Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-1

3.2 Land Use and Planning

3.2.1 Introduction

This section identifies the land use distribution within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area and 

provides an evaluation of land use-related effects associated with the No Build Alternative and Build 

Alternative Options. Information contained in this section is summarized from the Land Use and 

Planning Technical Memorandum (Appendix B of this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR).

3.2.2 Regulatory Framework

In accordance with NEPA (42 USC Section 4321 et seq.), CEQ regulations implementing NEPA 

(40 CFR Parts 1501-1508), FRA’s Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts (64 FR

28545, May 26, 1999), and CEQA, FRA identified land use resources within the Tier 1/Program 

EIS/EIR Study Area and evaluated the potential impacts on those resources from implementation of 

the Build Alternative Options. 

Federal

Federal Land Policy and Management Act

The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (43 CFR Part 35) provides for the proper

management and protection of property and natural and cultural resources within areas under the 

jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), including national monuments, federal 

recreation areas, and conservation areas. It establishes the regulations governing coordination and 

grants for ROWs that cross public lands managed by BLM.

Farmland Protection Policy Act

The Farmland Protection Policy Act (7 USC Sections 4201–4209 and 7 CFR Part 658) was 

established to minimize the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses as part of a federal 

undertaking. The Farmland Protection Policy Act was intended to assure that federal programs are 

administered in a way that is compatible with state, local, and private programs to protect farmland. 

Farmland subject to the Farmland Protection Policy Act includes prime or unique farmlands or 

farmland that is determined by a state or local agency to be farmland of statewide or local 

importance. Under 7 CFR Part 658.1, prime farmland is defined as “land that has the best 

combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing food, feed, forage, fiber, and 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-2

oilseed crops, and is also available for these uses.” Unique farmland is “land other than prime 

farmland that is used for the production of specific high value food and fiber crops.”

State

California Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program

The California Department of Conservation inventories and categorizes farmlands throughout the 

state as part of its Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. The Farmland Mapping and 

Monitoring Program classifications include:

• Prime Farmland (P): Farmland with the best combination of physical and chemical features 

able to sustain long-term agricultural production. This land has the soil quality, growing 

season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields. Land must have been 

used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the 4 years prior to the mapping 

date.

• Farmland of Statewide Importance (S): Farmland similar to prime farmland but with minor 

shortcomings, such as greater slopes or less ability to store soil moisture. Land must have 

been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the 4 years prior to the 

mapping date.

• Unique Farmland (U): Farmland of lesser quality soils used for the production of the state's 

leading agricultural crops. This land is usually irrigated but may include non-irrigated 

orchards or vineyards as found in some climatic zones in California. Land must have been 

cropped at some time during the 4 years prior to the mapping date.

• Farmland of Local Importance (L): Land of importance to the local agricultural economy as 

determined by each county's board of supervisors and a local advisory committee.

• Grazing Land (G): Land on which the existing vegetation is suited to the grazing of livestock.

• Urban and Built-up Land (D): Land occupied by structures with a building density of at least 

1 unit to 1.5 acre or approximately 6 structures to a 10-acre parcel. This land is used for 

residential, industrial, commercial, construction, institutional, public administration, railroad 

and other transportation yards, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills, sewage 

treatment, water control structures, and other developed purposes.

• Other Land (X): Land not included in any other mapping category.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-3

California Land Conservation Act (Williamson Act)

In 1965, the state enacted the California Land Conservation Act, more commonly known as the 

Williamson Act (Government Code Section 51230 et seq.). The Williamson Act provides tax 

incentives for landowners who enter into contracts with the local government for long-term use 

restrictions on agricultural and open space land for qualifying properties. Property owners commit 

their land to farming for a minimum of 10 years and in return receive tax benefits based on their 

agricultural production rather than on the property’s market value. Contracts are automatically 

renewed unless a notice of non-renewal is issued.

Regional

Southern California Association of Governments 2016-2040 Regional Transportation 

Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy

The SCAG 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)/Sustainable Communities Strategy

(SCS), adopted in April 2016, presents the long-range transportation and land use plan and 

transportation vision for Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Imperial, Riverside, and Ventura 

Counties with the overarching goal of integrating strategies for land use and transportation (SCAG 

2016). The following goals and policies from SCAG’s RTP/SCS are applicable to the Program:

• Maximize mobility and accessibility for all people and goods in the region

• Ensure travel safety and reliability for all people and goods in the region

• Preserve and ensure a sustainable regional transportation system

• Maximize the productivity of our transportation system

• Encourage land use and growth patterns that facilitate transit and active transportation

The RTP/SCS identifies priorities for transportation planning within the Southern California region, 

sets goals and policies, and identifies performance measures for transportation improvements to 

ensure that future projects are consistent with other planning goals for the area. It also presents an 

overall land use concept for the region, with increasing focus on densification of urban areas, as 

applicable in the Western Section of the Program development around transit stations and use of 

transit and active transportation.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-4

County General Plans

Applicable elements of the general plans for the four counties the Build Alternative Options cross

(Los Angeles County, Orange County, Riverside County, and San Bernardino County) are 

summarized in the Land Use and Planning Technical Memorandum (Appendix B of this Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR).

Local and Tribal Governments

Regulations from cities, local agencies, and tribal governments would be identified in the Tier 

2/Project-level analysis once site-specific rail infrastructure improvements and station facilities are 

known.

3.2.3 Methods for Evaluating Environmental Effects

The methodology for this evaluation consists of using existing data to identify existing land uses,

including agricultural and forest resources within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area for each 

Build Alternative Option and evaluating the potential level of effect that each Build Alternative Option 

could have if constructed. 

For purposes of this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR, agricultural lands are defined as lands that have been 

officially designated by a federal, state, or local agency for the purpose of farming or other 

agricultural uses. 

For this evaluation, analysis of land use effects focuses on areas where existing land uses could be 

converted to transportation-related land uses. The general plans for Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, 

and San Bernardino counties were reviewed to determine the Program’s general consistency with 

land use and circulation goals and policies. 

In a Tier 2/Project-level analysis, impacts would be analyzed quantitatively using more detailed 

analytical methods, such as field surveys, mapping of land use, and use of GIS overlays of land use 

resources with the defined Project footprint to quantify impacts. In addition, a subsequent Tier 

2/Project-level analysis would include a more detailed impact analysis of potential agricultural land 

use areas, including site specific land evaluation and site assessment documentation. As part of the 

Tier 2/Project-level analysis, additional coordination with the applicable jurisdiction would be required 

to determine land resource impacts.

Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area

This service-level evaluation is limited to a desktop evaluation of the data sources described in 

Section 3.2.3. The Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area was combined with GIS overlays to identify 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-5

potential land use resources (such as agricultural or forest lands) that could be affected by the 

Program. These potential land use resources were identified on a broad scale using available 

mapping information. A detailed description of the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area is provided in 

Section 3.1, Introduction to Environmental Analysis, of this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR. 

Data Sources

Land use data was compiled from publicly available electronic GIS data, which relies on local 

jurisdictions updating and inputting land use data into a publicly available GIS database. While some 

of the jurisdictions within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area have more recent existing or 

planned land use information than the SCAG data, others did not, or did not provide it publicly. 

SCAG consolidates and standardizes local land use data during preparation of its RTPs, making its 

land use data the most consistent for the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area. 

The existing land uses were primarily based on the 2008 SCAG GIS land use dataset, and the 

proposed land uses were primarily based on the 2012 SCAG GIS land use dataset. In addition to 

SCAG 2008 and 2012 land use information, the dataset was supplemented with InfoUSA 

2008 employment data, 2005 to 2008 new construction data, and inputs from local jurisdictions in 

the SCAG region. This dataset was used because it includes the most consistent and 

comprehensive information available for all jurisdictions that was available during preparation of this 

analysis. 

In addition to SCAG data, online GIS data available from the California Department of Conservation, 

the U.S. Department of the Interior, and a variety of other sources were used to identify agricultural 

and forest resources with the potential to occur within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area. 

Specifically, the following data sources were reviewed: 

• Farmlands: The California Important Farmland Finder dataset (California Department of 

Conservation 2020) was consulted. 

• Agricultural Preserve Lands: To identify designated agricultural preserve lands or lands 

under the Williamson Act Program, data from the California Department of Conservation was 

consulted. 

• Forest Lands: The U.S. Forest Service Land Ownership database was consulted.

Related Resources

This service-level evaluation incorporates data and analysis from related resources to contribute to 

the assessment of effects on land use and planning. These related resources are identified in

Table 3.2-1. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-6

Table 3.2-1. Related Resource Inputs for Land Use Resources

Resource Input for Land Use Assessment

Parklands and Community 

Services

(Section 3.14)

Supplemental information about parklands or recreational facilities including type, 

protection, ownership, and accessibility was used to inform the land use 

assessment.

3.2.4 Affected Environment

Existing and Future Land Uses

The Program Corridor crosses a large geographic area within Southern California, spanning a 

distance of approximately 144 miles from its western terminus in Los Angeles to its eastern terminus 

in Coachella. The Program Corridor occurs within an existing railroad corridor that traverses areas 

that have predominately been heavily modified for urban purposes, especially in the Western 

Section, although some areas occur in, or adjacent to, lands that are in a natural condition. Much of 

the Program Corridor from Los Angeles to Redlands is urbanized. The Eastern Section of the 

Program Corridor is less urbanized with vacant land comprising of the largest land use category.

Build Alternative Option 1 (Coachella Terminus)

Table 3.2-2 summarizes the existing and planned land uses within the Western Section of the 

Program Corridor under Build Alternative Option 1. As indicated in Table 3.2-2, the dominant existing 

land uses in the Western Section of the Program Corridor are transportation, communication, and 

utilities (32.5 percent); industrial (29.4 percent); and single-family residential (12.2 percent), which 

equals approximately 74 percent of total existing land uses. Based on anticipated development 

patterns for the area, distribution of future land uses would remain similar to existing conditions with

the same three land use categories (transportation, communication, and utilities; industrial; and 

single-family residential) making up the dominant planned land uses within the Western Section of 

the Program Corridor.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-7

Table 3.2-2. Western Section Existing and Planned Land Uses (Build Alternative 

Options 1, 2, and 3)

Land Use 

Existing 

(acres)

Percent of 

Existing Total 

(%)

Planned 

(acres)

Percent of 

Planned Total

(%)

Agriculture 61.6 0.6 0.0 0.0

Commercial services 1,169.1 11.6 661.4 6.5

Industrial 2,975.4 29.4 4,093.1 40.5

Mixed commercial and industrial 57.3 0.6 71.7 0.7

Mixed urban 10.1 0.1 0.0 0.0

Open space and recreation 208.2 2.1 733.7 7.3

Public facilities 0.0 0.0 366.3 3.6

Residential – multifamily 304.6 3.0 398.7 3.9

Residential – other 68.1 0.7 258.3 2.3

Residential – single family 1,230.0 12.2 1,228.0 12.1

Transportation, communications, 

utilities

3,283.8 32.5 2,295.8 22.7

Under construction 53.5 0.5 1.9 0.1

Vacant 687.6 6.8 0.0 0.0

Total 10,109.3 — 10,108.9 —

Table 3.2-3 summarizes the existing and planned land uses within the Eastern Section of the 

Program Corridor under Build Alternative Option 1. As indicated in Table 3.2-3, the dominant existing 

land uses for the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor are vacant land (40.2 percent); 

transportation, communication, and utilities (27.6 percent); and commercial (8.2 percent), which 

equals approximately 76 percent of total existing land uses. Based on anticipated development 

patterns for the area, future land uses in the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor would shift 

to transportation, communication, and utilities (21.6 percent); open space and recreation 

(19.7 percent); and single-family residential (17.7 percent) uses.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-8

Table 3.2-3. Eastern Section Existing and Planned Land Uses (Build Alternative Option 1)

Land Use 

Existing 

(acres)

Percent of 

Existing Total 

(%)

Planned 

(acres)

Percent of 

Planned Total

(%)

Agriculture 1,460.3 6.7 119.2 0.6

Commercial services 1,773.3 8.2 2,374.2 11.0

Industrial 907.5 4.2 2,585.9 11.9

Mixed commercial and industrial 41.2 0.2 1,246.1 5.8

Mixed urban 0.0 0.0 312.1 0.0

Open space and recreation 748.3 3.5 4,268.2 19.7

Public facilities 0.0 0 403.4 1.9

Residential – multifamily 192.9 0.9 509.7 2.4

Residential – other 399.5 1.8 1,310.3 6.1

Residential – single family 1,193.9 5.5 3,836.2 17.7

Transportation, communications, 

utilities

5,967.7 27.6 4,685.2 21.6

Under construction 268.5 1.2 0.0 0.0

Vacant 8,697.5 40.2 0.2 0.0

Total 21,650.6 — 21,650.7 —

Build Alternative Option 2 (Indio Terminus)

Distribution of existing and planned land uses within the Western Section of the Program Corridor 

under Build Alternative Option 2 are the same as Build Alternative Option 1.

Table 3.2-4 summarizes the existing and planned land uses within the Eastern Section of the 

Program Corridor under Build Alternative Option 2. There are fewer acres of land within Build 

Alternative Option 2 because of the shorter route alignment and reduced station options. 

As indicated in Table 3.2-4, the dominant existing land uses for the Eastern Section of the Program 

Corridor are vacant land (41.2 percent); transportation, communication, and utilities (27.6 percent); 

and commercial (8.0 percent), which equals approximately 76 percent of total existing land uses. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-9

Based on anticipated development patterns for the area, the dominant future land uses for the 

Eastern Section of the Program Corridor would shift to transportation, communication, and utilities 

(22.0 percent); open space and recreation (20.6 percent); and single-family residential (17.3 percent) 

uses.

Table 3.2-4. Eastern Section Existing and Planned Land Uses (Build Alternative 

Options 2 and 3)

Land Use 

Existing

(acres)

Percent of 

Existing Total 

(%)

Planned 

(acres)

Percent of 

Planned Total

(%)

Agriculture 1,239.9 6.0 119.2 0.6

Commercial services 1,648.0 8.0 2,186.9 10.6

Industrial 781.7 3.8 2,208.1 10.7

Mixed commercial and 

industrial

41.2 0.2 1,246.1 6.1

Mixed urban 0.0 0.0 312.1 1.5

Open space and recreation 740.9 3.6 4,243.7 20.6

Public facilities 0.0 0.0 376.8 1.8

Residential – multifamily 192.9 0.9 498.3 2.4

Residential – other 397.3 1.9 1,305.2 6.3

Residential – single family 1,100.3 5.3 3,570.1 17.3

Transportation, 

communications, utilities

5,683.4 27.6 4,518.6 22.0

Under construction 268.5 1.3 0.0 0.0

Vacant 8,480.7 41.2 0.2 0.0

Total 20,574.8 — 20,585.3 —
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-10

Build Alternative Option 3 (Indio Terminus with Limited Third Track)

Distribution of existing and planned land uses within the Western Section of the Program Corridor 

under Build Alternative Option 3 are the same as Build Alternative Option 1. Existing and planned 

land uses within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor under Build Alternative Option 3 are 

the same as Build Alternative Option 2. 

Agricultural Resources 

The Program Corridor occurs within an existing railroad corridor that traverses areas that have 

predominately been heavily modified for urban purposes, especially in the Western Section, 

although some areas occur in, or adjacent to, lands that are in a natural condition and designated for 

agricultural uses. The Eastern Section of the Program Corridor is less urbanized with some

agricultural uses present. Figure 3.2-1 shows the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program

designated land uses and agricultural preserve areas located within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR 

Study Area. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-11

Figure 3.2-1. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program Classifications within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR

(Page 1 of 6)
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-12

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-13

Figure 3.2-1. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program Classifications within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area

(Page 2 of 6)
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-14

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-15

Figure 3.2-1. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program Classifications within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area

(Page 3 of 6)
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-16

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-17

Figure 3.2-1. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program Classifications within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area

(Page 4 of 6)
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-18

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-19

Figure 3.2-1. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program Classifications within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area

(Page 5 of 6)
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-20

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-21

Figure 3.2-1. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program Classifications within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area

(Page 6 of 6)
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-22

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-23

Build Alternative Option 1 (Coachella Terminus)

Within the Western Section of Build Alternative Option 1, there are limited areas that are mapped for 

agricultural use. Of the land mapped for agricultural use, the largest is mapped as farmland of local 

importance (61.9 acres). The Western Section also includes other land mapped as prime farmland, 

farmland of statewide importance, and grazing land. The Western Section does not contain land that 

is considered part of an agricultural preserve or under a Williamson Act contract. Within the Eastern 

Section of Build Alternative Option 1, the largest type of agriculturally mapped land is farmland of 

local importance (2,623.9 acres). The Eastern Section also includes other land mapped as prime 

farmland, unique farmland, farmland of statewide importance, and grazing land. Unlike the Western 

Section, the Eastern Section passes through areas identified as part of an agricultural preserve or 

part of a Williamson Act contract. These areas are located in the non-station segment, between the 

Loma Linda Station Area and the Pass Area Station Area, and within a portion of the Pass Area 

Station Area. Table 3.2-5 provides a summary of agricultural resources within Build Alternative 

Option 1.

Table 3.2-5. Summary of Agricultural Resources (Build Alternative Option 1)

Agricultural Resourcea

Area of 

Agricultural 

Resource within 

Western Section

(acres)

Area of 

Agricultural 

Resource within 

Eastern Section

(acres)

Total Area of 

Agricultural 

Resource 

(acres)

Prime farmland 9.30 551.10 560.40

Unique farmland 0.00 96.70 96.70

Farmland of statewide importance 1.30 21.30 22.60

Farmland of local importance 61.90 2,562.00 2,623.90

Grazing land 35.60 1,887.60 1,923.20

Agricultural preserveb 0.00 760.82 760.82

Source: California Department of Conservation 2020

a Farmland designations are identified as part of the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and 

Monitoring Program.

b Agricultural Preserves are considered Williamson Act area for purposes of CEQA and are a separate designation 

from the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. 

CEQA=California Environmental Quality Act
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-24

Build Alternative Option 2 (Indio Terminus)

The types of agricultural resources that could be impacted by Build Alternative Option 2 are the 

same as for Build Alternative Option 1; however, there are fewer acres of agricultural resources 

within Build Alternative Option 2 because of the shorter route alignment and reduced station options.

Table 3.2-6 provides a summary of agricultural resources within Build Alternative Option 2. 

Table 3.2-6. Summary of Agricultural Resources (Build Alternative Options 2 and 3)

Agricultural Resourcea

Area of 

Agricultural 

Resource within 

Western Section 

(acres)

Area of 

Agricultural 

Resource within 

Eastern Section 

(acres)

Total Area of 

Agricultural 

Resource 

(acres)

Prime farmland 9.30 353.20 362.50

Unique farmland 0.00 96.70 96.70

Farmland of statewide importance 1.30 21.30 22.60

Farmland of local importance 61.90 2,488.00 2,549.90

Grazing land 35.60 1,887.60 1,923.20

Agricultural preserveb 0.00 760.82 760.82

Source: California Department of Conservation 2020

a Farmland designations are identified as part of the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and 

Monitoring Program.

b Agricultural Preserves are considered Williamson Act area for purposes of CEQA and are a separate designation 

from the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. 

CEQA=California Environmental Quality Act

Build Alternative Option 3 (Indio Terminus with Limited Third Track)

Agricultural resources within Build Alternative Option 3 are the same as Build Alternative Option 2. 

Forestry Resources

Based on a review of the U.S. Forest Service Land Ownership database and Forest Service 

Geodata Clearinghouse (U.S. Department of Agriculture 2020), there are no U.S. Forest Service 

lands within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-25

3.2.5 Environmental Consequences

Overview

Effects as a result of implementing the Build Alternative Options can be broadly classified into 

construction and operational effects. Long-term or permanent effects and short-term or temporary 

effects on land use and agricultural resources would be anticipated as a result of constructing any of 

the Build Alternative Options. Most effects on land use and agricultural resources would occur during 

construction, when land acquisitions could impact sensitive land uses or agricultural resources. 

Impacts could also result from operation of any of the Build Alternative Options. New station areas 

could result in land use changes, such as transit-oriented development, which would introduce the 

potential for adjacent land to be developed. Changes in land use, such as induced growth from an 

expanded transportation system, are assessed in Section 3.17, Cumulative Effects, of this Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR. To accommodate a passenger rail system, areas within the Program Corridor 

may need to be rezoned through the local development process. This would depend on the specific 

locations of stations, current zoning, and the locations and size of rail infrastructure facilities.

Sensitive land uses and agricultural resources potentially affected by a future passenger rail system 

would be further identified as part of the Tier 2/Project-level environmental review process. Specific 

types and degrees of impacts on individual resources (such as ROW acquisition and impacts on a 

specific resource) would not be known until further design of rail facilities takes place. 

No Build Alternative

The No Build Alternative, as described in Chapter 2, Program Alternatives, of this Tier 1/Program 

EIS/EIR, is used as the baseline for comparison. The No Build Alternative would not implement the 

Program associated with this service-level evaluation. Counties and cities in the Program Corridor 

would continue to grow, which would increase regional transportation demand. Therefore, the No 

Build Alternative assumes completion of those reasonably foreseeable transportation, development, 

and infrastructure projects that are already in progress; are programmed; or are included in the 

fiscally constrained RTP. 

Under the No Build Alternative, passenger rail service between Coachella and Los Angeles would 

not be established and land would not be allocated for rail infrastructure or station facilities. This may 

prevent potential displacements of existing and planned land uses but would increase the likelihood 

for displacing land uses adjacent to existing highways such as I-10, SR 60, and SR 111, which 

would likely need to be widened to accommodate the projected demands for capacity as population 

in the region increases. Land uses adjacent to major highway corridors would likely be affected by 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-26

increased traffic congestion, which may include time delays and increased exposure to noise and 

vehicle emissions.

Build Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3

Land Use Consistency Effects 

CONSTRUCTION

Western Section. No construction activities would be required to implement the Build Alternative 

Options within the Western Section because the existing railroad ROW and station areas from LAUS

to Colton would be utilized. The Build Alternative Options would not require construction of new 

stations or construction at existing stations, new track or extensions to existing track, or the addition 

of sidings, wayside signals, drainage, or at-grade separations within the Western Section of the 

Program Corridor. When compared with the No Build Alternative, effects would be negligible 

because no additional construction activities would occur within the Western Section under Build 

Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3.

Eastern Section. The Eastern Section of the Build Alternative Options primarily fall within the 

jurisdictions of San Bernardino and Riverside counties and the cities/towns of Loma Linda, 

Redlands, Calimesa Beaumont, Banning, Palm Springs, Palm Desert, Desert Hot Springs, Cathedral 

City, La Quinta, Indio, and Coachella. Land use elements vary greatly among different jurisdictions’ 

general plans. If a passenger rail system is constructed within the existing rail ROW, no ROW 

acquisitions would be required. However, the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area allows for rail 

infrastructure and station facilities to be located beyond the limits of the existing rail ROW, which 

would require acquisition of land not designated for transportation. Which land uses would be 

affected by the future construction of a passenger rail system and to what extent cannot be 

determined at this time. 

Since station locations have not yet been selected, land use consistency analyses would be required 

at the Tier 2/Project-level analysis to determine if the planned station facilities are consistent with the 

local general plan and/or municipal code (i.e., zoning). When compared with the No Build 

Alternative, effects would be moderate under the Build Alternative Options. When compared with 

Build Alternative Option 1, Build Alternative Option 2 would have slightly reduced effects due to a 

shorter route alignment and reduced station options. However, the magnitude of effects would be 

similar for Build Alternative Option 2 and considered moderate when compared with the No Build 

Alternative. When compared with Build Alternative Options 1 or 2, Build Alternative Option 3 may 

have slightly reduced effects due to a smaller footprint associated with a shorter route alignment, 

reduced station options, and reduced third rail track infrastructure. However, the magnitude of 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-27

effects would be similar for Build Alternative Option 3 and considered moderate when compared with 

the No Build Alternative. 

OPERATION

Western Section. Operation of the Build Alternative Options would increase activity along existing 

rail tracks by an additional two daily round-trip intercity passenger trains through largely built-out 

urban areas. The Western Section would not require any land acquisition or redesignation/rezoning 

of any parcels, and as such, would be consistent with existing land use designations of the general 

plans. In addition, by increasing service options through the use of existing infrastructure, the 

Program would be consistent with policies that focus on maximizing transit options and encourage 

the use of existing infrastructure. 

While the Build Alternative Options would result in an increase in train operations (up to four trains 

per day) within the Western Section, the existing infrastructure already includes sound barriers and 

other measures to reduce effects on adjacent sensitive uses, such as residential uses. Therefore, 

implementation of the Build Alternative Options in the Western Section of the Program Corridor 

would not conflict with policies related to context-sensitive design and would be consistent with 

existing plans and policies. When compared with the No Build Alternative, effects would be 

negligible under Build Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3.

Eastern Section. Land use elements vary greatly among different jurisdictions’ general plans. 

Typically, land use goals relate to economic growth that promotes alternative transportation 

methods, infill development, maintaining buffers between urban and rural land uses, and sensitivity 

to the natural environment. In general, transportation elements include goals relating to improving 

circulation, enhancing public transit, supporting commuter rail service, and creating alternatives to 

automobile transportation. Many of the SCAG RTP/SCS and Riverside County and San Bernardino 

County General Plan policies applicable to the Build Alternative Options promote increasing transit 

options and passenger rail in the region, and Coachella Valley, specifically. The Eastern Section of 

the Program Corridor would connect Colton in the west to Coachella Valley in the east, consistent 

with policies of SCAG, Riverside County, and San Bernardino County. This connection would 

specifically be consistent with Policy C 13.1 of the Riverside County General Plan, which seeks to 

“support continued development and implementation of the RCTC Rail Program including new rail 

lines and stations, the proposed California High Speed Rail System with at least two stations in 

Riverside County, the Coachella Valley San Gorgonio Pass Intercity Rail Service, and the proposed 

Intercity Rail Corridor between Calexico and Los Angeles.” 

Based on a Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level, the Build Alternative Options are generally 

consistent with the transportation goals outlined in the general plans, comprehensive plans, and 

transportation plans, as well as policies from the SCAG RTP/SCS. General plan policies include 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-28

guidance for siting transit stops within community centers and major activity areas. These policies 

are intended to coordinate the location and scheduling of public transit routes, services, and facilities 

for better coordination with bus and rail transit systems. Specific sites for the new stations have not 

been identified for this Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation. During Tier 2/Project-level analysis, 

detailed and specific evaluation of land use compatibility with plans and programs would be 

completed once design details are known.

Community Division or Disruption Effects

CONSTRUCTION

Western Section. No construction activities would be required to implement any of the Build 

Alternative Options within the Western Section of the Program Corridor because the existing railroad 

ROW and stations from LAUS to Colton would be used. The Build Alternative Options would not 

require construction of new stations, new track or extensions to existing track, or the addition of 

sidings, wayside signals, drainage, or at-grade separations within the Western Section of the 

Program Corridor. When compared with the No Build Alternative, disruption (including division) to 

existing communities would be negligible because no additional construction activities would occur 

within the Western Section under Build Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3.

Eastern Section. Within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor, Build Alternative Option

1 would include the construction of infrastructure improvements, such as sidings, additional main line 

track, wayside signals, drainage, grade-separation structures, and stations, to accommodate the 

proposed service. The majority of construction activities would occur within or directly adjacent to the 

existing railroad ROW, and, therefore, would not be anticipated to result in the physical division of 

existing land uses. However, the construction of up to five new potential stations would require 

acquisition of parcels within local communities adjacent to the railroad ROW. 

Temporary effects on land use would occur during construction within the Eastern Section of the 

Program Corridor under Build Alternative Option 1. Noise, pollutant emissions, and traffic generated 

by construction activities could temporarily disrupt residential or other sensitive land uses in the 

Eastern Section of the Program Corridor. When compared with the No Build Alternative, the 

temporary changes associated with Build Alternative Option 1 would have moderate effects on 

certain sensitive land uses adjacent to where construction could occur. When compared with Build 

Alternative Option 1, Build Alternative Option 2 would have slightly reduced construction effects due 

to a shorter route alignment and reduced station options (i.e., less construction activity and, as such, 

fewer sensitive land uses). However, the magnitude of effects would be similar for Build Alternative 

Option 2 and considered moderate when compared with the No Build Alternative. When compared 

with Build Alternative Options 1 or 2, Build Alternative Option 3 may have slightly reduced effects 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-29

due to a smaller footprint associated with a shorter route alignment, reduced station options, and 

reduced third rail track infrastructure. However, the magnitude of effects would be similar for Build 

Alternative Option 3 and considered moderate when compared with the No Build Alternative.

Site-specific land use compatibility effects, along with measures to minimize potential disruption to, 

and land use compatibility effects on adjacent land uses would be considered during the 

Tier 2/Project-level analysis. 

OPERATION

Western Section. Operation of Build Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3 within the Western Section 

would not result in any physical divisions of established communities as the addition of two daily 

round-trip passenger trains would travel within an existing railroad ROW. When compared with the 

No Build Alternative, effects on land uses would be negligible because no additional infrastructure 

improvements are planned within the Western Section under Build Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3.

Eastern Section. Within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor, Build Alternative Option

1 would include the operation of a passenger rail system including station facilities. The majority of 

operational activities would occur within or directly adjacent to the existing railroad ROW, and, 

therefore, would not be anticipated to result in the physical division of existing land uses. Depending 

on where the station facilities are sited, effects on sensitive land use could occur in the form of 

increased noise and traffic. However, operation of the passenger rail system would also provide an 

alternative transportation option and additional opportunities for transit orientated development within 

the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor. When compared with the No Build Alternative, the land 

use changes associated with Build Alternative Option 1 would have moderate effects on certain 

sensitive land uses adjacent to where infrastructure or station facilities would operate. When 

compared with Build Alternative Option 1, Build Alternative Options 2 and 3 would have slightly 

reduced construction effects due to a shorter route alignment and reduced station options. However, 

the magnitude of effects would be similar and considered moderate when compared with the No 

Build Alternative.

Site-specific land use compatibility effects, along with measures to minimize potential disruption to, 

and land use compatibility effects on adjacent land uses would be considered during the 

Tier 2/Project-level analysis. 

Agricultural Resource Effects

CONSTRUCTION

Western Section. No construction activities would be required to implement any of the Build 

Alternative Options within the Western Section of the Program Corridor because the existing railroad 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-30

ROW and stations from LAUS to Colton would be used. The Build Alternative Options would not 

require construction of new stations, new track, or extensions to existing track, or the addition of 

sidings, wayside signals, drainage, or at-grade separations within the Western Section of the 

Program Corridor. When compared with the No Build Alternative, conversion of agriculturally 

mapped lands to transportation uses would not occur and effects would be negligible within the 

Western Section under Build Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3.

Eastern Section. Construction of Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3 in the Eastern Section of the 

Program Corridor would require the construction of rail stations, reconfiguration of existing or 

creation of new rail facilities, and potential ROW acquisition. These would require the conversion of 

non-transportation land to a transportation use. The site-specific design that would be developed in 

later Tier 2/Project-level phases would determine the extent to which land use conversions occur. If 

the rail infrastructure or station facility is within the ROW of, or closely parallel to, an existing 

transportation corridor, the extent of land conversion would be minimal. However, the farther rail 

infrastructure or a station facility departs from an existing transportation feature, the greater the 

likelihood for land use conversion, ranging from building on vacant/undeveloped land to potential 

displacement of existing structures.

If a passenger rail system is constructed and operated within the existing rail ROW, relatively few 

ROW acquisitions would be required. However, the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area allows for 

infrastructure and station facilities to be located beyond the limits of the existing rail ROW, which 

would require acquisition of land not designated for transportation uses. Which agricultural land uses 

would be affected by the future construction and operation of a passenger rail system, and to what 

extent, cannot be determined at this time.

If agricultural mapped lands within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor are converted to a 

transportation use, it would be considered an adverse effect. Agricultural lands are considered a 

finite and unique resource, once agricultural land is converted to other uses, that agricultural land is 

effectively eliminated. When compared with the No Build Alternative, Build Alternative Option 1 could 

have a substantial effect on agricultural resources within the Eastern Section of the Program 

Corridor. When compared with Build Alternative Option 1, Build Alternative Option 2 would have 

slightly reduced effects due to a shorter route alignment and reduced station options. However, the 

magnitude of effects would be similar for Build Alternative Option 2 and considered substantial when 

compared with the No Build Alternative. When compared with Build Alternative Options 1 or 2, Build 

Alternative Option 3 may have slightly reduced effects due to a smaller footprint associated with a 

shorter route alignment, reduced station options, and reduced third rail track infrastructure. However, 

the magnitude of effects would be similar for Build Alternative Option 3 and considered substantial 

when compared with the No Build Alternative. Detailed analysis of ROW acquisition impacts would 

be completed in a subsequent Tier 2/Project-level analysis.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-31

OPERATION

Western Section. Operation of Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3 within the Western Section would 

not result in effects on agricultural resources as the additional train trips would travel within an 

existing railroad ROW. When compared with the No Build Alternative, effects on agricultural 

resources would be negligible because no additional infrastructure improvements are planned within 

the Western Section under Build Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3.

Eastern Section. Once construction ceases, operation of the new railroad infrastructure and stations 

under the Build Alternative Options would not be anticipated to require further conversion of 

agricultural lands. Operational effects associated with the Eastern Section portion of Build 

Alternative Option 1 on agricultural resources would be negligible when compared with the No Build 

Alternative. When compared with Build Alternative Option 1, Build Alternative Options 2 and 3 would 

have the same magnitude of effect and be considered negligible when compared with the No Build 

Alternative.

3.2.6 NEPA Summary of Potential Effects

Table 3.2-7 and Table 3.2-8 summarize the qualitative assessment of potential effects (negligible, 

moderate, or substantial) under NEPA for each of the Build Alternative Options. This service-level 

evaluation uses the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area to determine the types of resources that 

may be affected and, more importantly, the relative magnitude of resources that may be affected. 

Specific mitigation measures to reduce effects would be identified during the Tier 2/Project-level

environmental process. 

Table 3.2-7. NEPA Summary of Effects on Land Use

Alternative Options

Potential Intensity of Effect:

Western Section

Potential Intensity of Effect:

Eastern Section

No Build Alternativea Construction: None

Operation: None

Construction: None

Operation: Substantial

Build Alternative Option 1 

(Coachella Terminus)

Construction: Negligible 

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Moderate

Operation: Moderate

Build Alternative Option 2 

(Indio Terminus)

Construction: Negligible

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Moderate

Operation: Moderate
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-32

Alternative Options

Potential Intensity of Effect:

Western Section

Potential Intensity of Effect:

Eastern Section

Build Alternative Option 3 

(Indio Terminus with Limited Third Track)

Construction: Negligible

Operation: Negligible

Construction: Moderate

Operation: Moderate

Notes:

a The No Build Alternative includes existing and potential expansion of roadway, passenger rail, and air travel 

facilities within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study Area; however, for the service-level evaluation, identifying levels 

of effect from potential expansion of those facilities is speculative and would be dependent on Tier 2/Project-level 

specific analysis.

EIR=environmental impact report; EIS=environmental impact statement
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-33

Table 3.2-8. NEPA Summary of Effects on Agricultural Resources

Alternative Options

Prime 

Farmland 

(acres)

Unique 

Farmland 

(acres)

Farmland of 

Statewide 

Importance 

(acres)

Farmland of 

Local 

Importance 

(acres)

Total 

Farmland 

Protection 

Policy Act

Farmland 

(acres)

Potential Intensity of 

Effect:

Western Section

Potential Intensity of 

Effect:

Eastern Section

No Build Alternativea Not 

Applicable

Not 

Applicable

Not 

Applicable

Not 

Applicable

Not 

Applicable

Construction: None

Operation: None

Construction: None

Operation: None

Build Alternative Option 1 

(Coachella Terminus)

560.38 96.69 22.59 2,623.91 3,303.57 Construction: Negligible

Operation: Negligible

Construction: 

Substantial

Operation: Negligible

Build Alternative Option 2 

(Indio Terminus)

362.55 96.69 22.59 2,549.89 3,021.72 Construction: Negligible

Operation: Negligible

Construction: 

Substantial 

Operation: Negligible 

Build Alternative Option 3 

(Indio Terminus with 

Limited Third Track)

362.55 96.69 22.59 2,549.89 3,021.72 Construction: Negligible

Operation: Negligible

Construction:

Substantial 

Operation: Negligible 

Notes:

a The No Build Alternative includes existing and potential expansion of roadway, passenger rail, and air travel facilities within the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR Study 

Area; however, for the service-level evaluation, identifying levels of effect from potential expansion of those facilities is speculative and would be dependent on 

Tier 2/Project-level specific analysis.

EIR=environmental impact report; EIS=environmental impact statement
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-34

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-35

3.2.7 CEQA Summary of Potential Impacts

Based on the information provided in Section 3.2.4 and 3.2.5, and considering the CEQA Guidelines 

Appendix G Checklist questions for land use and planning and agriculture and forestry resources, 

the Build Alternative Options are considered to have a potentially significant impact on land use and 

planning and agriculture and forestry resources when reviewed on a Program-wide basis. Placing 

the infrastructure improvements and new stations largely within or along the existing ROW reduces 

the potential for significant impacts on these resources; however, because the proposed stations 

have not been selected, agricultural resources may be significantly impacted. At the programmatic 

analysis level, it is not possible to know the precise location, extent, and particular characteristics of 

impacts on these resources. 

Proposed programmatic mitigation strategies, discussed in Section 3.2.8, would be applied to reduce 

potential impacts. Table 3.2-9 describes the CEQA significance conclusions for the Build Alternative 

Options; the proposed programmatic mitigation strategies that would be applied to minimize, reduce, 

or avoid the potential impacts; and the significance determination after mitigation strategies are 

applied. The identification and implementation of additional site-specific mitigation measures 

necessary for Project implementation would occur as part of the Tier 2/Project-level analysis. 
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-36

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-37

Table 3.2-9. CEQA Summary of Impacts for Land Use and Planning and Agriculture and Forestry Resources

Impact Summary

Mitigation 

Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Would the Program physically divide an established community?

Construction 

Western Section – No Impact. No impacts are anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR 

evaluation level because no physical improvements are proposed or required in the Western 

Section under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. Potential impacts associated with physically 

dividing an established community depend on the location of new stations, which are currently 

unknown and which may require acquisition of parcels within local communities. However, the 

stations would be generally located adjacent to the existing tracks, and for that reason, impacts 

associated with dividing established communities would be unlikely. Construction activities 

would result in noise, air pollutants, and traffic impacts that may temporarily affect the 

community. While not anticipated, site-specific impacts would be further considered during the 

Tier 2/Project-level analysis, when the actual locations of the proposed stations can be 

identified.

LU-1

LU-2

LU-3

Potentially Significant. LU-1 through 

LU-3 would minimize, reduce, or avoid

potential impacts associated with 

physically dividing an established 

community through design and further 

analysis. However, impacts may remain 

significant and unavoidable as further 

analysis may determine that land 

acquisitions would result in community 

impacts. 

Operation

Western Section – No Impact. The increase in train service (two additional round-trip daily 

trains within the Program Corridor) would not change existing land use that would cause or 

contribute to physical division of communities. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated under 

Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3. 

Not applicable Not applicable
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-38

Impact Summary

Mitigation 

Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Eastern Section – Less than Significant. Impacts from two additional round-trip daily trains 

are anticipated to be less than significant because they would not cause or contribute to 

physical division of communities. Therefore, a less than significant impact is anticipated under 

Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Would the Program conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Program

(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?

Construction

Western Section – No Impact. No impacts are anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR 

evaluation level because no physical improvements are proposed or required within the 

Western Section under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. Potential impacts associated with consistency with 

plans and policies depend on the location of new stations and other infrastructure 

improvements, which are currently unknown. Construction of new stations may require land 

acquisition, which may require land use designation changes or amendments. However, a 

detailed analysis of city-level plans, policies, and regulations cannot be considered at the Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR level because such an analysis at this stage would be too speculative, 

given the exact location of stations is unknown at this time. The Tier 2/Project-level analysis 

would identify any conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation.

LU-3 Potentially Significant. LU-3 would 

minimize, reduce, or avoid potential 

impacts from conflicts with plans and 

policies through design and further 

analysis. However, impacts may remain 

significant and unavoidable as further 

analysis may determine that there is a 

conflict that cannot be mitigated between 

land uses. 

Operation

Western Section – No Impact. No impacts are anticipated from operation because Build 

Alternative Options 1, 2, and 3 are consistent with federal, state, and regional plans and 

policies that promote expanding existing transportation options and providing multimodal

connectivity within the region.

Not applicable Not applicable
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-39

Impact Summary

Mitigation 

Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. Potential impacts associated with consistency with 

plans and policies depend on the location of new stations and other infrastructure 

improvements, which are currently unknown. However, a detailed analysis of city-level plans, 

policies, and regulations cannot be considered at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR level because 

such an analysis at this stage would be too speculative, given the exact location of rail 

improvements and stations is unknown at this time. The Tier 2/Project-level analysis would 

identify any conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation. 

LU-3 Potentially Significant. LU-3 would 

minimize, reduce, or avoid potential 

impacts from conflicts with plans and 

policies through design and further 

analysis. However, impacts may remain 

significant and unavoidable as further 

analysis may determine that there is a 

conflict that cannot be mitigated between 

land uses. 

Would the Program 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?

Construction 

Western Section – No Impact. No impacts are anticipated under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, 

or 3 at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level because no physical improvements are 

proposed or required within the Western Section and no agricultural mapped lands would be 

converted to non-agricultural use.

Not applicable Not applicable
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-40

Impact Summary

Mitigation 

Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. The construction of rail infrastructure and station 

facilities could convert prime farmland, unique farmland or farmland of statewide importance to 

a non-agricultural use as these types of farmlands are present within the Eastern Section of 

the Program Corridor. Potential impacts associated with converting farmland to 

non-agricultural use depend on the location of new stations and other infrastructure 

improvements, which are currently unknown. Site-specific impacts would be further considered 

during the Tier 2/Project-level analysis when the actual locations of the proposed stations can 

be identified.

LU-4

LU-5

Potentially Significant. LU-4 and LU-5

would minimize, reduce, or avoid potential 

impacts associated with converting 

farmland through design, further analysis, 

and the consideration of agricultural 

easements. However, impacts may remain 

significant and unavoidable as further 

analysis may determine that agricultural 

easements would not actually mitigate the 

significant impact caused by the rail 

infrastructure or station facility proposed. 

Operation

Western Section – No Impact. The increase in train service (two additional round-trip daily 

trains within the Program Corridor) would not change existing land use that would result in 

conversion of agricultural mapped lands into non-agricultural uses within the Western Section 

of Program Corridor. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, 

or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – No Impact. Once construction is completed, operation of Build Alternative 

Option 1, 2, or 3 would not require conversion of farmland. Therefore, no impacts are 

anticipated under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-41

Impact Summary

Mitigation 

Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Would the Program conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?

Construction

Western Section – No Impact. No conflicts with agriculturally zoned land or land under a 

Williamson Act contract would occur because no physical improvements are proposed or 

required within the Western Section. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated at the Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. The construction of rail infrastructure and station 

facilities could conflict with existing zoning for agricultural uses or lands currently under a 

Williamson Act contract as both are present within the Eastern Section of the Program 

Corridor. Potential impacts associated with conflicts with existing zoning for agriculture or a 

Williamson Act contract depend on the location of new stations and other infrastructure 

improvements, which are currently unknown. Therefore, potentially significant impacts are 

anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, 

or 3. Site-specific impacts would be determined during the Tier 2/Project-level analysis.

LU-4

LU-5

LU-6

Potentially Significant. Although LU-4

through LU-6 would minimize, reduce, or

avoid potential impacts associated with 

converting farmland, it is unknown to what 

extent and type of impact on farmlands or 

Williamson Act contract lands would occur. 

Operation

Western Section – No Impact. The increase in train service (two additional round-trip daily 

trains within the Program Corridor) would not change existing land use that would result in 

conflicts with existing agricultural zoning or lands under a Williamson Act contract within the 

Western Section of Program Corridor. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated under Build 

Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – No Impact. Once construction is completed, operation of Build Alternative 

Option 1, 2, or 3 would not conflict with existing agricultural zoning or lands under a Williamson 

Act contract within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor. Therefore, no impacts are 

anticipated under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-42

Impact Summary

Mitigation 

Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Would the Program conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 

12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by 

Government Code section 51104(g))?

Construction

Western Section – No Impact. No conflicts with existing zoning of forest land or timberland 

would occur because no physical improvements are proposed or required and there are no 

forest lands in the Western Section. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated at the Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – No Impact. No conflicts with existing zoning of forest land or timberland 

would occur because there are no forest lands in the Eastern Section. Therefore, no impacts 

are anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 

2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Operation

Western Section – No Impact. No conflicts with existing zoning of forest land or timberland 

would occur during operation because there are no forest lands in the Western Section.

Therefore, no impacts are anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under 

Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – No Impact. No conflicts with existing zoning of forest land or timberland 

would occur during operation because there are no forest lands in the Eastern Section.

Therefore, no impacts are anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under 

Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-43

Impact Summary

Mitigation 

Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Would the Program result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

Construction

Western Section – No Impact. No loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest 

land use would occur because no physical improvements are proposed or required and there 

are no forest lands in the Western Section. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated at the Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – No Impact. No loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest 

land use would occur because there are no forest lands in the Eastern Section. Therefore, no 

impacts are anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative 

Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Operation

Western Section – No Impact. No loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest 

land use would occur during operation because there are no forest lands in the Western 

Section. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level

under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – No Impact. No loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest 

land use would occur during operation because there are no forest lands in the Eastern 

Section. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level

under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3.

Not applicable Not applicable
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-44

Impact Summary

Mitigation 

Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Would the Program involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of 

Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

Construction

Western Section – No Impact. No impacts are anticipated under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, 

or 3 at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level because no physical improvements are 

proposed or required within the Western Section.

Not applicable Not applicable

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. The construction of rail infrastructure and station 

facilities could result in the direct conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses and represent 

a change in existing conditions that could result in an indirect potential for conversion of 

farmland to non-agricultural uses within the Eastern Section of the Program Corridor. Potential 

impacts associated with converting farmland to non-agricultural use depend on the location of 

new stations and other infrastructure improvements, which are currently unknown. Therefore, 

potentially significant impacts are anticipated at the Tier 1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level

under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3. Site-specific impacts would be determined during the 

Tier 2/Project-level analysis.

LU-4

LU-5

Potentially Significant. LU-4 and LU-5

would minimize, reduce, or avoid potential 

impacts through design, further analysis, 

and the consideration of agricultural 

easements. However, impacts may remain 

significant and unavoidable as further 

analysis may determine that agricultural 

easements would not actually mitigate the 

significant impact caused by the rail 

infrastructure or station facility proposed.

Operation

Western Section – No Impact. The increase in train service (two additional round-trip daily 

trains within the Program Corridor) would not change existing land use that would result in 

other changes that may result in the conversion of farmland or forest uses to non-farmland or 

non-forest uses. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 

3.

Not applicable Not applicable
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-45

Impact Summary

Mitigation 

Strategy Significance with Mitigation Strategy

Eastern Section – Potentially Significant. Once construction is complete, the operation of 

rail infrastructure and station facilities would not result in the direct conversion of farmland to 

non-agricultural uses. While there are numerous economic and environmental factors that 

would preclude the long-term viability of agriculture in Riverside County and the Inland Empire, 

operation of station facilities represents a change in existing conditions that could result in an 

indirect potential for conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses within the Eastern Section 

of the Program Corridor. Therefore, potentially significant impacts are anticipated at the Tier 

1/Program EIS/EIR evaluation level under Build Alternative Option 1, 2, or 3. 

LU-5 Potentially Significant. Although LU-5

would minimize, reduce, or avoid potential 

impacts through design, further analysis, 

and the consideration of agricultural 

easements, impacts may remain 

significant and unavoidable as further 

analysis may determine that agricultural 

easements would not actually mitigate the 

significant impact caused by the rail 

infrastructure or station facility proposed.

Notes:

EIR=environmental impact report; EIS=environmental impact statement
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-46

This page is intentionally blank.
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-47

3.2.8 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Strategies

Identified below are proposed programmatic mitigation strategies for further consideration in the 

Tier 2/Project-level analysis. Specific mitigation measures, to the extent required, would be identified 

and discussed during Tier 2/Project-level analysis after design details are known and specific 

impacts are identified. Potential mitigation measures would be developed in consultation with the 

agency with jurisdiction over the resource and might include avoiding agricultural land resources or 

minimizing the acreage of a physical take of these properties during planning and design and 

selecting rail station locations that avoid conflicts with sensitive land uses. 

Proposed programmatic mitigation strategies, consistent with state and federal regulations, could 

include, but are not limited to, the following:

Mitigation Strategy LU-1: Based on the results of a subsequent Tier 2/Project-level analysis and 

recommendations, the identified lead agency or agencies shall determine the extent and duration of 

construction activities of the Tier 2/Project-level improvement being proposed and develop

construction best management practices that shall be implemented by the contractor to reduce 

noise, air quality, and transportation effects, such as temporary sound barriers and traffic 

management plans. Depending on the nature of construction activities proposed and the location 

where construction activities could occur, construction best management practices could include, but 

are not limited to, the following: 

• Limit noise-generating construction activities to the hours identified in the applicable local 

jurisdiction’s ordinance and/or policies governing construction activities

• Control fugitive dust by watering disturbed areas

• Require specifications for construction equipment and idling times

Mitigation Strategy LU-2: Based on the results of a subsequent Tier 2/Project-level analysis and 

recommendations, the identified lead agency or agencies shall determine if a construction 

management plan is required for construction activities of the Tier 2/Project-level improvement being 

proposed. If required, a construction management plan shall be developed by the contractor and 

reviewed by the lead agency or agencies prior to construction and implemented during construction 

activities. The construction management plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 

• Measures that minimize effects on populations and communities within the Tier 2/Project 

Study Area
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Program – Draft EIS/EIR

3.2 Land Use and Planning

May 2021 | 3.2-48

• Measures pertaining to visual protection, air quality, safety controls, noise controls, and 

traffic controls to minimize effects on populations and communities within the Tier 2/Project 

Study Area

• Measures to ensure property access is maintained for local businesses, residences, and 

community and emergency services

• Measures to consult with local transit providers to minimize effects on local and regional bus 

routes in affected communities

• Measures to consult with local jurisdictions and utility providers to minimize effects on utilities 

in affected communities

Mitigation Strategy LU-3: During a subsequent Tier 2/Project-level analysis, a land use consistency 

analysis shall be conducted by the identified lead agency or agencies to determine consistency of 

the Tier 2/Project-level improvement being proposed with the applicable local jurisdictional general 

plans or programs. If the land use consistency analysis identifies sensitive land uses or 

environmental resources within the Tier 2/Project-level Study Area, design or siting strategies shall

be identified by the lead agency or agencies to avoid or minimize conflicts with sensitive land uses or 

environmental resources. 

Mitigation Strategy LU-4: During a subsequent Tier 2/Project-level analysis, siting of rail 

infrastructure and station facilities shall be designed by the identified lead agency or agencies to 

avoid or minimize conversion of farmland resources. 

Mitigation Strategy LU-5: During a subsequent Tier 2/Project-level analysis, the identified lead 

agency or agencies shall determine if the siting of the Tier 2/Project-level improvement being 

proposed is located within an area mapped as farmland by the California Department of 

Conservation. If the Tier 2/Project-level improvement is located in an area mapped as farmland, the 

preparation of a land evaluation and site assessment shall be conducted to determine significance of 

impacts attributed to the loss or conversion of farmland associated with the siting of the Tier 

2/Project-level improvement being proposed. 

Mitigation Strategy LU-6: During a subsequent Tier 2/Project-level analysis, the identified lead 

agency or agencies shall determine if the siting of the Tier 2/Project-level improvement being 

proposed is located on land enrolled in a Williamson Act contract. Where lands enrolled in a 

Williamson Act contract are impacted during the siting of rail infrastructure or station facilities, the 

California Department of Conservation shall be notified by the identified lead agency or agencies 

and requirements of Government Code Section 51290-51295 and 51296.6 shall be met.