Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/25/2008 RDAAgenda and Reports CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA THOMAS BUCKLEY, CHAIRMAN WWW.LAKE- ELSINORE.ORG ROBERT SCHIFFNER, VICE - CHAIRMAN (951) 674 -3124 PHONE DARYL HICKMAN, MEMBER (951) 674 -2392 FAX GENIE KELLEY, MEMBER LAKE ELSINORE CULTURAL CENTER ROBERT MAGEE, MEMBER 183 NORTH MAIN STREET ROBERT BRADY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530 ****************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 2008 STUDY SESSION AT 4:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION AT 5:00 P.M. PUBLIC SESSION AT 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER -- 5:00 P.M. ROLL CALL CLOSED SESSION CALL BACK TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION REPORT ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENTS — NON - AGENDIZED ITEMS —1 MINUTE (Please read & complete a Speaker's Form at the podium, prior to the start of the City Council Meeting.) PUBLIC COMMENTS — AGENDIZED ITEMS — 3 MINUTES (Please read & complete a Speaker's Form at the Podium, prior to the Start of the City Council Meeting. The Chairman will call on you to speak, when your item is called.) CONSENT CALENDAR (All matters on the Consent Calendar are approved on one motion, unless a Boardmember or any member of the public requests separate action on a specific item.) (1) Approval of Redevelopment Agency Minutes Recommendation: Approve the following minute(s): a) Joint City Council /Redevelopment Agency meeting — November 11, 2008 b) Regular Redevelopment Agency meeting — November 11, 2008. (2) Warrant List Dated November 13, 2008 Recommendation: Authorize payment of Warrant List dated November 13, 2008. (3) Investment Report — October 2008 Recommendation: Receive and File. PUBLIC HEARING(S) No public hearings scheduled. BUSINESS ITEM(S) (4) Resolution Authorizing Transmittal of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans for Laguna Redevelopment Project Areas No. I, 11 and III; and Resolution Determining that Amended Plans will not Require the formation of a Project Area Committee Recommendation: The Agency adopt Resolution No. 2008- accepting the proposed Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans for the Lake Elsinore Rancho Laguna Redevelopment Project Areas No. I, No. 11 and No. 111 and the Initial Study and Negative Declaration to the Planning Commission for its report and recommendation and to all affected taxing entities and other interested persons for their information PUBLIC COMMENTS — NON - AGENDIZED ITEMS — 3 MINUTES EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMENTS LEGAL COUNSEL COMMENTS BOARDMEMBER COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT The Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency will adjourn to a regular meeting to be held on Tuesday, December 9, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. to be held in the Cultural Center located at 183 N. Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING I, CAROL COWLEY, Agency Secretary of the City of Lake Elsinore, do hereby affirm that a copy of the foregoing agenda was posted at City Hall, 72 hours in advance of this meeting. / /ss // CAROL COWLEY DATE INTERIM AGENCY SECRETARY CITY OF LAK 5LSINOR DREAM EXTREME REPORT TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO: CHAIRMAN BUCKLEY AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENC FROM: ROBERT A. BRADY CITY MANAGER DATE: NOVERMBER 25, 2008 SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF MINUTES Discussion The following City Council Minutes are submitted for approval as follows: a) Joint City Council /Redevelopment Agency Minutes — November 11, 2008 b) Regular Redevelopment Agency meeting — November 11, 2008 Recommendation Approve the Minutes as submitted. Prepared by: Carol Cowley Interim City Clerk Approved by: Robert A. Brady City Manager Agenda Item No. 1 Page 1 of 17 MINUTES JOINT CITY COUNCIL /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 11, 2008 CALL TO ORDER — 5:00 P.M. The joint meeting of the City Council and Redevelopment Agency Board was called to order by Mayor Hickman at 4:02 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: MAYOR/MEMBER HICKMAN MAYOR PRO TEM /MEMBER KELLEY COUNCILMAN /MEMBER MAGEE COUNCILMAN/VICE-CHAIRMAN SCHIFFNER ABSENT: COUNCILMAN /CHAIRMAN BUCKLEY Also present: City Manager /Executive Director Brady, City Attorney Leibold Parks and Recreation Director Gonzales, Information /Communications Manager Dennis, Director of Lake and Aquatics Kilroy, Acting Director of Community Development Weiner and Interim City Clerk Cowley. DISCUSSION ITEMS Mayor Hickman noted the Chamber update and the certificates will be at the 7:00 p.m. meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS No public comments. CONSENT CALENDAR (5) Minutes of the Following Meeting(s) a) Joint City Council /Redevelopment Agency Study Session — October 14, 2008. b) Joint City Council /Redevelopment Agency Study Session— October 28, 2008 c) Regular Meeting — October 28, 2008 1 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 2 of 17 Recommendation: Approve as submitted. (6) Warrant List Dated October 30, 2008 Recommendation: Authorize payment of Warrant List dated October 30, 2008. Mayor Hickman asked about the name on Warrant No. 97781 and Warrant Register No. 97756 to Spyglass Inn. Information /Communications Manager Dennis explained that Warrant No. 97781 is to Wendy Worthey and Warrant Register No. 97756 was his training for the CSDI Institute last week. (7) Claim against the City Recommendation: Reject the claim of Regina Thiele and direct the City Clerk's Office to send a letter informing the claimant of the decision (8) Large format Canon Printer with Scanner System Purchase Recommendation,: Authorize the City Manager to approve the purchase of the Canon imagePROGRAF 720 with Colortrac Scanner System from Innovative Document Solutions, Inc. (9) Rosetta Canyon Fire Station and Park Consultant Contract — Change Order No. 2 Recommendation: 1. Approve the project Change Order No. 2. 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract change order. Councilman Magee noted that the project has yet to start. In his opinion the twelve month completion period began in August and he is expecting it to be completed by August 2009. Mayor Hickman thanked Staff for getting the lowest price. (10) City Council, Planning Commission and City Treasurer Pay Waiver Implementation Recommendation: That the City Council receive and file this report explaining the implementation of the pay reduction. City Manager Brady advised that if the reduction of compensation for the City Council and Planning Commission were adopted by ordinance it would not be effective until after the next election. During the budget study session Council discussed a voluntary waiver of compensation. He explained if individual council members and planning 2 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 3 of 17 commissioners wished to reduce their compensation, they could notify the City Manager in writing. City Manager Brady clarified for the Council that this was strictly voluntary. There was no time limit; any reduction would stay in effect as long as the Council Member or Planning Commissioner wished to waive their compensation. (11) Adoption of resolution approving an amendment to the Riverside County Transportation Commission Transportation Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance (Ordinance No. 8 -1) (Measure A) Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2008 -94 approving an amendment to the Riverside County Transportation Commission Transportation Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance. Councilman Magee advised this was a housekeeping matter that RCTC is moving forward and he urged approval of this Resolution. Councilman Magee clarified that originally this was a state highway but this particular section was taken over by local jurisdictions similar to what the City may face. He reminded Council that the desert area gets 24% of these funds and 75% of the funds comes back to this area. (12) Feasibility of Having the Hawaii Mars Air Tanker Located on Lake Elsinore during the Fire Season Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to discuss with various fire fighting agencies and authorities at the local, county and state levels to determine the feasibility of locating the Coulson Hawaii Mars Air Tanker on Lake Elsinore during the fire season. PUBLIC HEARING(S) (13) Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2008 -04, General Plan Amendment No. 2008 -03 and Commercial Design Review No. 2008 -07 for the "Auto Sales and Service Center" Project Located on Lakeshore Drive West of the San Jacinto River Channel Recommendations: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 2008 -95 adopting Findings of Consistency with the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2008 -96 adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2008 -04 and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program appertaining thereto. 3. Adopt Resolution No. 2008 -97 approving General Plan Amendment No. 2008 -03. 4. Adopt Resolution No. 2008 -98 approving Commercial Design Review No. 2008 -07. 3 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 4 of 17 Mayor Hickman confirmed that the land has already been purchased and this item referred to the back half of the land. Councilman Magee advised staff that he did not find building elevations for this project in his packet. Community Development Director Weiner advised that was correct, the Commercial Design Review was to establish the footprint and preliminarily the site layout for a future dealership. He explained the applicants don't have a dealership at the current time and they don't have building design. in order to move forward for Toyota a preliminary footprint is needed. Staff is using this mechanism to move the plan forward. A second design review would be required for the architectural aspects of the plan. Councilman Magee indicated a concern with a section between the two parking Tots. He suggested a staircase or ramp be added for pedestrian crossing rather than having to walk completely around. (14) Residential Design Review No. 2005 -28, Amendment No. 1 for "Parkside Terrace" Located within the Canyon Hills Specific Plan Area Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2008 -99 approving Amendment No. 1 to Residential Design Review No. 2005 -28. APPEAL(S) No appeals scheduled. BUSINESS ITEM(S) (15) Summary Vacation and Related Resolution over a Portion of Street Right -of -Way Known as Wasson Canyon Road Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2008 -100 approving the Summary Vacation of a portion of Wasson Canyon Road. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PUBLIC COMMENTS Ron Hewison addressed Council regarding Item 6 and thanked Council for moving forward with the Pottery Court Affordable Housing project. He indicated from his review of the staff report, BRIDGE was going to be a good partner. He wasn't sure of the financials, but indicated it looked to be a good use of RDA funds. He commented that 4 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 5 of 17 the proposed rental amounts weren't included but he hoped it could be in the $400 -$650 per month range. He expressed his strong support of the concept in the staff report and looked forward to further details. CONSENT CALENDAR (2) Approval of Redevelopment Agency Minutes Recommendation: Approve the following minute(s): a) Regular Meeting — October 28, 2008. (3) Warrant List Dated October 30, 2008 Recommendation: Authorize payment of Warrant List dated October 30, 2008. (4) Agreement and Escrow Instructions for Purchase and Sale of Real Property APN 373 - 023 -011, -012, -015, -024, -025 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Agency Board approve the purchase of the property subject to the satisfaction of appropriate conditions, direct the Agency Counsel to finalize the Agreement and Escrow Instructions for Purchase and Sale of Real Property according to any further Agency direction and authorize the Chairman to execute the agreement in such final form as approved by the Agency Counsel. (5) Agency Compensation Waiver Implementation Recommendation: Receive and File the report explaining the implementation of the pay reduction. PUBLIC HEARING(S) No public hearings scheduled. BUSINESS ITEM(S) (6) BRIDGE Housing Corporation — Affordable Housing development Recommendations: a) Approve the Memorandum of Understanding by and between the Agency and BRIDGE Housing Corporation b) Approve Resolution No. 2008 -04 authorizing an Affordable Housing Development Loan from the Agency's Low and Moderate Income Housing fund to BRIDGE Housing Corporation for an affordable housing project known as Pottery Court 5 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 6 of 17 c) Continue to work with BRIDGE to develop a comprehensive affordable housing strategy for the Redevelopment Agency to fulfill its inclusionary housing obligations. CITY MANAGER/ EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMENTS CITY ATTORNEY /AGENCY COUNSEL COMMENTS CITY COUNCIL /MEMBER COMMENTS CLOSED SESSION Prior to adjourning the joint meeting City Attorney Leibold announced that at 5:00 p.m. the City Council and Redevelopment Agency will commence the closed session portion of the meeting. The City Council has two items, both involving real property negotiations. There are many parcels involved and they are listed as Item 1(a) and 1(b). The authority for the closed session is vested in Gov't Code § 54956.8. As to Item 1(a) the negotiating parties are the City of Lake Elsinore and County of Riverside. These are tax defaulted properties, under negotiation is price and terms of payment. Item 1(b) is the City of Lake Elsinore and the Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency, under negotiation is price and terms of payment. For the Redevelopment Agency there are eight (8) closed session items Each one of those are real property negotiations under the same authority of Gov't Code § 54956.8. Item 1(a) involves many parcels, which are the tax defaulted properties. The negotiating parties are the Agency and County of Riverside. Item 1(b) involves the same properties identified on the City Council's closed session within the negotiating authority of the City and the Agency. As to Items 1(c), 1(d), 1(e), 1(f), 1(g) and 1(h) the properties are listed with respect to each item. In each case the negotiating parties are the agency and the owners of the respective properties. Under negotiation is price and terms of payment. In addition, a special meting has been scheduled for 5:00 pm, and explained that at 5:00 pm the City Council will need to call the special meeting to order and the closed session item will be announced at that time. The only item on the agenda for the special meeting is one item for closed session. (1 a) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS (Gov't Code §54956.8) Properties: APNs 375042027 -4; 375042028 -5; 375031023 -6; 378157040 -1; 363281024 -3; 373082021 -8; 363540003 -4; 378182017 -9; 378182018 -0; 378182035 -5; 378055055 -0; 378100008 -7; 378100009 -8; 378100017 -5; 375201020 -8; 375201019 -8; 375274009 -5; 375274010 -5; 375321029 -8; 6 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 7 of 17 375321030 -8; 375321031 -9; 375321032 -0; 375321033 -1; 375223037 -2; 375223036 -1; 375293029 -2; 375293030 -2; 375321006 -7; 375321054 -0; 375321053 -9; 374043014 -8; 374072026 -9; 373132059 -7; 373132058 -6; 373132053 -1; 373132052 -0; 373134026 -3; 373134025 -2; 373134024 -1; 374262011 -2; 374262004 -6 City /RDA negotiator: City Manager / Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Redevelopment Agency, City of Lake Elsinore, and the County of Riverside, et al. Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 1(b) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: APN 374 - 072 -028, 374 - 072 -030, 374 - 072 -032, 374 - 072 -034, 374 -072- 036 Agency Negotiator: City Manager /Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency and City of Lake Elsinore Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment CLOSED SESSION 1(a) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS (Gov "t Code §54956.8) Properties: APNs 375042027 -4; 375042028 -5; 375031023 -6; 378157040 -1; 363281024 -3; 373082021 -8; 363540003 -4; 378182017 -9; 378182018 -0; 378182035 -5; 378055055 -0; 378100008 -7; 378100009 -8; 378100017 -5; 375201020 -8; 375201019 -8; 375274009 -5; 375274010 -5; 375321029 -8; 375321030 -8; 375321031 -9; 375321032 -0; 375321033 -1; 375223037 -2; 375223036 -1; 375293029 -2; 375293030 -2; 375321006 -7; 375321054 -0; 375321053 -9; 374043014 -8; 374072026 -9; 373132059 -7; 373132058 -6; 373132053 -1; 373132052 -0; 373134026 -3; 373134025 -2; 373134024 -1; 374262011 -2; 374262004 -6 City /RDA negotiator: City Manager / Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Redevelopment Agency, City of Lake Elsinore, and the County of Riverside, et al. Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 1(b) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: APN 374 - 072 -028, 374 - 072 -030, 374 - 072 -032, 374 - 072 -034, 374 -072- 036 Agency Negotiator: City Manager /Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency and City of Lake Elsinore Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 1(c) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: APN 374 - 072 -018, 374 - 020 -030, 374 - 072 -022 7 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 8 of 17 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency and Riverside County Flood Control District Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 1(d) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: APN 373 - 023 -011, -012, -015, -024, -025 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency and L &L Management Services, LLC Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 1(e) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: APN 379 - 131 -005, -006, -015, -018, -019 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency and Charles and Patricia Pearson Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 1(f) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: APN 379 - 050 -035, -036 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency and Harbor Grand Apartments Inv. Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 1(g) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: APN 374 - 174 -018 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency and Elsinore Pioneer Lumber Company Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 1(h) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: APN 374 - 174 -017, -013 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency and Thomas A. Martin Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 8 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 9 of 17 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the City Council and Redevelopment Agency, the meeting was recessed at 4:16 pm to a special session at 5:00 p.m., DARYL HICKMAN, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE THOMAS R. BUCKLEY, CHAIRMAN CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: CAROL COWLEY, INTERIM CITY CLERK CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 9 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 10 of 17 MINUTES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 11, 2008 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Buckley called the meeting to order at 7:42 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: CHAIRMAN BUCKLEY VICE CHAIRMAN SCHIFFNER MEMBER HICKMAN MEMBER KELLEY MEMBER MAGEE ABSENT: NONE Also present were Executive Director Brady, Agency Counsel Leibold, Captain Cleary, Fire Chief Hendershot, Public Works Director /City Engineer Seumalo, Information /Communications Manager Dennis, Director of Parks and Recreation Gonzales, Acting Director of Community Development Weiner, Redevelopment Project Manager McCarty- Snead, and Interim Secretary Cowley CLOSED SESSION REPORT Agency Counsel announced that the Redevelopment Agency met in closed session at 5:00 pm to discuss eight items all of which involve real property negotiations under the authority of Gov't Code § 54956.8. The parcels in each instance are identified with respect to agenda items 1(a) through 1(h). The negotiating parties in each instance are the Redevelopment Agency and the owners of each of the properties as identified on the agenda. Under negotiation in all circumstances are price and terms of payment. There is no reportable action on any of these items with the exception of Item 1(d) which involves a Purchase and Sale Agreement on the open session; and Items 1(b) and 1(c) are part of a project known as Pottery Court which is also on the open session agenda. Therefore action will be taken on those three items. 1(a) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS (Gov "t Code §54956.8) Properties: APNs 375042027 -4; 375042028 -5; 375031023 -6; 378157040 -1; 363281024 -3; 373082021 -8; 363540003 -4; 378182017 -9; 378182018 -0; 1 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 11 of 17 378182035 -5; 378055055 -0; 378100008 -7; 378100009 -8; 378100017 -5; 375201020 -8; 375201019 -8; 375274009 -5; 375274010 -5; 375321029 -8; 375321030 -8; 375321031 -9; 375321032 -0; 375321033 -1; 375223037 -2; 375223036 -1; 375293029 -2; 375293030 -2; 375321006 -7; 375321054 -0; 375321053 -9; 374043014 -8; 374072026 -9; 373132059 -7; 373132058 -6; 373132053 -1; 373132052 -0; 373134026 -3; 373134025 -2; 373134024 -1; 374262011 -2; 374262004 -6 City /RDA negotiator: City Manager / Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Redevelopment Agency, City of Lake Elsinore, and the County of Riverside, et al. Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 1(b) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: APN 374 - 072 -028, 374 - 072 -030, 374 - 072 -032, 374 - 072 -034, 374 -072- 036 Agency Negotiator: City Manager /Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency and City of Lake Elsinore Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 1(c) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: APN 374 - 072 -018, 374 - 020 -030, 374 - 072 -022 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency and Riverside County Flood Control District Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 1(d) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: APN 373 - 023 -011, -012, -015, -024, -025 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency and L &L Management Services, LLC Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 1(e) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: APN 379 - 131 -005, -006, -015, -018, -019 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency and Charles and Patricia Pearson Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 1(f) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: APN 379 - 050 -035, -036 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency and Harbor Grand Apartments Inv. 2 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 12 of 17 Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 1(g) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: APN 374 - 174 -018 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency and Elsinore Pioneer Lumber Company Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 1(h) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: APN 374 - 174 -017, -013 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director Brady Negotiating parties: Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency and Thomas A. Martin Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment PUBLIC COMMENTS — NON - AGENDIZED No public comments. CONSENT CALENDAR (2) Approval of Redevelopment Agency Minutes Recommendation: Approve the following minute(s): a) Regular Meeting — October 28, 2008. (3) Warrant List Dated October 30, 2008 Recommendation: Authorize payment of Warrant List dated October 30, 2008. (4) Agreement and Escrow Instructions for Purchase and Sale of Real Property APN 373 - 023 -011, -012, -015, -024, -025 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Agency Board approve the purchase of the property subject to the satisfaction of appropriate conditions, direct the Agency Counsel to finalize the Agreement and Escrow Instructions for Purchase and Sale of Real Property according to any further Agency direction and authorize the Chairman to execute the agreement in such final form as approved by the Agency Counsel. 3 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 13 of 17 (5) Agency Compensation Waiver Implementation Recommendation: Receive and File the report explaining the implementation of the pay reduction. Member Kelley moved to approve Consent Calendar items 2 through 5; second by Vice - Chairman Schiffner. The motion was unanimously approved by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Buckley, Vice - Chairman Schiffner, Member Hickman, Member Kelley and Member Magee. NOES: None. PUBLIC HEARING(S) No public hearings scheduled. BUSINESS ITEM(S) (6) BRIDGE Housing Corporation — Affordable Housing development Recommendations: a) Approve the Memorandum of Understanding by and between the Agency and BRIDGE Housing Corporation b) Approve Resolution No. 2008 -04 authorizing an Affordable Housing Development Loan from the Agency's Low and moderate Income Housing fund to BRIDGE Housing Corporation for an affordable housing project known as Pottery Court c) Continue to work with BRIDGE to develop a comprehensive affordable housing strategy for the Redevelopment Agency to fulfill its inclusionary housing obligations. Agency Counsel Liebold presented the report indicating that this item involves different issues. In March 2008, the Agency Board approved the selection of BRIDGE Housing Corporation as the Agency's affordable housing development partner in an effort to develop an affordable housing strategy aimed primarily at achieving the Agency's inclusionary housing requirements. BRIDGE was selected pursuant to a Request for Qualifications process and was the successful respondent. Pursuant to the Agency Board's direction, staff and BRIDGE have negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding essentially documenting that both the Agency and BRIDGE will work diligently and in good faith together to identify, politically, economically, socially viable and appropriate affordable housing sites and move toward meeting the Agency's inclusionary housing obligation. The first action staff is requesting of Council is to approve the Memorandum of Understanding. As part of the effort to work together on the affordable housing strategy, BRIDGE has identified a project which they propose as a first priority project known as Pottery Court. It is approximately a 3.8 acre site bounded by Pottery Street and Sumner Avenue between the outflow channel and Langstaff. Bridge has 4 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 14 of 17 successfully negotiated Letters of Intent for Purchase and Sales Agreements with all of the privately owned parcels and the Redevelopment Agency is engaged in negotiations with the City and the Flood Control District on the balance of the properties that would comprise the site. The project would consist of 90 units; 88 very low income units available at affordable rent to very low Income households and two manager- occupied units. There are many sources of funds and the parties have worked hard to leverage the funds. At this point BRIDGE is asking the Redevelopment Agency to adopt a resolution committing $4,039,000 of Low and Moderate Income Housing Set Aside Funds toward the project which involves a total of approximately $23 million. She indicated the proposed project would be subject to all City entitlement requirements, all applicable laws including CEQA, relocation laws, design review, and all applicable redevelopment laws. Staff was asking the City Council to approve the resolution committing the funds. She noted that at the study session earlier in the evening Ron Hewison addressed Council under public comments, and spoke in favor of the project congratulating the Agency and BRIDGE on such good leveraging of its housing set aside funds. She advised there were three recommended actions: approve the Memorandum of Understanding, approve the resolution and direct staff and BRIDGE to continue working toward developing the affordable housing strategy in meeting the Agency's housing requirement. Brad Wiblin of BRIDGE Housing addressed Council stating they were happy to be taking this step in what is a logical progression toward the larger strategy and they look forward to taking the progression of steps necessary to bring forward a financially, aesthetically and architecturally efficient project to meet the goals of the Agency and improve access to housing for low and moderate families. Member Kelley commented on what a wonderful opportunity it is for the Agency to move forward to meet its affordable housing requirements. She acknowledged the Agency found a very committed and professional partner with BRIDGE and the Agency looks forward to working with Bridge extensively in the future and now. Member Kelley moved to approve the Memorandum of Understanding; second by Member Schiffner. The motion unanimously carried by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Buckley, Vice - Chairman Schiffner, Member Hickman, Member Kelley and Member Magee. NOES: None Member Magee recognized the enormity of this project in committing $4 million toward the Agency's goal of securing low and moderate income housing and for the project being part of the downtown revitalization. He recognized City Attorney Leibold for her work on this project and complemented Redevelopment Project Manager McCarty as an incredible asset to the staff stating he has brought a level of professionalism that is impressive. He also recognized Chairman Buckley for driving this forward the last couple of years noting this is truly a passion for Chairman Buckley. Chairman Buckley indicated this is the first step as the Agency moves forward. He asked the City Attorney to confirm that by law the Agency must provide 800 to 1,000 5 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 15 of 17 units of affordable housing. He indicated as the Agency moves forward there is always going to be the question about spending the money now during this economy. He reminded everyone that redevelopment agencies were created specifically to redevelop downtowns and other blighted areas. The way that is done is by capturing tax increment, and in exchange for capturing the tax increment it is the law that housing units have to be built using set aside funds that cannot be used for anything else. The City Attorney confirmed that 20% of all of the increment that the Agency receives is dedicated for increasing, improving and preserving affordable housing. Member Hickman moved to approve Resolution No. 2008 -04 authorizing an Affordable Housing Development Loan from the Agency's Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund to BRIDGE Housing Corporation for an affordable housing project known as Pottery Court; second by Vice - Chairman Schiffner. The motion unanimously carried by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Buckley, Vice - Chairman Schiffner, Member Hickman, Member Kelley and Member Magee. NOES: None. Member Hickman moved to direct staff to continue to work with BRIDGE to develop a comprehensive affordable housing strategy for the Redevelopment Agency to fulfill its inclusionary housing obligations; second by Vice - Chairman Schiffner. The motion unanimously carried by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Buckley, Vice - Chairman Schiffner, Member Hickman, Member Kelley and Member Magee. NOES: None. PUBLIC COMMENTS — NON - AGENDIZED ITEMS No public Comments EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMENTS LEGAL COUNSEL COMMENTS City Attorney Leibold congratulated the Agency. BOARDMEMBER COMMENTS 6 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 16 of 17 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Agency Board, Chairman Buckley adjourned the meeting at 7:53 p.m. THOMAS R. BUCKLEY, CHAIRMAN CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: CAROL COWLEY, INTERIM Secretary CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 7 Agenda Item No. 1 Page 17 of 17 CITY OF i/.�c� LADE OLSINOKE DREAM EXTREME. REPORT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FROM: ROBERT A. BRADY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2008 SUBJECT: WARRANT LIST DATED NOVEMBER 13, 2008 Discussion The warrant list is a listing of all general checks issued since the prior Warrant List. Recommendation Authorize payment of Warrant List dated November 13, 2008. Prepared By: Crystal Robinson 3 Account Specialist I Reviewed By: Matt N. Presse Director of Administr. we Services /R. D. A. Treasurer Approved By: Robert A. Brady Executive Director Agenda Item No. 2 Page 1 of 3 NOVEMBER BER 13, 2008 LAKE ELSINORE WARRANT I' EDEVELOPMEN I' AGENCY SUMMARY FUND# FUND DESCRIPTION TOTAL 913 DEBT SERVICE FUND AREA 1 $ 1,775.39 914 20% HOUSING SET ASIDE FUND 2,011.44 923 DEBT SERVICE FUND AREA 2 290,359.33 933 DEBT SERVICE FUND AREA 3 843.51 952 C.F.D. 90 -2 DEBT SERVICE FUND 868.52 956 C.F.D. 90 -2 2007A TUSCANY DEBT SERVICE FUND 868.52 GRAND TOTAL $ 296,726.71 11/18/2008 Warrant 111308 1 of 1 Agenda Item No. 2 Page 2 of 3 NOVEMBER 13. 2008 LAKE ELSINORE WARRANT LIST REEVELOPMEN' 1' AGENCY CHECK# VENDOR NAME AMOUNT 6612 NBS GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP $ 3,474.08 6613 OAK GROVE EQUITIES, INC. 65,120.03 6614 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA 5,620.00 6615 WAL -MART STORES, INC. 222 512.60 TOTAL $ 296,726.71 11/18/2008 Warrant 111308 1 of 1 Agenda Item No. 2 Page 3 of 3 CITY QF LAKE 6LSINOR E DREAM EXTREME,. REPORT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FROM: ROBERT A. BRADY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2008 SUBJECT: INVESTMENT REPORT — OCTOBER 2008 Discussion The Investment Report is a listing of all funds invested for the Redevelopment Agency as of the date shown on the report. Recommendation Receive and file. Prepared By: James R. Riley Finance Manager Reviewed By: Matt N. Pressey��� Director of Admini ative Services/ RDA Treasurer Approved By: Robert A. Brady , � ' Executive Directo �� Agenda Item No. 3 Page 1 of 2 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE MONTHLY REPORT OF INVESTMENTS NOVEMBER 2008 INTEREST DATE MATURITY RATE PURCHASED RATE AMOUNT Local Agency Investment Fund 2.709% Daily 24 -Hour $ 32,565,274.30 INVESTMENT TOTAL $ 32,565,274.30 I certify that this report accurately reflects all pooled investments and it is in conformity with the investment policy as approved by the City Council on June 24, 2008. A copy of this policy is available in the office of the City Clerk. The pooled investments shown above provide sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet the next six months estimated expenditures. Matt N. Pressev Investment Officer November 25, 2008 Date Agenda Item No. 3 Page 2of2 CITY OF AIDE 5LSINOR i DREAM EXTREME. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE JOINT REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND AGENCY BOARD MEMBERS FROM: ROBERT A. BRADY CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2008 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR LAGUNA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS NO. I, II AND III; AND RESOLUTION DETERMINING THAT AMENDED PLANS WILL NOT REQUIRE THE FORMATION OF A PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE Background The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Lake Elsinore is vested with the responsibility to carry out the functions and requirements of the California Community Redevelopment Law ( "CRL ") and to implement the Redevelopment Plans for each of the three Redevelopment Project Areas. The original redevelopment plan ( "Original Redevelopment Plan ") for Rancho Laguna Redevelopment Project No. I was adopted by Ordinance No. 607 on September 23, 1980 and, thereafter, has been amended three times: by Ordinance No. 624 adopted on July 20, 1981 to add territory ( "Added Area "); by Ordinance No. 987 on November 22, 1994 to conform limits to Assembly Bill 1290 (AB1290); and by Ordinance No.1249 on February 26, 2008 to repeal the debt establishment limit as provided by Senate Bill 211 (SB211), to extend the effectiveness date and time limit to repay debt and collect tax increment as provided by Senate Bill 1045 (SB1045) (for ERAF payments) and to make certain technical corrections. The original project area ( "Original Project Area ") and Added Area have separate redevelopment plan effectiveness limits, and limits to repay debt and receive tax increment. The Original Project Area and Added Area have combined tax increment and bond debt limits. The Redevelopment Plan for Rancho Laguna Redevelopment Project No. II was adopted by Ordinance No. 671 on July 18, 1983 and, thereafter, has been amended two times by Ordinance No. 987 on November 22, 1994 to conform time limits to AB1290 and by Ordinance No.1249 on February 26, 2008 to repeal the debt establishment limit ' Riverside County's Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund Agef No. 4 Page 1 of 59 JOINT REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN UPDATE NOVEMBER 25, 2008 Page 2 for affordable housing debt establishment only as provided by SB211, to extend the effectiveness date and time limit to repay debt and collect tax increment as provided by SB1045 (for ERAF payments), and to make certain technical corrections. The Redevelopment Plan for Rancho Laguna Redevelopment Project No. III was adopted by Ordinance No. 815 on September 8, 1987 and, thereafter, has been amended two times: by Ordinance No. 987 on November 22, 1994 to conform time limits to AB1290; and by Ordinance No.1249 on February 26, 2008 to repeal the debt establishment limit for affordable housing debt establishment only as provided by SB211 and to extend the effectiveness date and time limit to repay debt, collect tax increment as provided by SB1045 (for ERAF payments), and make certain technical corrections. Discussion Redevelopment Plan Update As noted above, each of the Agency's Redevelopment Plans was originally adopted in the 1980's and the format and presentation is generally outdated. Subsequent amendments have been separately documented and it is difficult to sort through these documents to determine the governing provisions of the Plans. In an effort to improve the "readability" of the Redevelopment Plans and clarify ambiguities that present challenges in implementation, the Agency desires to update the Redevelopment Plans by processing a minor amendment under the provisions of the CRL that will result in an Amended and Restated Plan for each Project Area. This action is consistent with the Agency's 2005 -2009 Redevelopment and Housing Implementation Plan which included the following among its Goals and Objectives: "Prepare amendments to each of the Agency's Redevelopment Plans in order to consolidate and update the original plans with previously adopted amendments into a more "user- friendly" single document and to eliminate ambiguities and inconsistencies." The attached proposed Agency Resolution to receive and authorize transmittal of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will initiate the process to amend and restate each of the Redevelopment Plans. Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans Each of the proposed Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will (i) reflect changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (ii) incorporate all prior amendments, (iii) update the land use provisions, (iv) clarify and restate the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improve the Agerna No. 4 Page 2 of 59 JOINT REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN UPDATE NOVEMBER 25, 2008 Page 3 format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. Once completed, the Amended and Restated Plans will provide the foundation for the Agency to pursue its downtown revitalization, affordable housing and economic development goals and other redevelopment activities. Update Plan Provisions to Current CRL Standards There have been substantial changes in the CRL since the Redevelopment Plans were adopted between 1980 and 1987. Changes include major redevelopment reform legislation in 1993 (Assembly Bill 1290) which among other things determining the amount of tax increment a taxing agency can receive and increased affordable housing production requirements. Some of the changes in legislation only apply to new redevelopment plan adoptions or certain types of amendments but others such as affordable housing production are applicable to all projects with few exceptions. Specific changes that affect the existing redevelopment plans include: • Section 309 Property Acquisition clarifies that the Agency does not have eminent domain authority. • Section 313 Payments to Taxing Agencies were added, which reflect the Agency's current requirement to make statutory pass - throughs as a result of the benefits from eliminating the debt establishment limit with respect to the Rancho Laguna Redevelopment Project No. 1. • Section 334 Replacement Housing tracks current requirements that 100% of the replacement housing units be available to persons in same income category or lower. • Section 336 New or Rehabilitated Units Developed within the Project Area describes the Agency's inclusionary housing requirements, which became effective in 1994. • Section 401 Permitted Land Uses references land uses allowed in the General Plan rather than describing in detail permitted land uses and has a provision that the land uses may change as the General Plan is amended from time to time. • Section 417 Non - discrimination and Non - segregation states that discrimination is prohibited and references the applicable sections of the Government Code rather than defining the specific nondiscrimination language to be included in leases and contracts. Age=i4V15 No. 4 Page 3 of 59 JOINT REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN UPDATE NOVEMBER 25, 2008 Page 4 Incorporation of Past Amendments As described above, Project Area No. I has been amended three times and Project Areas No. II and III have been amended twice. When a Redevelopment Plan is amended, the standard method is to prepare a document (the amendment) which highlights the text of the Plan to be deleted and /or added. After adopting the amendment, it is therefore necessary to reference both the amendment and the original plan when consulting the Redevelopment Plan. In the case of the Project Area No. I, a new Redevelopment Plan was adopted for the Added Area which was intended to amend the Original Redevelopment Plan. Adopting an Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan for Project Area No. I would eliminate the two separate Redevelopment Plans and replace these Plans with an Amended and Restated Plan that would also include the third amendment. A new Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans for Project Areas No. II and III would incorporate prior amendments and, therefore, would be easier to reference and avoid potential confusion from consulting the amendments when reading the Redevelopment Plans. The following table summarizes the Redevelopment Plan time and financial limits currently in effect based upon the various amendments. Redevelopment Plan Limits for Project Areas No. I, No. II, and No. III Debt Plan Debt Tax Bond Debt Eminent Establishment Effectiveness Repayment Increment Domain (receipt of tax increment) Project No. I Repealed 9/23/21 9/23/31 expired (Original Area) Adopted 9/23/80 $3 million $30 million Project No. I Repealed 7/20/22 7/20/32 annually for for both expired (Added Area) both areas areas Adopted 7/20/81 Project No. II Repealed for 7/18/24 7/18/34 $15 million $120 expired Adopted 7/18/83 affordable annually million housing debt — non-housing authority expired Project No. III Repealed for 9/8/28 9/8/38 $20 million $150 expired Adopted 9/8/87 affordable annually million housing debt — Non-housing authority expired Ag �r No. 4 Page 4 of 59 JOINT REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN UPDATE NOVEMBER 25, 2008 Page 5 Clarify Cumulative Tax Increment Limit The three existing Redevelopment Plans identify tax increment limits on a fiscal year basis. This annual allocation provides certainty in connection with Agency budgeting and the issuance of Agency debt by assuring annual allocations of tax increment throughout the Plan's time limit to repay debt. The proposed Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans clarify that any shortfall within the allowable annual allocation of tax increment is carried forward to the following year or years and is available to the Agency until the period for receipt of tax increment/repayment of debt has terminated. For example, if the Agency received $2 million in tax increment in a fiscal year from Project No. I which has a $3 million annual limit, the balance of $1 million would roll- over and be applied to future fiscal years such that the Agency could receive up to $4 million during the following fiscal year, assuming the Project Area generated $4 million in tax increment revenues. The Agency cannot receive tax increment in any fiscal year that exceeds the sum of the annual limit plus any unallocated revenues from previous years. Nor can the Agency receive tax increments over the life of the applicable Redevelopment Plan in excess of the aggregate of the annual limits. Project Area Committee (PAC) A Project Area Committee or PAC is an elected advisory body to the Agency and City Council consisting of residents, property owners, businesses and community organizations that are within the boundaries of the Project Area. (Community organizations may be outside the Project Area if they serve the Project Area.) The proposed resolution determining that a Project Area Committee need not be formed will document that this requirement of the CRL is not required for the adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans. A more detailed discussion is set forth below. Section 33385.3 (a) requires that a Project Area Committee be formed if the Agency proposes to amend a redevelopment plan that would do either of the following: 1. Grant the authority to the Agency to acquire by eminent domain property on which persons reside in a project area in which a substantial number of low- moderate - income persons reside; or 2. Add territory in which a substantial number of low- moderate - income persons reside and grant the authority to the Agency to acquire by eminent domain property on which person reside in the added territory. The proposed Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans do not propose to grant eminent domain authority or add territory. Therefore, formation of a PAC is not AgtritgaM No. 4 Page 5 of 59 JOINT REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN UPDATE NOVEMBER 25, 2008 Page 6 required. As an alternative, the Agency will hold an information meeting to make available the proposed Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans and to obtain the advice of residents, business and community organizations in the Project Areas on adoption of the proposed Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans. A summary of the community information meeting will be included in the Report to City Council that will be provided to the Agency and City Council prior to the joint public hearing on adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans. CEQA Determination Based on the attached Initial Study, there is no substantial evidence that the adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans may have a significant effect on the environment. Accordingly, the Agency will publish a Notice of Intent to adopt a Negative Declaration and mail the notice with the Initial Study /Negative Declaration to responsible agencies, trustee agencies and County Clerk for a 20 -day review period. At the joint public hearing on the adoption of the Amended and Restated Plans, the City and Agency will also hear testimony regarding the Initial Study /Negative Declaration. The Agency and City Council will consider the Initial Study /Negative Declaration, testimony, and all comments received during the public review process prior to action on the adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans. Notice Notice of this meeting was published in accordance with applicable requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act. Fiscal Impact There is no fiscal impact associated with the adoption of the proposed Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans. Recommendations 1) City Council adopt the attached Resolution determining that the formation of a Project Area Committee is not required. 2) Agency adopt the attached Resolution accepting the proposed Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans for the Lake Elsinore Rancho Laguna Redevelopment Project Areas No. I, No. II and No. III and the Initial Study and Negative Declaration prepared in connection therewith and referring the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans and the Initial Study and Negative Declaration to the Planning Commission for its report and recommendation and to all affected taxing entities and other interested persons for their information. Aggzeida Tern No. 4 Page 6 of 59 JOINT REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN UPDATE NOVEMBER 25, 2008 Page 7 Prepared by: Barbara Leibold City Attorney /Agency Counsel Approved by: Robert A. Brady ' f City Manager /Executive Director Agefgtagfergi No. 4 Page 7 of 59 RESOLUTION NO. 2008 - RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ACCEPTING THE PROPOSED AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE LAKE ELSINORE RANCHO LAGUNA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS NO. I, NO. II AND NO. III AND THE INITIAL STUDY AND NEGATIVE DECALARTION PREPARED IN CONNECTION THEREWITH AND REFERRING THE AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLANS AND THE INITIAL STUDY AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE FOR ITS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND TO ALL AFFECTED TAXING ENTITIES AND OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS FOR THEIR INFORMATION WHEREAS, the Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency ( "Agency ") is a community redevelopment agency duly created, established and authorized to transact business and exercise its powers, all under and pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law (Part 1 of Division 24, commencing with Section 33000, of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California ( "CRL "); and WHEREAS, the Agency is engaged in activities necessary and appropriate to carry out the Redevelopment Plans ( "Redevelopment Plans ") for the Lake Elsinore Rancho Laguna Redevelopment Project Areas No. I, No. II, and No. 11I ( "Project Areas ") which were adopted by the Agency's legislative body, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore ( "City Council "), by Ordinance No. 607 on September 23, 1980 and thereafter amended by Ordinance No. 624 on July 20, 1981, and Ordinance No. 1249 on February 26, 2008 (Project Area No. I), by Ordinance 671 on July 18, 1983 and thereafter amended by Ordinance No. 987 on November 8, 1994 and Ordinance No. 1249 on February 26, 2008 (Project Area No. II), and by Ordinance No. 815 on September 8, 1987 and thereafter amended by Ordinance No. 987 on November 8, 1994 and Ordinance No. 1249 on February 26, 2008 (Project Area No. III); and WHEREAS, the Agency desires to amend the Redevelopment Plans for Project Areas No. I ( "Fourth Amendment "), No. II ( "Third Amendment ") and No. III ( "Third Amendment ") collectively the "Amendments" pursuant to CRL Sections 33450 -33458 to incorporate into a single Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan for each Project Area No. 1, No. II and No. III all prior amendments, update the provisions of each Redevelopment Plan to reflect current CRL provisions, clarify and restate the time limits and financial limits of each Redevelopment Plan, update the land use designations for consistency with the City's General Plan as may be amended from time to time, and improve the format and presentation of the Redevelopment Plans; and WHEREAS, Sections 33346 and 33356 of the provide that, prior to a joint public hearing on a proposed amendment to a redevelopment plan, the redevelopment agency shall submit the proposed changes to the planning commission; and Agenda Item No. 4 Page 8 of 59 WHEREAS, the Agency desires to provide notice to the affected taxing entities regarding the proposed Amendments and the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans for Project Areas No. I, No. 11 and No. 111; and WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared and completed an Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan in draft form for each Project Area No. I, No. 11 and No. 111; and WHEREAS, the Agency is authorized and required to act as the "Lead Agency" per Sections 15050 and 15051 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq.); and WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared an Initial Study /Negative Declaration for the proposed Amendments in accordance with Sections 15070 and 15071 of the CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 15073 of the CEQA Guidelines, the Initial Study /Negative Declaration shall be transmitted to all affected taxing entities, responsible agencies, trustee agencies concerned with the proposed Amendments and every other public agency with jurisdiction by law over resources affected by the proposed Amendments. NOW, THEREFORE, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES RESOLVE, ORDER AND DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Agency Board accepts the Initial Study /Negative Declaration for the proposed Amendments and hereby authorizes Agency staff to transmit the Initial Study /Negative Declaration for the proposed Amendments to all affected taxing entities, responsible agencies, trustee agencies concerned with the proposed Amendments and every other public agency with jurisdiction by law over resources affected by the proposed Amendments in conformance with the Amendments' adoption schedule and all affecting legal requirements. SECTION 2. The Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans prepared for the proposed Amendments to the Redevelopment Plans for Rancho Laguna Redevelopment Project Areas No. I, No. 11 and No. 111 in the form submitted to the Agency Board and on file in the office of the Agency Secretary, are hereby accepted by the Agency, and are referred to the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore for their report and recommendation. SECTION 3. The Executive Director is hereby authorized and directed to transmit a copy of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans for Project Areas No. 1, No. 11 and No. 111 to all affected taxing entities. SECTION 4. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 9 of 59 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of November, 2008, by the following vote: THOMAS BUCKLEY, CHAIRMAN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: AGENCY SECRETARY, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVED AS TO FORM: BARBARA LEIBOLD, AGENCY COUNSEL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE Agenda Item No. 4 Page 10 of 59 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ) I, , Agency Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, hereby certify that Resolution No. was adopted by the Redevelopment Agency Board of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting held on the day of 2008, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: AGENCY SECRETARY, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE Agenda Item No. 4 Page 11 of 59 LADE LSITYORE - -` '?' DREAM EXTREME INITIAL STUDY/ NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.2oo8 -02 for Rancho Laguna Redevelopment Project Area I, II, and III Plan Update Prepared By: City of Lake Elsinore Community Development Department 13o South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 November 2008 Agenda Item No. 4 Page 12 of 59 INITIAL STUDY Introduction This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with relevant provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code §§ 21000, et seq.: "CEQA ") and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (14 Cal. Code Regs §§ 15000 et seq.: "CEQA Guidelines "). According to Section 15063(c) of the CEQA Guidelines, the purposes of an Initial Study are to: 1. Provide the Lead Agency (i.e., the City of Lake Elsinore) with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative Declaration; and to 2. Enable an applicant or Lead Agency to modify a project to mitigate adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to quality for a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration; and to 3. Assist in the preparation of an EIR, if one is required; and to 4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of a project; and to 5. Provide documentation of the factual basis for the findings in a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment; and to 6. Eliminate unnecessary EIRs; and to 7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 13 of 59 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Rancho Laguna Redevelopment Project Area Nos. I, II, and III Plan Amendments 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Redevelopment Agency of the City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, California 92530 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Steven McCarty, Redevelopment Project Manager (951) 674 -3124, ext. 314 4. Project Location: Rancho Laguna Redevelopment Project Area Nos. I, II, and III 5. Project Applicant Name and Address: Redevelopment Agency of the City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 6. General Plan Designation(s): Land uses shown in the Redevelopment Plans conform to the land uses established by the City's currently adopted General Plan. 7. Zoning: Zoning designations shown in the Redevelopment Plans conform to the zoning districts established by the City's current Zoning Map. 8. Description of Project: Each of the proposed Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will (i) incorporate all prior amendments, (ii) reflect changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) update the land use provisions to mirror the land uses established by the City's current General Plan, (iv) clarify and restate the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improve the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Varies by location within Rancho Laguna Redevelopment Project Area Nos. I, II, and III. 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.q., permits, financing approval, or participating agreement): None. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 14 of 59 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" or as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agricultural Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology /Soils ❑ Hazards & Hazardous ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use /Planning Materials ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population /Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑Traffic ❑ Utilities /Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: ® I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that although the 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 or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 15 of 59 T / July 18, 2008 Signature Date Wendy Worthey Principal Environmental Planner Print Name Title Agenda Item No. 4 Page 16 of 59 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATION CHECKLIST 1. 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 Tess than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analyses," cited in support of conclusions reached in other sections 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 15063(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. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 17 of 59 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. 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 Tess than significance. A. AESTHETICS Potentially Less Than y Si gni Less than fi Significant W cant Significant No Impact Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation 1. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ❑ 2. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within ❑ ❑ ❑ a state scenic highway ?) 3. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings ?) E: ❑ ❑ 4. Create a source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or ❑ ❑ ❑ nighttime views in the area? B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES* Potentially Less Than Less than Significant No Significant Significant Would the project: Impact With Impact Impact Mitigation 5. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the" ❑ ❑ California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? Agenda Item No. 4 Page 18 of 59 B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES* Potentially Less Than Less than Si No Significant Significant Would the project: Impact With Impact Impact Mitigation 6. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act❑ ❑ ❑ IZ contract? 7. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location ❑ ❑ IZI or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use? * In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agricultural and farmland. C. AIR QUALITY* Potentially Less Than Less than Significant No Significant Significant p act Would the project: Impact With Impact Mitigation 8. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of ❑ ❑ El the applicable air quality plan? 9. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or❑ ❑ ❑ El projected air quality violation? 10. 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 airD ❑ ❑ IZ quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? 11. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial ❑ ❑ IZ pollutant concentrations? 12. Create objectionable odors affecting a ❑ ❑ IZI substantial number of people? * Where available, the significant criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 19 of 59 D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Less Than Potentially Significant Less than Significant With Significant No Impact Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation 13. 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? 14. 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? 15. 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? 16. 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? 17. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological ❑ ❑ resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? 18. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other❑ ❑ ❑ approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Agenda Item No. 4 Page 20 of 59 E. CULTURAL RESOURCES Potentially Less Than Less than Significant No Significant Significant Would the project: Impact With Impact Impact Mitigation 19. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as❑ ❑ ❑ defined in Section15064.5? 20. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological❑ ❑ ❑ resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? 21. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or uniqueD ❑ ❑ geological feature? 22. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal❑ ❑ ❑ cemeteries? F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potentially Less Than Less than Significant . Significant With Signficant Impact Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation 23. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of Toss, injury, or death involving: a. 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 known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Pub. 42. b. Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑ c. Seismic - related ground failure, including❑ o o liquefaction? d. Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ 24. Result in substantial soil erosion, or the❑ ❑ ❑ loss of topsoil? Agenda Item No. 4 Page 21 of 59 F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potentially Less Than Less than Significant No Significant With Significant Impact Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation 25. 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 26. 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? ❑ ❑ ❑ El 27. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systemEl ❑ ❑ IZ where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? G. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS Less Than MATERIALS Potentially Significant Less than No Significant With Significant Impact Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact 28. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine ❑ ❑ tZ transport, use or disposal of hazardous' materials? 29. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable up -set and accident ❑ ❑ conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? 30. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within❑ ❑ ❑ IZ one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Agenda Item No. 4 Page 22 of 59 G. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS Less Than MATERIALS Potentially Significant Less than No Significant With Significant Impact Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact 31. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code D 0 IZI Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 32. 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? 33. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety o IZ hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 34. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 35. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including wher o IZ wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas' or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY potentially Less Than Less than Significant No Significant p act Would the project: Impact With Impact Mitigation 36. Violate any water quality standards or0 o o waste discharge requirements? Agenda Item No. 4 Page 23 of 59 H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY potentially Less Than Less than Significant No Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Impact With Impact Mitigation 7. 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❑ ❑ ❑ IZ production rate of preexisting nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 38. 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ IZ amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? 39. Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or❑ ❑ ❑ IZ provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 40. Otherwise substantially degrade water ❑ ❑ IZI quality? 41. Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood ❑ ❑ El Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? 42. Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect❑ ❑ ❑ El flood flows? 43. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of Toss, injury or death involving El flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? 44. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ CZ Agenda Item No. 4 Page 24 of 59 I. LAND USE AND PLANNING Pl) Less Than Potentially Less than Si Significant W hificant i Significant No Impact Would the project: Impact Wth Impact Mitigation 45. Physically divide an established ❑ ❑ Eg community? 46. 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❑ ❑ El plan, local coastal program, or zoning IZ ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 47. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community❑ ❑ ❑ conservation plan? J. MINERAL RESOURCES Potentially Less Than Less than Significant No Significant With Significant Impact Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact 48. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value top ❑ ❑ the region and the residents of the state? 49. 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? K. NOISE Potentially Less Than Less than Significant No Significant With Significant Impact Would the project result in: Impact Impact Mitigation 50. 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? Agenda Item No. 4 Page 25 of 59 K. NOISE Potentially Less Than Less than Significant No Significant With S Impact Would the project result in: Impact Impact Mitigation 51. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground -borne vibration orD ❑ ❑ IZ ground -borne noise levels? 52.A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity❑ ❑ ❑ IZ above levels existing without the project? 53.A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ ❑ project vicinity above levels without the project? 54. 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? 55. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose❑ El El people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? L. POPULATION AND HOUSING Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant With Significant Impact Would the project: Impact Impact Mitigation 56. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or❑ ❑ ❑ IZ indirectly (for example, through an extension of roads or other infra - structure)? 57. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of 0 ❑ ❑ replacement housing elsewhere? 58. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction ofD ❑ ❑ IZ replacement housing elsewhere? Agenda Item No. 4 Page 26 of 59 M. PUBLIC SERVICES* Less Than Potentially Less than Significant Would the project result in substant i a ' Si g nificant With Significant No Impact adverse physical impacts to the following: Impa Mitigation Impact 59. Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ El 60. Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ 61. Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ EZ 62. Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ El 63. Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ IZ * Include potential effects associated with the provision of 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. N. RECREATION Less Than Potentially Significant Less than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact 64. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that❑ ❑ ❑ IZI substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 65. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which0 ❑ ❑ IZI might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? O. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Potentially Less Than Less than Significant No Significant Significant Would the project: Impact With Impact Impact Mitigation 66. 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 theD ❑ ❑ El number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? Agenda Item No. 4 Page 27 of 59 O. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Less Than Potentially Less than Significant No Would the project: S act ant With Si act ant Impact p Mitigation p 67. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by❑ ❑ ❑ the County congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? 68. Result in a change in traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels❑ ❑ ❑ or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? 69. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or ❑ ❑ dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? 70. Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ 71. Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ 72. Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative ❑ ❑ ❑ transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Less Than Potentially Less than Significant Significant Significant No With Impact Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact 73. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality❑ ❑ ❑ Control Board? 74. 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? 75. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of 0 ❑ ❑ which could cause significant environmental effects? Agenda Item No. 4 Page 28 of 59 P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS potentially Less Than Less than Significant Significant Significant No With Impact Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact 76. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements ❑ ❑ and resources, or are new or expanded" entitlements needed? 77. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate❑ ❑ ❑ IZ capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? 78. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the❑ ❑ ❑ project's solid waste disposal needs? 79. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid❑ ❑ ❑ waste? Q. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF potentially Less Than Less than SIGNIFICANCE Si Significant Significant No Impact With Impact Impact Mitigation 80. 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❑ ❑ ❑ IZ animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Agenda Item No. 4 Page 29 of 59 Q. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF potentially Less Than Less than SIGNIFICANCE Significant No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact 81. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a o 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)? 82. Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? -End of Environmental Impact Evaluation Checklist - Agenda Item No. 4 Page 30 of 59 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATION DISCUSSION The following is a discussion of the potential impacts associated with the approval of the proposed project, as identified in the above Environmental Impact Evaluation Checklist. Explanations are provided for each item below. A. AESTHETICS. Would the project: 1) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. Additionally, all applicable development projects will be reviewed pursuant to the City's design review process. The design review process involves an additional layer of review for aesthetics, and provides an opportunity to incorporate additional conditions to increase the aesthetic value of the project. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Mitigation Measures: None. 2) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact: See A -1 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not substantially damage scenic resources. Mitigation Measures: None. 3) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Agenda Item No. 4 Page 31 of 59 No Impact: See A -1 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Mitigation Measures: None. 4) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? No Impact: See A -1 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Mitigation Measures: None. B. AGRICULTURAL 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 Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: 5) 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? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. According to map data provided by the California State Farmland Mapping and Agenda Item No. 4 Page 32 of 59 Monitoring Program (FMMP), no prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance exist in the City of Lake Elsinore and its Redevelopment Project Areas. However, the map indicates that the City contains a small area of unique farmland. This area consists of approximately 10.25 acres in the City's East Lake Specific Plan (Redevelopment Projects Areas II and III) that is currently zoned for low /medium residential and recreational land uses. This project would not directly impact the development of the area of unique farmland identified in the FMMP. Farmland will not be converted to urban uses as a result of the City's adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans. Mitigation Measures: None. 6) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact: See B -5 above. The City of Lake Elsinore and its Redevelopment Project Areas contain no land zoned for agricultural use. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. Mitigation Measures: None. 7) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which due to their location or nature, could result in the conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use? No Impact: See B -5 above. There is no known farmland in the City of Lake Elsinore or its Redevelopment Project Areas; therefore the proposed project could not result in the conversion of farmland to a non - agricultural use. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not involve other changes in the existing environment, which due to their location or nature, could result in the conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use. Mitigation Measures: None. C. 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: 8) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions Agenda Item No. 4 Page 33 of 59 to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan. Mitigation Measures: None. 9) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? No Impact: See C -8 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Mitigation Measures: None. 10) 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)? No Impact: See C -8 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is under non - attainment. Mitigation Measures: None. 11) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? No Impact: See C -8 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Mitigation Measures: None. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 34 of 59 12) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? No Impact: See C -8 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Mitigation Measures: None. D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: 13) 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? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. As a Permittee under the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), the City of Lake Elsinore contributes to the preservation of over 500,000 acres of open space and conservation area for 146 species of wildlife. The program was created to implement federal and state law found in the Federal Endangered Species Act and the State's Natural Communities Conservation Planning Act. Lake Elsinore Area Plan, found in Section 3.3.3 of the MSHCP, designates specific areas of the City for conservation and protection from development. These areas include the wetlands that surround Lake Elsinore and the floodplain to the east of the lake, among other habitats that fall within Redevelopment Project Areas. Altogether, the Elsinore Area Plan calls for the conservation of between 66,500 and 73,315 acres of land within the area, which includes 4,830 to 7,870 acres within the City of Lake Elsinore. Current approximations indicate that 3,500 acres of land have been reserved within the City and its Sphere of Influence in accordance with the Agenda Item No. 4 Page 35 of 59 MHSCP. Nothing in the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans violate the MSHCP or the City's obligations thereunder. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not have a substantial adverse effect, directly or through habitat modification, on any protected species and will not cause conflict between the project and any adopted city, county, regional, state or federal policy, goal, or plan pertaining to the preservation and /or conservation of biological resources in the City of Lake Elsinore and its Redevelopment Project Areas. Mitigation Measures: None. 14) 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? No Impact: See D -13 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not have any 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. Mitigation Measures: None. 15) 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? No Impact: See D -13 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not have any effect on federally protected wetlands. Mitigation Measures: None. 16) Interfere substantially with the movement of anv 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? No Impact: See D- 13above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not substantially interfere with the movement of any native, resident or migratory fish or wildlife species. Mitigation Measures: None. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 36 of 59 17) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact: See D -13 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Mitigation Measures: None. 18) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact: See D -13 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved plan. Mitigation Measures: None E. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: 19) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the and use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 37 of 59 For these reasons, adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not cause any change in significance of a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. Mitigation Measures: None. 20) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5? No Impact: See E -19 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not cause any change in the significance of an archaeological resource. Mitigation Measures: None. 21) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? No Impact: See E -19 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource, site, or geological feature. Mitigation Measures: None. 22) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? No Impact: See E -19 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in the disruption of any human remains, including those interred outside of formal ceremonies. It is the City's standard policy to condition all development projects to require compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, which says that if human remains are discovered on any project, all work shall stop until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to the origin and disposition of the remains pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. Mitigation Measures: None. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 38 of 59 F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: 23) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: a.) 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. No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the and use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not expose people or structures to adverse effects or risk of loss, injury or death in connection with the rupture of a known earthquake fault. Mitigation Measures: None. b.) Strong seismic ground shaking? No Impact: See F -23 (a) above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not expose people or structures to adverse effects or risk of loss, injury or death in connection with strong seismic ground shaking. Mitigation Measures: None. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 39 of 59 c.) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? No Impact: See F -23 (a) above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not expose people or structures to adverse effects or risk of loss, injury or death in connection with seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction. Mitigation Measures: None. d.) Landslides? No Impact: See F -23 (a) above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not expose people or structures to adverse effects or risk of loss, injury or death in connection with landslides. Mitigation Measures: None. 24) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? No Impact: See F -23 (a) above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in substantial soil erosion or the Toss of topsoil. Mitigation Measures: None. 25) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? No Impact: See F -23 (a). Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in a project being located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable or would become unstable as a result of the project. The Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans does not change zoning designations or the location of permitted uses. Mitigation Measures: None. 26) 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? Agenda Item No. 4 Page 40 of 59 No Impact: See F -23 (a) above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in a project being located on expansive soil. The Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans do not change zoning designations or the location of permitted uses. Mitigation Measures: None. 27) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal system where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No Impact: See F -23 (a) above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans does not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems. Mitigation Measures: None. G. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: 28) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not create a significant hazard to the public or environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Mitigation Measures: None. 29) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably Agenda Item No. 4 Page 41 of 59 foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? No Impact: See G -28 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not 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. Mitigation Measures: None. 30) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact: See G -28 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in the emission of hazardous emissions or the handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste at all let alone within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Mitigation Measures: None. 31) 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? No Impact: See G -28 above. The Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans does not involve hazardous materials. This impact is not applicable. Mitigation Measures: None. 32) 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? No Impact: See G -28 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in a particular project being located next to an airport land use. In the event that a future project is located near the Lake Elsinore airport, that project will be analyzed at the time that a development application is submitted. Mitigation Measures: None. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 42 of 59 33) 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? No Impact: See G -32 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 34) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact: See G -28 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 35) 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? No Impact: See G -28 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not 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. Mitigation Measures: None. H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: 36) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 43 of 59 Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Mitigation Measures: None. 37) 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)? No Impact: See H -36 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not 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. Mitigation Measures: None. 38) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of the surface runoff in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? No Impact: See H -36 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of the surface run -off in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off -site. Mitigation Measures: None. 39) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? No Impact: See H -36 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Mitigation Measures: None. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 44 of 59 40) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? No Impact: See H -36 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not substantially degrade water quality. Mitigation Measures: None. 41) 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? No Impact: See H -36 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not 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. When a development project is submitted for the City's review, the City will analyze whether the development project falls within a 100 -year flood hazard area. Mitigation Measures: None. 42) Place within a 100 year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? No Impact: See H -36 and H -41 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows. Mitigation Measures: None. 43) 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? No Impact: See H -36 and H -41 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not 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. Mitigation Measures: None. 44) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Agenda Item No. 4 Page 45 of 59 No Impact: See H -36 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow. Mitigation Measures: None. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: 45) Physically divide an established community? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not physically divide an established community. Mitigation Measures: None 46) 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? No Impact: See 1 -45 above. The Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans conform to the City's established General Plan Land Use Map, adopted Specific Plans, and adopted Zoning Ordinance. Any potential environmental impacts associated with development projects which occur within the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans' Project Areas will be analyzed at the time that the development application is submitted. Mitigation Measures: None. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 46 of 59 47) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact: See D -13 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Mitigation Measures: None. J. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: 48) 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? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not 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. Mitigation Measures: None. 49) 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? No Impact: See J -48 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not 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. Mitigation Measures: None. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 47 of 59 K. NOISE. Would the project result in: 50) 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? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. The construction of any future development project within the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans' Project Areas must comply with noise regulations and must adhere to City regulations governing hours of construction, noise levels generated by construction and mechanical equipment, and the allowed level of ambient noise (Chapter 17.78 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, as amended from time to time). Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not expose people to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the City's General Plan or Noise Ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Mitigation Measures: None. 51) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or ,groundborne noise levels? No Impact: See K -50 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not expose people to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Mitigation Measures: None. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 48 of 59 52) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? No Impact: See K -50 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels throughout the City or its Redevelopment Project Areas above levels existing without the project. Mitigation Measures: None. 53) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? No Impact: See K -50 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Mitigation Measures: None. 54) 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? No Impact: See G -32 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in any projects being located within an airport land use plan. Mitigation Measures: None. 55) 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? No Impact: See K -54 above. Mitigation Measures: None. L. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: 56) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by Agenda Item No. 4 Page 49 of 59 proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly. Mitigation Measures: None. 57) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact: See L -56 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Mitigation Measures: None. 58) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact: See L -56 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans would not displace substantial numbers of people. Mitigation Measures: None. M. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with Agenda Item No. 4 Page 50 of 59 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 ratio, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public service: 59) Fire protection? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. Through the permit process, impact fees are paid to off -set the cost of any increase to services such as police, fire, parks, schools etc. Development impact fees are collected upon issuance of a building permit, to reduce any potential impacts to local services. Any future development projects within the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans' Project Areas will be required to pay all required impact fees to offset any potential impact on public services. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in a substantial adverse physical impact associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection. Mitigation Measures: None 60) Police protection? No Impact: See M -59 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in an adverse physical impact associated with the provision of new or physically altered police protection. Mitigation Measures: None. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 51 of 59 61) Schools? No Impact: See M -59 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in an adverse physical impact associated with the provision of new or physically altered schools. Mitigation Measures: None. 62) Parks? No Impact: See M -59 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in an adverse physical impact associated with the provision of new or physically altered parks. Mitigation Measures: None. 63) Other Public Facilities? No Impact: See M -59 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in an adverse physical impact associated with the provision of other new or physically altered public facilities. Mitigation Measures: None. N. RECREATION 64) Would the proposed 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? No Impact: See M -59 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. Mitigation Measures: None. 65) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse effect on the environment? No Impact: Refer to response M -59 and M -62 above. Because the City's action Agenda Item No. 4 Page 52 of 59 only involves adoption of Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans, it does not include recreational facilities. However, new additional recreational facility opportunities will be pursued when development applications are submitted. Mitigation Measures: None. 0. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: 66) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (Le., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic Toad and capacity of the street system. Mitigation Measures: None. 67) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? No Impact: See 0-66 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. Agenda Item No. 4 Page 53 of 59 Mitigation Measures: None. 68) Result in a change in traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? No Impact: See 0-66 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in a change in traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. Mitigation Measures: None. 69) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.q., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.q., farm equipment)? No Impact: See 0 -66 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature. Mitigation Measures: None. 70) Result in inadequate emergency access? No Impact: See 0 -66 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in inadequate emergency access. Mitigation Measures: None. 71) Result in inadequate parking capacity? No Impact: See 0 -66 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not result in inadequate parking capacity. Mitigation Measures: None. 72) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.q., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Agenda Item No. 4 Page 54 of 59 No Impact: See 0 -66 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. Mitigation Measures: None. P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: 73) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Mitigation Measures: None. 74) 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? No Impact: See P - 73 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not 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. Mitigation Measures: None. 75) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or Agenda Item No. 4 Page 55 of 59 expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Impact: See P -73 above. Adoption of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will not 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. Mitigation Measures: None. 76) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? No Impact: See P -73 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 77) 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? No Impact: See P -73 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 78) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? No Impact: See P -73 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 79) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No Impact: See P -73 above. Additionally, Ordinance 1167, a construction and demolition recycling ordinance, to comply with the California Integrated Waste Management Act. This Act requires that jurisdictions maintain a 50% or better diversion rate for solid waste. The City implements this requirement through Chapter 14.12 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. Therefore, future Agenda Item No. 4 Page 56 of 59 development within the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans' Project Areas would not cause any significant impacts related to solid waste. Mitigation Measures: None. Q. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. 80) 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? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. The project involves amending and restating the three Redevelopment Plans and no physical development activity that could affect biological, cultural, or historical resources. Therefore, the proposed Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plans will have no impact on any sensitive plant or animal species or habitat, or on any important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Likewise, there will be no conflict with any adopted city, county, regional, state or federal policies, goals, or plans pertaining to the preservation and /or conservation of biological, cultural, or historical resources in the City of Lake Elsinore and its Redevelopment Project Areas. The project involves no changes to the zoning designation of property or to the locations where development is permitted. 81) 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 Agenda Item No. 4 Page 57 of 59 proiects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future proiects) ? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. 82) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No Impact: The proposed project involves the clerical exercise of (i) incorporating all prior amendments for each Plan into one document, (ii) reflecting changes in the CRL that impose additional requirements and restrictions not reflected in the original text, (iii) updating the land use provisions to mirror the land use designations set forth in the City's approved General Plan, (iv) clarifying and restating the time limits and financial limits, and (v) improving the format and presentation of the text and the Project Areas Maps. At this time there are no development proposals included as part of the project. Identification and mitigation of specific direct impacts would be speculative at this time. The Agency and /or City will analyze the direct environmental impacts of all projects that occur within redevelopment project areas on a project -by- project basis when those projects are submitted to the Agency and /or City for review. - End of Environmental Impact Evaluation Discussion - Agenda Item No. 4 Page 58 of 59 REFERENCES FOR ENIVRONMENTAL EVALUATION The following references were utilized during preparation of this Initial Study: 1) City of Lake Elsinore General Plan 2) City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Update Background Study Report 3) CEQA Air Quality Handbook, South Coast Air Quality Management District, revised 1993 4) Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, as amended 5) Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Agenda Item No. 4 Page 59 of 59