analysis is required in the EIR.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a. Potentially Significant Impact.
The 2,935-acre project site is currently primarily undeveloped, and provides habitat for species such as
the Coastal California gnatcatcher, southwestern pond turtle, northern red diamond rattle snake, coastal
cactus wren, California horned lark, loggerhead shrike, and yellow-breasted chat. Implementation of the
proposed project allowed under the proposed General Plan Update, Zone Change, and Specific Plan
could result in potential adverse impacts to candidate, sensitive, or special status plant and wildlife
species either directly or indirectly through habitat modifications. Therefore, the EIR will provide an
analysis of the potential impacts of the proposed project to special status species. (Source: 16, 17, 18)
b, c. Potentially Significant Impact.
The 2,935-acre project site contains riparian habitat, wetland habitat, and sensitive natural communities,
including strands of oak and walnut woodlands. Twelve acres of riparian habitat are present on-site,
including 4.2 acres of Southern California Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest, as well as approximately
14 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
0.6 acre of wetland. These resources contain habitat that supports sensitive species. The EIR will
provide an analysis of the potential impacts of the proposed project on riparian habitat, wetlands, and
sensitive natural communities. (Source: 16, 17, 18)
d. Potentially Significant Impact.
The project site falls within the Puente-Chino Hills Wildlife Corridor, supporting functional habitat linkage
and wildlife movement. The project area and adjoining lands are partially urbanized and partially open
space. One of the objectives of the proposed project is to “provide for habitat restoration and the
permanent preservation/enhancement of a major wildlife habitat linkage and movement corridor
extending from a riparian area at the northwest boundary of the project site to Tonner Creek at the
southeast corner of the project site.” Although preservation and rehabilitation of these corridors will be a
focus of the proposed project, construction and operation of the project could have an impact on the
movement of species through the project site. Therefore, the EIR will analyze the proposed project’s
impact on wildlife corridors. (Source: 16, 17, 18)
e. Potentially Significant Impact.
As discussed in items IV.a through IV.c. above, the project site contains a number of species and habitats
that are protected by local policies and ordinances. The proposed project would result in the removal of
existing trees. Chapter 22.38 of the City's Municipal Code, "Tree Preservation and Protection," is in place
to enforce practices to protect and preserve trees through requiring permits and tree
replacement/relocation standards. The proposed project's consistency with natural resource policies
within the City's General Plan and Municipal Code, including the City's Resource Management Element,
will be analyzed in the EIR. (Source: 3, 4). Additionally, because portions of the proposed project would
be carried out in unincorporated areas expected to remain under the Jurisdiction of the County of
Los Angeles and the County of Orange, the proposed project will be reviewed for consistency with the
provisions of SB 1334 (2004) adding Section 21083.4 to the Public Resources Code. Finally, the
potential impacts and minimization/mitigation measures will be reviewed with respect to the County of
Los Angeles SEA designation and guidelines.
f. Potentially Significant Impact.
As discussed in items IV.a through IV.c. above, implementation of the proposed project would have
potentially significant impacts on species and habitats on the site, and the proposed project could
therefore conflict with the provisions of an existing habitat conservation plan. The proposed project
includes implementation of a Comprehensive Resource Restoration Management Plan, which will
address a restoration plan for impacted native habitats and wildlife movement. However, further
evaluation in the EIR is required to determine the level of significance of this impact, and to identify
mitigation measures that reduce impacts to below a level of significance, if possible.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
a. Potentially Significant Impact.
The project site is primarily undeveloped land, and it is not likely that historic resources will be found in
the project vicinity. However, the EIR will contain a cultural resources analysis to include archival
background research at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) to review and map any
previously recorded sites and surveys, scan designated landmarks, review excavation reports and historic
maps, and review other sources of local data. The EIR will describe the methods and results of the
literature search and fieldwork. If historic resources are encountered, or are presumed to exist, records
will be submitted and opinions developed regarding their potential importance. These issues, as well as
steps to protect unanticipated/previous unknown resources that may be encountered during project
implementation, will be evaluated in the EIR.
15 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
b. Potentially Significant Impact.
The project site contains a number of features, such as oak trees and drainage courses, that could
contain archaeological resources, and archaeological resources are known to exist in the project vicinity.
The EIR will contain a cultural resources analysis to include archival background research at the SCCIC
to review and map any previously recorded sites and surveys, scan designated landmarks, review
excavation reports and historic maps, and review other sources of local data. The EIR will describe the
methods and results of the literature search and fieldwork. If sites are encountered, or are presumed to
exist, records will be submitted and opinions developed regarding their potential importance. These
issues, as well as steps to protect unanticipated/previous unknown resources that may be encountered
during project construction, will be evaluated in the EIR. (Source: 4, 11, 13)
c. Potentially Significant Impact.
The project site is located within the Puente Formation, a highly fossiliferous area that has produced fossil
leaves, invertebrates, sharks, fishes, and marine and terrestrial mammals in the eastern Puente Hills,
Anaheim Hills, El Toro, and San Dimas areas. The paleontological sensitivity of the Puente Formation is
considered to be Very High. There is the potential that paleontological resources on-site, including those
that may be located in subsurface deposits, could be exposed and impacted during grading activities.
The EIR will contain a cultural resources analysis to include archival background research at the SCCIC
to review and map any previously recorded sites and surveys, scan designated landmarks, review
excavation reports and historic maps, and review other sources of local data. The EIR will describe the
methods and results of the literature search and fieldwork. If sites are encountered, or are presumed to
exist, records will be submitted and opinions developed regarding their potential importance. These
issues, as well as steps to protect unanticipated/previous unknown resources that may be encountered
during project construction, will be evaluated in the EIR. (Source: 4, 9, 10, 11, 13)
d. Potentially Significant Impact.
As stated above under item V.b. above, the project site will be evaluated for the presence of known
archaeological sites. The potential for discovery of unknown/unanticipated human remains could occur
during construction of the proposed project. The potential impacts to human remains will be analyzed in
the EIR.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
a. i. Potentially Significant Impact.
The project site is located within an active fault zone, with the Whittier Fault Zone crossing the extreme
southern portion of the site. Consequently, the proposed project may expose new residents and on-site
structures to significant seismic hazards if an earthquake occurs along this fault. The State of California
has imposed Alquist-Priolo (A-P) zones along the Whittier Fault Zone. The A-P zones require further
investigation to ascertain and locate active faults if development is contemplated within these limits. The
EIR will include an analysis of impacts associated with seismic hazards related to rupture of a known
earthquake fault. (Source: 4, 11, 13, 14)
ii. Potentially Significant Impact.
The project site is located within a seismically active area, as is all of southern California, and it would be
subject to strong seismic ground shaking. The closest known active fault is the Whittier-Elsinore Fault,
located along the southern portion of the site. Consequently, the proposed project may expose new
residents and on-site structures to significant seismic hazards (i.e., shaking) if an earthquake occurs
along this fault. Impacts associated with seismic hazards would generally be addressed through
adherence to applicable regulations (i.e., Uniform Building Code) and design, grading, and structural
16 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
recommendations. The EIR will include an analysis of impacts associated with seismic hazards.
(Source: 4, 11, 13, 14, 15)
iii. Potentially Significant Impact.
According to the liquefaction potential map for Los Angeles and Orange counties, the project site is
located within a mapped seismic hazard zone for liquefaction. Additionally, the State of California has
designated the Big Valley and Brea Canyon as zones requiring liquefaction potential/mitigation analysis.
Therefore, potentially liquefiable soils are present on-site in the form of loose/soft alluvium, colluvium, and
nonengineered artificial fill. A development-specific assessment of liquefaction potential, including lateral
spread, will be necessary when site development plans and grading plans are prepared. Consequently,
the proposed project may expose new residents and on-site structures to significant hazards associated
with liquefaction. The EIR will analyze the potential for liquefaction hazards to affect the project site.
(Source: 1, 14, 15)
iv. Potentially Significant Impact.
Landslides are common throughout the property, particularly on the north and northwest-facing slopes
and in the vicinity of the Whittier Fault Zone. Consequently, the proposed project may expose new
residents and on-site structures to significant hazards if a landslide occurs. Impacts associated with
seismic hazards would generally be addressed through adherence to applicable regulations (i.e., Uniform
Building Code) and design, grading, and structural recommendations. However, the EIR will include an
analysis of impacts associated with landslides. (Source: 4, 11, 13, 14, 15)
b. Potentially Significant Impact.
The majority of the project site is undeveloped land with varying topography, including a series of
canyons, ridges, and ravines. Elevation on the property ranges between 440 feet above mean sea level
(MSL) in Brea Canyon to 1,425 feet above MSL along the highest ridgeline. Construction of the proposed
project would require a great deal of grading. As a result, grading for above-ground project components
and excavation at the site would expose soil to erosional processes during construction. These impacts
will be addressed through the implementation of Best Management Practices during construction
activities and adherence to design, grading, and structural recommendations identified in the geotechnical
investigations that will be submitted for each Tentative Tract Map. The EIR will analyze the potential for
erosional impacts from construction activities and identify mitigation measures that reduce impacts to
below a level of significance, if possible. (Source: 4, 11, 13, 15)
c. Potentially Significant Impact.
As discussed in VI.a.iii. and VI.a.iv. above, the site is at risk for liquefaction and landslides, particularly in
areas in the vicinity of the Whittier Fault Zone. Cut, fill, and natural slope stability can be affected by
several factors including geologic structure, strength of materials, height, inclination, and orientation of
design slopes. The EIR will address the ability for engineering controls to appropriately address geologic
stability on the project site. (Source: 4, 11, 13, 15)
d. Potentially Significant Impact.
The earth materials on-site vary in expansion potential from nonexpansive to highly expansive.
Expansive soils will expand (increase in volume) upon the introduction of water, and shrink (decrease in
volume) upon drying. These volume changes can produce excessive stresses on engineered structures
that can result in cosmetic distress and even structural damage. These risks could generally be
addressed through adherence to applicable regulations (i.e., Uniform Building Code) and design, grading,
and structural recommendations from the geotechnical investigations that will be submitted for each
17 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
Tentative Tract Map. The EIR will address the ability for project design features to appropriately address
expansive soil risks. (Source: 4, 11, 13, 15)
e. Potentially Significant Impact.
Approximately 90 percent of the acreage within the project site is located within Los Angeles County;
however, the drainage flows almost entirely southward into Orange County. The Los Angeles County
Sanitation District and the Orange County Sanitation District each maintains existing sewer lines near the
project site. The proposed project could exceed the capacity of local facilities, and septic tanks or waste
waster disposal systems may be needed. Therefore, the EIR will evaluate whether the soils on-site are
capable of adequately supporting these systems, and analyze potential waste water alternatives.
(Source: 4, 6, 7, 11, 13, 15)
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
a. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project includes the development of residential and commercial structures, and long-term
operation of the proposed project would not involve the introduction nor the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials. Proposed construction of the proposed project would comply with
CalOSHA (California Occupational Safety and Health Administration) requirements, the Hazardous
Materials Management Act, and other state and local requirements. Compliance with local, State, and
federal regulations would minimize the risks associated with accidental conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment during construction of the proposed project. The EIR will
assess the potential for discovery of any undetected contamination or issues with the existing oil
operations that could cause a significant hazard to the public or environment.
b, d. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project includes the development of residential and commercial structures, and the long-
term operation of the project would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials. Compliance with local, state, and federal regulations would minimize the risks associated with
accidental conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment during
construction of the proposed project. However, as oil production is conducted on-site, and a total of 358
active, idle and abandoned oil and gas wells are located on the project site, construction of the proposed
project could result in an accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment. Therefore, the
EIR will address the potential impacts associated with current oil operations.
The Phase 1 Report that was completed for the project site included a search of regulatory databases to
determine if properties on-site or adjacent to the site are included on any of these lists of recognized
environmental concerns. Portions of the proposed project site have been listed on federal and state
environmental databases. Further analysis is necessary to characterize the existing conditions within the
project area with respect to past and current activities involving the handling, use, storage, transport, or
emission of hazardous materials. Based on the findings, it can be determined whether the proposed
project could involve a risk of release of hazardous materials into the environment. Therefore, further
evaluation in the EIR is required to determine the level of significance and to identify mitigation measures
that reduce impacts to below a level of significance, if possible. (Source: 20)
c. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project could involve the construction of a school within one-quarter mile of existing oil
drilling operations. As such, the proposed project has the potential to emit hazardous emissions or
handle hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of a proposed school. Therefore, further evaluation
of the proposed project’s impact on a proposed school will be included in the EIR.
18 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
e, f. No Impact.
The project is not located within 2 miles of any known public or private airstrip. Therefore, the project
would not result in a safety hazard for people residing in the project area. No impacts would occur, and
no further analysis on this issue is required in the EIR. (Source: 12)
g. Less-Than-Significant Impact.
With regard to emergency response plans, the project site does not currently and would not in the future
function in any emergency response or evacuation plan. However, subdivision maps and site-specific
development projects will be submitted by the project applicant to the appropriate fire authorities, for
example, the Orange County Fire Authority, to ensure compliance with guidelines and standards related
to the project’s location in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Therefore, although it is not
anticipated that the proposed project would physically interfere with an emergency response plan, the
project’s location in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone warrants further evaluation of this issue in the
EIR. (Source: 4, 11, 12, 13)
h. Potentially Significant Impact.
The project area is identified by both Los Angeles and Orange counties as a Very High Fire Hazard
Severity Zone. Such zones are defined as “…any geographic area designated per Government Code
Section 51178, which contains the type and condition of vegetation, topography, weather, and structure
density that potentially increased the possibility of wildland conflagration fires.” These areas have been
classified as very high fire hazard in response to recommendations by the Los Angeles County Fire
Department, Orange County Fire Authority, and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection,
who conducted an assessment of environmental conditions throughout the counties, in accordance with
statewide evaluation criteria. Consequently, the proposed project could result in an encroachment into
fire hazard areas, exposing people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury, or death involving
wildland fires. Therefore, the EIR will evaluate the hazards associated with wildland fires and identify
mitigation measures that reduce impacts to below a level of significance, if possible. (Source: 4, 11, 13)
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
a. Potentially Significant Impact.
Project development would change the character of the site from primarily undeveloped to the
development of half the site with up to 3,600 residential units, golf course and park uses, and 300,000
square feet of commercial uses. More than half of the site is proposed to be devoted to internal
greenbelts and open space. Roadways, buildings, paid services, and landscaping would be constructed
with implementation of the proposed project. A water quality management plan will be prepared pursuant
to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements, including preparation of a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which would address impacts to water quality. The
ability of the project to meet applicable waste discharge and water quality requirements will be addressed
in the EIR.
b. Potentially Significant Impact.
The project site is currently undeveloped, and implementation of the proposed project would result in the
covering of pervious surfaces to potentially interfere with groundwater recharge. A Pacific Soils and
Engineering (PSE) report of the site concluded that local borings indicate the presence of perched
groundwater that ranges from depths of 34 to 84 feet below ground surface. PSE also observed surface
flows during dry conditions that could be attributed to springs. In general these data indicate that, except
possibly in selected locations such as canyons or washes, groundwater levels are fairly deep. Therefore
19 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
the EIR will evaluate the potential reduction in groundwater recharge from the proposed project.
(Source: 14, 15)
c, d, e. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project would allow for the development of a maximum of 3,600 units covering a maximum
disturbance area of 1,950 acres, the majority of which will be for residential land use. The proposed
project will considerably alter the existing drainage patterns within the delineated Drainage Areas relevant
to the project site. The addition of impervious surfaces along with proposed storm drain and grading
improvements will increase the amount of surface runoff generated from the project site and alter its
conveyance to downstream drainage courses. Further analysis of the existing and post-development
hydrology is required in the EIR to determine whether this project could result in significant impacts to
erosion or siltation on- or off-site.
During project site grading and construction (before storm drains are installed and operational), short-
term runoff impacts could be addressed through the incorporation of Best Management Practices and
adherence to the SWPPP that would be prepared for the project. Potential runoff during construction due
to changes in drainage patterns will be analyzed in the EIR. The EIR will also provide an analysis of peak
storm runoff expected from the developed site, and the ability of the proposed storm drains to adequately
accommodate the flow during long-term project operation.
f. Potentially Significant Impact.
Project development would change the character of the 2,935-acre site from undeveloped land to the
development of half of the site with up to 3,600 residential units, golf course and park uses, and 300,000
square feet of commercial uses. More than half of the site is proposed to be devoted to internal
greenbelts and open space. This new development would include roadways, buildings, paved surfaces,
and landscaping. Development would potentially result in site characteristics that could cause runoff to
adversely impact water quality of the regional storm drain system. A water quality management plan will
be prepared pursuant to NPDES requirements, including preparation of a SWPPP, which would address
impacts to water quality. The ability of the project to meet applicable waste discharge and water quality
requirements and prevent water quality impacts will be addressed in the EIR.
g, h. Potentially Significant Impact.
Portions of the project site are located within a 100-year flood hazard area as designated on Federal
Emergency Management Agency flood maps. Further evaluation in the EIR is required to determine the
level of significance and to identify mitigation measures that reduce impacts to below a level of
significance, if possible. (Source: 7)
i. Potentially Significant Impact.
The Brea Dam is located just south of the Fullerton Municipal Golf Course and the Brea Municipal Golf
Course, approximately 15 miles from the project site. In addition, the Whittier Narrows Dam is
approximately 20 miles from the project site. Although not in the immediate vicinity of the proposed
project site, the EIR will analyze potential impacts to people or structures resulting from the potential
failure of the Brea Dam and Whittier Narrows Dam.
j. Less-Than-Significant Impact.
The project area is located several miles inland from the Pacific Ocean and is not subject to tsunami
hazard. As a result, no further assessment of this issue is warranted.
20 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING
a. Less-Than-Significant Impact.
The proposed project would not disrupt or physically divide an established community. The project
involves the development of a maximum of 3,600 residential units, golf course and park uses, and
300,000 square feet of commercial uses. More than half of the site is proposed to be devoted to internal
greenbelts and open space The proposed project would add residential units to a site surrounded by
residential communities to the north, west, and south; undeveloped vacant land to the northwest and
east; and oil production lands to the southeast. The proposed development would not cut off an existing
or proposed transportation route and would be compatible with existing uses. Therefore, no impacts
would occur, and no further analysis is required for the EIR.
b. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project is located on the border of Los Angeles and Orange counties, just west of
San Bernardino County, in southern California. The majority of the project site is located within an
unincorporated area of Los Angeles County (approximately 2,614 acres) and the remaining portion is
located within unincorporated Orange County (approximately 321 acres). The County of Los Angeles
Countywide General Plan designates the site as “R” Non-Urban, “1” Low Density Residential, “O” Open
Space, and “SEA” Significant Ecological Areas. The Orange County General Plan designates the portion
located in Orange County as “1B” Suburban Residential. The project requires General Plan and Zoning
amendments to redesignate the area as “SP” Specific Plan. Existing General Plan designations do not
allow for the development of the proposed master planned community. The EIR will analyze the change
to the General Plan and Zoning Code and any resulting effects upon the surrounding land uses.
(Source: 4, 11, 13)
c. No Impact.
The project site is not located within any adopted NCCP or HCP area. Therefore, no conflicts are
anticipated and no impacts are anticipated.
X. MINERAL RESOURCES
a, b. Potentially Significant Impact.
Currently the project site is being used for oil production. In general, the southern and far western
portions of the site are within the boundaries of the Brea/Olinda Oil Field and have had active oil
production operations since the late 1880s. Implementation of the proposed project will result in the
decommissioning of 22 active oil wells. Therefore, the proposed project would result in the loss of known
mineral resources both at the local and regional levels. Further evaluation in the EIR is required to
determine the level of significance and to identify mitigation measures that reduce impacts to below a
level of significance, if possible.
XI. NOISE
a. Potentially Significant Impact.
Over the long term, noise would be generated at the proposed project site due to increased traffic during
project operation and by activity at the site once it is built and occupied. The long-term noise created by
the increase of residential, retail, and office uses at the project site is mostly likely to occur as a result of
increased mobile sources on project area roadways. Temporary increases in ambient noise levels would
occur during construction at the project site. The EIR will include a noise analysis and will investigate
noise increases associated with the project.
21 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
b. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project will involve the construction and occupancy of a maximum of 3,600 residential
units, golf course and park uses, and 300,000 square feet of commercial uses. More than half of the site
is proposed to be devoted to internal greenbelts and open space. Long-term project operation would not
include uses that would substantially elevate groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels above
existing conditions. Potential temporary and intermittent vibration impacts on adjacent residential uses
could occur during certain construction activities. Vibration impacts during project construction will be
addressed in the EIR.
c. Potentially Significant Impact.
As stated above in the discussion for item XI.a., long-term project operation would contribute to increased
traffic noise levels and would cause additional noise from human activity and operation of mechanical
equipment at the project site. The noise generated by project traffic once the project is built could
substantially increase ambient noise levels in the project area. Noise increases due to increased human
activity and vehicular trips associated with the project will be analyzed in the EIR.
d. Potentially Significant Impact.
See discussion XI.a. above regarding temporary and intermittent construction noise impacts associated
with the project. The EIR will include a noise analysis to investigate construction noise generated by the
proposed project.
e, f. No Impact.
The project site is not located within 2 miles of a public airport, public use airport, or private airstrip.
Therefore, the project would not expose people to excessive noise from airports. No impact would occur,
and no further analysis of the issue is required in the EIR. (Source: 12)
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
a. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project would involve the construction and occupancy of a maximum of 3,600 residential
dwelling units, which would result in a direct increase in population growth. The proposed project’s effect
on population and housing projections for the City of Diamond Bar, and Los Angeles and Orange counties
will therefore be evaluated in the EIR.
b, c. No Impact
The proposed project site is currently undeveloped, and the project site does not have existing residential
uses and therefore would not result in the displacement of any existing housing. No impact would occur,
and no further analysis on this issue is required in the EIR.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a. Potentially Significant Impact.
Due to the volume of project development in the project area, which consists of a maximum of 3,600
residential uses, golf course and park uses, and 300,000 square feet of commercial uses, the proposed
development would result in an increased demand on fire protection services. In addition, as described in
item VII.h. above, the site is located within an area classified as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone.
An analysis of projected demand on fire protection services will be provided in the EIR, including an
22 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
evaluation of the City and County Fire Department’s ability to operate within acceptable response time
standards in serving the future developed project site.
b. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project includes the development of a maximum of 3,600 residential uses, golf course and
park uses, and 300,000 square feet of commercial uses. More than half of the site is proposed to be
devoted to internal greenbelts and open space. The addition of these uses to the currently undeveloped
property would increase demands on police services. An analysis of the City Police Department’s ability
to serve the future developed project site in accordance with acceptable service standards will be
included in the EIR.
c. Potentially Significant Impact.
The project site is located within three separate school districts. The edges of these school district
territories generally are delineated by the existing Los Angeles and Orange County boundary line. The
northern portion of the property is located within the boundaries of Rowland Unified School District, while
the southern portion of the site is situated in the Brea-Olinda Unified School District. A portion of the
project site on the east side of SR-57 is also located within Walnut Valley Unified School District. The
project includes the development of a maximum of 3,600 dwelling units, in addition to a possible school
site. Although a school may be included as part of the proposed project, the population increase caused
by development in the area would increase demand on existing schools. The potential increase in
students and the effect of the project on existing school systems will be addressed in the EIR.
(Source: 4, 11, 13)
d. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project includes the development of a maximum of 3,600 units on 2,935 acres. The
proposed project includes open and recreational space, such as public parks. However, the EIR will
investigate the ability of the proposed parks to meet the needs of the increase in population caused by
the proposed project.
e. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project includes the development of residential and commercial uses, along with open
space and recreational uses. The additional residents resulting from the proposed project would induce
an increase in demand for use of public facilities, including libraries and civic buildings/auditoriums. The
EIR will investigate the proposed project’s impacts on existing public facilities and services in the project
area.
XIV. RECREATION
a. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project includes the development of a maximum of 3,600 units on 2,935 acres. As the site
is currently undeveloped, implementation of the proposed project would increase the population in the
area and result in corresponding additional demand for use of area parks. The proposed project includes
recreational facilities, including natural open space, a golf course, and parks. These public parks and
recreational facilities would serve to reduce the project’s associated demand upon the existing public
parks. The EIR will include an analysis of impacts to existing and planned recreational facilities as they
relate to the ability of each affected jurisdiction to meet park service standards.
23 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
b. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project includes construction of the recreational facilities discussed in item XIV.a. above.
The construction of these facilities would contribute to the potential environmental impacts from the
overall project as identified in this Initial Study. The EIR will include an analysis of impacts associated with
construction of the proposed recreational facilities.
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
a. Potentially Significant Impact.
During construction of the proposed project, impacts on traffic from construction vehicles queuing at and
entering and exiting the site would occur. In addition, the long-term operation of the project would
generate additional vehicular trips that could potentially result in a substantial traffic increase in the area.
The potential impacts due to increased trip generation, changes to the volume-to-capacity ratio on roads,
and congestion at intersections will be analyzed in the EIR.
b. Potentially Significant Impact.
Refer to the discussion XV.a. above. Increased trip generation from the long-term operation of the project
could potentially exceed levels of service standards on designated Orange County Congestion
Management Plan (CMP) and Los Angeles County intersections in the project vicinity. The potential
impacts to CMP intersections will be analyzed in the EIR.
c. No Impact.
The project site is not located within 2 miles of a public or private airstrip and does not propose any
structures of substantial height to interfere with existing airspace or flight patterns. No impact would
occur, and no further analysis of this issue is required in the EIR. (Source: 12)
d. Potentially Significant Impact.
The project design of on-site roads and circulation system could include design features that may result in
substantial vehicular or pedestrian hazards, such as sharp curves. The design features of the proposed
project will be further analyzed in the EIR to investigate potential traffic hazards and design options to
minimize these potential impacts.
e. Less-Than-Significant Impact.
The proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access. Existing protocols ensure that
the project shall meet all applicable City and County Fire Department requirements prior to the start of
construction. Impacts would be less than significant.
f. Less-Than-Significant Impact.
The proposed project would provide parking in conformance with City and County requirements as
appropriate and is expected to provide adequate parking spaces to meet the demands of the project. The
EIR will, however, provide an analysis of the proposed parking demand and the ability of the proposed
project to adequately meet the demand of the project.
24 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
g. Less Than Significant Impact.
It is not anticipated that the proposed project would conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation. However, the EIR will explore these policies and evaluate the
proposed project and Specific Plan’s consistency with these policies.
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
a. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project would change the project site from primarily undeveloped land to a development
with 3,600 residential uses, golf course and park uses, and 300,000 square feet of commercial uses.
More than half of the site is proposed to be devoted to internal greenbelts and open space. New
wastewater discharges from the project would put additional demand on regional treatment facilities. The
ability of the project to meet applicable wastewater discharge and treatment requirements will be
addressed in the EIR. (Source: 12)
b, e Potentially Significant Impact.
Construction of the new water or wastewater treatment facilities and/or expansion of existing water or
wastewater treatment facilities would be necessary to serve the project’s needs. Due to the large number
of residential and commercial uses that will be introduced to the currently undeveloped project site, the
ultimate sizing and location of project reservoirs and connections to Metropolitan Water District (MWD)
feeder lines will be determined via preparation of the Master Water Plan for the proposed project and
periodic updates to the Urban Water Management Plan and applicable water assessment reports. The
EIR will include an analysis of the existing facilities and their ability to serve the proposed project.
(Source: 12)
c. Potentially Significant Impact.
The increase in impervious surfaces from development of the proposed project would result in additional
runoff that would be captured and carried to the existing off-site storm drain system. New on-site storm
drain facilities would be constructed as part of the proposed project. The City will require that the on-site
storm drain facilities function to capture and temporarily retain excess runoff to avoid overburden of the
off-site system during peak flow events. The project’s demand upon the existing off-site storm drain
system will be investigated in the EIR, including the need for expansion or modifications of existing
off-site storm drain facilities. The EIR will include an analysis of the existing facilities and their adequacy
to serve the proposed project.
d. Potentially Significant Impact.
Water is currently supplied to the project site for the existing oil and cattle operations by California
Domestic Water Company, and the areas surrounding the project site are currently serviced by the
Rowland Water District and the Walnut Valley Water District. The MWD maintains its Orange County
Feeder, a 36-inch pipeline, within the proposed project area. The EIR will analyze whether sufficient water
supplies are available to serve the project. (Source: 4, 6, 7, 11, 13)
f, g. Potentially Significant Impact.
Future development on the proposed project site would generate a substantial volume of solid waste on a
recurring basis. The County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County operates the Puente Hills Landfill,
the closest landfill that could be used by the proposed project for the area within unincorporated
Los Angeles County. This volume needs to be estimated and an analysis made of the impact of this solid
waste stream on the City of Diamond Bar’s ability to comply with its obligations to reduce disposal at
25 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
landfills, pursuant to AB 939. Further evaluation in the EIR is required to determine the level of
significance and to identify mitigation measures that reduce impacts to below a level of significance, if
possible. (Source: 11)
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a. Potentially Significant Impact.
The proposed project has the potential to degrade the quality of the environment in terms of biological
resources (as discussed in Section IV. above) and may impact important archaeological and
paleontological resources (as discussed in Section V. above), which requires further analysis within an
EIR.
b. Potentially Significant Impact.
Potential project impacts related to visual quality, agricultural resources, air quality, noise, transportation
and traffic, biological resources, public services, and utilities/services systems could contribute to
cumulative impacts that would result from related development in the vicinity of the proposed project. The
EIR will discuss the potential for cumulative impacts to all resource areas analyzed in the EIR.
c. Potentially Significant Impact.
Potential impacts to human beings, either directly or indirectly, could occur through the potential
environmental impacts upon air quality, noise, and transportation/traffic identified in the Initial Study.
These impacts and the potential for substantial adverse effects upon human beings will be analyzed in
the EIR.
26 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
Source Documentation
1. California Geological Survey, Seismic Hazards Zonation Program, http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/
download/pdf/ozn_sdim.pdf, accessed March 30, 2007.
2. California, State of. Department of Conservation, Office of Land Conservation, California Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program, http://www.consrv.ca.gov/DLRP/fmmp/index.htm, accessed
March 30, 2007.
3. Diamond Bar, City of. Municipal Code.
4. Diamond Bar, City of. General Plan, 1995.
5. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1997. Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Orange County,
California. http:// http://msc.fema.gov, accessed March 29, 2007.
6. Hunsaker and Associates: Irvine, Inc., AERA Master Planned Community Summary of Sewer
Alternatives, 2006.
7. Hunsaker and Associates: Irvine, Inc., AMPC Domestic Water Facilities, 2006.
8. John Minch and Associates, Inc., A Cultural Resources Assessment of the 2,935-Acre Aera Energy
Master Planned Community Project, Unincorporated Orange and Los Angeles Counties,
September 2005.
9. John Minch and Associates, Inc., Paleontological Resources Assessment of the 2,935-Acre Aera
Master Planned Community Site, Puente Hills, Orange and Los Angeles Counties, California,
September 2004.
10. John Minch and Associates, Inc., Pre-construction Paleontological Survey Report for the
2,935-Acre Aera Master Planned Community Site, Puente Hills, Orange and Los Angeles Counties,
September 2004.
11. Los Angeles, County of. General Plan, 1988.
12. Los Angeles, County of. Notice of Preparation/Initial Study, Aera Master Planned Community,
April 21, 2003.
13. Orange, County of. General Plan, 2003. County of Orange General Plan,
http://www.ocplanning.net/docs/GeneralPlan2004, updated February 2004, accessed March 30,
2007.
14. Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc., Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Investigations, October 4,
2005.
15. Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc., Geological and Geotechnical Engineering Assessment in Support of
an Environmental Impact Report, November 2005.
16. PCR Services Corporation, Biological Constraints Analysis, April 2002.
17. PCR Services Corporation, Biological Resources Assessment of the Proposed Puente Hills
Significant Ecological Area, November 2000.
27 4/30/2007
Checklist Discussion
18. PCR Services Corporation, Los Angeles County Significant Ecological Area Update Study 2000:
Background Report, November 2000.
19. South Coast Air Quality Management District website, http://www.aqmd.gov/, accessed April 2,
2007.
20. Tetra Tech, Inc, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, October 2005.
07080067 City of Diamond Bar IS
28 4/30/2007