HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Reso No 2011-070 Cerfitying Recirculated EIR (SCH No. 2005121019)RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -070
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE CERTIFYING RECIRCULATED PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE, HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE, DOWNTOWN
MASTER PLAN AND ANNEXATION NO. 81 (SCH NO.
2005121019)
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore initiated a comprehensive update of
its General Plan, a Housing Element update, a Downtown Master Plan
(consisting of the Downtown Master Plan, Downtown Code and Key to
Downtown Implementation Plan), a Climate Action Plan and Annexation No. 81
(also referred to as the 3rd Street Annexation) (the "Project "); and
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore (the "City ") has prepared a Program
Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2005121019: the "PEIR ")
to be prepared on the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act (California Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.: "CEQA "), the
State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
(California Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.: the "State CEQA
Guidelines "), and the City's Procedures for Implementing the State CEQA
Guidelines and its other procedures relating to environmental evaluation of public
and private projects; and
WHEREAS, the City transmitted for filing a Notice of Preparation of the
Draft PEIR on November 15, 2005 in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines,
forwarded the Draft PEIR to the State Clearinghouse again on December 5, 2005
for distribution to those agencies which have jurisdiction by law with respect to
the Project and to other interested persons and agencies, and sought the
comments of such persons and agencies; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15082(c)(1), on
November 30, 2005, the City held a duly noticed scoping meeting in order to
expedite consultation regarding the scope and content of the environmental
information in the Draft PEIR; and
WHEREAS, the City transmitted for filing a Notice of Completion of the
Draft PEIR and thereafter, in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, forwarded
the Draft PEIR to the State Clearinghouse for distribution to those agencies
which have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project and to other interested
persons and agencies, and sought the comments of such persons and agencies;
and
WHEREAS, notice to all interested persons and agencies inviting
comments on the Draft PEIR was published in accordance with the provisions of
CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines; and
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2011- 070
PAGE 2OF5
WHEREAS, the State Clearinghouse posted the Draft PEIR for a 45 -day
public comment period which ran from December 5, 2007 to January 18, 2008;
and
WHEREAS, in 2008, the City began work on a substantive revision of the
Project, which included revisions to the Land Use Element and Land Use Map,
an updated Housing Element, a Downtown Lake Elsinore Master Plan, and a
Climate Action Plan; and
WHEREAS, the combined changes to the General Plan Update made
between 2008 and 2011 triggered the need to update, revise, and where
necessary expand upon the analysis of General Plan Update impacts presented
in the PEIR; and
WHEREAS, due to the combined changes made to the proposed project,
the City determined that it was appropriate to reissue the Notice of Preparation of
a Draft Environmental Impact Report; and
WHEREAS, on or about May 26, 2011, the Notice of Preparation of a
Draft Environmental Impact Report (Reissued) and a revised description of
potential adverse impacts were distributed to the State Clearinghouse,
responsible agencies, and other interested parties; and
WHEREAS, the City transmitted for filing a Notice of Availability /Notice of
Completion of a Recirculated Draft Program Environmental Impact Report
( "RDP -EIR ") and in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines forwarded the
RDP -EIR to the State Clearinghouse, for distribution to those agencies which
have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project, and to other interested
persons and agencies, and sought the comments of such persons and agencies;
and
WHEREAS, notice to all interested persons and agencies inviting
comments on the RDP -EIR was published in accordance with the provisions of
CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and posted at the Office of the County
Clerk of Riverside County on September 7, 2011; and
WHEREAS, all actions required to be taken by applicable law related to
the preparation, circulation, and review of the Draft PEIR and the RDP -EIR have
been taken; and
WHEREAS, the Draft PEIR prepared for the Project was sent to the
Planning Commission and the Planning Commission held public hearings to
receive public input on the adequacy of the Draft PEIR on April 15, 2008, April
29, 2008, May 6, 2008, May 20, 2008, and September 16, 2008; and
- WHEREAS, the RDP -EIR and the Final Recirculated Program EIR
('Recirculated Program EIR ") were sent to the Planning Commission and the
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2011- 070
PAGE 3 OF 5
Planning Commission held a public hearing to receive public input on the
adequacy of the Recirculated Program EIR on November 15, 2011; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has been delegated with the
responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council for certifying
Environmental Impact Reports, and on November 15, 2001 the Planning
Commission recommended certification of the Recirculated Program EIR; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing to receive public input
on the adequacy of the Recirculated Program EIR on December 13, 2011.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council has considered and evaluated all written
and oral staff reports and comments received from persons who have reviewed
the Recirculated Program EIR, public testimony and such other matters as are
reflected in the record of the public hearing on the Project and the Recirculated
Program EIR.
SECTION 2. The City Council finds that the Recirculated Program EIR for
the Project is adequate and has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the
State CEQA Guidelines, and local procedures adopted by the City pursuant
thereto. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information
contained in the Recirculated Program EIR and finds that the Recirculated
Program EIR represents the independent judgment of the City.
SECTION 3. The City Council hereby makes, adopts, and incorporates
herein as its "findings of fact" regarding the potential environmental impacts of
the Project, the analysis and conclusions set forth in the Recirculated Program
EIR (including, without limitation, the mitigation measures therein set forth); the
following summarizes those conclusions:
a. The Recirculated Program EIR determined that the Project will
have no potentially significant impacts upon Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Mineral
Resources, Population and Housing and Utilities and Service Systems and as a
result, no mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed General Plan Update are required for these
issue areas.
b. The Recirculated Program EIR also determined that the Project will
have potentially significant environmental impacts upon Aesthetics, Biological
Resources, Cultural and Paleontological Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use & Planning
(including Agricultural Resources), Parks and Recreation and Public Services;
but that these impacts will be mitigated to below a level of significance through
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2011- 070
PAGE 4 OF 5
compliance with the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in the
proposed General Plan Update and compliance with the mitigation measures set
forth in the Recirculated Program EIR.
C. The Recirculated Program EIR also determined that the Project will
have significant and unavoidable project -level and cumulative impacts related to
Air Quality, Noise and Transportation and Circulation, which cannot be mitigated
to below a level of significance.
d. All feasible mitigation measures, which are within the jurisdiction of
the City, as identified in the Recirculated Program EIR have been incorporated
into the Project and represent the fullest extent to which the Project - related
impacts can be reasonably avoided and /or substantially lessened.
e. The Recirculated Program EIR did not identify alternatives to the
Project which would reduce environmental impacts while still substantially
achieving Project objectives, and as such, the proposed Project was determined
to be the environmentally superior alternative.
SECTION 4. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ( "MMRP ") for
the Project has been prepared in accordance with Section 21081.6 of CEQA, and
the City Council hereby adopts the MMRP.
SECTION 5. The City Council finds that for each of the significant impacts
which are subject to a finding under CEQA Section 21081(a)(3), that each of the
social, economic, and environmental benefits of the Project, independent of the
other benefits, outweigh the potential significant unavoidable adverse impacts
and render acceptable each and every one of the unavoidable adverse
environmental impacts. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations has
been prepared and is attached hereto as Exhibit A (Findings of Fact) and
incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 6. Based upon all of the evidence presented and the above
findings, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore certifies the Recirculated
Program Environmental Impact Report for the Project with Errata and Responses
to Comments, the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations,
and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
SECTION 7. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its
passage and adoption.
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2011- 070
PAGE 5 OF 5
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of December 2011.
Brian Tis ale, Mayor
City of Lake Elsinore
ATTEST: /��j/�
V� -
UVV ""'
Virginia I om
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Aa6w &6�
B rbara Leib-old
City Attorney
City of Lake Elsinore
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE )
I, Virginia J. Bloom, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, hereby
certify that Resolution No. 2011 -070 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake
Elsinore, California, at a regular meeting held on the 13th day of December 2011, and
that the same was adopted by the following vote:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN
Council Member Melendez, Council Member Hickman, Council
Member Weber, Mayor Pro Tern Magee and Mayor Tisdale
None
None
None
CITY OF
LSINOKE
DREAM EXTREME
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS AND
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
REGARDING THE RECIRCULATED PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE GENERAL PLAN
UPDATE
SCH #2005121019
PREPARED BY:
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
130 SOUTH MAIN STREET
LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530
DECEMBER 2011
EXHIBIT A
4
for
RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -070
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
CITY OF ,�
LAKE ��LSII10R
DREAM EXTREME
1.0 BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
FINDINGS OF FACT
The City of Lake Elsinore has completed a Recirculated Program Environmental Impact Report
( "RP -EIR ") (State Clearinghouse Number 2005121019) for the Lake Elsinore General Plan
Update, Annexation No. 81 (also referred to as the "3rd Street Annexation "), Downtown Master
Plan, Housing Element, and Climate Action Plan. The City of Lake Elsinore (City) is the Lead
Agency for the purposes of preparing and certifying this RP -EIR pursuant to Sections 15050 and
15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section 15000 et seq.)
The purpose of this RP -EIR is to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the City of
Lake Elsinore's proposed General Plan Update (GPU). The proposed GPU incorporates the
City's related updated Housing Element. This RP -EIR also provides a policy -level California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) evaluation of three related projects: the proposed
Downtown Master Plan (DMP), the proposed Annexation No. 81 (referred to herein as the "3rd
Street Annexation') and the proposed Climate Action Plan (CAP). The RP -EIR is an
informational document intended for use by the City of Lake Elsinore decision - makers and
members of the general public in evaluating the potential environmental effects of the proposed
GPU and related projects.
In compliance with Section 21002.1 of CEQA and Section 15002 of the State CEQA Guidelines,
the City of Lake Elsinore, as Lead Agency, has prepared this RP -EIR in order to (1) inform the
general public, the local community, responsible and interested public agencies and the City's
decision - making bodies and other organizations, entities, and interested persons of the potential
environmental effects of the proposed project, feasible measures to reduce potentially
significant environmental effects, and alternatives that could reduce or avoid the significant
effects of the proposed project, (2) enable the City to consider environmental consequences
when deciding whether to approve the proposed project and (3) to satisfy the substantive and
procedural requirements of CEQA. Furthermore, the RP -EIR will enable the City to tier later
environmental documents pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15152.
The proposed project consists of five separate parts: Lake Elsinore General Plan Update,
Annexation No. 81, Downtown Master Plan, Housing Element and Climate Action Plan as
summarized below.
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
California Government Code Section 65300 requires each city and county in California to adopt
a comprehensive, long -term general plan. This general plan must cover a local jurisdiction's
G E;1 GI2A 1., P1, ,AN U PDA"1'6_
I' I N A l., P R O D It A M F I R
D1 CLM131 a 201 I
PACs 7
CITY OF
F l Dl < s al FACT LAKE r,LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
entire planning area and address the broad range of issues associated with its development.
Pursuant to this requirement, the City of Lake Elsinore has prepared an update to its General
Plan. The proposed General Plan Update would:
• Replace the existing 1990 City of Lake Elsinore General Plan;
Incorporate revisions to the City's Land Use Element and Land Use Map. The Plan will
also include 16 District Plans that cover specific, defined geographic areas within the
City, to provide a more precise focus and to recognize the unique and treasured assets of
the individual communities that make up the City;
• Revise the format of the City's General Plan by dividing the Plan into an introduction
and three topical chapters.
The General Plan Update's planning horizon is 2030. While the General Plan Update does not
present a specific plan for individual development, it establishes a framework for future
projects and actions that may be taken in furtherance of the general plan's goals and policies.
ANNEXATION NO. 81
Annexation No. 81 (also referred to as the "3rd Street Annexation') consists of the proposed
annexation of approximately 320 acres from the County to the City. The 3rd Street Annexation
entails pre - zoning the parcels for consistency with City zones. This action will require revision
of the City's Zoning Ordinance to properly implement the pre - zoning conditions. The 3rd
Street Annexation territory is currently within the City's Sphere of Influence.
DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN
The Downtown Master Plan will provide a vision and strategic framework to guide the future
development of the City's downtown area. The purpose of the Downtown Master Plan is to
identify the goals, objectives and desires of the community and offer approaches to implement
them.
HOUSING ELEMENT
The Housing Element is one of the seven mandatory elements of the General Plan. Through its
policies, procedures, and incentives, the updated Housing Element will provide an action -plan
for maintaining and expanding the housing supply for all income levels in the City of Lake
Elsinore. Lake E1singre's Housing Element for the planning period of July 1, 2008 to June 30,
2014
C V tiRA I, PLAN UPDA'P F.
1�
I N A I PIt4DGRAM liI
DECD[ "B 1l R 201 1
1'AC:r•. 2
CITY OF
LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
11NDINGS OF FACT
The Climate Action Plan (CAP) is the City of Lake Elsinore's long -range plan to reduce local
greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change.
1.2 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND EIR SCOPING
This document complies with the provisions of CEQA (California Public Resources Code,
Sections 21000 et seq-, the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section
15000 et seq.) and the City's Procedures for Implementing the State CEQA Guidelines. In
compliance with CEQA, the City of Lake Elsinore has solicited and considered comments from
Responsible and Trustee Agencies, members of the public, and other interested parties during
the proposed project's various environmental review processes:
• In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15082, the City prepared and distributed a
Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR. The NOP was distributed on or about
November 15, 2005. In furtherance of tribal consultation, the NOP was distributed to
local Native American tribes in December 2005. Communications with State
Clearinghouse (SCH) staff on December 2, 2005, showed that the November NOP had
not been received by some agencies. Based on direction from SCH staff, the November
NOP was resent for SCH distribution on December 2, 2005.
• In compliance with Section 21083.9 of CEQA and Section 15082 (c)(1) of the State CEQA
Guidelines, the City held a public scoping meeting on November 30, 2005, to receive
public and agency comments.
• Comments received from the public and agencies during the public review period for
the NOP and the public scoping meeting were considered in the preparation of the RP-
EIR prepared for the proposed project.
• In 2007, a draft Program EIR (PEIR) was prepared for the proposed project in accordance
with then - current CEQA regulations and guidelines. The first draft PEIR was circulated
for a 45 -day public review period on or about December 6, 2007. Notification was
provided to the State Clearinghouse (SCH), responsible and trustee agencies, and all
interested parties and jurisdictions pursuant to the requirements of Section 15087 of the
State CEQA Guidelines. Approximately 180 comments were received by the City
during this original 45 -day review period. These comments were evaluated and
responded to in accordance with Section 15088 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
• Combined changes to the General Plan Update made between 2008 and 2011, including
revisions to the Land Use Element and Land Use Map, the updating of the Traffic
G 17.N F:RA 1.. PI.. .AN L.I PDA "rE
1'1NA1... Paoc::11 An1 It, IR
D LCr M131:a 201 1
PALL 3
CITY OF
FINDINGS OF FA( l
(461 rh00310'1
DREAM EXTREME
Impact Study to reflect those changes, revisions to the GPU in order to incorporate an
updated Housing Element that was not a part of the original General Plan scope, the
provisions of a Downtown Lake Elsinore Master Plan, and a Climate Action Plan,
triggered the need to update, revise, and where necessary expand upon the analysis of
General Plan Update impacts presented in the first draft PEIR.
• Due to the combined changes made to the proposed project, the City of Lake Elsinore
determined that it was appropriate to reissue the Notice of Preparation of a Draft
Environmental Impact Report (NOP). The reissued NOP for an EIR and a revised
description of potential adverse impacts were distributed to the State Clearinghouse,
responsible agencies, and other interested parties on or about May 26, 2011. Comments
received from the public and agencies during the public review period for the reissued
NOP were considered in the preparation of the RP -EIR prepared for the proposed
project.
• In 2011, a Recirculated Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ( "RDP- EIR ") was
prepared for the proposed project was prepared pursuant to the provisions of CEQA,
the State CEQA Guidelines and the City's Procedures for Implementing the State CEQA
Guidelines. The RDP -EIR was circulated for a 45 -day public review period on or about
September 6, 2011. Notification was provided to the State Clearinghouse (SCH),
responsible and trustee agencies, and all interested parties and jurisdictions pursuant to
the requirements of Section 15087 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Twenty comment
letters were received by the City during this 45 -day review period. These comments
were evaluated and responded to in accordance with Section 15088 of the State CEQA
Guidelines.
1.3 FINAL EIR CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT
APPROVAL PROCESS
1.3.1 FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA
The City Council (the decision - making body) of the City of Lake Elsinore (the CEQA Lead
Agency) certifies the Final RP -EIR. The Final RP -EIR, as required by State CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15089 and 15132, consists of the Recirculated Draft Program Environmental Impact
Report ( "RDP- EIR ") (SCH No. 200512019) or a revision of the RDP -EIR, comments and
recommendations received on the RDP -EIR, a list of persons, organizations, and public agencies
commenting on the RDP -EIR, the responses of the City of Lake Elsinore as "Lead Agency` to
significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process and any other
information added by the City. Since the RDP -EIR identified potentially significant
environmental impacts, the City Council must also prepare "findings" as part of its action to
Ci F,N E11A 1, PLAN U1'1)ATE
I'INAL PrtaGRAb1 EER.
D r c•r•. M r;[: 1x 201 E
PAG IC 4
CITY OF �.
LADE �LSIN0RE
DREA
FINDINGS OF FACT.
certify that the Final RP -EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA and to approve the
proposed project. Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091,
no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report
has been certified, which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that
would occur if the project is approved or carried out, unless the public agency makes one or
more findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the
rationale of each finding. The possible findings, which must be supported by substantial
evidence in the record, are:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into, the project which
avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final RP-
EIR.
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by
such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the
mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the RP -EIR.
1.3.2 SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The RDP -EIR identified several significant environmental effects (or "impacts') resulting from
implementation of the proposed project. Some of these significant effects can be fully
avoided/ mitigated through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures. For those significant
impacts that cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance, the City Council is required to
balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the
proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to
approve the proposed project. The State CEQA Guidelines at Section 15093(a) provide that if
specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the proposed project outweigh
the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be
considered "acceptable."
As indicated in Section 6.2.4 (CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations) of
the RDP -EIR, two environmental effects of the proposed project cannot be reduced to less than
significant levels by the adoption of feasible mitigation measures or feasible environmentally
superior alternatives. Project -level and cumulative Air Quality, Noise and Transportation and
Circulation impacts. have been identified as significant and unavoidable and require the
preparation of a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Section 3.0, below, describes those
C: };N ERA 1., PLAN U P DA-1 E
FINAL. PROC;rtANI E1R.
D 1: Cr.-: ro B C•.R 2011
P A O G 5
FINDINGS OF FA(A
CITY OF
LAY\-E LSI� E
` DREAM EXTREME
effects and outlines the City's findings with respect to the environmental effects of the proposed
project.
1.3.3 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared to monitor and
report the implementation of the mitigation measures identified for the proposed project. The
MMRP will be adopted by the City Council concurrently with these findings, and will be
implemented by the City during the proposed project's planning horizon; and through the
project review, construction and post - construction periods of individual development projects.
To the extent that these findings conclude that all mitigation measures outlined in the RDP -EIR
are feasible and have not been modified, superseded, or withdrawn, the City hereby binds itself
to implement these measures. These findings, in other words, are not merely informational, but
rather constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City Council
formally approves the proposed project.
1.3.4 CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL EIR AND ADOPTION OF FINDINGS
The City Council will review and consider the information contained in the Final RP -EIR, as
well as submissions from public officials; public agencies and the general public. Prior to project
approval, the City Council shall certify that the Final RP -EIR reflects the City's independent
judgment and analysis. Having considered the foregoing information, as well as any and all
other information in the record, the City Council shall make findings pursuant to CEQA Section
21081. In accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City
Council shall adopt the Findings as part of its certification of the Final RP -EIR for the proposed
project.
G F N ER A L PLAN U PDA'rE
FINAL PRO(]RAM EIR
DE: c: GM 13ISR 2011
PAGE.
CITY OF
LADE
DREAM EXTREME
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION
FI:NDENG:S OF FACT
The City of Lake Elsinore (City) is located in the southwestern portion of Riverside County. The
City encompasses approximately 43 square miles (27,747 acres). Interstate 15 (I -15) provides
north -south regional access to the City and the Ortega Highway - State Route 74 (SR -74) extends
in a northeast to southeast direction through the City. Surrounding cities include Canyon Lake
and Menifee to the east and Wildomar to the south. The City of Lake Elsinore is also bordered
to the north, east and southwest by unincorporated lands within the County of Riverside.
United States Forest Service lands within the Cleveland National Forest border the City to the
west. Along the I -15 corridor, the city of Corona is approximately twenty miles to the north and
the cities of Murrieta and Temecula are within ten miles to the south. The city of Perris is
within ten miles to the northeast of the City along the SR -74 corridor. The City's Sphere of
Influence (SOI) is more than 72 square miles (46,565 acres) and includes the land within City
boundaries as well as unincorporated land surrounding the City to the north, west, and south.
The majority of the unincorporated land in the SOI is vacant, with limited residential,
agricultural, and industrial land uses dispersed throughout.
2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project consists of five separate parts: Lake Elsinore General Plan Update,
Annexation No. 81, Downtown Master Plan, Housing Element and Climate Action Plan.
Summarized below, these project parts are described in more detail in the following subsections
of this chapter.
2.2.1 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
California Government Code Section 65300 requires each city and county in California to adopt
a comprehensive, long -term general plan. This general plan must cover a local jurisdiction's
entire planning area and address the broad range of issues associated with its development.
Pursuant to this requirement, the City of Lake Elsinore has prepared an update to its General
Plan. The proposed General Plan Update would:
• Replace the existing 1990 City of Lake Elsinore General Plan;
• Incorporate revisions to the City's Land Use Element and Land Use Map. The Plan will
also include 16 District Plans that cover specific, defined geographic areas within the
City, to provide a more precise focus and to recognize the unique and treasured assets of
the individual communities that make up the City,
C: E. N E RA I.. P 1, n N UPn A'rr
)f' I NA1. PROGRAM E R.
11 E. Cv.. M RLR 701 I
PAGE 7
FINDINGS OF F:AC.I.
CITY OF
LADE C3LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
• Revise the format of the City's General Plan by dividing the Plan into an introduction
and three topical chapters.
The City's General Plan Update is a large -scale planning update that covers all land within the
City's corporate boundaries and its sphere of influence. The General Plan Update's planning
horizon is 2030. While the General Plan Update does not present a specific plan for individual
development, it establishes a framework for future projects and actions that may be taken in
furtherance of the general plan's goals and policies.
The format of the City's General Plan Update consists of an introduction and three topical
chapters. The topical chapters include:
Community Form, which includes a Strategic Framework for 2030, intended to guide the overall
development of the City of Lake Elsinore by providing a set of Goals and Policies in a City-wide
context. The Chapter deals with Land Use, Circulation, Growth Management, Housing, and
Parks and Recreation.
Public Safety and Welfare, which addresses Air Quality, Hazards and Hazardous Materials,
Community Facilities and Services, and Noise.
Resource Protection and Preservation, which addresses Biological Resources, Open Space,
Water Resources, Cultural Resources and Paleontological Resources, Historic Preservation,
Aesthetics, and Sustainable Environment (Greenhouse Gases /Climate Action Plan).
PROPOSED LAND USE PLAN
The proposed Land Use Plan shows the proposed land use plan that is part of the General Plan
Update. The proposed Land Use Plan shows the anticipated development in the horizon year
of 2030. It functions as a guide to planners, the general public, and decision makers as to the
ultimate pattern of development of the City at buildout.
LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
The GPU includes 19 residential, commercial, mixed -use, industrial, and other land use
designations to depict the types of land uses that will be allowed in the GPU area. Each land
use designation is defined in terms of the allowable uses and density and intensity standards.
DISTRICT PLANS
The City is divided into 16 District Plans, eleven of which are for property within the existing
City limits and five are for districts located within the City's Sphere of Influence but outside of
iiENrR.AL PLAN UPDATE
INAr. PROGRAM 1�1.R.
D F. CEM n F.R 201 1
PAC: F: 8
CITY OF
LADE F�jLSI1YORE } ENDINGS 01 FACT
DREAM EXTREME
current city limits. Each District Plan contains sections on baseline conditions, planned land use,
overall goals and policies as well as goals and policies related to urban design, historic
preservation, transportation/ circulation, and parks and recreation.
LAND USE SUMMARY
The planning horizon for the proposed GPU is 2030. The City buildout population would be
318,856. The total amount of housing at buildout is anticipated to be 94,616 dwelling units. The
proposed buildout housing level represents a reduction in total housing units from that
anticipated by the existing 1990 General Plan. However, due to an increase in projected average
household size from 2.78 persons per dwelling unit to 3.37 persons per dwelling unit, the
proposed buildout population level represents an increase in projected total population from
that anticipated by the existing 1990 General Plan.
2.2.2 ANNEXATION N0.81 3RD STREET ANNEXATION)
In addition to the GPU and the associated alteration to land use designations throughout the
City and Sphere Of Influence, the project addressed by this Program Environmental Impact
Report includes Annexation No. 81 (also referred to as the "3rd Street Annexation ").
Annexation No. 81 consists of the proposed annexation of approximately 320 acres from the
County to the City. The 3rd Street Annexation entails pre - zoning the parcels for consistency
with City zones. This action will require revision of the City's Zoning Ordinance to properly
implement the pre - zoning conditions. The proposed annexation would allow increased
efficiency in service provision to the area, which is almost completely surrounded by
incorporated land, and would represent a more orderly planning and development pattern than
would occur if the land remained in the County's jurisdiction.
The 3rd Street Annexation territory is currently within the City's Sphere of Influence and is
nearly surrounded by incorporated land. The 3rd Street Annexation territory is generally
bounded by State Route 74 to the northwest, recent residential development in the Ramsgate
Specific Plan Area to the north; a mixture of developed and undeveloped land to the east and
south; and Dexter Avenue, Cambem Avenue, and Interstate 15 to the southwest.
2.2.3 DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN
The Downtown Master Plan will provide a vision and strategic framework to guide the future
development of the City's downtown area. The purpose of the Downtown Master Plan is to
identify the goals, objectives and desires of the community and offer approaches to implement
them. The Downtown Master Plan will establish five distinct walkable districts centered on
t: FN E: RA L. PLAN LI PDATF
I TNAL.. PROGRANI EI:R
I)ecr."BY',R 201 I
PA(; 1•, 9
CITY OF
FINDINGS OF FACT
LSI I`IOIZE
DREAM EXTREME
Main Street (Gateway District, Garden District, Cultural District, Historic District and
Waterfront District) in order to accomplish the following guiding principles:
• Celebrate the lake
• Create a vibrant and sustainable downtown
• Create a civic identity
• Improve walkability and connectivity
• Develop an urban design framework and guidelines
2.2.4 DOUSING ELEMENT
The Housing Element is one of the seven mandatory elements of the General Plan. Through its
policies, procedures, and incentives, the updated Housing Element will provide an action -plan
for maintaining and expanding the housing supply for all income levels in the City of Lake
Elsinore. Lake Elsinore's Housing Element for the planning period of July 1, 2008 to June 30,
2014 will describe policies and programs including:
• Identification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs, resources and
constraints;
• A statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives, and scheduled programs for
preservation, improvement and development of housing;
• Identification of adequate sites for housing; and
• Adequate provision for existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the
community, including both lower and higher incomes.
2.2.5 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
The Climate Action Plan (CAP) is the City of Lake Elsinore s long -range plan to reduce local
greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change. The CAP will identify the activities
in Lake Elsinore that generate greenhouse gas emissions, will quantify these emissions, and
project their future trends. It will also describe local greenhouse gas emissions targets for the
years 2020 and 2030, consistent with the State of California's emissions reduction targets, as well
as strategies and measures to meet these targets. Implementation of the CAP will guide Lake
Elsinore s actions to reduce its contribution to climate change and will support the State of
Gr:NURA1.. Pr.AV UPDATk,
P-1NA1. PROD RA.iM FIR.
Dr:cr•_m13ca 201 1
PAG r'. 10
CITY OF
LAS LSIN RE
` 'DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT
California's emissions reduction targets. The CAP is also intended to support tiering and
streamlining of future projects within Lake Elsinore pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections
15152 and 15183.5.
2.2.6 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The proposed project involves a series of proposed changes to the General Plans Land Use
Map, land use designations, and goals, policies and implementation. The proposed project will
set the standards for development within the City for the next twenty years. The City's
objectives for the proposed project are as follows:
• Update the City's environmental baseline (i.e., existing) conditions to the year 2005 (2007
for the Housing Element).
• Create a General Plan consistent with state law that guides City planning until 2030 and
update the General Plan development projections for the year 2030, including
projections for dwelling units, non - residential square footage, population and
employment.
• Update the Housing Element of the General Plan (separately bound).
• Establish District Plans as part of the Land Use Element to allow for more focused
planning of the City's many diverse neighborhoods.
• Incorporate a Downtown Master Plan into the Historic District Plan to guide the future
development of the City's historic downtown core.
• Establish new land use designations including Gateway Commercial, Downtown
Recreational, Commercial Mixed Use, Residential Mixed Use, and Lakeside Residential
• Create a Land Use Plan that encourages the creation of a vibrant and active downtown
and a lake destination.
• Create a plan to preserve the unique topography and visual character of the City
through the preservation of steep slopes, ecologically significant areas, and public open
space.
• Incorporate a program for sustainable development into the General Plan, drawn from
the City's Climate Action Plan (2011)
GF;N F,RA 1, P1..1 N L.I PD.47 "F:
1' 1 N A1.. P R 0 G RA 111 1's 1 1i.
1)E C'E• 11113 E• R 201 1
PACE 11
FINDING'S OF FACT
CITY OF
LADE
LSINOIZE
DREAM EXTREME
• Create a General Plan that recognizes the rich history of the City and seeks to preserve
its historical resources.
• Create a user - friendly plan for City officials, staff, residents, and stakeholders of the City
of Lake Elsinore.
PAGF. 1 2
G ENE R r. PLAN UPDATE
F I N A l.. P R O G R A M E 1 2
D E,c t;m it rR 2011
CITY OF
LADE 09LSII`IOKE FINDINGS OF FACT
` DREAM EXTREME
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
3.1 FINDINGS REGARDING LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
IDENTIFIED IN THE PROGRAM EIR
Environmental impacts identified in the Final RP -EIR as less than significant and requiring no
mitigation beyond the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in the proposed
General Plan Update (CPU) and the proposed project's related documents are described in this
section.
3.1.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING
a. Impact: Due to the small percentage of land currently dedicated to agriculture, and the
designation by the Riverside County General Plan as non - agricultural land uses, the
conversion of this land will result in a less - than - significant impact.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that impacts related to the conversion of agricultural land to non-
agricultural uses are less than significant because a minimal amount of land within the
City and SOI are still used for agricultural production and because none of the farmland
designations applied to land within the City or SOI (Farmland of Local Importance,
Grazing Land and Unique Farmland) is considered "important farmland" by the State of
California.
Reference: RP -EIR pages 3.1 -41 through 3.142.
3.1.2 AESTHETICS
a. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project, including the Land Use Plan, the
District Plans and within the 3rd Street Annexation area will result in less than
significant impacts to scenic resources.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
GENERAL, PLAN U P D ATF
FINAI.. 1'R0C:RAM i?112.
D ECF M 13 E;11 2011
PAGE 13
FINDINGS OF FACT
CITY OF
LAK-E LSI� E
= DREAM EXTREME
Finding(Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that impacts upon scenic resources will be less than significant
because the following policies of the CPU Resource Protection and Preservation
Chapter, Aesthetics Section, protect views of the City's natural open space areas:
• Policies 11.2, 11.3, and 12.3 which encourage the dedication of open space in
hillside development to preserve view opportunities from transportation
corridors and surrounding development as well as improve the quality of
existing landscaping in parkways, parks, civic facilities, rights -of -ways, and other
public open areas.
• There are goals and policies that specifically address open space within the City
and also preserve the visual character of these areas.
• The Resource Protection and Preservation Chapter, Open Space Section, Policies
3.1, 3.2 and 3.4 maximizes the City's MSHCP conservation areas, ensures that
passive and active open space uses are incorporated into development areas and
preserves the City's visual character in the surrounding hillsides.
These policies ensure that the City will implement the MSCHP and preserve valuable
open space, which thereby preserves the visual character of open space in the City.
References: RP -EIR pages 3.3 -27 through 3.3 -40; General Plan Chapter 4.0 (Resource
Protection and Preservation) Goal 3, Policies 3.1, 3.2 and 3.4, Goal 11, Policies 11.2 and
11.3 and Goal 12, Policy 12.3 and related Implementation Programs.
b. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project, including the Land Use Plan, the
District Plans and within the 3rd Street Annexation area will result in less than
significant impacts to the existing visual character of the City and its SOI.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that impacts upon the visual character of the City and its SOI
because goals and policies have been incorporated into each district plan to minimize
impacts on the visual character of the City and its SOI. With the implementation of the
goals, policies and implementing programs of the proposed project, including the goals
and policies of the individual district plans, impacts visual character will be reduced to a
less- than- significant level.
G F,N ERA r. PL..AN UPDATI-.,
I TTNAL PROGRAM EIK
1), 3 Cr, Mnf,32 201 1
PAGF 14
CITY OF
LAKE ' LSINOIZE FINDINCS OF FACT
DREAM EXTREME
Additionally, Resource Protection and Preservation Chapter, Aesthetics Section, Goals 10,
11, and 12 of the GPU protect visual character by minimizing activities, development,
and landform modification that could distract viewers from the City's visual character.
Policies 11.2 and 11.3 of the Resource Protection and Preservation Chapter, Aesthetics
Section, preserves the City's visual character, in particular the surrounding hillsides,
which topographically define the lake region. In addition, the following policies
regarding design requirements ensure maintenance of the visual quality of planned
development:
• Policy 11.4 states that the City shall establish a series of community gateways for
individual communities to promote the visual character of the area. These goals
and policies of the GPU protect the citywide visual character from potentially
significant impacts of buildout of the GPU.
• Policies 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 11.1 and 12.3 require design and landscaping for new
development and redevelopment, including architectural and streetscape, in
order to preserve the City's visual character.
References: RP -EIR pages 3.3 -41 through 3.3 -45; General Plan Chapter 4.0 (Resource
Protection and Preservation) Goals, 10, 11 and 12, Policies 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 11.1, 11.2, 11.3
and 12.3, and related Implementation Programs.
C. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project, including the Land Use Plan, the
District Plans and within the 3rd Street Annexation area and compliance with the
regulatory requirements of the City's Zoning Code will result in less than significant
impacts from light and glare.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding&acts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that impacts upon the visual character of the City and its SOI
because Resource Protection and Preservation Chapter, Aesthetics Section, Policy 12.2
states that the City shall discourage uses or development that entails excessive light and
glare visible from private and public viewpoints. Additionally, compliance with Section
17.112.040 and Section 17.148.110 of the City's Zoning Code require that lighting shall be
designed to preclude light shining into the sky above a horizontal plane passing through
the luminaire and encourage the use of low pressure sodium lighting in non - residential
development. ' Thus compliance with Policy 12.2 and the zoning code will reduce any
potential impacts from light and glare to a less - than - significant level.
�. F,N EIt A1.. P1.. .AN UPDATE
N I N A 1. P 110 (: R A R9 E 1 R
D1 ?CEP9nrR 201 t
PAGE 15
CITY OF
FINDINGS OF FAC "1
LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.3 -45 through 3.3 -49; General Plan Chapter 4.0 (Resource
Protection and Preservation) Goal 12, Policy 12.2 and related Implementation Program;
Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Section 17.112.040 and Section 17.148.110.
3.1.3 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
a. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in significant impacts
related to airport traffic patterns.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding&acts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that the proposed project will have less - than - significant impacts
related to airport traffic patterns because no features of the GPU or the Land Use Plan
would conflict with requirements of the FAA regarding proximity of development to
airports. Additionally, all future development proposed within proximity to the airport
would be required to comply with FAA regulations to ensure that future residents or
employees are not subject to significant hazards.
Reference: RP -EIR, pages 3.4-109,3-10-10,3-10-11, and 3- 10 -15.
b. Impact: The proposed project will not increase hazards due to design features or
incompatible uses, result in inadequate emergency access, or result in inadequate
parking capacity.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that the proposed project will not result in inadequate emergency
access and would not substantially increase hazards from a design feature or
incompatible uses and impacts are less than significant, because the improvements
included in the Traffic Study (Appendix D of the RP -EIR) ensure sufficient capacity of
roadways and intersections for efficient utilization by both normal vehicle traffic and
emergency vehicle traffic.
Reference: RP -EIR, pages 3.4 -109 and 3.4 -110.
G 1 N E R A 1. PI-AN U PDA'PE:
F''I N A L hROG RAbi EII2.
13 ec:cmr3r ?.R 201 l
PAGC 16
CITY OFD
LAKE GF',LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF F-ACT
C. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project will not result in inadequate
emergency access.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Findin&Tacts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that the proposed project will not result inadequate emergency
access because the proposed project would be required to meet all applicable local and
State regulatory standards for adequate emergency access.
Reference: RP -EIR, page 3.4 -110
3.1.4 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
a. Impact: The proposed Climate Action Plan is consistent with and built upon the goals,
policies and implementation programs contained in the proposed GPU. Therefore, the
proposed project would be consistent and not conflict with an applicable GHG
reduction plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions
of greenhouse gases.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond implementation of the strategies and
measures set forth in the proposed Climate Action Plan and compliance with the goals,
policies and implementation programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Findin : Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that potential impacts due to conflicts with an applicable GHG
reduction plan will be less than significant because as part of the proposed project, the
City of Lake Elsinore has prepared a Climate Action Plan. The City of Lake Elsinore
Climate Action Plan (CAP) is a long -range plan to reduce community-wide greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions from activities within the City limits. Specifically, the CAP is
designed to:
Benchmark Lake Elsinore's existing (2008) GHG emissions and projected
emissions relative to statewide emissions targets.
Establish GHG emissions reduction strategies and measures to reduce the City's
proportionate share of emissions to meet the statewide targets identified in
Assembly Bill (AB) 32 and Executive Order S -3 -05.
G F;N F, It A 1.. P1., .AN t.1 P13 A I
F NA I.. PROD 11 A N1 Is 112.
DECEM)3ER 2011 -
PAC:F_ 17
CITY OF ,��
FiNBItiGS OF FAC 1 LAKE LSI110KE
DREAM EXTREME
• Set forth procedures to monitor and verify the effectiveness of the CAP and
require amendment if the CAP is not achieving targeted levels of emissions.
• Mitigate Lake Elsinore's GHG emissions impacts (by reducing GHG emissions
consistent with the State of California via the California Environmental Quality
Act [CEQA] Guidelines, AB 32, and Executive Order S- 3 -05). The CEQA
Guidelines encourage the adoption of plans or mitigation programs as a means
of comprehensively addressing the cumulative impacts of projects (see CEQA
Guidelines, Sections 15064(h)(3),15130(c)).
The proposed Climate Action Plan (Appendix G of the RP -EIR) is consistent with and
built upon the goals, policies and implementation programs contained in the proposed
GPU. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent and not conflict with an
applicable GHG reduction plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.7 -32 through 3.7 -34 and Table 3.14 -6 (Climate Action Plan
Strategies and Measures), pages 4.0 -11 through 4.0 -12; General Plan Chapter 4.0
(Resource Protection and Preservation) Goal 14, Policies 14.1 through 14.4 and related
Implementation Program.
b. Impact: Inasmuch as the City will be able to achieve established AB 32 and Executive
Order S -3 -05 target GHG emission reduction levels, the proposed project will result in
less- than - significant cumulative impacts associated with GHG emissions.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond implementation of the strategies and
measures set forth in the proposed Climate Action Plan and compliance with the goals,
policies and implementation programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions contribute,
on a cumulative basis, to the significant adverse environmental impacts of global climate
change. No single land use project could generate enough GHG emissions to noticeably
change the global average temperature. The combination of GHG emissions from past,
present, and future projects contribute substantially to the phenomenon of global
climate change and its associated environmental impacts and as such is addressed only
as a cumulative impact. Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and
considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council
hereby finds that the proposed project will result in less - than - significant cumulative
impacts associated with Greenhouse Gas Emissions for the following reason:
RP -EIR Table 3.7 -8 (Summary of Greenhouse Gas Reduction Measure Potential)
provides a summary of the GHG reductions that would result from the state -level and
GENERAL PLAN UPDA'rr
FINAL PROGRAM 'EIR
13ECEN1BER 20'1'1
PAGE 18
CITY OF �n
LADE 4:2 LSIIYOIZE
- DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT
local measures listed in RP -EIR Table 3.7 -6 (Climate Action Plan Strategies and
Measures). Together, the measures would reduce emissions by 399,244 MT CO2e by 2020
and 768,105 MT CO2e by 2030. As a result, 2020 emissions would be 665,341 MT CO2e or
4.6 MT CO2e /SP in 2020 and 1,263,966 MT CO2e or 4.2 MT CO2e in 2030. Therefore,
GHG reductions would exceed the target reductions; thereby reducing potential
greenhouse gas emissions to below the level of significance.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.7 -24 through 3.7 -32, Table 3.7 -8 (Summary of Greenhouse
Gas Reduction Measure Potential), Table 3.7 -9 (Reductions Relative to Targets) and
Table 3.14 -6 (Climate Action Plan Strategies and Measures), pages 4.0 -11 through 4.0 -12;
General Plan Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and Preservation) Goal 14, Policies 14.1
through 14.4 and related Implementation Program.
3.1.5 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a. Impact: Implementation of the future projects permitted pursuant to the proposed
project could result in the removal of significant local heritage trees such as significant
palm trees and native oak trees.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that impacts associated with the removal of local heritage trees will
be less than significant because the City has in place a palm tree preservation program
(Chapter 5.116 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code). The purpose of the program is for
the protection of the City's plant life heritage for the benefit of all citizens in Lake
Elsinore. The City recognizes the value of significant palm trees within the City of Lake
Elsinore as natural aesthetic resources, which help define the history and character of the
City. In addition, all future projects developed pursuant to the GPU Land Use Plan
would need to demonstrate consistency with the applicable Goals and Policies of the
proposed GPU and its District Plans and satisfy the requirements of the City's Municipal
Code before being allowed to proceed.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.8-34,3.8-52 through 3.8 -53.
b. Im act: Inasmuch as the proposed project includes goals, policies and implementation
programs that implement the MSHCP and support implementation of the SKR HCP, the
proposed project does not conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat
GLiNH12A1, PI.. .AN UPnA -F
FINAL. PROGRAM 1',1R.
13 V C E M 13 E R 2 0 7 1
PAC;c 19
F'INDING'S OF FACF
CITY OF
LADE LSINORE
DREA
conservation plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
FindingNacts in Support of the Finding Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that the proposed project does not conflict with an adopted habitat
conservation plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan because the City of Lake Elsinore is signatory
to the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP)
and is, therefore, required to review development projects having impacts on identified
sensitive biological resources in conformance with all the applicable regulations and
mitigation requirements of the MSHCP. The GPU establishes City policies that
encourage development while remaining sensitive to biological resources concerns.
Adherence to the MSHCP and coordination with the resource agencies is required by the
policies of the GPU.
Additionally, Chapter 19.04 (Habitat Conservation) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
addresses the City's implementation of the Stephens' Kangaroo Rat Habitat
Conservation Plan in western Riverside County. No development permit for real
property located within the boundaries of the plan area shall be issued or approved
without the payment of the impact and mitigation fee and the submission of the
biological survey as required by Chapter 19.04. Chapter 4 (Resource Protection and
Preservation) of the GPU, Biological Resources Section, Goal 1 and Goal 2 and associated
policies state the City's intention to identify and conserve important biological habitats
where feasible.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.8 -26 through 3.8 -34, 3.8 -53 through 3.8 -55; General Plan
Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and Preservation), Goal 1, Policies 1.1 -1.8 and related
Implementation Program.
3.1.6 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
a. Impact: Implementation of the proposed Land Use Plan will result in the increase in the
number of persons residing and the amount of construction within the high inundation
zone of the Railroad Canyon Dam. Although failure of the Railroad Canyon Dam is an
extremely unlikely event, portions of the City would be subject to flooding possibly
necessitating evacuation of the area.
G V ER.A I., f I. AN UPDATE
1''INA1, P'r20GRA ivi E I R
DECEmnER 201 t
PACs•. 20
CITY OF ,��
LADE LLSI� OIZE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OFF 1C"1'
Implementation of the proposed Land Use Plan will result in the increase in the number
of persons residing and the amount of construction within areas that have the potential
for mudflows /debris flows.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding&acts in Support of the Finding_ Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that implementation of the proposed Land Use Plan will result in
the increase in the number of persons residing within the high inundation zone of the
Railroad Canyon Dam and an increase in the number of persons residing in and the
amount of construction within areas that have the potential for mudflows /debris flows.
Although failure of the Railroad Canyon Dam is an extremely unlikely event, portions of
the City would be subject to flooding and /or mudflows /debris flows possibly
necessitating evacuation of the affected areas. Such emergency evacuations could
preclude injury and loss of life, but not property damage. However, the City Council
finds that such potential impacts are less than significant because, as described in more
detail in Section 3.10 (Hazards and Hazardous Materials) of the RP -EIR, the proposed
GPU will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The feasibility of evacuation
and the improbability of dam failure support the conclusion that impacts associated
with potential dam failure and mudflows /debris flows will be less than significant.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.9-6,3.9-7,3.9-35 through 3.9 -37.
3.1.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
a. Impact: The proposed project itself will not directly result in any specific development
project. However, individual development projects implemented pursuant to the
proposed project could be affected by sites that were once or in the future may be listed
on a hazardous materials site list.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council here> y finds that the proposed project will have less than significant impacts
related to sites that were once or in the future may be listed on a hazardous materials
site list because Implementation Program for Goal 3 in Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and
C.; Ii:N 2nA 1, P 1.. .A N. LT P D A TE
1'1NAL. PROGR.ANi 1.;1.R
D 1F.c L: M n L: 12 2611
PAG o-.. 21
F'1 ti1)1NGS OF FA CT
CITY OF
LADE 3LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
Welfare) of the proposed GPU states that through project review and the CEQA process
the City shall assess new development and reuse applications for potential hazards, and
shall require compliance with the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan and
collaboration with its Department of Environmental Health. Through compliance with
the goals, policies and implementation programs of the proposed GPU, this impact will
be less than significant.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.10 -23 and 3.10 -24; General Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety
and Welfare), Goal 3 and related Implementation Program.
b. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project will not impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding_ Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that the proposed project will not impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan because the proposed project does not propose any changes to the City's
Emergency Preparedness Plan or the Riverside County Operational Area Multi-
Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. All applicable local and State regulatory
standards for adequate emergency access will be met. Additionally, pursuant to Policies
8.1 and 8.2 of the Community Facilities and Protection Services section of Chapter 3.0
(Public Safety and Welfare), as described in Section 3.14 (Public Services) of the RP -EIR,
the City will continue to work with the Riverside County Fire Department to follow the
most current guidelines to achieve standard response times and staffing levels and with
the County of Riverside to provide adequate police service and staffing levels. New
developments associated with the buildout of the proposed General Plan Update would
be required to comply with all applicable fire code requirements for construction and
access to the site.
References: RP -EIR, page 3.10 -25 and 3.10 -26, General Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety
and Welfare), Goal 3, Goal 8, Policies 8.1 and 8.2, and related Implementation Programs.
3.1.8 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
a. Impact: Cleating and grading for construction associated with future development in
. the City and its SOI could result in short -term soil erosion by wind and water, and loss
G F.NE R A L P1.,AN UPDATE
FINAF. PROGRANI IF-AR
DE(JEMRER 201 1
PAGE], 22
CITY OF
LADE 1S1110 K FINDINGS O FAC 1
DREAM EXTREME
of topsoil. Through compliance with regulatory requirements and implementation of the
proposed project's goals, policies and implementation programs potential impacts
related to soil erosion or loss of topsoil are considered less than significant.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
FindinWFacts in Support of the Finding. upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that the proposed project will have no significant impacts related
to soil erosion or loss of topsoil because erosion - related effects can be minimized
through compliance with LEMC provisions that address soil erosion including LEMC
Chapter 14.08, Stormwater /Urban Runoff Management and Discharge Controls which
requires that development be designed and constructed to provide facilities for the
proper conveyance, treatment, and disposal of storm water. Additionally, development
sites encompassing an area of one or more acres would require compliance with a
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and consequently the
development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
including the use of Best Management Practices in compliance with Goal 1 and Policy
1.1 of the Public Safety and Welfare chapter of the GPU and Policies 4.1 and 4.3 of the
Resource Protection and Preservation chapter to control erosion and protect surface
water and groundwater from the adverse effects of construction activities. Through
compliance with regulatory requirements and implementation of the proposed project's
goals, policies and implementation programs potential impacts related to soil erosion or
loss of topsoil are considered less than significant.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.11 -32 and 3.11 -33; General Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety
and Welfare), Goal 1, Policy 1.1 and related Implementation Program, Chapter 4.0
(Resource Protection and Preservation), Goal 4, Policies 4.1 and 4.3 and related
Implementation Program.
b. Impact: The proposed project would not result in the installation of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems in soils incapable of adequately supporting
such sewage disposal systems.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
FindinQ/Facts in Support of the Findi� Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that the proposed project will have less than significant impacts
G E,N E: RAL PLAN UPRAT F:
F1NAI.. PROGRAM ILIIi
DECEMBER 2011
23
FINDINGS OF FAC-I
CITY OF
LL! LSIN IZE
� J DREAM EXTREME
resulting from the installation of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems
because prior to the installation of such systems, project applicants would be required to
comply with applicable City requirements. Future development allowed under the
proposed project will be required to comply with the provisions of Chapter 16.24,
Chapter 16.34 and Chapter 16.56 of the City's Municipal Code.
References: RP -EIR, page 3.11 -23 and 3.11 -34.
3.1.9 MINERAL RESOURCES
a. Impact: Implementation of the proposed General Plan policies related to mineral
resources ensure that future development in the City and its SOI would not have any
significant adverse impacts on mineral resources nor would future mineral resource
extraction have any significant adverse impacts on future development.
Implementation of the proposed General Plan policies related to mineral resources
ensure that future development in the City and its SOI would not have any significant
adverse impacts on mineral resources nor would future mineral resource extraction have
any significant adverse impacts on future development. This cumulative impact would
be less than cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Findinoacts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that the proposed project will have less than significant impacts on
mineral resources because mineral extraction within some areas of the City and its SOI.
is planned be phased out over time and the areas converted to other land uses, such as
residential and commercial. This land use designation change has already been
approved,. and therefore, development under the GPU would not significantly affect the
availability of known mineral resources that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state. The proposed GPU includes an Extractive Overlay designation
located in the Alberhill District, the Business District, and the North Central Sphere
District which provides for continued operations of extractive uses, such as aggregates,
coal, clay mining, and certain ancillary uses. Reclamation Plans are required in
conjunction with mining permits as particular projects come forward.
Additionally, the policies within the proposed General Plan pertaining to mineral
resources seek to conserve areas identified as containing significant mineral deposits for
potential use. The policies will maintain the availability of mineral resources while
G; IB N t- 11 A 1. Pt_AN UPDA "PE:
T' IIYAL. PROGRAM E I R.
DEC'IE NI n ER 201 1
PAC: 1S 24
CITY OF
LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT
continuing to encourage proper reclamation and enhancement of areas impacted by
extractive/ mining activities for the public's health, safety and welfare.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.12 -1 through 3.12 -12, 4.0 -16 and 4.16 -17; General Plan
Chapter 2.0 (Community Form) Goal 1, Policy 1.4, Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and
Preservation), Goal 5, Policies 5.1 through 5.3 and related Implementation Program.
3.1.10 POPULATION AND HOUSING
a. Impact: The projected population is based on the land use categories and density
assumptions included in the Land Use Plan. Though the projected population with
buildout of both the incorporated and unincorporated portions of the GPU is 318,856,
projected buildout for the incorporated area only is 209,756. This is in direct comparison
with the adopted SCAG population forecast for 2030 of 85,376 in the incorporated area.
The GPU population projections are considered consistent with the projections being
considered by SCAG for several key reasons. First, the SCAG population forecast is not
based upon buildout pursuant to the City's General Plan, but rather on projected annual
growth rates; second, the greater range set forth in the GPU allows for greater flexibility
in providing affordable housing, a state mandated program; and, third, the GPU will
require a jobs- housing balance that meets or exceeds the regional goals.
The proposed project establishes goals, policies and implementation programs that will
reduce potential growth- related impacts. Therefore, the proposed project will direct
growth and development so that it occurs in a manner that is manageable for the City
and avoids significant physical impacts that result from population growth.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the FindjR& Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that the proposed project establishes goals, policies and
implementation programs that will reduce potential growth - related impacts.
Compliance with these goals, policies and implementation programs and with federal,
State and local regulatory requirements will assure that necessary services and
infrastructure sufficient to serve the planned growth will be development over the
projected buildout period of 20 years. Therefore, the proposed project will direct growth
and development so that it occurs in a manner that is manageable for the City and
avoids significant physical impacts that result from population growth.
G F.N 1i RA 1. P1, .AN lI PDAT F.
I� 1 N :A 1_. PRO (;RAM F', I ti
Drcr,N,B1_R 201 1
P A G iL 2 +
CITY OF
FIN''DINGS OF 1'ACI.
LSINOIZE
DREAM EXTREME
References: RP -EIR, 3.13- 20 through 3.13 -22; General Plan Chapter 2.0 (Community
Form), Goal 1, Policies 1.2 through 1.6, 1.8 and 1.9, Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and related
Implementation Program, Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and Preservation, Goal 14,
Policy 14.1 through 14.4 and related Implementation Program; Housing Element Goal #1
through Goal #7 and related Policies.
b. Impact: Approval of the proposed project would not result in the direct
displacement of existing housing or people, since the proposed project will only result in
the adoption of land use designations and associated goals, policies and implementation
programs; rather than individual development projects. Development of vacant land
would not displace residential units or persons; therefore, no impact would occur.
However, redevelopment of existing developments has the potential to result in some
displacement of housing or people. Without the exact location of new development, it is
not possible to determine whether it will displace residential units or persons and any
such analysis would be speculative.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that potential impacts associated with the displacement of existing
housing or people will be less than significant because development of vacant land
would not displace residential units or persons; therefore, no impact would occur.
However, redevelopment of existing developments has the potential to result in some
displacement of housing or people. Individual development projects that implement the
proposed Land Use Plan will be reviewed pursuant to CEQA and the GPU's goals,
policies and implementation programs. In the event that there is a potential for the
displacement of housing and people, as required by state and federal law, a relocation
analysis must be prepared and adequate and appropriate compensation provided.
Adherence to applicable County, state and /or federal regulations related to the
provision of replacement housing would reduce potential impacts associated with this
issue to a less - than- significant level.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.13 -22 and 3.13 -23,
C. Impact: Subsequent land use activities associated with the implementation of the
proposed project, in addition to existing, approved, proposed and reasonably
foreseeable development, could result in a cumulative increase in the population and
housing growth in western Riverside County.
(:. r:N 1:11 A 1, PLAN' UPDA'T'E,
I NA 1, FROG RAYI 1 "s1 R.
D 1iCE n9 FS 1.R 201 1
PA4:, le. 26
CITY OF �
LADE F�LSINOR-E
DREAM EXTREME
Fltil)INGS Of" FACT
Miti ag tion: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding(Facts in Support of the Finding_ Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that cumulative impacts related to population and housing will be
less than significant because the proposed project establishes goals, policies and
implementation programs that will reduce potential growth - related impacts.
Compliance with these goals, policies and implementation programs and with federal,
State and local regulatory requirements will assure that necessary services and
infrastructure sufficient to serve the planned growth will be development over the
projected buildout period of 20 years. It is important to note that the proposed GPU
does not include any policy provisions that require its buildout potential be attained.
Therefore, the proposed project will direct growth and development so that it occurs in a
manner that is manageable for the City and avoids significant physical impacts that
result from population growth.
References: RP -EIR, pages 4.0 -20 through 4.0 -22; General Plan Chapter 2.0 (Community
Form), Goal 1, Policies 1.2 through 1.6, 1.8 and 1.9, Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and related
Implementation Program, Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and Preservation, Goal 14,
Policy 14.1 through 14.4 and related Implementation Program; Housing Element Goal #1
through Goal #7 and related Policies.
3..1.11 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
a. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project result in population increases due to
increased development throughout the City and SOI in accordance with the proposed
Land Use Plan. This increased development would generate increased wastewater
flows that will require treatment at Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD)
facilities.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Findinaacts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that impacts upon ability of the service provider to treat
wastewater generated as a result of implementation of the proposed project will be less
than significant because the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District's Wastewater
Master Plan provides a long -range assessment of existing and future wastewater
generation for its service area, which includes the City and its SOI, and a capital
G 17N EItA 1., P1. .A N UP 13 Al 1,
FIN.A1. PROGRAM 1. IZ
Ii EC'EM RH.R 2011
PAGE 27
CITY OF
FINDINC;S OF FACT
LSINOKE
DREAM EXTREME
improvements plan describing proposed improvements programs designed to address
future wastewater collection system demands. In developing its Wastewater Master
Plan, EVMWD used a 2030 service area population, household and employment
projections developed by the Riverside County Center for Demographics Research
(RCCDR). Future development would be reviewed by the City on a project -by- project
basis to ensure that adequate wastewater treatment capacity is available to serve the
project at the time of its construction. EVMWD will determine whether sufficient sewer
capacity exists to serve a specific development. EVMWD's utility rates and connection
fees are collected to pay off debt financing, to fund capital improvements, and to pay
operations and maintenance costs. Connection fees will also be collected by EVMWD on
new developments, for recovering the capital costs of public facilities needed to service
those developments. Title 16 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) requires the
construction of wastewater facilities as needed to serve future construction with such
facilities of such size and design to adequately satisfy the sanitary sewer requirements of
the development.
Through compliance with EVMWD's Wastewater Master Plan, payment of established
EVMWD utility rates and connection fees, and compliance with Chapter 16 of the
LEMC, wastewater - related impacts associated with the proposed project would be
reduced to a less- than - significant level.
References: RP -EIR, pages3.16 -1, and 3.16 -18 through 3.16 -20.
b. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project result in population increases and
increases in commercial, industrial and other non - residential uses due to increased
development throughout the City and SOI in accordance with the proposed Land Use
Plan. This increased development would generate increased demand for water.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
FindingNacts in Support of the Finding_ Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that impacts upon the availability of water to meet future demand
within the City and its SOI will be less than significant because the EVMWD Urban
Water Management Plan (UWMP) indicates that there are sufficient water supplies and
water shortage contingency plans to protect existing and future water needs within its
service area. Through compliance with EVMWD's UWMP and Water Distribution
System Master Plan, Chapter 16 of the LEMC and the City's Water Efficient Landscaping
Requirements (LEMC Chapter 19.08), and payment of established EVMWD utility rates
G t: .11' li It AL PE..AN' UPDA•F F.
1•''I NA r. PIt OC RAM I', I R
D E C T,.M n F•,R 201 1.
PAGLT. 28
CITY OF
LADE �LSINORE l l lllecs OF FACT
DREAM EXTREME
and connection fees, water supply and infrastructure associated with the proposed
project would be reduced to a less- than - significant level.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.16 -2 through 3.16 -5, 3.16 -9 through 3.16 -10, 3.16 -12 through
3.16 -13, and 3.16 -21 though 3.16 -28, Appendix I (EVMWD UWMP).
C. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project result in population increases and
increases in commercial, industrial and other non - residential uses which would
potentially impact solid waste disposal services and the capacity of landfill facilities that
serve the City. However, through compliance with City and County waste reduction
programs and compliance with applicable State and local laws and regulations, potential
impacts will be reduced to less - than - significant levels.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that impacts upon impacts upon solid waste disposal services and
the capacity of landfill facilities that serve the City will be less than significant because
recycling of construction and demolition waste generated during construction will
greatly reduce the amount of such waste that is directed into landfills and given the
limited contribution of construction- related solid waste anticipated to be generated by
the proposed project over its construction period, development of the project site will
not substantially contribute to the exceedance of the permitted capacity of the
designated landfills.
The goals, policies and implementing programs pertaining to solid waste disposal in the
GPU include measures to ensure quality services that meet the needs of the population
as it grows and establishment of a long -term solid waste management plan. These
policies from the Public Safety and Welfare chapter, Community Facilities and
Protection Services section, require:
• requesting the City's franchise trash hauler(s) to establish long -term solid waste
management plans that includes goals for recycling and source reduction
programs (Policy 13.1), and
• requesting the City's franchise trash hauler(s) to provide a public education
program on recycling and source reduction techniques for homes and businesses
(Policy 13.2).
li C:NF,RA1, PLAN UPDATE
I�JN.AL PROGRAM E,IR.
I)1'CEM11 E11 2011
PAG[ 29
CITY OF
FINDINGS OF FAC'l
LSINOKE
DREAM EXTREME
• through the project review and CEQA processes, the City shall condition projects
to provide adequate disposal of solid waste generated by the project.
(Implementation Program)
• through the franchise renewal process, the City shall request cooperation in
meeting recycling and source reduction goals. (Implementation Program)
Therefore, through compliance with City and County waste reduction programs and
compliance with applicable State and local laws and regulations, potential impacts will
be reduced to less - than - significant levels.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.16 -5 through 3.16 -6, 3.16 -29 through 3.16 -32; General Plan
Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare) Goal 13, Policies 13.1 through 13.3 and related
Implementation Programs.
d. Impact: The increase in development allowed under the proposed Land Use Plan would
require increases in the availability and adequacy of electrical and natural gas service,
and telecommunications services.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
FindinglEacts in Support of the Finding; Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that impacts upon potential impacts on electrical and natural gas
service, and telecommunications services will be less than significant because both SCE
and The Gas Company (Southern California Gas Company) anticipate the ability to
accommodate future growth within the City of Lake Elsinore. Development proposals
would be required to formally request "will serve" letters on an individual basis for
electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications service. The proposed project's goals,
policies and implementation programs will reduce potential impacts on electrical and
natural gas service, and telecommunications services as development continues by
ensuring that these services will be provided. Therefore, impacts would be considered
less than significant at a programmatic level.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.16 -33 through 3.16 -34; General Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public
Safety and Welfare) Goal 12, Policies 12.1 through 12.3 and related Implementation
Program.
e. Impact: Witll implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs of the
proposed project and compliance with existing regulatory requirements and service
G I,N1 It A L, PLAN U PI>A'I'E
PI NAI., PROD RAN 131 R.
lle( r!.m ER 261 t.
PACs. 30
CITY OF ,�
LAKE 7LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF i AcT
provider Master Plans; potential cumulative impacts on utilities and service systems will
be less than significant.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding_ Based upon the analysis presented in the RP-
EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City
Council hereby finds that impacts upon cumulative impacts on utilities and service
systems will be less than significant because the EVMWD UWMP indicates that there
are sufficient water supplies and water shortage contingency plans to protect existing
and future water needs within its service area. EVMWD has also prepared a
Wastewater Master Plan to provide long range planning for the provision of wastewater
services. Through compliance with EVMWD's UWMP and Water Distribution System
Master Plan, EVMWD's Wastewater Master Plan, Chapter 16 of the LEMC and the City's
Water Efficient Landscaping Requirements (LEMC Chapter 19.08), and payment of
established EVMWD utility rates and connection fees, impacts upon water supply,
wastewater - related impacts and infrastructure associated with the proposed project will
have a less than cumulatively considerable impact.
Additionally, compliance with City and County waste reduction programs and
compliance with applicable State and local laws and regulations, the proposed project's
contribution to cumulative impacts upon landfills is considered to be less than
cumulatively considerable; and both Southern California Edison and The Gas Company
(Southern California Gas Company) anticipate the ability to accommodate future growth
within the City of Lake Elsinore.
References: RP -EIR; pages 4.0 -23 through 4.0 -24;
l.: L:N F, HA P1:, .AN UPDA "1'4:
i� i N A 1.. P R O C; R A M19 E t 12.
DF CIE` ro1RTR 20'11
PAGr> 31
CITY OF
FINDINGS OF I AC ► LADE CO LSINOP E
` DREAM EXTREME
3.2 FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WHICH
CAN BE MITIGATED TO LEVEL OF LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
Environmental impacts identified in the Final RP -EIR as potentially significant but which the
City finds can be mitigated to a level of less than significant through the imposition of feasible
mitigation measures identified in the Final RP -EIR and set forth herein, are described in this
section.
3.2.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING
a. Impact: The community character of the area could significantly change with the
implementation of individual projects in accordance with the proposed Land Use Plan.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the City of
Lake Elsinore has several key aspects of community character that add economic or
aesthetic value for the benefit of the City's residents and visitors. The Historic District is
an important resource to the City. The proposed project includes a Downtown Master
Plan and a Historic District Plan within the GPU that preserve historic resources and
enhance and improve the characteristic aspects of the area.
The City has existing commercial and industrial areas adjacent to I -15 that included in
the GPU to continue supporting the strong central commercial and industrial area that
provides jobs within the City. The overall character of this area will not be substantially
changed with the implementation of the GPU. The GPU ensures that the Lake Elsinore
is preserved as a water resource and recreational center that attracts visitors and adds
economic value to the City. The GPU adds value to the lake rather than changing the
current character in .a negative way by adding recreational opportunities and
encouraging the enhancement of the aesthetic value of the lake. Development carried
out pursuant to the specific plans will change the character of these areas which are
currently predominantly vacant. Residential development within these Specific Plan
Areas is relatively consistent to other residential developments that have been recently
G F..N E 12 .A L P L A N U PDATE.
FINAL. Prior. RA E1. R.
1)EC EM 11ER 2011
PAGF 32
CITY OF
LADE (��LSII`IOIZE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT
planned or constructed within the City and SOI; therefore, the community character
would not be substantially altered.
Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan will be required to
demonstrate avoidance of significant impacts through implementation of the goals and
policies of GPU Chapter 2.0 (Community Form), Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare)
and Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and Preservation). With implementation of these
goals and policies individual development proposed in accordance with the Land Use
Plan would not result in significant impacts upon community character.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.1 -14 thorough 3.1 -15; General Plan Chapter 2.0
(Community Form), Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare) and Chapter 4.0 (Resource
Protection and Preservation) goals, policies and implementation programs.
b. Impact: Overall implementation of individual projects in accordance with the Land Use
Plan's land use designations could result in significant adverse land use compatibility
impacts.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures beyond the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Findin&Tacts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required u1,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that overall
implementation of individual projects in accordance with the Land Use Plan's land use
designations could result in significant adverse land use compatibility impacts.
Residential land use designations would result in a population increase in areas
characterized by vacant land that could create indirect impacts on community character
associated with increased traffic, noise and impacts on community services such as
utilities and recreational opportunities. Implementation of the Land Use Plan would
also convert vacant land to commercial and industrial uses that could also create indirect
impacts on community character related to increased traffic, development of structures
that may impact the visual quality of an area as well as potential impacts of commercial
development on existing public infrastructure. However, as discussed further below
land use incompatibility impacts would be avoided or minimized through
implementation of features of the Land Use Plan land use designations and through
implementation of goals and policies of GPU Chapter 2.0 (Community Form) , Chapter
3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare) and Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and Preservation).
C Ii:N ER A1. PI, .AN U P D A 7'E
FIN AI_. PROGRAM 1, I. R.
I3 FC L• MBE It 201 1
PACE 33
CITY OF �"c�
FINDINGS OF rAt..l, LADE LSI� E
` DREAM EXTREME
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.1 -15 thorough 3.1 -19; General Plan Chapter 2.0
(Community Form), Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare) and Chapter 4.0 (Resource
Protection and Preservation) goals, policies and implementation programs.
C. Impact: The projected population with buildout of the Land Use Plan is 318,856. The
buildout for the proposed GPU within currently incorporated land only is projected to
be 209,756. SCAG has projected the population to be 85,376 based on the 2008 Regional
Transportation Plan within incorporated areas of the city only. The variance between
the Land Use Plan and the SCAG forecast is considered to be in substantial conformance
with the SCAG population forecasts with the understanding that the greater population
figure correlates to additional housing opportunities to provide affordable housing, and
the GPU contains policies that require a job - housing balance.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the follo7ing mitigation measure is required:
MM Land Use 1: The Gr07oth Management Program developed by the City provides a strategy
for developing a pattern and rate of gr071Yth to ensure that adequate public facilities and
infrastructure can be provided to meet the rate of ne7o construction and population gr07oth. The
goals and policies cinder the Growth Management section of the Community Form chapter
provide principles for a gr07oth management section. Implementation of the development pattern
provided in the Gr07oth Management Program and implementation of policies from the Growth
Management Section of the Community Form chapter, in association with future development,
would reduce impacts related to the population and housing forecasts.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment..
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that Table 3.1 -5
(Consistency with SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide Policies) in the RP-
EIR describes the consistency of the GPU Land Use Plan and associated goals and
policies with SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide Policies and shows that
the GPU goals and policies are consistent with the SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan
in all areas with the exception of the provision of productive agricultural land.
Therefore, the variance between the Land Use Plan and the SCAG forecast is considered
to be in substantial conformance with the SCAG population forecasts with the
G rN F]RA L PLAN UPDA'i'F7
1'_INAL VROGRAM EIR.
Dr:c-rMnr•.R 2011
PAG 4: 34
CITY OF
LADE C LSIN OKE
` DREAM EXTREME
P1NDINCS O F AC "I
understanding that the greater population figure correlates to additional housing
opportunities to provide affordable housing, and the GPU contains policies that require
a job - housing balance.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.1 -19 thorough 3.1 -30 and 4.0 -15 through 4.0 -16; General
Plan Chapter 2.0 (Community Form), Goal 1, Policies 1.1 through 1.9 and related
Implementation Program and Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and related Implementation Program.
d. Impact: Implementation of individual projects in accordance with the Land Use Plan
could result in significant inconsistencies with the MSHCP.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Land Use 2: Implementation of the GPU, the Land Use Plan, and District Plans could
result in significant impacts related to disturbance of areas described for conservation in the
MSHCP. Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan and District Plans in
accordance with the Resource Protection and Preservation Chapter, Biological Resources Section,
Goal 1, Policies 1.1 -1.11 will be required to demonstrate their avoidance of significant impacts
associated with areas described for conservation in the MSHCP Conservation Areas. Future
projects may be allowed to alter the Conservation Area boundaries through criteria refinement,
minor amendments, or other means, but would be required to do so in conformance with all
regulations and mitigation requirements of the MSHCP.
Findinoacts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that with
implementation of the goals and policies in Section 4.2 (Biological Resources) of Chapter
4.0 (Resources Protection and Preservation) of the GPU (for the protection of biological
habitats and long -term survival of plant and animal wildlife species) future
development proposed in accordance with the Land Use Plan would not result in any
significant inconsistencies with the MSHCP. The policies ensure that the City is
consistent with the programs and policies set forth in the MSHCP, including those set
forth in the Section 10(a) incidental take permit conditions issued for western Riverside
County. In addition, the City must deny grading plans that modify slope extending into
l> h;N FRA L PLAN U PDA "rF
FIN.A1.. PROGRAM 1,142.
1)I- CI-NJBv, R 201'1
PAC ;Ii: 3 0
FINDING'S OF F AC "i
CITY OF
LAKJE LSI� E
DREAM EXTREME
MSCHP areas; enforce usage restrictions for MSCHP areas; ensure that development
occurs in a manner that is compatible with MSHCP habitat conservation goals; protect
existing and planned riparian habitat communities; restrict development in areas as
consistent with the MSHCP, including those with relatively low levels of biological
function and values that are planned for restoration in the long -term planning goals of
the MSHCP; provide buffering in MSHCP adjacent areas; encourage revegetation with
native plants to create areas compatible with natural surrounding habitat; coordinate
with appropriate county, state, and federal agencies regarding planning decisions
affecting MSHCP areas; and require development proposals to consider a project's direct
and indirect potential impacts on a biological habitat area. With implementation of the
policies set forth in the GPU, the document would be consistent with the biological
resources preservation goals of the MSHCP.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.1 -31 and 3.8 -53 through 3.8 -55; General Plan Chapter 4.0
(Resources Protection and Preservation, Goal 1, Policies 1.1 though 1.8 and related
Implementation Program, Goal 2, Policies 2.1 and 2.2 and related Implementation
Program.
e. Impact: Development consistent with the proposed GPU and the District Plans could
result in the potential for incompatibility of proposed land uses with current land uses
throughout the City and SOL
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measures are required:
MM Land Use 3: Each project within the Skylark Airport Influence Area, as shown on Figure
2.7 of the General Plan, will be reviewed for its consistency with the Airport Land Use Planning
Handbook Recommendations when individual projects are proposed. This review will include
analysis and subsequent review under CEQA. The feasibility of fix proposed mitigation
measures must be determined on a project - specific level.
MM Land Use 4: If the motocross track is relocated, future development within the East Lake
District Plan shall be required to comply with mitigation measures identified in the East Lake
Specific Plan EIR. However, additional project - specific CEQA environmental analysis and
review will be required when a detailed project is proposed at the new motocross site. This
project -level review will include an analysis of potential land use compatibility issues.
G I N ER.A 1. PLAN UPDATE
I NA 1. PRO<G RA YI F,IR.
Drc E NI BE:R 2011
PACT, 36
CITY OF
LSIIYOIZE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINCS OF FAC"1
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that Development
consistent with the proposed GPU and the District Plans could result in the potential for
incompatibility of proposed land uses with current land uses throughout the City and
SOI. Land use changes in these District Plans could result in impacts on traffic, air
quality, noise, community services, and natural resources. Potential traffic, air quality,
and noise impacts caused by changes in land use designations would be attributed to an
increase in residential development in place of vacant land. Increased residential land
would increase the number of residents, thereby increasing vehicle travel trips and
travel time, which will increase emissions and noise. Potential community services
impacts would also be related to a conversion of vacant land to residential land, as an
increase in residents would necessitate an increase in the provision of public services
and facilities. Potential impacts on natural resources would result from the conversion
of open space and vacant land to developed uses, mainly residential uses. As described
in Table 3.1 -6 (District Plan Land Use Impacts) of the RP -EIR, goals and policies are set
forth in the GPU that would decrease the effects of land use changes and potential
incompatibility between proposed uses. With implementation of the District Plan land
use designations, significant adverse land use incompatibility impacts would not result.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.1 -31 through 3.1 -41 Final RP -EIR, pages 2.0 -108 through
2.0 -110 and 3.0 -2; General Plan's District Plan Goals and Policies.
f. Impact: The GPU includes goals and policies that, in combination with a growth
management strategic plan, will reduce increased development and density impacts.
Implementation of the growth management plan would reduce impacts related to the
inconsistency of the GPU with the population and housing forecasts of SCAG to below a
level of significance. Potential cumulative impacts related to the loss of agricultural
lands are less than significant.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, implementation of mitigation measures MA4 Land Use 1 through MM Land
Use 4-is required.
C.; E:N f5 RA 1.. Pr. AN UPDATE
FINAL FROG EtAM ILIR
1.3 F C: 3s M 13 E• R 2011
PAC, IE 37
FINDINGS OF FAC"F
CITY OF
LADE 9 LSINOP,,E
MM'
DREAM EXI REME
Finding /Facts in Support of the Findiin: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the land use
designations set forth in the Proposed Land Use Plan allow for a substantial increase in
population from existing conditions and from that anticipated for the area by SCAG.
The Growth Management Program developed by the City provides a strategy for
developing a pattern and rate of growth to ensure that adequate public facilities and
infrastructure can be provided to meet the rate of new construction and population
growth. The goals and policies under the Growth Management section of the
Community Form chapter provide principles for a growth management section.
Implementation of the development pattern provided in the Growth Management
Program and implementation of policies from the Growth Management Section of the
Community Form chapter, in association with future development, would reduce
impacts related to the population and housing forecasts to less - than - significant levels.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.1 -19 thorough 3.1 -30 and 4.0 -15 through 4.0 -16; General
Plan Chapter 2.0 (Community Form), Goal 1, Policies 1.1 through 1.9 and related
Implementation Program and Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and related Implementation Program,
and General Plan's District Plan Goals and Policies.
3.2.2 CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project, including the General Plan Update's
Land Use Plan and District Plans and the Downtown Master Plan, and within the 3rd
Street Annexation area could result in impacts on significant historic resources as
defined in California Code of Regulations, Section 15064.5.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the folhnVing mitigation measure is required:
MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 1: Individual projects implemented in accordance
With the Land Use Plan shall also demonstrate compliance with Land Use Policies 4.1 -4.4,
Cultural and Paleontological Resources Policy 6.1, and Historic Preservation Policies 9.1 -9.4,
and 10.1 - 10.4`. As zoell as compliance With applicable District Plan Policies related to cultural
and paleontological resources.
GENERAL PLAN U PDATI•,
FINAL PROGRAYI EIR
DECEMI3GR 2011
PACE 38
CITY OF ,�
L_AK-E , C LSI E
` DREAM EXTREME
FNDI`iGSOf FXCT
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that it is the intent
of the proposed project that buildings on this inventory be preserved from demolition
and, where necessary, restored/ improved in order to promote the City's historic
character. Cultural Resources Goal 9 Policy 9.1 sets forth the intent to prevent loss or
compromise of significant historical resources. Policies identify the requirement to
conduct a literature search and site survey for any project that would demolish a
structure with potential historical value to the community. Cultural Resources Goal 8
and its related policies emphasize the City's intent to promote its heritage through
preservation of historical sites and structures.
Although it is the intent of the GPU to promote the City's historical heritage by
preserving and restoring existing sites and structures, individual projects implemented
pursuant to the Land Use Plan may result in significant impacts on resources considered
significant historic resources as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines that
cannot be specifically identified here. Project applicants would be required to provide
mitigation for these potential impacts, as dictated by City guidelines. Impacts and
mitigation would be quantified by project - specific cultural resources review.
Additionally, compliance with federal, State and local regulations pertaining to
historical resources and compliance with Land Use Policies 4.1 -4.4, Cultural and
Paleontological Resources Policies 7.1 -7.5, and Historic Preservation Policies 9.1 -9.4, and
10.1 -10.4 at a programmatic level, will prevent the proposed project, including the GPU,
the District Plans and the 3rd Street Annexation from resulting in significant impacts to
historical resources. Specific projects that implement the proposed project must
demonstrate that the specific project will not result in significant impacts to historical
resources through implementation of mitigation measures identified in this RP -EIR.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.2 -24 through 3.2 -31 and 3.2 -36 through 3.2 -41; Final RP -EIR,
pages 2.0 -88 and 3.0 -5; General Plan Chapter 2.0 (Community Form), Goal 4, Policies 4.1
through 4.4 and related Implementation Program, Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and
Preservation), Goal 6, Policy 6.1 and related Implementation Program, Goal 9, Policies
9.1 through 9.4 and related Implementation Program, Goal 10, Policies 10.1 through 10.4
and related Implementation Program and General Plan's District Plan Goals and
Policies. "
G E:N F, E2A 1.. P LAN U PDA"rE
F.1 N A t. 1' R 0 G It A M E 1 R.
uriCFmnr,u 2011
PAGE, 39
FINDINGS OF F`ACF
CITY OF
L_ALLSIN RE
DREAM EXTREME
b. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project, including the General Plan Update's
Land Use Plan and District Plans and the Downtown Master Plan, and within the 3rd
Street Annexation area could result in impacts on significant archeological resources as
defined in California Code of Regulations, Section 15064.5.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measures are required:
MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 2: Prior to issuance of grading permit(s) for the
project, the project applicant shall retain an archaeological monitor to monitor all ground -
disturbing activities in an effort to identifij any unknoum archaeological resources. Any nezoly
discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation.
MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 3: At least 30 days prior to seeking a grading
permit, the project applicant shall contact the appropriate tribe to notifij that Tribe of grading,
excavation and the monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Lake Elsinore and the
Tribe to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement
shall address the treatment of knoeon cultural resources, the designation, responsibilities, and
participation of Native American Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground
disturbing activities, project grading and development scheduling, terms of compensation; and
treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains
discovered on the site.
MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 4. Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the
project archaeologist shall file a pre - grading report with the City and County (if required) to
document the proposed methodology for grading activity observation. Said methodology shall
include the requirement for a qualified archaeological monitor to be present and to have the
authority to stop and redirect grading activities. In accordance 714th the agreement required in
MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 2; the archaeological monitor's authority to stop and
redirect grading will be exercised in consultation with the appropriate tribe in order to evaluate
the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. Tribal monitors shall
be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and ground breaking activities, and shall also have
the authority to stop and redirect grading activities in consultation with the project archeologist.
MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 5: The landozoner shall relinquish ownership of all
cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are
found on the project area to the appropriate tribe for proper treatment and disposition.
G @N V.IZ I, PLAN U PDA"r6:
FI N A1.. PRO(d RA iN £.1 R.
131'C1;:n1nGR 2011
PAGE 4 0
CITY OF �n
LADE �LSINOIZE I-'INI)I (,S ()F FACT
DREAM EXTREME
MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 6: All sacred sites, should they be encountered
within the project area, shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation, if feasible.
MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 7. If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface
archaeological /cultural resources are discovered during grading, the Developer, the project
archaeologist, and the appropriate tribe shall assess the significance of such resources and shall
meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources. If the Developer and the Tribe
cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for such resources, these issues toill be
presented to the Community Development Director (CDD) for decision. The CDD shall make
the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with
respect to archaeological resources and shall take into account the religious beliefs, customs, and
practices of the appropriate tribe. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the
decision of the CDD shall be appealable to the City of Lake Elsinore.
MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 8: Individual projects implemented in accordance
With the Land Use Plan shall also demonstrate compliance with Cultural and Paleontological
Resources Policies 6.2 -6.4 and 7.1 -7.5. As well as compliance with applicable District Plan
Policies related to cultural and paleontological resources.
Finding9acts in Support of the Finding; Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that projects
conducted pursuant to the proposed project have the potential to affect archaeological
resources (including those known and unknown) by disturbing earth in which the
resources lie. Disturbance of an archaeological resource that is considered significant
pursuant to California Code of Regulations Section 15064.5 would be a significant
impact. It is the intent of the proposed project that development conducted pursuant to
the General Plan Update, the Downtown Master Plan and within the boundaries of the
3rd Street Annexation avoids all significant impacts on archaeological resources.
Cultural Resources Policy 6.1 sets forth the City's intent to prevent the loss or
compromise of significant archaeological resources. Policies related to Goal 6 of the
Resource Protection and Preservation chapter require the applicant to consult with local
Native American tribes as to the sensitivity of the site, require the applicant to conduct
archaeological literature search and survey for projects proposed within potentially
sensitive resource areas, and outline the necessary procedures if resources are
discovered to exist on the site.
C:I -'N E RA I.. P A N U P13 ATE
I'INA1.. 1 >R0 GIt ANJ I IIZ.
DECC•MnrR 2011
P A G E 4 1
CITY OF
FINDINGS OF FACT
LSINOIZE
DREAM EXTREME
Although it is the intent of the proposed project to minimize archaeological resources
impacts, projects implemented pursuant to the proposed project may result in
significant impacts with respect to such resources that cannot be identified or quantified
here. Applicants of implementing development project will be required to provide
mitigation for these potential impacts, as dictated by State and City guidelines and in
consultation with local tribes. Impacts and mitigation would be quantified by project -
specific cultural resources review.
Additionally, compliance with federal, State and local regulations addressing
archaeological resources and compliance with Cultural and Paleontological Resources
Policies 7.1 -7.5, at a programmatic level, will prevent the proposed project, including the
GPU, the District Plans and the 3rd Street Annexation from resulting in significant
impacts to archaeological resources. Specific projects that implement the proposed
project must demonstrate that the specific project will not result in significant impacts to
historical resources through implementation of mitigation measures identified in this
PEIR.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.2 -24 through 3.2 -31 and 3.241 through 3.2 -48; Final RP -EIR,
pages 2.0 -88 and 3.0 -5; General Plan Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and Preservation),
Goal 6, Policies 6.1 through 6.4, Goal 7, Policies 7.1 through 7.5 and related
Implementation Program, and General Plans District Plan Goals and Policies.
C. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project, including the General Plan Update's
Land Use Plan and District Plans and the Downtown Master Plan; and within the 3rd
Street Annexation area could directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 9: Individual projects implemented in accordance
tuith the Land Use Plan shall also demonstrate compliance with Cultural and Paleontological
Resources Policy 8.1. As well as compliance with applicable District Plan Policies related to
cultural and paleontological resources.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
GI,,Nfe IZAL PLAN UPnATe:
F1NAL Paoc; It NJ FIR.
DI EC.LmnER 2011
PA< [ 42
CITY OF
LADE LLSINOIZE
DREAM
FINDINCS OFFACT
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the region s
rich prehistoric and historic heritage and the known presence of paleontological
resources means that development planned throughout the City and the SOI pursuant to
the GPU may unearth or damage sensitive paleontological resources. Cultural
Resources Policy 8.1 requires survey and study of project impacts on paleontological
resources for projects within "High" and "Undetermined" areas and implementation of
proper measures to reduce impacts. Although it is the intent of the GPU to minimize
paleontological resources impacts, GPU projects may result in significant impacts with
respect to such resources that cannot be identified or quantified here. Project applicants
would be required to provide mitigation for these potential impacts, as recommended
by Society for Vertebrate Paleontology guidelines. Impacts and mitigation would be
quantified by project- specific paleontological resources review.
Additionally, compliance with federal, State and local regulations pertaining to
paleontological resources and compliance with Cultural and Paleontological Resources
Policy 8.1, at a programmatic level, will prevent the proposed project, including the
GPU, the District Plans and the 3rd Street Annexation from resulting in significant
impacts to paleontological resources. Specific projects that implement the proposed
project must demonstrate that the specific project will not result in significant impacts to
paleontological resources through implementation of mitigation measures identified in
this RP -EIR.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.2 -24 through 3.2 -31 and 3.2 -48 through 3.2 -49; Final RP -EIR,
pages 2.0 -88 and 3.0 -5; General Plan Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and Preservation),
Goal 8, Policy 8.1 and related Implementation Program.
d. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project, including the General Plan Update's
Land Use Plan and District Plans and the Downtown Master Plan, and within the 3rd
Street Annexation area could result in impacts due to the accidental discovery of human
remains.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
MM Cultural/Paleontological Resources 10: If human remains are encountered, California
Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the
Riverside Counhj Coroner has made the necessanj findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to
California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from
disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the
Riverside Counhj Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall
C.; 5:N EIt 1 L PL. .AN U PD.A '1'1,
FINAL.. PROCRAM F�,IR
D F.CE M B r 201 1
PAGr. 43
FINDINGS OF FACT
CITY OF
LADE �LSIN RE
= DREAM EXI REME
contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. Subsequently, the Native
American Heritage Commission shall identifij the person or persons it believes to be the "most
likely descendant." The most likely descendant may then make recommendations, and engage in
consultations concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code
5097.98.
FindingTacts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that several
Indian tribes identified the City and its SOI as being within either their traditional use
area or one in which they have cultural ties. Inasmuch as archaeological resources, as
described above, have been documented within the project area, there is the potential
that human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries, are located
within the project area. Therefore, ground - disturbing activities associated with
development that occurs during implementation of the proposed project, including the
General Plan Update (Land Use Plan and District Plans), the Downtown Master Plan
and the 3rd Street Annexation, have the potential to disturb as yet undiscovered human
remains.
However, compliance with federal, State and local regulations pertaining to Native
American resources and human remains and compliance with Cultural and
Paleontological Resources Policies 6.2, 6.3, and 7.1 at a programmatic level, will prevent
the proposed project, including the GPU, the District Plans and the 3rd Street
Annexation from resulting in significant impacts to regarding the accidental discovery
of human remains. Specific projects that implement the proposed project must
demonstrate that the specific project will not result in significant impacts related to the
accidental discovery of human remains through implementation of mitigation measures
identified in this PEIR
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.2 -24 through 3.2 -31 and 3.2 -49 through 3.2 -50; Final RP -EIR,
pages 2.0 -88, 2.0 -97, 2.0 -98, 3.0 -4 and 3.0 -5; General Plan Chapter 4.0 (Resource
Protection and Preservation), Goal 6 Policies 6.1 through 6.4 and related Implementation
Program and Goal 7, Policy 7.1.
e. Impact: With implementation of the proposed project's goals, policies and
implementation programs and compliance with regulatory requirements, any potential
cumulative impacts related to historical, cultural and paleontological resources will be
mitigated to a less - than - significant level.
G F V E R A l.. PLAN UPDATE
I�rnAE, PRoGRANI EIR.
D r car Ni nr•,n 2011
PAC:r 44
CITY OF
LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
Fl.N1DINGS OF FACT
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, implementation of mitigation measures MM Cultural/Paleontological 1
through MM Cultural/Paleontologica110 is required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that federal
regulations such as the National Historic Preservation Act and State regulations such as
CEQA and Senate Bill 18 provide substantial guidance for identifying significant
cultural and historical resources. These existing state and federal regulations in place
that require identification of significant resources and mitigation for impacts on those
resources that must be complied with for all future development projects. Compliance
of future development projects with these regulations would minimize cumulative
impacts on those resources. The GPU includes policies under Cultural Resources Goal 5
affirming the City's intent to prevent the loss of cultural resources. The policy ensures
the proper identification and treatment of cultural resources, thereby avoiding
contribution to any cumulative impact on archaeological resources.
The City's GPU policies under Cultural Resources Policy 6.1 and Goal 7 highlight the
importance to the City of historical resources and ensure the proper identification,
treatment, and preservation of such resources —both known and unknown— thereby
avoiding contribution to any cumulative regional impact on historical resources that
could occur.
Areas of paleontological sensitivity throughout the County have been delineated by the
Riverside County General Plan. Areas identified as "high" or "undetermined" may
contain important paleontological resources; therefore, technical analysis by a qualified
paleontologist is required in these areas, ensuring the proper identification and
treatment of resources. The City's GPU policies under Cultural Resources Goal 7 reflect
the City's participation in this program, which will ensure any contribution to the
cumulative loss of paleontological resources is less than significant.
Since all local jurisdictions, including the City of Lake Elsinore, are subject to the
regulatory requirements described in Section 3.2 (Cultural and Paleontological
Resources) of this RP -EIR including CEQA, the National Historic Preservation Act
G E: NE: It A I., P1, .AN UP1)A -FU
I "I N AL P ROG RA I\1 1s I R
Dr,cEmuriz 2011
PAGF.. 4 5
FINDING'S OF FACT
CITY OF
LADE- -JLSIIYORE
DREAM EXTREME
(NHPA) of 1966 and Senate Bill 18, potential cumulative impacts to cultural and
paleontological resources should not occur.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.2 -24 through 3.2 -31 and 4.0 -8 and 4.0 -9; Final RP -EIR, pages
2.0 -88 and 3.0 -5; General Plan Chapter 2.0 (Community Form), Goal 4, Policies 4.1
through 4.4 and related Implementation Program, Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and
Preservation), Goal 6, Policy 6.1, Goal 7, Policies 7.1 through 7.5, Goal 8, Policy 8.1, Goal
9, Policies 9.1 through 9.4, Goal 10, Policies 10.1 through 10.4, and related
Implementation Programs and General Plan's District Plan Goals and Policies.
3.2.3 AESTHETICS
a. Impact: Buildout of the proposed project would have potentially significant adverse
impacts on views of hillsides and mountains. The impacts on views from I -15 looking
toward the lake and hillsides are potentially significant.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Aesthetics 1: Future development projects will be required to prepare visual simulations
demonstrating compliance with the applicable GPU goals and policies. Preparation of visual
simulations demonstrating compliance toith the GPU goals and policies zoould be required for
future development projects located in scenic viewsheds along the 1 -15 corridor and other areas at
the discretion of the Director of Communihj Development.
Findinoacts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that views of the
larger Santa Ana Mountains in the distance would not be affected by the proposed
project. However the hillsides to the south and west are planned for hillside residential
uses and this development would result in a significant impact on views of hillsides.
The character of the I -15 corridor as it is developed with commercial and industrial uses
would be protected through the designation of similar uses as an extension of the
existing uses Views from I -15 would also be potentially affected by hillside residential
development.
GrNIZ Ix AL PLAN UPDATE
F NA 1. PITOG R. AYI 1' I R
D1 (:'r. Ni n E: rt 201 1
Pnt::E 46
CITY OF
LAKE � ` LSI� E
DREAM EXTREME
H N D I N GS OF FACT.
Policies are included in Chapter 4.0 of the proposed GPU to protect and mitigate these
impacts potential impacts. Policies 3.3 and 3.4 require contour grading on steep slopes
and set forth the policy to preserve the City's visual character in the surrounding
hillsides. Policies 10.1 -10.6, 11.1 -11.3, and 12.1 -12.3 protect views and specify design
requirements for new development to minimize visual impacts. Specifically, the policies
require the creation of a program to identify specific visual resources and valued views
within the City, discourage development that blocks or substantially alters public views
of Lake Elsinore and local ridgelines, encourage the dedication of open space in hillside
development, encourage new development and redevelopment to incorporate views of
Lake Elsinore, and encourage application to Caltrans for official designation of I -15 and
SR -74 as state scenic highways. With implementation of the goals, policies and
implementation programs of the GPU, potentially significant impacts on the visual
character of mountains and hillsides and upon the visual quality of views from I -15 will
be reduced to a less - than - significant level.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.3 -27 through 3.3 -40; General Plan Chapter 4.0 (Resource
Protection and Preservation), Goal 3, Policies 3.1 through 3.4, Goal 10, Policies 10.1
through 10.7, Goal 11, Policies 11.1s through 11.5, Goal 12, Policies 12.1 through 12.3,
and related Implementation Programs, and General Plan's District Plan Goals and
Policies.
b. Im act: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in cumulatively
considerable aesthetic impacts.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, implementation of mitigation measure MM Aesthetics 1 is required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that future
developments within the City and the SOI will be required to comply with GPU goals,
policies and implementation programs to ensure that impacts on visual quality from
public viewsheds and vantage points are minimized. These policies ensure that the City
will implement the MSCHP and preserve valuable open space, which thereby preserves
the visual character of open space in the City. Development within the City and SOI in
C; F.N F. RA 1. Pr.AN U P DATE
FINA1. PnoGIt Ani I lit
DFcCEMnrR 201 I
PAC ;1. 47
FINDINGS OF FACT
CITY OFD
LADE F1LSINOIZE
DREAM EXTREME
combination with other development in the County would contribute to changes in
views to motorists on I -15. With development in the region it is inevitable that views
from I -15 will be modified from existing conditions. However, measures by the
proposed GPU that must be incorporated into future development within the City and
SOI would minimize impacts on views from I -15. With adherence to GPU goals and
policies, the contribution of development within the City to County-wide cumulative
effects to views from I -15 would be less than significant.
Although sources of light and glare will increase within the project area, the Chapter 4.0
(Resource Protection and Preservation) Policy 12.2 states that the City shall discourage
uses or development that entails excessive light and glare visible from private and
public viewpoints. Additionally, compliance with Section 17.112.040 and Section
17.148.110 of the City's Zoning Code require that lighting shall be designed to preclude
light shining into the sky above a horizontal plane passing through the luminaire and
encourage the use of low pressure sodium lighting in non - residential development.
Thus compliance with Policy 12.2 and the zoning code will reduce any potential impacts
from light and glare to a less- than - significant level. Light and glare within the area
surrounding the project area is controlled by regulatory requirements, including but not
limited to Riverside County Ordinance No. 655 (Regulating Light Pollution) and City of
Murrieta Development Code Section 16.18.110 (Mount Palomar Lighting Standards),
which have the effect of reducing the impact of nighttime lighting in the cumulative area
to less- than - significant levels.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.3 -27 through 3.3 -40 and 4.0 -3 through 4.0 -4; General Plan
Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and Preservation), Goal 3, Policies 3.1 through 3.4,
Goal 10, Policies 10.1 through 10.7, Goal 11, Policies 11.1s through 11.5, Goal 12, Policies
12.1 through 12.3, and related Implementation Programs, and General Plan's District
Plan Goals and Policies.
3.2.4 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
a. Impact: Implementation of individual projects and associated population growth
anticipated in accordance with the Land Use Plan could result in significant impacts on
existing bikeways or create hazards by failing to support alternative modes of
transportation
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
C: EN iCRA L PLAN U PD A'PF_
FINAL PROGRAM EIR
DEC 'L• NJBIcR 207 1
PACs•. 48
CITY OF
LAKE FgiLSINORE F1NI)INGS €1F FACT
DREAM EX-IREME
MM Transportation 4: Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan mill he
required to demonstrate avoidance of significant impacts through implementation of the ultimate
roadruay and intersection classifications and improvements shovvn on the Land Use plan and the
Capital Improvement Program as Well as the goals and policies set forth by the Circulation
Section of the Communihj Form Chapter.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed
GPU Circulation Section of the Community Form Chapter proposes changes to the
existing bikeway plan that will provide for additional bikeways within the City.
Implementation of these modifications would not conflict with adopted policies and
programs supporting alternative transportation.
Additionally, implementation of individual projects and associated population growth
anticipated in accordance with the Land Use Plan could result in significant impacts on
existing bikeways or create hazards by failing to support alternative modes of
transportation. However, with implementation of General Plan goals, policies and
implementation programs, individual projects implemented in accordance with the GPU
and associated population growth anticipated in accordance with the Land Use Plan
would not result in significant and unavoidable adverse impacts on bikeways and will
provide adequate opportunities for alternative transportation by providing additional
bikeways within the City.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.4 -111 through 3.4 -121; General Plan Chapter 2.0
(Community Form), Goal 6, Policy 6.4, Goal 9, Policy 9.1 and related Implementation
Programs, and General Plan's District Plan Goals and Policies.
b. Impact: Implementation of individual projects and associated population growth
anticipated in accordance with the Land Use Plan could result in significant impacts on
existing truck routes or create hazards by failing to provide adequate truck routes.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
1.: EN ERA1, Pr,AN UPDA -1 E
F -
INAI_ PaoGR.AN1 E
I3V,CF•.trn3rR 2011
PAC r, 49
FINDINGS OF FAC "I
CITY OF
LAKE ilaLSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
MM Transportation 5: Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan will be
required to demonstrate avoidance of significant impacts through implementation of the ultimate
roadway and intersection classifications and improvements shown on the Land Use Platt and the
Capital Improvement Program as well as the goals and policies set forth by the Circulation
Section of the Communihj Form Chapter.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that
implementation of individual projects and associated population growth anticipated in
accordance with the Land Use Plan could result in significant impacts on existing truck
routes or create hazards by failing to provide adequate truck routes. However, with
implementation of General Plan goals, policies and implementation programs,
individual projects implemented in accordance with the GPU and associated population
growth anticipated in accordance with the Land Use Plan would not result in significant
and unavoidable adverse impacts on bikeways and will provide adequate opportunities
for alternative transportation by providing additional bikeways within the City.
However, with implementation of General Plan goals, policies and implementation
programs, individual projects implemented in accordance with the GPU and associated
population growth anticipated in accordance with the Land Use Plan would not result in
significant and unavoidable adverse impacts on existing and planned truck routes.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.4 -111 through 3.4 -121; General Plan Chapter 2.0
(Community Form), Goal 6, Policy 6.1 through 6.5 and related Implementation
Programs, and General Plan's District Plan Goals and Policies.
3.2.5 NOISE
a. Impact: The GPU proposes commercial development that would generate noise related
to such sources as delivery operations, parking lots, and human activity.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the follotoing mitigation measure is required:
4
G6.IVI]RAI. PLAN UPDA'.'1:
FINAL PRO C: RANI 1-I12.
1>rc rmnr vt 2011
PAC r•_ 50
CITY OF
LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FAC`I
MM Noise 2: For projects proposing nem commercial uses in the vicinity of sensitive receptors,
the City shall require the project applicant to demonstrate the ne7o use's compliance with City
noise standards. Where project - specific analysis determines that noise standards may be
exceeded, the City shall require binding mitigation measures that Will reduce the noise received to
acceptable levels.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed
project allows commercial uses that could generate noise received by residences and
other sensitive receptors in excess of relevant standards set forth in the City's Zoning
Code and the General Plan's Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix and Interior and
Exterior Noise Standards. GPU policy sets forth the City's intent to enforce the Zoning
Code and other noise standards. Placement of new uses that exceed relevant noise
standards would be considered a significant impact.
However, the mitigation measure listed above would reduce the potential impacts of the
Proposed Land Use Plan and GPU related to noise levels from commercial operations to
less - than - significant levels. The mitigation would reduce the impacts associated with
future projects because the City shall require the project applicant to demonstrate the
new use's compliance with City noise standards. The City noise standards contain
specific requirements for reducing noise levels associated with commercial projects.
Existing standards include restrictions on activities and limits on operational hours that
reduce noise levels associated with commercial uses. Where project- specific analysis
determines that noise standards may be exceeded, then the City shall require binding
mitigation measures that will reduce the noise received to acceptable levels.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.5 -19 through 3.5 -22, 3.5 -40, 3.5 -43 and 3.5 -45; General Plan
Chapter 3.0 (Public Health and Welfare), Goal 7, Policy 7.1, Policy 7.2 and related
Implementation Program, Eastlake District Goal 1 and Policy EL 1.1.
b. Impact: The GPU would entail construction of new schools that have the potential to
receive noise exceeding state standards. Exceeding state standards for school noise
would be considered a significant impact.
Mitigation : The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
G li N E; It A 1, P 1, A N Ct P D Al F:
FINAL. PR0GRAN1 E
DIE CE: Nlnr.R 2011
PAC; 1 ?. 51
FINDINGS OF FAE'I
CITY 0r _^1
LADE c_9LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the follo:oing mitigation measure is required:
MM Noise 3: For residential projects proposed adjacent to schools, the City shall require the
project applicant to demonstrate the neto use's compliance With City noise standards. Where
project - specific analysis determines that noise standards may be exceeded, the City shall require
binding mitigation measures that Will reduce the noise received to acceptable levels.
The City shall require all school projects to conduct site - specific noise analysis in accordance With
State requirements.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that GPU
proposes new residential development that could receive noise from adjacent schools in
excess of relevant standards set forth in the Zoning Code and the General Plan's Noise
and Land Use Compatibility Matrix and Interior and Exterior Noise Standards. GPU
policy sets forth the City's intent to enforce the Zoning Code and other noise standards.
Placement of new uses that exceed relevant noise standards would be considered a
significant impact. The GPU would entail construction of new schools that have the
potential to receive noise exceeding state standards. Exceeding state standards for
school noise would be considered a significant impact.
However, the mitigation measure listed above would reduce the potential impacts of the
Proposed Land Use Plan and GPU related to noise levels from school operations to less -
than- significant levels. The mitigation would reduce the impacts associated with future
projects because compliance with City standards would ensure that potential impacts
from schools on sensitive land uses would be mitigated to a less - than - significant level.
Existing standards include restrictions on the types of land uses that can be located in
the vicinity of a school and include measures that can be incorporated into the design of
a project that would
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.5 -19 through 3.5 -22, 3.5 -40, 3.5 -43 and 3.5 -45; General Plan
Chapter 3.0 (Public Health and Welfare), Goal 7, Policy 7.1, and related Implementation
Program.
C. Impact: The.GPU proposes new or enhanced recreational uses that may generate noise
conditions received off -site, as well as new residential and commercial development in
G J,N ERA L PLAN U PDA'r1;
FINAL PROGRAM 1.:1R.
D I ( F N) B E R 2 0 1 1
PACs 52
CITY OF
LAKE'grLSINORE FINDINGS OF FACT
DREAM EXTREME
proximity to existing and proposed recreational uses, which may in turn be affected by
recreational noise.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Noise 4: For projects proposing new recreational uses or increased intensity of recreational
activity in proximity to sensitive receptors, the City shall require the project applicant to
demonstrate the residential use's compliance with City noise standards with respect to the
existing recreational areas. Where project- specific analysis determines that noise standards may
be exceeded, the City shall require binding mitigation measures that will reduce the noise received
to acceptable levels.
For projects proposing ne7o residential uses in proximity to recreational areas, the City shall
require the project applicant to demonstrate the recreational use's compliance with City noise
standards. Where project - specific analysis determines that noise standards may be exceeded, then
the City shall require binding mitigation measures that will reduce the noise received to
acceptable levels.
Finding&acts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the GPU
proposes new or enhanced recreational uses that may generate noise conditions received
off -site, as well as new residential and commercial development in proximity to existing
and proposed recreational uses, which may in turn be affected by recreational noise.
Such noise received from within recreational areas or generated by recreational areas
has the potential to exceed relevant standards set forth in the Zoning Code and the
General Plans Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix and Interior and Exterior
Noise Standards. GPU policy sets forth the City's intent to enforce the Zoning Code and
other noise standards and to minimize recreational noise. Placement of new uses or
increased intensity of existing uses that exceeds relevant noise standards would be
considered a significant impact.
However, the mitigation measure listed above would reduce the potential impacts of the
Proposed Land Use Plan and GPU related to noise levels from recreation use operations
(i F.N F,It A 1.. 1' LA N LI PDA "rE
FINAL. PROGRAM 1x112
DI (: I,. Ni nI.R 201 1
PAGF 53
CITY OF
F'INDI \GS OF FAt' l
LSINORZE
DREAM EXTREME
to less- than - significant levels. The mitigation would reduce the impacts associated with
future projects because compliance with City standards would ensure that potential
impacts from recreation uses on sensitive land uses would be mitigated to a less -than-
significant level. Existing standards include restrictions on the types of land uses that
can be located in the vicinity of recreation uses and include measures that can be
incorporated into the design of a project that would reduce noise levels within the land
uses surrounding recreation facilities to acceptable levels.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.5 -19 through 3.5 -22, 3.5 -41, 3.5 -43 and 3.5 -45 through 3.5 -46;
Final RP -EIR, pages 2.0 -110, 2.0 -111 and 3.0 -5; General Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public Health
and Welfare), Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and related Implementation Program.
d. Impact: The GPU proposes industrial and mining uses in various places throughout the
City and SOI that may generate noise received off -site.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the fallowing mitigation measure is required:
MM Noise 5: For projects proposing new industrial /ruining operations in the vicinity of
sensitive receptors or projects that propose new sensitive uses in the vicinity of industrial /mining
operations, the City shall require the project applicant to demonstrate the nezu use's compliance
with City noise standards. Where project - specific analysis determines that noise standards may
be exceeded, the City shall require binding mitigation measures that will reduce the noise received
to acceptable levels.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Findiin: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that GPU projects
have the potential to place new industrial and mining operations in proximity to
sensitive receptors, and vice versa, such that relevant noise standards set forth in the
Zoning Code and the General Plan's Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix and
Interior and Exterior Noise Standards would be exceeded. GPU policy sets forth the
City's intent to enforce the Zoning Code and other noise standards and to discourage the
juxtaposition. of noisy industrial/ mining uses with sensitive uses. Placement of new
uses that exceed relevant noise standards would be considered a significant impact:
G ENERA r, PE_AN tJ I'DA'rk,
IN Ar. PR0(; It A,M EIR
DEC EMBEn 2011
PAGC S4
CITY OF
LSINOIZE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT
However, the mitigation measure listed above would reduce potential impacts of the
Proposed Land Use Plan and GPU related to noise levels from industrial and mining
operations to less - than - significant levels. The mitigation would reduce the impacts
associated with future projects because compliance with City standards would ensure
that potential impacts from mining and industrial operations would be mitigated to a
less than significant level. Existing standards include restrictions on activities and limits
on operational hours that reduce noise levels associated with these types of activities.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.5 -19 through 3.5 -22, 3.5 -41, 3.5 -44 and 3.5 -46; General Plan
Chapter 3.0 (Public Health and Welfare), Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and related Implementation
Program, Alberhill District Goal 1 and Policy AH 1 -5.
e. Impact: The 3rd Street Annexation would entail individual projects that would generate
construction noise. The 3rd Street Annexation project also proposes new commercial
uses in proximity to residential development; commercial uses can generate noise that
would be received by residential uses.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implernentation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the folloeoing mitigation measures are required:
MM Noise 6: The City shall require 3rd Street Annexation project applicants to demonstrate
their compliance with City standards regarding construction noise. Where project - specific
analysis determines that noise standards may be exceeded, the City shall require binding
mitigation measures that will reduce the construction noise to acceptable levels.
For 3rd Street Annexation projects placing noise - sensitive land uses adjacent to or in the vicinity
of 1 -15, SR -74, Cambern Avenue, and Camino del Norte, the City shall require the project
applicant to demonstrate the new use's compliance with City standards regarding traffic noise
received on the site. Where project - specific analysis determines that noise standards may be
exceeded, then the City shall require binding mitigation measures that will reduce the noise
received to acceptable levels.
For 3rd Street Annexation projects proposing new commercial uses in the vicinity of sensitive
receptors, the City shall require the project applicant to demonstrate the new use's compliance
with City noise standards. Where project- specific analysis determines that noise standards may
be exceeded, then the City shall require binding mitigation measures that will reduce the noise
received to acceptable levels.
<..rNr,:a,Ar, PLAN UPDATE
FINAL. PROGIZANI F,IR
13 17',CErvi13 ER 2011
PACs 55
FINDINGS OF FAC`F
CITY OF
LADE LSI�IZE
DREAM E,YTREME
Finding/Facts in Support of the Findin: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the 3rd Street
Annexation project proposes new development that may receive traffic noise levels in
excess of relevant standards set forth in the Zoning Code and the General Plan's Noise
and Land Use Compatibility Matrix and Interior and Exterior Noise Standards. Excess
of City noise standards would be considered a significant impact.
The 3rd Street Annexation project has the potential to place new commercial uses in
proximity to residential development, or vice versa, which may result in the reception of
commercial noise in these residential areas in excess of relevant standards set forth in
the Zoning Code and the General Plan's Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix and
Interior and Exterior Noise Standards. Generation of noise in excess of City noise
standards would be considered a significant impact.
However, the mitigation measure listed above would reduce the potential impacts of the
Proposed Land Use Plan and GPU related to noise levels within the 3rd Street
Annexation area to less- than - significant levels. The mitigation would reduce the
impacts associated with future projects because compliance with City standards would
ensure that potential impacts would be mitigated to a less- than - significant level. The
City shall require 3rd Street Annexation project applicants to demonstrate their
compliance with City standards regarding construction noise, noise sensitive land uses
in proximity to I -15, and commercial operations. Where project- specific analysis
determines that noise standards may be exceeded, then the City shall require binding
mitigation measures that will reduce the construction noise to acceptable levels.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.5 -19 through 3.5 -22, 3.5 -42, 3 -5 -44 and 3.546; General Plan
Chapter 3.0 (Public Health and Welfare), Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and related Implementation
Program.
f. Impact: GPU projects have the potential to generate vibration during future
construction and grading activities.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
G E N E R A L P L A N O r n ATE
I !INAL PROCRAm E1R.
13 E CLM n[ R 201 t
PAC r•. SG
CITY OF
LAKE IN LSIIYORE FENDINGS car FACT
DREAM EXTREME
MM Noise 7: For projects that have a potential to generate construction - related groundborne
vibration (e.g., use of pile drivers, rock drills, and pavement breakers), the City shall require the
project applicant to submit a construction - related vibration mitigation plan to the City for revie7o
and approval. The mitigation plan shall depict the location of the construction equipment and
activities and hotu the vibration from this equipment and activity 7uould be mitigated during
construction of the project. The City shall require binding mitigation measures implementing the
approved mitigation plan.
FindingNacts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that construction
activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment
and methods employed, distance to the affected structures and soil type. Buildings in
the vicinity of the construction site respond to these vibrations, with varying results
ranging from no perceptible effects at the lowest levels, low rumbling sounds and
perceptible vibrations at moderate levels, and slight damage at the highest levels. The
construction activities that typically generate the most severe vibrations are blasting and
impact pile- driving.
However, the mitigation measure listed above would reduce the potential impacts of the
Proposed Land Use Plan and GPU related to construction- related vibration to less -than-
significant levels. Pursuant to this mitigation measure, the City shall require project
applicants of projects that have a potential to generate construction- related groundborne
vibration to submit a construction- related vibration mitigation plan to the City for
review and approval. The mitigation plan shall depict the location of the construction
equipment and activities and how the vibration from this equipment and activity would
be mitigated during construction of the project. The City shall require binding
mitigation measures implementing the approved mitigation plan in order to assure that
construction vibration impacts are reduced to less- than - significant levels.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.5 -19 through 3.5 -22, 3.5 -46 through 3.5 -49; General Plan
Chapter 3.0 (Public Health and Welfare), Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and Policy 7.2 and related
Implementation Program.
g. Impact: GPU projects have the potential to place new industrial and mining operations
in proximity, to sensitive receptors, and vice versa, such that the sensitive receptors
would be subject to vibration that would be annoying to people in buildings.
Ci F:N F.: RA L PL. .AN LT D:'\"r'P:
FINAL: PROGRAM 12,
D ECF M 131iR 2011
PAGE 57
FlN DV`,,'G S OF FAC F
CITY OF
LADELSI� IYOIZE
tom+' DREAM EXTREME
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, tine following mitigation measure is required:
MM Noise 8: For projects proposing new industrial /mining operations in the vicinity of
sensitive receptors or projects that propose nem sensitive arses in the vicinity of industrial /mining
operations, the City slall require the project applicant to demonstrate the neew use's compliance
eoith City noise standards. Where project- specific analysis determines there is a potential for
significant vibration- related impacts, the City shall require binding mitigation measures that Will
reduce the vibration received to acceptable levels.
FindingNacts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed
project proposes industrial and mining uses in various places throughout the City and
SCI that may generate groundborne vibration and groundborne noise levels. However,
the mitigation measure listed above would reduce the potential impacts of the Proposed
Land Use Plan and GPU related to the vibration impacts of new industrial and mining
operations to less- than - significant levels. Pursuant to this mitigation measure, the City
shall require project applicants of new industrial/ mining operations in the vicinity of
sensitive receptors or projects to demonstrate the new use's compliance with City noise
standards. Where project - specific analysis determines that there is a potential for
significant vibration- related impacts, the City shall require binding project - specific
mitigation measures in order to assure that vibration impacts are reduced to less -than-
significant levels.
Additionally, Goal 7 from Section 3.4 (Noise) of General Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety
and Welfare) sets forth the City's overall goal of maintaining an environment free of
unhealthy, obtrusive, or otherwise excessive noise conditions. Industrial and mining
uses would be required to adhere to the City's Zoning Code, including with respect to
hours of operation and allowable noise levels. The GPU establishes an Implementation
Program in Section 3.4 (Noise) of General Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare)
requiring new development proposals to analyze the off -site reception of noise from
their operations, and to incorporate noise - reducing mitigation measures, wherever
necessary. In accordance with GPU Policy 7.1 projects (including non - noise - generating
projects placed adjacent to noise - generating uses) must demonstrate their compliance
G T,N IIRA i., PLAN U PDA'rR
F'INA1, PItOG1tAN1 £slit
Drc:r•_mni;:R 201 t
PAGE S8
CITY OF
LADE L LSINOKE
` DREAM EXTREME
FINDEN S OF FACT
with the General Plan's Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix and the City's Interior
and Exterior Noise Standards. Adherence to the above mitigation measure, the City
Zoning Code, proper project - specific analysis of noise impacts, and incorporation of
project - specific mitigation measures determined as a part of that analysis will ensure
that future development of industrial and mining uses pursuant to the GPU would not
result in significant ground -borne vibration and ground -borne noise impacts.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.5 -19 through 3.5 -22, 3.5 -46 through 3.5 -49; General Plan
Chapter 3.0 (Public Health and Welfare), Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and Policy 7.2 and related
Implementation Program.
h. Impact: Implementation of the GPU has the potential to result in temporary
construction noise received by nearby residents, schools, commercial areas, and other
receptors that could exceed acceptable levels set forth in the Zoning Code. GPU policy
sets forth the City's intent to enforce the Zoning Code and other noise standards.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Noise 9: The City shall require project applicants to demonstrate their compliance with
Cihj standards regarding construction noise. Where project - specific analysis determines that
noise standards may he exceeded, the City shall require binding mitigation measures that will
reduce the construction noise to acceptable levels.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that it is inevitable
that noise from construction will be heard at various places throughout the City over the
course of the implementation of the proposed project. The City has established
regulations in Chapter 17.176 (Noise Control) of its Zoning Code (Title 17 of the Lake
Elsinore Municipal Code) that limit the allowable hours of operation and the duration of
noise - producing construction activities. The Zoning Code also maintains schedules of
allowable (where technically and economically feasible) construction noise levels
received by residential and commercial land uses. All construction pursuant to the
proposed project would be required to demonstrate conformance to these schedules.
l..k;N EnA 1.. 1'1., AN UPp A'1 L:
FINAL P110GItAM F.1R.
D F, Cr MDF,R 201 1
PACs 59
FINDING'S OF FAC'l
CITY OF
C-1 �.
LADE /OLSIN IZE
` DREAM EXTREME
Additionally, the mitigation measure listed above would reduce potential impacts of the
Proposed Land Use Plan and GPU related to construction- related noise levels to less -
than- significant levels. The mitigation would reduce the impacts associated with future
projects because compliance with City standards would ensure that potential impacts
construction- related noise impacts to a less- than - significant level by requiring project
applicants to demonstrate their compliance with City noise standards during
construction. Where project- specific analysis determines that noise standards may be
exceeded, then the City shall require binding mitigation measures that will reduce the
noise received to acceptable levels.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.5 -19 through 3.5 -22, 3.5 -49 through 3.5 -51; General Plan
Chapter 3.0 (Public Health and Welfare), Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and Policy 7.2 and related
Implementation Program.
i. Impact: The GPU proposes development adjacent to Skylark Airport that would
generate noise received off -site.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed CPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Noise 10: For projects proposing sensitive uses that may receive airport noise, the City shall
require the project applicant to demonstrate the new use's compliance with City noise standards.
Where project - specific analysis determines that noise standards may be exceeded, the City shall
require binding mitigation measures that will reduce the noise received to acceptable levels.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed
project proposes development that could receive noise from adjacent airfields. However,
through implementation of mitigation measure MM Noise 10, the airport - related noise
will not be in excess of relevant standards set forth in the City's Zoning Code and the
General Plans Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix and Interior and Exterior
Noise Standards. The mitigation would reduce the impacts associated with future
projects because compliance with City standards would ensure that potential impacts
from airport noise on sensitive uses would be mitigated to a less - than- significant level.
C. E N ER A I:. PLAN1 U PDA "rE
FINAL PROGRAM EAR
Drcrn•InrR 2017
PACE 60
CITY OF
LADE C09 FINDINGS O F'AC.1
DREAM EXTREME
Existing standards include restrictions on the types of land uses that can be located in
the vicinity of an airport.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.5 -19 through 3.5 -22, and 3.5 -51; General Plan Chapter 3.0
(Public Health and Welfare), Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and Policy 7.2 and related
Implementation Program, General Plan's East Lake District Plan Policy EL I.I.
3.2.6 AIR QUALITY
a. Impact: New development and increased growth that would be accommodated over the
next 20 years under the GPU would result in construction activity that would cause an
increase in temporary construction- related emissions (particulate matter, CO, NOx, SOz,
and VOCs) by the operation of construction equipment. Fugitive dust (PM10) would be
emitted by activities that disturb the ground, such as grading and excavation, road
construction, and building construction. These emissions could result in temporary or
intermittent health and nuisance -type impacts in the immediate vicinity of individual
construction sites.
Construction emissions would not directly obstruct implementation of the AQMP, but
construction projects associated with implementation of the proposed Land Use Plan
have the potential to exceed emissions thresholds established by the SCAQMD.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Air Quality 1. Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan will be
required to demonstrate their avoidance of significant impacts on air quality from construction
activities through implementation of regulatory requirements and the goals and policies set forth
in the proposed GPU. Where project - specific analysis determines that air quality standards may
be exceeded, the City shall require mitigation measures that will reduce the emissions to the
greatest extent practicable.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that new
G l9.N E RA L PLAN UPDATE
F1NA1. PROGRAM EII.R.
D F CEM nE•R 2011
P A G I, 6 l
CITY OF
FreDlvcs OF r:acr LAKE G33LSIN0RE
DREAM EXTREME
development and increased growth that would be accommodated over the next 20 years
under the proposed project including the GPU would result in construction activity that
would cause an increase in temporary construction- related emissions (particulate
matter, CO, NOx, SOz, and VOCs) by the operation of construction equipment. Fugitive
dust (PM10) would be emitted by activities that disturb the ground, such as grading and
excavation, road construction, and building construction. These emissions could result
in temporary or intermittent health and nuisance -type impacts in the immediate vicinity
of individual construction sites.
Construction projects associated with implementation of the proposed project would
also emit 03 and particulate matter, for which the SCAB is a nonattainment area.
Excessive emissions of these pollutants would be considered a significant impact.
Therefore, implementation of individual projects anticipated in accordance with the
proposed Land Use Plan could result in potentially significant short -term impacts
associated with construction emissions and inconsistency with SCAQMD thresholds.
However, with implementation of GPU goals, policies and implementation measures,
potential short -term impacts on air quality associated with construction of projects
proposed in accordance with the GPU and Land Use Plan would be reduced to a less -
than- significant level. The mitigation would reduce the impacts associated with future
projects because individual projects implemented pursuant to the Proposed Land Use
Plan will be required to demonstrate their avoidance of significant impacts on air quality
from construction activities through implementation of regulatory requirements and the
goals and policies set forth in the proposed GPU. Where project- specific analysis
determines that air quality standards may be exceeded, the City shall require mitigation
measures that will reduce the emissions to the greatest extent practicable.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.6 -14 through 3.6 -20, and 3.6 -24 through 3.6 -25, General Plan
Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare) Goal 1, Policy 1.1.
b. Impact: The proposed GPU will allow the types and quantity of land uses that have the
potential to create objectionable odors.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Air Quality 6: Through the City's project review process, individual projects implemented
pursuant to the land Use Plan will be evaluated to determine their potential for creating
G i,N eaAL PLAN UPnA'rti:
]�INAr, PROGRAM 1ii.R
I)r:crM� ;ca 2011
PAG1, 62
CITY OF ^�A
LADE i�'iLSINO
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FAC.I..
objectionable odors that Would potentially impact a substantial number of persons. Where
project - specific analysis determines that objectionable odors Will occur, the City shall rewire
mitigation measures that Will reduce the emissions to the greatest extent practicable.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Findin Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed
GPU will allow the types and quantity of land uses that have the potential to create
objectionable odors. As development proposals occur, project -level analysis of odor
impacts will be addressed. Additionally, future industrial and commercial development
which implements the proposed Land Use Plan that could generate potentially
objectionable odors will be subject to SCAQMD Rule 402 governing odor emissions.
Any objectionable odor may be reported to the SCAQMD, which resolves complaints
through investigation. A Notice to Comply /Notice of Violation will be issued when
necessary.
However, through implementation of mitigation measure MM Air Quality 6, potential
impacts associated with objectionable odors will be reduced to less- than - significant
levels. The mitigation would reduce the impacts associated with future projects because
individual projects implemented pursuant to the Proposed Land Use Plan will be
evaluated to determine their potential for creating objectionable odors that would
potentially impact a substantial number of persons. Where project- specific analysis
determines that objectionable odors will occur, the City shall require mitigation
measures that will reduce the emissions to the greatest extent practicable.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.6 -14 through 3.6 -20, and 3.6 -35.
3.2.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
a. Impact: Under forecasted business -as -usual conditions, and accounting for the full
extent of the growth permitted under the General Plan, Lake Elsinore s GHG emissions
are projected to increase to 1,064,565 MT CO2e in 2020, which is equivalent to 7.4 MT
CO2e per resident or employee in the City's service population, and to 2,028,819 MT
CO2e in 2030, which equates to 6.7 MT CO2e per resident or employee in the City's
service population.
G ENI,R A L PLAN 1.1 PDA_1'E
FINAL P1t0Dr2AN -1 FIR
I>rcr•,rv1nrR 2011
PAGE 63
CITY OF ,tc,q
FINDING'S o hAr. r LADE LSIIAORE
` DREAM ExTREME
The combination of state -level measures and local strategies and measures identified in
the CAP will allow Lake Elsinore to meet, if not exceed, the overall service population
target of 6.6 MT CO2e /SP in 2020 and 4.4 MT CO2e /SP in 2030.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
No mitigation measures beyond implementation of the strategies and measures set forth in the
proposed Climate Action Plan and compliance with the goals, policies and implementation
programs identified in the proposed GPU are required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions contribute, on a cumulative basis, to the significant adverse
environmental impacts of global climate change. No single land use project could
generate enough GHG emissions to noticeably change the global average temperature.
The combination of GHG emissions from past, present, and future projects contribute
substantially to the phenomenon of global climate change and its associated
environmental impacts.
As part of the proposed project, the City of Lake Elsinore has prepared a Climate Action
Plan. The City of Lake Elsinore Climate Action Plan (CAP) is a long -range plan to
reduce community -wide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from activities within the
City limits. The CAP is designed to:
• Benchmark Lake Elsinore's existing (2008) GHG emissions and projected
emissions relative to statewide emissions targets.
• Establish GHG emissions reduction strategies and measures to reduce the City's
proportionate share of emissions to meet the statewide targets identified in
Assembly Bill (AB) 32 and Executive Order S -3 -05.
• Set forth procedures to monitor and verify the effectiveness of the CAP and
require amendment if the CAP is not achieving targeted levels of emissions.
• Mitigate Lake Elsinore's GHG emissions impacts (by reducing GHG emissions
consistent with the State of California via the California Environmental Quality
Act [CEQAj Guidelines, AB 32, and Executive Order S- 3 -05). The CEQA
Guidelines encourage the adoption of plans or mitigation programs as a means
C: F, N E R A L P L AN U I'D ATE.
FINAL PRO<:RAM £,1R
DECE,MRGR 2011
PACT 64
CITY OF
LSI IY:OIZE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT
of comprehensively addressing the cumulative impacts of projects (see CEQA
Guidelines, Sections 15064(h)(3), 15130(c)).
Table 3.7 -8 in the RP -EIR provides a summary of the GHG reductions that would result
from the state -level and local measures listed above in Table 3.7 -6 of the RP -EIR.
Together, the measures would reduce emissions by 399,244 MT CO2e by 2020 and
768,105 MT CO2e by 2030. As a result, 2020 emissions would be 665,341 MT CO2e or 4.6
MT CO2e /SP in 2020 and 1,263,966 MT CO2e or 4.2 MT CO2e in 2030. Therefore,
implementation of the strategies and measures set forth in the proposed Climate Action
Plan and compliance with the proposed GPU goals, policies and implementation
measures will reduce potential greenhouse gas emissions to below target levels and will
not conflict with an applicable plan, policy. or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Therefore, inasmuch as the City will be
able to achieve established AB 32 and Executive Order S-3 -05 target GHG emission
reduction levels, the proposed project will result in less- than - significant impacts
associated with GHG emissions.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.7 -32 through 3.7 -34 and Table 3.14 -6 (Climate Action Plan
Strategies and Measures), pages 4.0 -11 through 4.0 -12; General Plan Chapter 4.0
(Resource Protection and Preservation) Goal 14, Policies 14.1 through 14.4 and related
Implementation Program.
3.2.8 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would result in permanent impacts on
the various habitats present throughout the City and SOI that support candidate,
sensitive, or special status plant and animal species. Habitat impacts include direct
removal through clearing and development, as well as indirect encroachment by new
uses placed in or adjacent to natural areas, which in turn would affect plant and wildlife
species residing within the area, including special - status species.
Although it is the intent of the proposed project to minimize habitat impacts, future
projects permitted by the GPU Land Use Plan may result in significant impacts and
could result in inconsistencies between City policy and land use decision - making and
the adopted policies and goals of the MSHCP.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
4
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measures are required:
�i F:N F 12 A1, Pr. .AN LI PDA'rE
NI NA 1., PROGRAM It, {.R
13FC EN1I3EE> 2011
P AG: F. 6 $
CITY OF
1'lN1)1NGS 0F FACI.
LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
MM Biological Resources 1: Project - specific analysis of plant and wildlife impacts and habitat
impacts completed in accordance with the MSHCP will be required to determine the significance
of impacts and identifij mitigation measures to reduce the impacts of future developments on
plant and wildlife species and vegetation communities to less - than - significant levels.
MM Biological Resources 2: Project - specific analysis of habitat impacts and impacts on
special- status wildlife species completed in accordance with the MSHCP and the Resource
Protection and Preservation Chapter, Biological Resources Section, Goal 1, Policies 1.1 -1.8 and
Policy 2.2 will be required to determine the significance of impacts and identifij mitigation
measures to minimize the impacts to less - than - significant levels.
Finding/ Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that
implementation of the proposed project would result in permanent impacts on the
various habitats present throughout the City and SOI that support candidate, sensitive,
or special status plant and animal species. Habitat impacts include direct removal
through clearing and development, as well as indirect encroachment by new uses placed
in or adjacent to natural areas, which in turn would affect plant and wildlife species
residing within the area, including special - status species. Although it is the intent of the
proposed project to minimize habitat impacts, future projects permitted by the CPU
Land Use Plan may result in significant impacts and could result in inconsistencies
between City policy and land use decision - making and the adopted policies and goals of
the MSHCP.
However, sufficient safeguards are in place in the form of federal, state, regional, and
local laws, ordinances, plans, and policies to ensure the maximum feasible preservation
of, and minimum feasible adverse impacts upon, sensitive habitats and candidate,
sensitive, and /or endangered species within the GPU planning area and to ensure
project -level consistency with MSHCP as well as the requirements of other resource
agencies charged with habitat and species protection. With implementation of the
mitigation measures listed above, project impacts will be reduced to less - than - significant
levels. The mitigation will reduce the impacts associated the proposed project because
individual projects implemented pursuant to the Proposed Land Use Plan will be
required identify project - specific impacts as required by LEMC Chapter 19.04 (Habitat
Conservation) and would be conditioned to provide mitigation for these potential
impacts. In •addition, future projects will be required to demonstrate a reduction in
impacts to habitat through implementation of the City's continued participation in the
Gu: r�zAr. PLAN UPPA7' /i
FI IV AE. PROG rznm F.1 K.
Dr:( En413ER 2011
PAGe 66
CITY OF
LADE CLSIE
` DREAM EXTREME
I'INI)IN( ;S O FACT
MSHCP including the completion of a MSHCP consistency analysis pursuant to the
City's LEAP program, and the MSHCP. The consistency analysis requires site - specific
biological surveys and jurisdictional delineations pursuant to existing federal, state,
regional, and local regulations and ordinances.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.8 -20 through 3.8 -34 and 3.8 -46 through 3.8 -48; General Plan
Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and Preservation, Goal 1, Policies 1.1 through 1.8, Goal
2, Policies 2.1. through 2.3 and Policy 3.1, and related Implementation Programs, General
Plan District Plan Goals and Policies.
b. Impact: Future development proposed in accordance with the proposed project could
result in temporary and /or permanent impacts on wetland habitat and wetland features
within the City and the SOI, including Lake Elsinore, the San Jacinto River, and the
Temescal Wash. Project development could disturb wetland habitat, result in
dredge /fill activities in creeks and rivers, or result in increased sedimentation to
wetland features that could adversely affect the feature's viability as a biological
resource as a result of site grading, and project drainage. In addition, adverse impacts
could occur as a result of activities such as watercourse modification, development -
required hardening of slopes adjacent to sensitive watercourses, construction of bridges
and crossings, and the introduction of non -native invasive species into wetland or
vernal pool habitats. Due to the programmatic level of environmental analysis
conducted for this RP -EIR and the lack of site - specific information available, such as
grading plans for potential future development projects, the full extent of potential
biological impacts resulting from the implementation of the proposed project is not
quantifiable at this time.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, tite following mitigation measure is required:
MM Biological Resources 3: Individual environmental revieio conducted for future
development projects will be required to identifij any impacts on riparian areas and wetlands and,
in consultation with the appropriate resource agencies and applicable regional plans, must ensure
incorporation of adequate mitigation to preserve the viability of these important biological
resources.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Findin : Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
C; F.N is rt A t.. PLAN UPDATE
FI,N.At. PkOGI> AAl E I R
T)I- C1, M n F: It 201 t
PAGE 67
FINDINGS OF FAC I
CITY OF !—�N-
LAI-L ULSIN ORE
:` DREAM E,'(T Rf ME
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that development
proposed in accordance with the proposed project has the potential to result in
significant wetland impacts. Individual environmental review conducted for future
development projects must identify any impacts on wetlands and, in consultation with
the appropriate resource agencies, must ensure incorporation of adequate mitigation to
preserve the viability of these important biological resources.
However, existing federal, State, regional and local regulatory environment as well as
the implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs of the MSHCP
and the City GPU provide sufficient protection to riparian areas and wetlands within the
proposed project planning area, including all District Plan areas and the 3rd Street
Annexation Area. Therefore, with the implementation of the mitigation measure listed
above, the proposed project and future development projects pursuant to proposed
project will have a less- than - significant impact on riparian areas and wetlands. The
mitigation would reduce the impacts associated with future projects implemented
pursuant to the Proposed Land Use Plan because individual environmental review
conducted for future development projects will be required to identify any impacts on
wetlands and, in consultation with the appropriate resource agencies and applicable
regional plans, must ensure incorporation of adequate mitigation to preserve the
viability of these important biological resources.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.8 -20 through 3.8 -34 and 3.8 -48 through 3.8 -50; General Plan
Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and Preservation; Goal 1, Policies 1.1 through 1.8, Goal
2, Policies 2.1 through 2.3 and Policy 3.1, and related Implementation Programs, General
Plan District Plan Goals and Policies.
C. Impact: Implementation of the future projects permitted pursuant to the proposed
project could result in the loss of established wildlife movement corridors and the loss or
disturbance of nesting habitat for avian species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measures are required:
MM Biological Resources 4. Not more than thirhj days prior to construction activities that
occur beteveen`Februanj 1 and August 15 of any year, surveys for nesting bird species shall be
Conducted by a qualified biologist selected by the developer and approved by the Cihj. If no active
C; r:NERA r, I'r.AN Urns °rf =,
FINAL PROGRAM EIR
DOE( rMf3ER 201'1
PAC: Ir. 68
CITY OF
LADE CLSINOIZE
-� ` DREAM
FIN'DLNGS OF FACT
avian nests are identified on or within 250 feet of the limits of the construction area, up to the
limits of flue project site, no fiurther mitigation is necessary. Alternatively, to avoid impacts, the
City may allow individual projects the option of beginning construction after the previous
breeding season for bird species has ended (after August 15) and before the next breeding season
begins (before Februanj 15).
MM Biological Resources 5: If active nests for avian species are found within the construction
footprint of any future project, construction activities shall be delayed within a minimum 250 -
foot buffer zone surrounding nests of other special - status avian species until the young have
fledged. This buffer zone shall not extend beyond the project site. No action other than avoidance
shall be taken without CDFG consultation.
Findings/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required
in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant
effects on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that
implementation of the future projects permitted pursuant to the proposed project could
result in the loss of established wildlife movement corridors and the loss or disturbance
of nesting habitat for avian species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
However, all future projects within the City's jurisdiction, implemented pursuant to
proposed project are subject to the provisions of the California Fish and Game Code, the
California Endangered Species Act, and the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Through
compliance with the goals, policies and implementation measures of the proposed
project and through compliance with the applicable provisions of the MSHCP and with
implementation of the above -listed mitigation measures, the potential for adverse
impacts to migratory birds as defined by the MBTA and to wildlife corridors would be
reduced to a less - than - significant level. The proposed mitigation measures shall apply
to activities in all District Plan areas and in the 3rd Street Annexation Area.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.8 -20 through 3.8 -34 and 3.8 -51 through 3.8 -52; General Plan
Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and Preservation, Goal 1, Policies 1.1 through 1.8, Goal
2, Policies 2.1 through 2.3 and Policy 3.1, and related Implementation Programs, General
Plan District Plan Goals and Policies.
d. Fact: Implementation of existing State, federal, regional, and local regulatory
requirements, including GPU goals, policies and implementation programs, together
with implementation of applicable mitigation measures contained herein, would ensure
that implementation of the proposed project, and the future development projects
G F.N F. It A 2.. P1., .AN UPDATE
FINAL PROGRAM [?IR
1) E CE Al BE11 2011
PACs•_ 69
FINDINGS OF FAC "I'
CITY OF
L� LSI�IZE
= DREAM EXTREME
derived from it, would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to cumulative
biological resource impacts within either the Elsinore Area Plan jurisdiction area or the
area covered by the LESJWA.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, implementation of mitigation measures MM Biological Resources I
through MM Biological Resources 5 is required.
Findings/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required
in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant
effects on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed
project is consistent with implementation of MSHCP and with the Stephens' Kangaroo
Rat Habitat Conservation Plan (SKR HCP) and therefore will have a less- than - significant
impact upon the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan.
While the proposed project would not result in any specific development project, the
proposed GPU Land Use Plan could facilitate future developments. Future
development activities could result in potential conflicts with plans and policies that are
designed to mitigate avoid potential environmental affects. However, implementation
of existing State, federal, regional, and local regulatory requirements, including GPU
goals, policies and implementation programs, together with implementation of the
above -listed mitigation measures, would ensure that implementation of the proposed
project, and the future development projects derived from it, would not make a
cumulatively considerable contribution to cumulative biological resource impacts within
either the Elsinore Area Plan jurisdiction area or the area covered by the LESJWA, and is
therefore impacts upon biological resources are not considered to be cumulatively
significant.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.8 -20 through 3.8 -34 and 4.0 -7 through 4.0 -8; General Plan
Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and Preservation, Goal 1, Policies 1.1 through 1.8, Goal
2, Policies 2.1 through 2.3 and Policy 3.1, and related Implementation Programs, General
Plan District Vlan Goals and Policies.
G F.NERA L PLAN' U PDAT'F.
1'IINAL PROGRAM IF, 1R
DF( EN113rR 2011
1'AG F_ 70
CITY OF
LsINORE
DREAM EXTREME
3.2.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
FINDINGS Of FACT
a. Impact: Development consistent with the GPU could result in increased non -point
source and point source contamination from common urban sources, construction
activity, and vehicle use. This pollution could have a potentially significant impact on
surface and groundwater quality.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Hydrology 1: The following goals and policies of the GPU must be implemented as a part of
future development to mitigate potential impacts associated with 1) alteration of drainage
patterns and associated erosion; 2) development Within the 100 year floodplain and 3) water
quality:
• Flooding and Floodplains Policies 5.1 -5.2
• Water Resources Policies 4.1-4.4
• Biological Resources Policies 1.1 -1.8 and 2.1 -2.2
Findings/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required
in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant
effects on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that development
consistent with the GPU could result in increased non -point source and point source
contamination from common urban sources, construction activity, and vehicle use. The
increased pollutants carried in runoff into the streams, rivers, and lake in and around
the City is a potentially significant impact of the implementation of the GPU. Impacts on
surface water quality also affect groundwater quality because groundwater is recharged
through percolation in the watercourses and in exposed soils.
GPU Biological Resources Policies 1.1 -1.4 require the City to adhere to MSHCP policies
and encourage barriers between development and MSHCP Conservation Areas. These
policies protect the water and hydrology of the San Jacinto River, which is proposed to
have a buffer of open space and floodway designation. In addition, Policy 2.2
discourages development in riparian areas, which will help protect the natural
drainages from alteration. Water Resources Policies 4.1, and 4.2 require development
C:. r.N r. 11 A 1., PI,AN 1.1 PD A-1 "6:
F N A 1... P 110 RAM F,
D ECEIY1 BER 2011
P,AGF 71
FINDINGS OF FAC: I
CITY OF
LAKE" LSIIYOKE
—� DREA
projects to obtain an NPDES permit and implementing BMPs is an effective way to
reduce the amount of pollutants being discharged into the drainage system. Biological
Resources Policies 1.1 through 1.4 call for implementation of the MSHCP to preserve
wetlands and natural drainages which drain into Lake Elsinore, such as the waterways
of the San Jacinto River. In addition, project level assessment must be prepared for any
future development for hydrology or groundwater and surface water quality impacts.
Because the lake is polluted, Water Resources Goal 4 and its related policies, address
protecting and improving the water quality of the lake. Implementing Flooding and
Floodplains Policies 5.1 -5.2 at the project level would ensure that projects avoid
exposing people or property to flooding. Compliance with the goals, policies and
implementation programs of the proposed project and implementation of mitigation
measure MM Hydrology) will reduce potential impacts to less- than - significant- levels.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.9 -18 through 3.9 -33; General Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety
and Welfare) Goal 5, Policies 5.1 and 5.2 and related Implementation Program, Chapter
4.0 (Resources Protection and Preservation) Goal 1, Polices 1.1 through 1.4, Policy 2.2,
Goal 4, Policies 4.1 through 4.4 and related Implementation Program.
b. Impact: Development consistent with the GPU could result in altered drainage patterns,
significantly increasing the potential for erosion throughout the City, especially where
hillsides are developed with residential uses.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
Same as mitigation measure MM Hydrology 1, above.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that development
consistent with the GPU could result in altered drainage patterns, significantly
increasing the potential for erosion throughout the City, especially where hillsides are
developed with residential uses. Alteration of drainage patterns would result in
substantial erosion within the City. Impacts on drainage patterns within the City and
SOI can be mitigated by goals and policies of the GPU. The following goals and policies
for biological resources, open space, and water quality address the hydrologic resources
issues. Biological Resources Policies 1.1 -1.4 require the City to adhere to MSHCP
policies and encourage barriers between development and areas described for
<. EN ERAS PLAN Ur nA"VE
i'LNAL PROGRAM EIR
Dr( E• MRGR 2011
PAGE 72
CITY OF ,�q
LAKE IYOKE
` DREAM EXTREME
FI\DING %5 OF FAC '1.
conservation as a part of the MSHCP. These policies protect the water and hydrology of
the San Jacinto River, which is proposed to have a buffer of open space and MSHCP
land. In addition, Policy 2.2 discourages development in riparian areas, which will help
protect the natural drainages from alteration. Therefore, compliance with the goals;
policies and implementation programs of the proposed project and implementation of
mitigation measure MM Hydrology 1 will reduce potential impacts to less -than-
significant- levels.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.9 -33 through 3.9 -34; General Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety
and Welfare) Goal 5, Policies 5.1 and 5.2 and related Implementation Program, Chapter
4.0 (Resources Protection and Preservation) Goal 1, Polices 1.1 through 1.4, Policy 2.2,
Goal 4, Policies 4.1 through 4.4 and related Implementation Program.
C. Impact: Increased development throughout the City and SOI would potentially result in
significant alteration of the drainage patterns by altering or extending grading within
any of these streams. Any development within the 100 -year floodplain would be subject
to potentially significant flooding impacts.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
Same as mitigation measure MM Hydrology 1, above.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that portions of
future development consistent with the GPU would be subject to 100 -year flooding
within the City and development within the 100 -year floodplain would be a potentially
significant impact. However, the following GPU policies avoid exposing people or
property to flooding: Flooding and Floodplains Policies 5.1 -5.2. These policies require
new development to be constructed above the 100 -year base flood elevation, in
conformance with all applicable provisions of the National Flood Insurance Program
and that the City utilize the Capital Improvement Program for storm drainage projects
and maintenance and improvement of local storm drain systems including channels,
pipes, and inlets to ensure capacity for maximum runoff flows. Therefore, compliance
with existing,regulatory requirements and implementation of mitigation measure MM
Hydrology 1 will reduce potential impacts to less - than- significant levels.
G E N E It A L. P 1...A N U P D A "1 E
FINAL. .PROGRAM EIR.
DECEmItEit 2011
PAGE 73
CITY OF
Fl ND l \c;s «r 1':lt: "1' LADE CLSIN KE
` DREAM EXTREME
References: RP -EIR, page 3.9 -34; General Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare)
Goal 5, Policies 5.1 and 5.2 and related Implementation Program.
d. Impact: Increased development throughout the project area and throughout western
Riverside County could result in increased non -point source and point source
contamination from common urban sources, construction activity, and vehicle use.
Additionally, more people could be exposed to potential flooding and impacts from
debris flows. However, through compliance with existing regulatory requirements,
compliance with the goals, policies and implementation programs of the proposed GPU
and implementation of mitigation measure MM Hydrology 1 potential cumulative
impacts related to hydrology and water quality will be less than significant.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, implementation of mitigation measure MM Hydrology 1 is required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Findin : Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that development
consistent with the GPU could result in increased non -point source and point source
contamination from common urban sources, construction activity, and vehicle use. The
increased pollutants carried in runoff into the streams, rivers, and lake in and around
the City is a potentially significant impact of the implementation of the GPU. Impacts on
surface water quality also affect groundwater quality because groundwater is recharged
through percolation in the watercourses and in exposed soils.
GPU Biological Resources Policies 1.1 -1.4 require the City to adhere to MSHCP policies
and encourage barriers between development and MSHCP Conservation Areas. These
policies protect the water and hydrology of the San Jacinto River, which is proposed to
have a buffer of open space and floodway designation. In addition, Policy 2.2
discourages development in riparian areas, which will help protect the natural
drainages from alteration. Water Resources Policies 4.1, and 4.2 require development
projects to obtain an NPDES permit and implementing BMPs is an effective way to
reduce the amount of pollutants being discharged into the drainage system. Biological
Resources Policies 1.1 through 1.4 call for implementation of the MSHCP to preserve
Wetlands and natural drainages which drain into Lake Elsinore, such as the waterways
G F:NETxAI. PLAN UrnA'r@.
FINAI.. PROGiZAM I�IR
Drc:EmnrR 2011
PAGE 74
CITY OF
LADE Cog, LSIINOIZE
` DREAM EXTREME
Fl.NDEN :S OF FAA
of the San Jacinto River. In addition, project level assessment must be prepared for any
future development for hydrology or groundwater and surface water quality impacts.
Because the lake is polluted, Water Resources Goal 4 and its related policies, address
protecting and improving the water quality of the lake. Implementing Flooding and
Floodplains Policies 5.1 -5.2 at the project level would ensure that projects avoid
exposing people or property to flooding. Compliance with the goals, policies and
implementation programs of the proposed project and implementation of mitigation
measure MM Hydrology 1 will reduce potential impacts to less - than - significant- levels.
References: RP -EIR, pages 4.0 -14 through 4.0 -15; General Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety
and Welfare) Goal 5, Policies 5.1 and 5.2 and related Implementation Program, Chapter
4.0 (Resources Protection and Preservation) Goal 1, Polices 1.1 through 1.4, Policy 2.2,
Goal 4, Policies 4.1 through 4.4 and related Implementation Program.
3.2.10 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
a. Impact: Increased development throughout the City and SOI in accordance with the
Land Use Plan could expose people to potentially significant hazards from use of
hazardous materials and the disposal of hazardous waste.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the follozing mitigation measures are required:
MM Hazards 1: Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan will be
required to demonstrate their avoidance of significant impacts associated with use and storage of
hazardous materials and disposal of hazardous waste through implementation of Policies 3.1
through 3.4 of the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section of the Public Safehj and Welfare
chapter.
MM Hazards 2: Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan within the
District Plans will be required to demonstrate their avoidance of significant impacts associated
with exposure to hazardous materials through implementation of Policy 3.5 of the Hazards and
Hazardous Materials section of the Public Safehj and Welfare chapter. Proposed development
projects on or adjacent to the SARI line in these districts would be required to analyze risks
specific to sensitive land uses and the extent of the subsurface components involved with building
in these locations.
G B;N E-, 11 A 1.. P L A N U PDAl E
F N 1.. PROG n A NI K E2
Y>}< rni}3rn 2011
PAC. r•. 7 S
CITY OF
FINI71tiC4 Of PAC "I'
LSINO1ZE
DREAM EXTREME
MM Hazards 3: Individual projects implemented pnrsnant to the Land Use Plan within the 3rd
Street Annexation will be required to demonstrate their avoidance of significant impacts
associated ioith apse and storage of hazardous materials and disposal of hazardous Waste through
implementation of Policies 3.1 through 3.4 of the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section of the
Public Safehj and Welfare chapter.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that an increase in
the generation, storage, and disposal of household hazardous wastes would be
associated with buildout of the GPU. In addition to increased household sources of
hazardous materials and waste, new commercial and industrial land uses proposed
under the GPU could also indirectly increase hazardous materials use and waste
generation as more facilities are built. Commercial and industrial generators of
hazardous waste are strictly regulated by the Riverside County Fire Department and
applicable federal, state, and local regulations. All new development allowed under the
GPU would be subject to these regulations. In addition to regulations, the policies under
Goal 3 of the Hazardous Materials section of the Public Safety and Welfare chapter
provide measures to ensure that waste reduction programs are implemented by waste
generators and that regulations are strictly adhered to and regular inspections are
performed to ensure that safe use and storage practices are in place for commercial and
industrial operations. Potential impacts from population increase under the GPU and
potential hazards from the use, handling, and disposal of hazardous materials; exposure
of employees to hazardous working conditions; and the creation of a substantial risk to
public health or safety due to unusual risk of accident would be potentially significant.
Therefore, through compliance with the goals, policies and implementation programs of
the proposed GPU and implementation of the mitigation measures listed above would
reduce the potential hazards and hazardous materials impacts of the proposed project,
including the Proposed Land Use Plan and GPU, to less- than - significant levels. The
mitigation would reduce the impacts associated with future projects because Goat 3 and
its associated policies under the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section of the Public
Safety and Welfare chapter of the GPU include measures to keep all hazardous materials
generators within the City and SOI in compliance with regulations and continue to
avoid any public health and safety impacts. Individual projects implemented pursuant
to the Land Use Plan will be required to demonstrate their avoidance of significant
impacts associated with use and storage of hazardous materials and disposal of
4C: EN ERA E. PLAN U PDA'r B:
1'INAI_ PROGRAiYI EIR
D E<T, nj r3 F, j4 2011
PAGF- 76
CITY OF
LSINOIZE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT
hazardous waste through implementation of Policies 3.1 through 3.4 of the Hazards and
Hazardous Materials section of the Public Safety and Welfare chapter. These policies
require continuation of household hazardous waste collection and education programs.
Hazardous waste generators must also be in compliance with the Riverside County
Hazardous Waste Management Plan.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.10 -12, 3.10 -16, and 3.10 -20 through 3.10 -23; General Plan
Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare), Goal 3, Policies 3.1 through 3.5 and related
Implementation Program.
b. Impact: The Land Use Plan would allow development of residential and commercial
uses in the vicinity of the airport. However, no features of the GPU or the Land Use
Plan would conflict with requirements of the FAA regarding proximity of development
to airports. All future development proposed within proximity to the airport would be
required to comply with FAA regulations to ensure that future residents or employees
are not subject to significant hazards.
The potential inconsistencies of future development with the densities allowed for in the
Land Use Planning Handbook are considered to be a potentially significant land use
compatibility impact at a programmatic level.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Hazards 4: Proposed development projects zoithin the Skylark Airport Influence Area, as
shown on Figure 2.7 of the General Plan, will be evaluated for consistency tuith continued
operations at the airport. The project applicant of each such development project shall comply
with the applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regarding any
encroachment into the airport's navigable airspace in accordance with Federal Aviation
Regulations (FAR) Part 77.
Findinffacts in Support of the Findin : Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the Land Use
Plan would allow development of residential and commercial uses in the vicinity of the
C F,Nri)1AL. PLAN t1PDA1'1?.
1' / NA1. PL20G RAM F.1 R
Dr:C'T --.mn ER 2011
PACF 77
FIMANN'S OF FACT
C.
CITY OF
LADE
LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
airport. However, no features of the GPU or the Proposed Land Use Plan would conflict
with requirements of the FAA regarding proximity of development to airports. All
future development proposed within proximity to the Skylark Airport would be
required to comply with FAA regulations to ensure that future residents or employees
are not subject to significant hazards.
Within the traffic pattern zone of Skylark Airport, the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics'
Airport Land Use Planning Handbook recommends no more than 3 du /acre and
exclusion of areas that attract large assemblages of people to minimize hazards
including fuel spills. Low- medium residential areas (1 -6 du /acre) currently exist and
are designated in the Land Use Plan adjacent to the airport use area. The potential
inconsistencies of future development with the densities allowed for in the Land Use
Planning Handbook are considered to be a potentially significant land use compatibility
impact at a programmatic level. However, each project will be reviewed for its
consistency with the Land Use Planning Handbook Recommendations when individual
projects are proposed. This review will include analysis and subsequent review under
CEQA. Therefore, through compliance with applicable regulatory requirements and
mitigation measure listed above, potential impacts related to Skylark Airport will be less
than significant.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.10 -10, 3.10 -11, 3.10 -15, and 3.10 -24 through 3.10 -25; Final
RP -EIR, pages 2.0 -114 and 3.0 -9.
Impact: New development under the GPU would extend into areas of the SCII that are
considered highly susceptible to wildfires.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Hazards 5: Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan in each
District and within the 3rd Street Annexation Area will be requited to demonstrate their
avoidance of significant impacts associated with wildfire hazards through implementation of all
policies under the Wildfire Hazards section of the Public Safely/ and Welfare chapter.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Findin : Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
G 2NtiR A 1., PLAN U PRATE
I''TNAL PROGRA..M EIR.
13 E C EM n E:R 201 1
CITY OF
LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
F ENDINGS OF FACT
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the wildfire
susceptibility of the City and its SOI is defined as ranging from moderate to very high.
New development under the GPU would extend into areas of the SOI that are
considered highly susceptible to wildfires. A fire that ignites in these areas has the
potential to spread to areas within the SOI. Therefore, a substantial risk of loss and
damage exists to new developments in these areas. However, with prevention strategies
and response programs, these risks can be reduced greatly. Nevertheless, increased
development throughout the City and SOI in accordance with the proposed Land Use
Plan could expose more people and additional development to potentially significant
hazards from wildfires.
However, the mitigation measure listed above would reduce potential impacts of the
Proposed Land Use Plan and GPU related to wildfire hazards to less than significant.
The mitigation would reduce the impacts associated with future projects because Goal 4
and its associated policies in Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare), Section 3.4
(Wildfire Hazards) of the GPU include measures to prevent and be sufficiently prepared
for wildfire occurrences in the City and SOI. Individual projects implemented pursuant
to the Proposed Land Use Plan will be required to demonstrate their avoidance of
significant impacts associated with wildfire hazards through implementation of all
policies under the Wildfire Hazards section of the Public Safety and Welfare chapter.
The policies in this chapter require brush clearance, use of low fuel landscaping and fuel
modification zones, and fire resistant building techniques.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.10 -14 through 3.10 -17, and 3.10 -26 through 3.10 -27; General
Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare), Goal 4, Policies 4.1 through 4.4 and related
Implementation Program.
d. Impact: With implementation of the policies of the GPU, all project - related impacts
related to hazards and hazardous materials would be reduced to less than significant
levels. State, federal, regional and local regulations would apply to development within
the project area and throughout western Riverside County, thereby reducing the
potential for cumulative impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials to a
less than significant level. The proposed project's incremental contribution to these
impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation:
G 1,N :RAL PLAN UPDA"rr_
I'IN.A '1... PROGRAM E I R
D V, (,,E Nl nr•.R 201 1
PAG¢ 79
CITY OF n^n
1tivl NGS OF F,ac l' LAKE rc2iLSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and intpletnentation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, implementation of mitigation measures MM Hazards 1 through MM
Hazards 5 is required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Findin : Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the increase
in local population and employment that will occur with implementation of the
proposed project in conjunction with development elsewhere in western Riverside
County; would result in the increased use of hazardous household, commercial and
industrial materials and increased exposure from use of hazardous materials and the
disposal of hazardous waste and to hazards related to wildland fires and airport
operations.
With implementation of the policies of the GPU, all project - related impacts related to
hazards and hazardous materials would be reduced to less - than - significant levels. State,
federal, regional and local regulations would apply to development within the project
area and throughout western Riverside County, thereby reducing the potential for
cumulative impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials to a less -than-
significant level. The proposed project's incremental contribution to these impacts
would be less than cumulatively considerable.
References: RP -EIR, pages 4.0 -13 through 4.0 -14; General Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety
and Welfare), Goal 3, Policies 3.1 through 3.5, Goal 4, Policies 4.1 through 4.4, goal 5,
Policies 5.1 and 5.2 and the related Implementation Programs.
3.2.11 GEOLOGY/SOILS
a. Impact: Increased development throughout the City and SOI in accordance with
proposed project has the potential to cause impacts involving exposure of people or
property to the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake
fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic- related ground failure, including
liquefaction, landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
G 1, NERAV PLAN tJPnA'r F:
f'''TNA1.. PROGRANI II-AR .
DECEMRGR 2011
PAC: TE 8 0
CITY OF ,�
LAKE C LSIN OP E
` DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT.
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the follouling mitigation measures are required:
MM Geology and Soils 1: Individual projects implemented pursuant to the proposed project
zoi11 be required to demonstrate their avoidance of significant impacts associated with seismic
hazards including ground - shaking, liquefaction, landslides, subsidence and collapse through
implementation of all goals and policies under the Land Use section of the Community Form
Chapter and the Seismic Activity section of the Public Safety and Welfare chapter of the GPU.
MM Geology and Soils 2: The City shall continue to enforce the seismic design provisions for
Seismic Zone 4 of the California Building Code, including near - source seismic conditions for all
nero construction in the City.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that increased
development throughout the City and SOI in accordance with proposed project has the
potential to cause impacts involving exposure of people or property to the risk of loss,
injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground
shaking, seismic- related ground failure, including liquefaction, landslides, lateral
spreading, subsidence, or collapse.
However, the City regulates development (and reduces potential seismic impacts) under
the requirements of the 2010 California Building Code (CBC) (adopted and modified by
the Elsinore Municipal Code Title 15) and project - specific mitigation measures. The
potential seismic hazards would be sufficiently mitigated for buildings designed and
constructed in conformance with current CBC and industry- accepted engineering
standards. Moreover, the General Plan Update proposes, through implementation of
Chapter 3, Policy 6.1, to take actions to encourage structural repairs to buildings and
structures to meet current Building Code standards related to seismic safety. This action
could reduce potential structural damage, particularly of existing, aging structures.
Additionally, future development would be subject to compliance with the provisions of
Chapters 17.28 and 17.32 of the City's Zoning Code (Title 17 LEMC) that would reduce
seismic hazards to less -than- significant levels. Among other requirements, applicants of
future development within the City would be required to prepare geological and
geotechnical investigations in areas of potential seismic or geologic hazards, as part of
the environmental impact and development review process. Regulatory requirements
(i E, N ERA E, PLAN 11 PI)ATF
FINAL. PROC IZAM F1R
1) P. C: LIN RI3R 201 I
PACE[ 81
CITY OF
FINDINGS OF l AC C LADE OLSINOkE
` DREAM EXTREME
and GPU goals, policies and implementation programs that would be implemented
during the project review process include:
• Continue to require Alquist- Priolo and other seismic analyses be conducted for
new development to identify the potential for ground shaking, liquefaction,
slope failure, seismically induced landslides, expansion and settlement of soils,
and other related geologic hazards for areas of new development in accordance
with the Fault Rupture Hazard Overlay District adopted by the City of Lake
Elsinore Zoning Code. The City may require site - specific remediation measures
during permit review that may be implemented to minimize impacts in these
areas. [GPU Public Safety and Welfare Policy 6.3, LEMC Chapter 17.32 and Title
15]
• Through project review and the CEQA processes the City shall assess new
development and reuse applications for potential hazards, and shall require
compliance with Alquist - Priolo and other guidelines where appropriate. The
City shall not approve proposals and projects for development or
redevelopment, which do not provide for mitigation of seismic or geologic
hazards to the satisfaction of the reviewing departments and agencies. [GPU
Public Safety and Welfare Implementation Program, LEMC Chapters 17.28 and
17.32)
• The City shall require preliminary geological investigations of tract sites by State -
registered geotechnical engineers and certified engineering geologists (in
accordance with the California Building Code). [LEMC Title 151
Therefore, with project -level compliance with the goals, policies and implementation
programs of the proposed project, provisions of the City's Municipal Code, and the 2010
CBC, and implementation of the above - listed mitigation measures, there would be less
than significant impacts involving the exposure of people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects involving seismic hazards, including strong seismic ground
shaking, ground lurching/ settlement, and liquefaction/ lateral spreading.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.11- 20 through 3.11 -24 and 3.11- 26 through 3.11 -32; General
Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare) Goal 6, Policies 6.1 and 6.2 and related
Implementation Program.
b. Impact: Increased development throughout the City and SOI in accordance with the
proposed project would increase the potential for significant exposure of people or
property to the risk of property loss, injury, or death resulting from expansive and
corrosive soils hazards.
GENERAL PLAN UPDATr;
1' I NA1, PROGRA M E1 R.
D t_c E n913 E•. 1¢ 2011
PACE 82
CITY OF
LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Geology and Soils 3c Individual projects implemented pursuant to the proposed project
Will be required to demonstrate their avoidance of significant impacts associated with expansive
or corrosive soils through implementation of the policies under the Seismic Activity section of the
Public Safety and Welfare chapter.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that expansive
and corrosive soils are widely distributed throughout Riverside County and likely exist
within the City and its SOI. Increased development throughout the City and SOI in
accordance with the proposed project would increase the potential for significant
exposure of people or property to the risk of property loss, injury, or death resulting
from expansive and corrosive soils hazards.
The potential impacts associated with expansive and corrosive soils would be
sufficiently mitigated for buildings designed and constructed in conformance with
current CBC and industry- accepted engineering standards. Additionally, in accordance
with Policy 6.2 of the Seismic Activity section of the Public Safety and Welfare chapter of
the GPU applicants for future development within the City and its SOI would be
required to prepare geological and geotechnical investigations in areas of potential
seismic or geologic hazards, as part of the environmental impact and development
review process. With project -level compliance with the goals, policies and
implementation programs of the proposed project, the cited provisions of the Municipal
Code, and 2010 CBC requirements, and implementation of the mitigation measure listed
above, there would be less- than - significant impacts involving risks associated with
expansive and corrosive soils.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.11- 20 through 3.11 -24 and 3.11- 33; General Plan Chapter
3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare) Goal 6, Policies 6.1 and 6.2 and related Implementation
Program.
C; F, N F, ft 1.. P1,A N U PDAT'E
1'IN,,L PROGRAM
I7 SCL M RER 201 1
PAC; b: 83
CITY OF
FINDINGS OF FAC "F
LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
C. Impact: With implementation of the policies of the GPU as, previously cited, the
applicable provisions of the LEMC, and proposed mitigation measures, potential
cumulative impacts related to geotechnical hazards, expansive soils, corrosive soils,
landslides and subsidence within the City and SOI would be less than significant with
mitigation incorporated.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, implementation of mitigation measures MM Geology and Soils 1 through
MM Geology and Soils 3 is required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that future
development pursuant to the General Plan Update within the City and its SOI,
considered with other cumulative projects in the region, could incrementally increase in
the number of people and properties potentially exposed to impacts involving seismic or
geologic hazards. However, the City would regulate future cumulative development
under the requirements of the Title 15, Title 17.28 and 17.32 of the LEMC, the goals,
policies and implementation programs of the GPU, and project - specific mitigation
measures. Impacts involving seismic and geologic hazards would be sufficiently
addressed by designing and constructing buildings in conformance with current
California Building Cod (CBC) and industry- accepted engineering standards.
Additionally, all future development in the GPU planning area would be subject to
compliance with GPU Public Safety and Welfare and Land Use policies and properties
that are exposed to higher risk would be required to comply with the provisions of
LEMC Title 17.32 and 17.28 and thus would be required to prepare geological and
geotechnical investigations in areas of potential seismic or geologic hazards, as part of
the environmental impact and development review process. With adherence to the cited
GPU policies, the mitigation measures listed above, the provisions of the cited sections
of the LEMC, and CBC requirements for all future development within the City and its
SOI, the General Plan Update's contribution to geologic cumulative effects is considered
less than cumulatively considerable and potential impacts will be less than significant.
G ti N e' R A 1., P LAN U I'D A'I' F_
I•''IN A 1, PIt OG It AM 1? I R
DECLMnER 2011
PAG[ 84
CITY OF
LACLSI� MORE FINDINGS OF 1�AC
�Z� DKEAM EXTREME
References: RP -EIR, pages 4.0 -9 through 4.0 -11; General Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety
and Welfare) Goal 6, Policies 6.1 and 6.2 and related Implementation Program.
3.2.12 PUBLIC SERVICES
a. Impact: Potential impacts would result from population increase and increased
development throughout the City and SO] in accordance with the proposed Land Use
Plan and potential substantial adverse physical impacts 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 or other
performance objectives for police, fire, school, library, and animal control would be
potentially significant. Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan
would also result in potentially significant impacts associated with public services
related to police, fire, school, library, and animal control.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Public Services 1: Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan evill be
required to demonstrate their avoidance of significant impacts associated with public services
related to 1) police service, 2) fire protection, 3) schools, 4) libraries, , and 5) animal control
through implementation of the following:
• Compliance with applicable State and local laws and regulations,
• Policy 1.6 of the Community Form chapter, Land Use section,
• Policies 83 through 8.4 under Goal 8 of the Community Facilities and Protection
Services section of the Public Safehj and Welfare chapter, and
• Goals 9 through 11 and associated policies of the Community Facilities and Protection
Services section of the Public Safehj and Welfare chapter addressing schools, libraries,
and animal control services.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon `the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the increase
G };N E. It A 1. PL. .AN UPC) AT E:
TI NAL. ]FROG RAM
131,c I. - mBrR 2011
PAC:[ 85
CITY OF
FINDINGS OF FAC "I
LSINOIZE
DREAM EXTREME
in development allowed under the proposed Land Use Plan would require increases in
the availability and adequacy of public services including police and fire protection,
schools, libraries, and animal control services. Potential substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision and construction of new or physically altered
governmental facilities would result from implementation of the district plans in
accordance with the proposed Land Use Plan. These impacts would occur as a result of
maintaining acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives
for these public services and facilities.
However, with implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs of
the GPU and the mitigation measure listed above, potential impacts on public facilities
and services within the City and SOI would be mitigated to a less- than - significant level.
The mitigation would reduce the impacts associated with future projects because the
goals and policies of the GPU require coordination with the responsible agencies to
ensure that future projects would provide adequate facilities and would not adversely
affect the ability of the agency to meet existing or future demand.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.14 -11, 3.14 -12 and 3.14 -15 through 3.14 -22; General Plan
Chapter 2.0 (Community Form) Goal 1, Policy 1.6, Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and
Welfare), Goal 8, Policies 8.1 through 8.4, Goal 9, Policies 9.1 through 9.2, Goal 10, Goal
11, Policies 11.1 and 11.1, and related Implementation Programs, General Plan Country
Club Heights District Plan Goal 6a, Policy CCH 6,1 and related Implementation
Program, and Lake View District Plan Goal 1.
b. Impact: With the population growth allowed by the Proposed Land Use Plan,
cumulative impacts are inevitable. With the provisions made in the goals and policies in
planning efforts by County agencies and other service providers, implementation of
future development in accordance with the Proposed Land Use Plan would not have
significant cumulative impacts upon these services.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, implementation of mitigation measures MM Public Services I is required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Findin : Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
4
G IC N E 11 A I. P1.A N U P1)A'r F:
1''INA1. P IkOG RANI I I
1)1`.<:, F- N1HE]R 2011
PAGE: 86
CITY OF
LADE (i)LSIIYOIZE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that future
regional growth would result in increased demand for public services including police
and fire protection, schools, libraries, and animal control. Currently, the City of Lake
Elsinore contracts with the County of Riverside Sheriffs Department for police services
and with the Riverside County Fire Department for fire protection services. These
agencies also provide service in unincorporated areas and other cities in western
Riverside County. The City of Lake Elsinore is part of the Riverside County Library
System and it contracts with a private company called Animal Friends of the Valley
(AFV) for all animal control services. Planning efforts by these County service providers
and by affected school districts take anticipated growth of the planning area and
neighboring cities and unincorporated County areas into account.
The applicable goals and policies for each public service in the proposed GPU and
implementation of the above -cited mitigation measure ensure adequacy and availability
of these services and facilities as development occurs. With the population growth
allowed by the Proposed Land Use Plan, cumulative impacts are inevitable. With the
provisions made in the goals and policies in planning efforts by County agencies and
other service providers, implementation of future development in accordance with the
Proposed Land Use Plan would not have significant cumulative impacts upon these
services.
References: RP -EIR, pages 4.0 -22 through 4.0 -23; General Plan Chapter 2.0 (Community
Form) Goal 1, Policy 1.6, Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare), Goal 8, Policies 8.1
through 8.4, Goal 9, Policies 9.1 through 9.2, Goal 10, Goal 11, Policies 11.1 and 11.1, and
related Implementation Programs, General Plan Country Club Heights District Plan
Goal 6a, Policy CCH 6.1 and related Implementation Program, and Lake View District
Plan Goal 1.
3.2.13 PARKS AND RECREATION
a. Impact: The population increase associated with increased development
throughout the City and SOIin accordance with the proposed Land Use Plan would
potentially result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the increased
use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
t: L;N r RA r. P1. .AN UPDATE
1' / N A I_ P R O C: R A rv7 L 1. R
Dj:c- .NiBr.R 2011
PAC:r 87
FINDING'S 01, F CI
CITY OF
LAKE to-2, LSI� MORE
` DREAM EXTREME
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Parks and Recreation 1: Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan
Will be required to demonstrate their avoidance of significant impacts associated with communihj
services related to parks and recreation through implementation of the following:
• Policies under Goals 8 and 9 of the Parks and Recreation section of the Communih/ Form
chapter.
• Policies 1.1 and 2.1 of the Community Form chapter, Land Use section.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the increase
in development allowed under the Land Use Plan would require increases in availability
and adequacy of parks and other recreational facilities would potentially result in
substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the increased use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. The goals and
policies pertaining to 'parks and recreation in the GPU include extensive measures to
provide adequate parkland, programs, and recreational facilities and opportunities and
establish funding mechanisms to ensure quality recreational services that meet the needs
of the population as it grows. These policies and implementation programs require that
the City:
• continue to utilize the City of Lake Elsinore Parks and Recreation Master Plan as
a guide for decision - making and implementation of the Parks and Recreation
Program,
• meet parkland acreage requirements,
• require accessibility for special needs individuals,
• develop a trails network for equestrians and hikers,
• utilize the development review process to examine existing and future needs for
park facilities and programs to ensure adequate quantity, quality, type and
distribution,
G S.N ERA r. PLAN UPDA'I'L
171N A L PROGRAM EAR.
DECEMBER 201 1
PAC. 1. 88
CITY OF
LSINOKE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDING', OF FACT
• require parkland in -lieu or exaction fees or parkland dedication for new
developments, and
• explore the use of public - private partnerships, corporate sponsorships, and
leasing agreements that provide for additional parks and recreational facilities.
• utilize the development review process to examine existing and future needs for
park facilities and programs to ensure adequate quantity, quality, type and
distribution.
• include Policies 1.1 and 2.1 of the Community Form chapter, Land Use section
because policies pertaining to land use include measures that require open space
dedication and encourage development of recreational uses; Policy 2.1 also
encourages development of parks around the Lake.
The land use designations shown on the proposed Land Use Plan and the goals, policies
and implementation programs under the Parks and Recreation section and the Land Use
section of the Community Form chapter and the District Plans of the GPU include
measures to reduce potential impacts on parks, recreation, and open space. Therefore,
with implementation of those goals, policies and implementation programs and the
mitigation measure listed above, potential impacts would be considered less than
significant at a programmatic level. Individual projects implemented pursuant to the
Proposed Land Use Plan will be required to demonstrate their avoidance of significant
impacts associated with community services related to parks and recreation through
implementation of these goals and policies.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.15 -18 through 3.15 -23; General Plan Chapter 2.0
(Community Form) Goal 1, Policy 1.1, Goal 2, Policies 2.1 through 2.5, Goal 8, Policies
8.1 through 8.7, Goal 9, Policy 9.1 and related Implementation Programs, and General
Plan District Plan Goals and Policies.
b. Impact: The proposed project will provide sufficient acreage to meet the projected parks
needs of the residents of the City of Lake Elsinore. Inasmuch as the City will be able to
provide adequate park and recreation services to serve its future population, potential
impacts are not considered to be cumulatively significant.
Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed CwPU, implementation of mitigation measure MM Parks and Recreation 1 is
required.
GF;N L: RA 1.. PLAN U PDA`I'E
FINAL; PROGRAM 1s1 R.
DF:CEPIRTR 2011
PAGE 89
FINDING'S 01, FAC
CITY OF
LADE (JLSII`IORE
DREAM EXTREME
Findin&Tacts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects
on the environment.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the increase
in development allowed under the proposed Land Use Plan would require increases in
availability and adequacy of parks and other recreational facilities. The goals and
policies pertaining to parks and recreation in the GPU include extensive measures to
provide adequate parkland, programs, and recreational facilities and opportunities and
establish funding mechanisms to ensure quality recreational services that meet the needs
of the population as it grows.
There are 16 existing park facilities (approximately 125.1 acres) and four recreational
facilities totaling 21,000 square feet in the City of Lake Elsinore, with 12 additional parks
and three recreational facilities slated for future development. However, the dominant
parkland in the City is Lake Elsinore. Lake Elsinore is the largest natural freshwater lake
in southern California with 3,000 surface acres and over 14 miles of shoreline and
includes the 86 -acre Lake Elsinore Recreational Area Campground. Although not
designated as recreational land by the proposed Land Use Plan, this property is and will
for perpetuity be used for public park and recreation purposes. Therefore, the proposed
project will provide sufficient acreage to meet the projected parks needs of the residents
of the City of Lake Elsinore. Inasmuch as the City will be able to provide adequate park
and recreation services to serve its future population, potential impacts are not
considered to be cumulatively significant. With implementation of the policies of the
GPU and the above -cited mitigation measure, potential cumulative impacts related to
parks and recreation within will be less than significant.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.15 -2 through 3.15 -9, pages 4.0 -19 through 4.0 -20; General
Plan Chapter 2.0 (Community Form) Goal 1, Policy 1.1, Goal 2, Policies 2.1 through 2.5,
Goal 8, Policies 8.1 through 8.7, Goal 9, Policy 9.1 and related Implementation Programs,
and General Plan District Plan Goals and Policies.
3.3 FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NOT
FULLY MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
Environmental impacts identified in the Final RP -EIR as potentially significant but which the
City finds cannot be fully mitigated to a level of less than significant, despite the imposition of
all feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final RP -EIR and set forth herein, are described
C_. i-N ERA 1., PLAN U PDATE
FIINAL 11 rt0, GRnVt LI.R
DEC:L• mj3CR 201 1
PAGE 90
CITY OF ��A
LAKE F�`)LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
F1lDiNGS OF IACi
in this section. The applicable environmental issue areas include Transportation and
Circulation, Noise and Air Quality.
3.3.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
a. Impact: With implementation of the Land Use Plan all roadways within the study area
would be expected to have substantial traffic volumes and nearly all of the intersection
analysis locations would require improvements. Therefore, implementation of the GPU
and Land Use Plan could result in potentially significant impacts on traffic levels within
the City and SOL
Mitigation: The impact will be partially mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measures are required:
MM Transportation 1: The intersection of Old Franklin Street at Auto Center Drive shall be
configured as a through street parallel to 1 -15, roith the overcrossing of the freeway forming a "T"
intersection.
MM Transportation 2: Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan will be
required to demonstrate avoidance of significant impacts through implementation of the ultimate
roadway and intersection classifications and improvements shoeon on the Land Use Plan and the
Capital Improvement Program as well as the goals and policies set forth by the Circulation
Section of the Community Form Chapter. With implementation of these goals and policies,
individual projects implemented in accordance with the GPU and Land Use Plan would not
result in significant and unavoidable adverse impacts on traffic levels.
MM Transportation 3: Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan within
the 3rd Street Annexation will be required to demonstrate their avoidance of significant impacts
through:
implementation of the ultimate roadtoay and intersection classifications and
improvements shown on the Land Use Plan and the Capital Improvement Program,
the goals and policies set forth by the Circulation Section of the Community Form
Chapter,
implementation of improvements to signalization and the curve radius for the alignment
from 2nd Street to Camino Del Norte identified in the Traffic Study,
C: ENF.RA 1. PLAN (.I PDATE
F 1NAL P RUC; LIlAM r4, I
D F:C I, NI 11 L• R 201 1
PAC.V 91
FINDINGS Ol FAC" Y
CITY OF .eSq,
LAKE F'�LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in
or incorporated into the proposed project which will reduce potentially significant
effects on the environment, however, there are no feasible mitigation measures available
that will lessen these significant impacts to a less- than - significant level.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that with
implementation of the Land Use Plan all roadways within the study area would be
expected to have substantial traffic volumes and nearly all of the intersection analysis
locations would require improvements. Therefore, implementation of the GPU and
Land Use Plan could result in potentially significant impacts on traffic levels within the
City and SOI.
However, through implementation of the GPU goals, policies and implementation
programs and the above- listed mitigation measures, all study area intersections would
operate at acceptable LOS during peak hours after implementation of the proposed
improvements. In addition, some intersections currently warrant a traffic signal and
additional intersections would warrant a traffic signal with buildout of the GPU.
The actual construction of the required intersection and roadway improvements cannot
be determined with certainty. Thus, it is possible that the required improvements will
not be constructed in time to mitigate the proposed project's traffic and circulation
impacts to below the level of significance. Therefore, the proposed project will cause an
increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity
of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle
trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections) and even
after mitigation, will remain significant.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.4 -64 through 3.4 -109 and Appendix C (3rd Street
Annexation Environmental Initial Study) and Appendix D (Traffic Studies); General
Plan Chapter 2.0 (Community Form), Goal 6, Policies 6.1 through 6.5 and related
Implementation Program, and General Plan District Plan's Goals and Policies.
b. Impact: With implementation of the Land Use Plan all roadways within the study area
would be expected to have substantial traffic volumes and nearly all of the intersection
analysis locations would require improvements. However, the actual construction of the
required intersection and roadway improvements cannot be determined with certainty.
Thus, it is possible that the required improvements will not be constructed in time to
mitigate the proposed project's traffic and circulation impacts to below the level of
significance. Therefore, cumulative impacts will remain significant and unavoidable.
G 1.N F -R.A L PI,AN 11 11 UA "P8:
I- INAL PROG RA rvE EIR
Dr.cF-Mitr,R 2011
P A G F•. 92
CITY OF ,��
LADE (19LSII IOIZE
DREAM E,YFREME
FI:\I)INGS OF F AC1
Mitigation: The impact will be partially mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, implementation of mitigation measures MM Transportation 1 through MM
Transportation 5 is required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding Changes or alterations have been required in
or incorporated into the proposed project which will reduce potentially significant
effects on the environment, however, there are no feasible mitigation measures available
that will lessen these significant impacts to a less- than - significant level.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that with
implementation of the GPU, all roadways within the study area would be expected to
have substantial traffic volumes and nearly all of the intersection analysis locations
would require improvements assuming buildout of the City and growth in the region by
the 2030 horizon. With implementation of the Land Use Plan all roadways within the
study area would be expected to have substantial traffic volumes and nearly all of the
intersection analysis locations would require improvements. However, through
implementation of the GPU goals, policies and implementation programs and the above -
listed mitigation measures, all study area intersections would operate at acceptable LOS
during peak hours after implementation of the proposed improvements.
However, the actual construction of the required intersection and roadway
improvements cannot be determined with certainty. Thus, it is possible that the required
improvements will not be constructed in time to mitigate the proposed project's traffic
and circulation impacts to below the level of significance. Therefore, the proposed
project will cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing
traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either
the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections) and even after mitigation, cumulative impacts will remain significant and
unavoidable
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.4 -64 through 3.4 -109, pages 4.0 -24 through 4.0 -26 and
Appendix C (3rd Street Annexation Environmental Initial Study) and Appendix D
(Traffic Studies); General Plan Chapter 2.0 (Community Form), Goal 6, Policies 6.1
through 6.5 and related Implementation Program, and General Plan District Plan's Goals
and Policies. .
(i FN ER A 1, PL.A N 1.1 PDA7'E
F N.A1... E'ROG RAM E E R
I ), 1! -(- F Mnrut 2011
93
F1Nll1NG'S OF F,i(' F
3.3.2 NotsF
CITY OF
LADE 9 LSIN0P,E
DREAM
a. Impact: Implementation of the GPU would increase the number of vehicles utilizing the
local circulation system and place new receptors (including residences, commercial
developments, etc.) near roadways that experience varying levels of traffic noise.
Additional vehicles on roadways would result in additional noise generated along the
affected roadways, and more receptors adjacent to noisy roadways would mean that
more people would potentially be affected by traffic noise conditions.
In accordance with the GPU, projects will be required to demonstrate their compliance
with the relevant noise standards, but where projects do not comply, specific mitigation
measures will be required. Due to the programmatic nature of noise analysis on this
project, such impacts and mitigation measures cannot be identified at this time.
Mitigation: The impact will be partially mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Noise 1: In accordance with the policies of the Lake Elsinore General Plan Update and the
City's Zoning Code, the City shall require the applicant for any future development to analyze
the impacts of increased traffic volume on noise conditions along affected roadways. Where
project- specific analysis concludes that noise standards may be exceeded, the City shall require
binding mitigation measures that will reduce the traffic noise to acceptable levels.
For projects placing noise - sensitive land uses adjacent to or in the vicinity of a major roadway,
the City shall require the project applicant to demonstrate the ne7a use's compliance 7vith City
standards regarding traffic noise received on the site. Where project - specific analysis determines
that noise standards may be exceeded, then the City shall require binding mitigation measures
that 7vill reduce the noise received to acceptable levels. However, in some cases where
realignments or upgrades of road7oays are proposed or traffic levels ioill increase substantially like
that anticipated for 1 -15, SR -74, Riverside Drive, Grand Avenue, Lakeshore Drive, and Lake
Street there may be no mitigation that would adequately reduce future traffic noise as experienced
by existing land uses or future development projects, resulting in significant and unmitigated
impacts at the project level.
Findin&Tacts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in
or incorporated into the proposed project which will reduce potentially significant
effects on the environment, however, there are no feasible mitigation measures available
that will lessen these significant impacts to a less- than- significant level.
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE:
FrNAE, PROGRAM EIK
DEC EMBER 201 1
PAGE 94
CITY OF
LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
FI11)ING`i Of FACT
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that an increase in
traffic volume throughout the local and regional circulation system as a result of GPU
implementation has the potential to generate noise levels along roadway corridors that
would exceed standards set forth in the Zoning Code and the General Plan's Noise and
Land Use Compatibility Matrix and Interior and Exterior Noise Standards. The
corridors of 1 -15, SR -74, and Railroad Canyon Road are particularly sensitive to
additional traffic noise due to the substantial noise levels currently generated along
these routes. Considering that at project buildout the 65 Ldn contour would extend
beyond existing conditions, additional existing and planned residential areas in
proximity to major public roadways could be subject to exterior noise levels that exceed
City standards. As a result, traffic levels at buildout of the GPU could result in
significant noise impacts on existing land uses.
Additionally, developments implemented in accordance with the proposed project have
the potential to place new receptors in areas that would receive traffic noise (both
existing and future) exceeding standards set forth in the Zoning Code and the General
Plan's Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix and Interior and Exterior Noise
Standards. GPU policy sets forth the City's intent to enforce the Zoning Code and other
noise standards and to reduce traffic- related noise. Placement of new uses in areas
subject to excessive traffic noise would also be considered a significant impact.
The proposed project addresses the potential significant noise impacts that may result
from its implementation in its Proposed Land Use Plan by avoiding juxtaposition of
incompatible future uses wherever possible and by requiring consideration of the City's
noise standards set forth in the General Plan and the City's Zoning Code. The
mitigation measure listed above would reduce the potential impacts of the Proposed
Land Use Plan and GPU related to traffic- related noise levels to less - than - significant
levels. The mitigation would reduce the impacts associated with future projects because
compliance with City standards would ensure that potential impacts would be mitigated
to a less - than - significant level. The City shall require project applicants for any future
development to analyze the impacts of increased traffic volume on noise conditions
along affected roadways. Where project- specific analysis determines that noise
standards may be exceeded, then the City shall require binding mitigation measures that
will reduce the traffic noise to acceptable levels. However, in some cases where
realignments or upgrades of roadways are proposed or traffic levels will increase
substantially like that anticipated for I -15, SR -74, Riverside Drive, Grand Avenue,
Lakeshore Drive, and Lake Street there may be no mitigation that would adequately
reduce future traffic noise as experienced by existing land uses or future development
projects, resulting in significant and unmitigated impacts at the project level.
C: r:N E]Et A 1, P1,AN t.!PDA -r E:
1' IN.A1, Pn0C;ItA N1 F_'
F. 4UF N1 BER 201 1
PAGE 95
FINDING'S OF I'AC"1
CITY OF
LAKE 1 LSI� OIZE
DREAM EXTREME
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.5 -19 through 3.5 -22, 3.5 -25 through 3.5 -40, and 3.5 -44
through 3.45; General Plan Chapter 3.0 (Public Health and Welfare), Goal 7, Policies 7.1
through 7.5 and related Implementation Program.
b. Impact: Since the traffic associated with the proposed project in conjunction with the
increased traffic generated by cumulative growth would extend the 70 dBA, 65 dBA and
60dBA Ldn contours beyond existing conditions, cumulative long -term traffic - related
noise impacts would be significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation: The impact will be partially mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, implementation of mitigation measures MM Noise I through MM Noise 10
is required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in
or incorporated into the proposed project which will reduce potentially significant
effects on the environment, however, there are no feasible mitigation measures available
that will lessen these significant impacts to a less- than- significant level.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that an increase in
traffic volume throughout the local and regional circulation system as a result of GPU
implementation has the potential to generate noise levels along roadway corridors that
would exceed standards set forth in the Zoning Code and the General Plan's Noise and
Land Use Compatibility Matrix and Interior and Exterior Noise Standards. The
corridors of I -15, SR -74, and Railroad Canyon Road are particularly sensitive to
additional traffic noise due to the substantial noise levels currently generated along
these routes. Traffic- related cumulative noise impacts were considered as part of the
noise analysis provided in Section 3.5 (Noise) of the RP -EIR, since the future traffic
projections used for the noise analysis were generated by a traffic model that considered
growth under the proposed project in conjunction with projected area -wide traffic.
Considering that the 65 Ldn contour would extend beyond existing conditions,
additional existing and planned residential areas in proximity to major public roadways
could be subject to exterior noise levels that exceed City standards. Since the traffic
associated with the proposed project in conjunction with the increased traffic generated
by cumulative growth would extend the 70 dBA, 65 dBA and 60dBA Ldn contours
beyond existing conditions, cumulative long -term traffic- related noise impacts would be
significant and unavoidable.
PLAN U PDA7'F.
F I.N AL. PROC: RANI (: t R
Do I,( EN9 BI. R 201 i
P,AGr 96
CITY OF
LsINORE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT
On a programmatic basis, all noise impacts would be less than significant if GPU
policies and the above -cited mitigation measures are implemented. It is the ultimate
intent of the GPU policies and the mitigation measures detailed above to reduce
significant noise impacts for GPU and 3rd Street Annexation projects to less -than-
significant levels. However, due to the programmatic level of noise analysis for this EIR
it is impossible to make a definitive statement that all noise - related impacts associated
with increased traffic noise on existing land uses and future development projects
would be reduced to a less - than - significant level through policies proposed in the GPU.
This increased traffic noise would be contributing to significant and unavoidable
cumulative impacts.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.5 -19 through 3.5 -22, 4.0 -17 through 4.0 -19; General Plan
Chapter 3.0 (Public Health and Welfare), Goal 7, Policies 7.1 through 7.5 and related
Implementation Program.
3.3.3 AIR QUALITY
a. Impact: The development shown in the proposed Land Use Plan will generate
additional regional area- and mobile- source emissions over time from both stationary
sources and mobile sources.
GPU buildout would drastically exceed project -level emissions thresholds established
by the SCAQMD. The discrepancy between thresholds and estimated emissions are
somewhat misleading, however, as the thresholds are intended to identify individual
projects that emit excessive amounts of regulated pollutants, and the GPU is a much
larger endeavor than a stand -alone development project.
Buildout of the GPU would also result in emission of pollutants for which the SCAB is in
nonattainment of federal and /or state standards.
The GPU would obstruct implementation of the AQMP by not contributing to its goals
of regional reductions of.air pollutant emissions in the region, and it would conflict with
the AQMP in its inconsistency with AQMP projections for pollutant emissions.
Mitigation: The impact will be partially mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
C; 17 N F. It A L P L. .A N 1.1 P D A 9" F
F I AL. PROG RAM F" F:
llF. CF. M13ER 2011
PAGR 97
FINDINGS OF FACT
CITY OF
L A, K-E LSINORE
= DREAM EXTREME
MM Air Quality 2: Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan Will be
required to demonstrate a reduction in impacts on air qualihy from operational emissions through
implementation of goals and policies listed Within the General Plan. Where project - specific
analysis determines that air quality standards may be exceeded, the City shall require mitigation
measures that Will reduce the emissions to the greatest extent practicable. All applicants for
future development shall comply With AQMP control measures so as to reduce this impact to the
greatest extent possible.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in
or incorporated into the proposed project which will reduce potentially significant
effects on the environment, however, there are no feasible mitigation measures available
that will lessen these significant impacts to a less- than - significant level.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that GPU
buildout would drastically exceed project -level emissions thresholds established by the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The discrepancy between
thresholds and estimated emissions are somewhat misleading, however, as the
thresholds are intended to identify individual projects that emit excessive amounts of
regulated pollutants, and the GPU is a much larger endeavor than a stand -alone
development project. Buildout of the GPU would also result in emission of pollutants for
which the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is in nonattainment of federal and /or state
standards. The GPU would obstruct implementation of the Air Quality Management
Plan (AQMP) by not contributing to its goals of regional reductions of air pollutant
emissions in the region, and it would conflict with the AQMP in its inconsistency with
AQMP projections for pollutant emissions
Implementation of the policies set forth in the GPU and the above -cited mitigation
measure would reduce operational emissions impacts associated with future
development in the City; however, considering that the region is in federal and state
nonattainment status for certain criteria pollutants, such policies do not ensure that
future development and associated emissions will not continue to contribute to regional
nonattainment status for these pollutants. As a result, no mitigation is available that
would reduce this impact to a less - than - significant level.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.6-14 through 3.6 -20 and 3.6 -24 through 3.6 -34; General Plan
Chapter 2.0 (Community Form) Goal 6, Policy 6.4, Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and related
Implementation Program, Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare), Goal 1, Policy 1.1,
Goal 2, Policies 2.1 through 2.3 and related Implementation Programs, Chapter 4.0
(Resource Protection and Preservation) Policy 14.2.
G E:N ERA L PLAN U PDA "1'P
FINAL PROGRAM LIR.
DECCnJR1,;R 201 I
P AC. r•.. 98
CITY OF
LADE LSINOIZE FINDINGS OF FACT
DREAM EXTREME
b. Impact: The regional and cumulative impacts on CO, NOx, and 03 concentrations
related to conflicts or obstruction of the applicable air quality plan, violation of air
quality standards set forth by the SCAQMD AQMP, and contributions to a cumulatively
considerable net increase of a criteria pollutant in a nonattainment region would be
considered significant.
Mitigation: The impact will be partially mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Air Quality 3: Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan toithin
each District Plan will be required to demonstrate a reduction in impacts on air quality from
operational emissions through implementation of the General Plan's goals and policies. Where
project - specific analysis determines that air quality standards may be exceeded, the City shall
require mitigation measures that will reduce the emissions to the greatest extent practicable. All
applicants for future development shall comply with AQMP control measures so as to reduce this
impact to the greatest extent possible.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in
or incorporated into the proposed project which will reduce potentially significant
effects on the environment, however, there are no feasible mitigation measures available
that will lessen these significant impacts to a less- than - significant level.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the 2007
AQMP established a program to reduce the SCAB'S emissions based on 2004 SCAG
population projections. As discussed in Section 3.1 (Land Use and Planning) and
Section 3.13 (Population and Housing) of the RP -EIR, the GPU would accommodate a
population increase that surpasses current SCAG projections. GPU would_
accommodate a population increase that surpasses current SCAG projections. The GPU
would obstruct implementation of the AQMP by not contributing to its goals of regional
reductions of air pollutant emissions in the region, and it would conflict with the AQMP
in its inconsistency with AQMP projections for pollutant emissions. Control measures
in the AQMP include: promotion of lighter color roofing and road materials;. requiring
clean fuels, supporting alternative fuels, and reducing petroleum dependency; pursuit of
long -term advanced technologies measures; process modifications and improvements;
best management practices; and market incentives. However, no mitigation is available
that would make the GPU consistent with the AQMP and reduce this impact to a less -
than- significant level. This obstruction and conflict are a significant air quality impact
G 11.N F: R A 1.. Pi.. .A N tI PD A TE
FINAL FROG 12AIN I:I K
DEC::r•.mnrR 2011
P A c,": Lt 9 9
FINDING'S OF FACT
CITY OF
LAKE LSINORTE
?t DREAM Ej(T REME
that cannot be mitigated through implementation of the air quality- related measures set
forth in the GPU.
Non - vehicular operational emissions resulting from activities associated with residential
and nonresidential development anticipated under the GPU would incrementally add to
total air emissions. Implementation of the policies set forth in the GPU would reduce
operational emissions impacts associated with future development in the City; however,
considering that the region is in federal and state nonattainment status for certain
criteria pollutants, such policies do not ensure that future development and associated
emissions will not continue to contribute to regional nonattainment status for these
pollutants. As a result, the contribution of development and associated operational
emissions anticipated with buildout of the GPU to violation of state and federal ambient
air quality standards would be a significant impact on air quality.
The above -cited mitigation measure and the proposed project's policies would reduce
the impact of implementation of the GPU in association with the future development
process. However, the regional and cumulative impacts on other criteria pollutants
concentrations related to conflicts or obstruction of the applicable air quality plan,
violation of air quality standards set forth by the SCAQMD AQMP and contributions to
a cumulatively considerable net increase of a criteria pollutant in a nonattainment region
would still be considered significant.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.6 -14 through 3.6 -20 and 3.6 -24 through 3.6 -34; General Plan
Chapter 2.0 (Community Form) Goal 6, Policy 6.4, Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and related
Implementation Program, Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare), Goal 1, Policy 1.1,
Goal 2, Policies 2.1 through 2.3 and related Implementation Programs, Chapter 4.0
(Resource Protection and Preservation) Policy 14.2.
C. Impact: The land use designation changes would result in more commercial areas,
which could increase traffic emissions. Development proposed in accordance with the
Land Use Plan within the 3rd Street Annexation could result in short- and long -term
impacts related to air quality that would be considered significant.
Mitigation: The impact will be partially mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the following mitigation measure is required:
MM Air QuAlity 4: Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan within the
3rd Street Annexation will be required to demonstrate a reduction in impacts on air quality from
GENER.A1., PLAN UPDATE
FINAL PnoGRk'm F..I.R.
DEC EMBER 2011
PAGE 100
CITY OF
LAKE ,q)LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT
operational emissions through compliance With the General Plan's goals and policies. Where
project - specific analysis determines that air quality standards may be exceeded, the City shall
require mitigation measures that Will reduce the emissions to the greatest extent practicable. All
applicants for fidure development shall comply with AQMP control measures so as to reduce this
impact to the greatest extent possible.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in
or incorporated into the proposed project which will reduce potentially significant
effects on the environment, however, there are no feasible mitigation measures available
that will lessen these significant impacts to a less- than - significant level.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that GPU
buildout within the boundaries of the 3rd Street Annexation would exceed project -level
emissions thresholds established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD). The discrepancy between thresholds and estimated emissions are
somewhat misleading, however, as the thresholds are intended to identify individual
projects that emit excessive amounts of regulated pollutants, and the GPU and the 3rd
Street Annexation is a larger endeavor than a stand -alone development project. Buildout
would also result in emission of pollutants for which the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB)
is in nonattainment of federal and /or state standards.
Implementation of the policies set forth in the GPU and the above -cited mitigation
measure would reduce air quality impacts associated with future development in the
3rd Street Annexation Area; however, considering that the region is in federal and state
nonattainment status for certain criteria pollutants, such policies do not ensure that
future development and associated emissions will not continue to contribute to regional
nonattainment status for these pollutants. As a result, no mitigation is available that
would reduce this impact to a less - than - significant level.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.6 -14 through 3.6 -20 and 3.6 -34; General Plan Chapter 2.0
(Community Form) Goal 6, Policy 6.4, Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and related Implementation
Program, Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare), Goal 1, Policy 1.1, Goal 2, Policies 2.1
through 2.3 and related Implementation Programs, Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and
Preservation) Policy 14.2.
d. Impact: New development under the GPU could result in the exposure of sensitive
receptors to air pollutants.
4
Mitigation: The impact will be partially mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
C: Ir,N r:RA r. PLAN UPDAIrl,
1' I N A I. P R O G R A M
DECEnv3Eit 2011
P A G L 1 0 1
FINDINGS OF FAC.' "I
CITY OF
LADE
LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, the folhnVing mitigation measure is required:
MM Air Quality 5: Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan will be
required to demonstrate avoidance of significant impacts on air quality emissions associated with
sensitive land uses. Where project - specific analysis determines that air quality emissions will
adversely affect sensitive receptors, the City shall require mitigation measures that Will reduce the
emissions to the greatest extent practicable.
Finding(Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in
or incorporated into the proposed project which will reduce potentially significant
effects on the environment, however, there are no feasible mitigation measures available
that will lessen these significant impacts to a less- than - significant level.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that new
development under the GPU could result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to air
pollutants. Commercial land uses are planned in proximity to sensitive receptors such
as residential and recreational land uses. The SCAQMD and the CARB monitor most
stationary sources of air pollutants that would be associated with commercial and
industrial development through the issuance of emissions permits and monitoring of
operations. Goals and policies within the GPU would mitigate the potential effects of
exposure of sensitive receptors to air pollutants by providing buffers between emissions
sources and sensitive receptors and requiring that air quality mitigation measures are
incorporated into design features for sensitive receptors.
However, even with the assessment of implementing development projects for potential
air quality impacts upon sensitive receptors, implementation of mitigation measure MM
Air Quality 5 and compliance with the goals, policies and implementation programs of
the proposed GPU, impacts related to exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations may not be reduced to below the level of significance.
Therefore, this impact would be considered to be significant.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.6-14 through 3.6 -20 and 3.6 -34; General Plan Chapter 2.0
(Community Form) Goal 6, Policy 6.4, Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and related Implementation
Program, Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare), Goal 1, Policy 1.1, Goal 2, Policies 2.1
through 2.3 and related Implementation Programs, Chapter 4.0 (Resource Protection and
Preservation) Policy 14.2.
e. Impact: The policies would reduce the impact of implementation of the GPU in
association with the future development process. However, the regional and cumulative
(: EN ERA L P1... AN U PRATE
FINA1. PROGI2A.M E I R
D E(,umBER 201 1
PAGE 102
CITY OF
LAKE (2LSIIYOR-E
DREAM EXTREME
FENDINGS OF FACT
impacts on other criteria pollutants concentrations related to conflicts or obstruction of
the applicable air quality plan, violation of air quality standards set forth by the
SCAQMD AQMP and contributions to a cumulatively considerable net increase of a
criteria pollutant in a nonattainment region would be considered significant.
Mitigation: The impact will be partially mitigated with implementation of the following
mitigation measure(s):
In addition to implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs identified in
the proposed GPU, implementation of mitigation measures MM Air 1 through MM Air 6 is
required.
Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in
or incorporated into the proposed project which will reduce potentially significant
effects on the environment, however, there are no feasible mitigation measures available
that will lessen these significant impacts to a less- than- significant level.
Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information
contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that additional
development under the proposed project would contribute to regional growth and
increase the emission of criteria pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB).
Emission sources would increase with additional development. The emission sources
from anticipated development by the GPU would include stationary sources, consumer
products, and mobile sources. The emissions associated with mobile sources would be
attributable to a population increase, causing increased traffic within the City limits and
trips originating outside the City limits. Increased traffic, lower average speeds, and
increased idling times can lead to an increase in local CO concentrations. The portion of
the SCAB within which the project area is located is designated as a nonattainment area
for ozone (03), PM10 and PM2.5 under State standards. Under federal standards, the area
is designated as a nonattainment area for ozone (03), PMIo and PM2.5 and serious
maintenance for carbon monoxide (CO) under federal standards.
As shown in Table 3.6-10 of the RP -EIR, GPU buildout would drastically exceed project -
level emissions thresholds established by the SCAQMD for all criteria pollutants
resulting in significant adverse impacts. The goals, policies and implementation
programs contained within the proposed GPU include measures that will reduce criteria
pollutant emissions, including the reduction of vehicle trips through compatible land
use planning, encouragement of alternative transportation methods, and improvement
of traffic infr4kstructure to increase efficiency through coordination with regional and
state governments. Future development projects in the City will be evaluated for
conformance with the GPU policies related to air quality These measures include
G r:N IS R A L P1:, .AN UPI-1 ATE
FINAL Przoc;aANr iJI.R
I)F:CriN1nElx 2011
PAGG '103
FI AiNGSOFF'ACI
CITY OF
LC?2LSI� N0RE
= DREAM EXTREME
cooperating with regional and state governments to develop mitigation measures
region -wide, and reducing air quality emissions from future development.
However, implementation of the GPU policies related to air quality do not ensure that
increased traffic and operational emissions associated with buildout of the General Plan
would not contribute to future nonattainment of federal and state standards for criteria
pollutants. Therefore the impact of buildout of the GPU related to increased air quality
emissions is considered to be significant and not fully mitigated.
References: RP -EIR, pages 3.6 -14 through 3.6-20 and 3.6 -34, and 4.0 -4 through 4.0 -7;
General Plan Chapter 2.0 (Community Form) Goal 6, Policy 6.4, Goal 7, Policy 7.1 and
related Implementation Program, Chapter 3.0 (Public Safety and Welfare), Goal 1, Policy
1.1, Goal 2, Policies 2.1 through 2.3 and related Implementation Programs, Chapter 4.0
(Resource Protection and Preservation) Policy 14.2.
3.4 FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT
CEQA requires that the RP -EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed
project, or to the location of the project, which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the
project and to evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. Section 15126.6(b) of the
State CEQA Guidelines states that the "...discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the
project or its location Which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the
project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or
:would be more costly."
The proposed project has been compared to three alternative development scenarios, including
the No Project alternative as prescribed by CEQA. These alternatives include: 1) No Project
(Existing General Plan) Alternative; 2) Alternative 1 - Low Density Alternative and 3)
Alternative 2 - High Density Alternative. A comparison of the alternatives is presented below.
G E' N ERA L PLAN U P D AT /i
FINAr. PROGRAM E I R
DECEMnLR 2011
PA<..E t04
CITY OF
LADE ( IIti>1 G5 cl Ac "l �
DREAM EXTREME
Alternatives Comparison
3.4.1 NO PROJECT/NO DEVELOPMENT (NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE)
CEQA requires that the FIR address a No Project Alternative. For purposes of this RP -EIR, the
No Project Alternative is defined as the existing conditions plus the projects that had received
planning approvals but were not completed prior to preparation of the Draft GPU. The No
Project Alternative also consists of implementing the existing General Plan, zoning and other
City regulations, and ordinances without a GPU. At buildout of the existing General Plan, there
would be approximately 103,395 dwelling units and a population of 287,400 people.
SUMMARY OF MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Under the No Project Alternative, the City would continue to function under the direction of the
existing adopted General Plan policies. As a result certain policies of the proposed project that
may result in a reduction of impacts from those associated with the existing general plan,
including those in the proposed GPU, Housing Element, Downtown Master Plan and Climate
Action Plan, would not be implemented. Considering that implementation of the No Project
Alternative would also allow for increased development within the City that would exceed that
proposed as a part of the Proposed Land Use Plan the No Project Alternative would not reduce
the severity of impacts from that identified for the Proposed Land Use Plan. Additional details
regarding potential impacts of the No Project alternative compared with that of the Proposed
Land Use Plan and the GPU are provided in Section 5.0 of the RP -EIR. The following is a
summary comparison of the No Project Alternative with the Proposed Land Use Plan as well as
the new goals and policies of the GPU.
• Greater aesthetic impacts. This alternative would not include General Plan policies that
would include improvements to the visual quality of the City or creation of well - defined
C.: EN E RA 1, P1, .A N 1_1 PDA-1'E
ANAL, PRO<.'RAM F,I12.
DECErvIRtiR 2011
PACe 105
QUANTITY DWELLING UNITS
NO PROJECT/
PROPOSED
EXISTING GENERAL
ALTERNATIVE' -
ALTERNATIVE 2-
SOCIO-ECONOMIC
LAND USE
PLAN
LOW DENSITY
HIGH DENSITY
VARIABLE
PLAN
ALTERNATIVE'
ALTERNAnVE2
ALTERNATIVE2
Total Dwelling Units
94,616
103,395
45,099
99,559
Projected Population
318,856
287,400
151,984
335,514
'Source: City of Lake Elsinore 1990 General Plan, page 111 -15. Assumes 2.78 persons per dwelling unit.
2 Assumes 3.37 persons per dwelling unit.
3.4.1 NO PROJECT/NO DEVELOPMENT (NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE)
CEQA requires that the FIR address a No Project Alternative. For purposes of this RP -EIR, the
No Project Alternative is defined as the existing conditions plus the projects that had received
planning approvals but were not completed prior to preparation of the Draft GPU. The No
Project Alternative also consists of implementing the existing General Plan, zoning and other
City regulations, and ordinances without a GPU. At buildout of the existing General Plan, there
would be approximately 103,395 dwelling units and a population of 287,400 people.
SUMMARY OF MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Under the No Project Alternative, the City would continue to function under the direction of the
existing adopted General Plan policies. As a result certain policies of the proposed project that
may result in a reduction of impacts from those associated with the existing general plan,
including those in the proposed GPU, Housing Element, Downtown Master Plan and Climate
Action Plan, would not be implemented. Considering that implementation of the No Project
Alternative would also allow for increased development within the City that would exceed that
proposed as a part of the Proposed Land Use Plan the No Project Alternative would not reduce
the severity of impacts from that identified for the Proposed Land Use Plan. Additional details
regarding potential impacts of the No Project alternative compared with that of the Proposed
Land Use Plan and the GPU are provided in Section 5.0 of the RP -EIR. The following is a
summary comparison of the No Project Alternative with the Proposed Land Use Plan as well as
the new goals and policies of the GPU.
• Greater aesthetic impacts. This alternative would not include General Plan policies that
would include improvements to the visual quality of the City or creation of well - defined
C.: EN E RA 1, P1, .A N 1_1 PDA-1'E
ANAL, PRO<.'RAM F,I12.
DECErvIRtiR 2011
PACe 105
CITY OF
FINDINGS c;s c>l rAc € LADE LSIN ORE
` DREAM EXTREME
public space. Overall, impact would be greater than the proposed project due to having
fewer policies to protect scenic resources.
• Greater impacts to air quality. The No Project Alternative would permit as much or
more development than the Proposed Land Use Plan and would result in increased air
quality impacts;
• Greater greenhouse gas emissions impacts. The No Project Alternative would not
include a Climate Action Plan with strategies and measures that would reduce
greenhouse gas emissions to below the overall service population target.
• Greater impacts to biological resources. The No Project Alternative would result in
greater biological impacts than the Proposed Land Use Plan. The GPU has specific
policies that implement the MSHCP which protect biological resources in the region that
are not contained in the No Project Alternative and includes open space within and
outside the MSHCP planning area which would not be included in the No Project
Alternative.
• Similar historic, cultural and paleontological resources impacts.
• Similar impacts to geology and soils and mineral resources.
• Similar impacts relating to hazards and hazardous materials.
• Similar impacts to population and housing.
• Greater impacts to hydrology and water quality. The No Project Alternative would
increase offsite runoff due to increased surface coverage by pavements and structures,
and the increase could be greater due to unregulated growth in the City.
• Similar impacts to land use.
• Similar agriculture and farmland impacts.
• Similar noise impacts.
• Greater impacts to public services, parks and recreation, and utilities and service
systems. Under the No Project Alternative, existing General Plan policies would apply
and development would continue to increase, putting additional demand on public
services. There may be a larger increase in demand than for the Proposed Land Use
Plan with this alternative, considering the projected housing level at buildout is higher.
• Greater impacts to transportation and circulation. Buildout of the City in accordance
with the existing General Plan would result in greater impacts on traffic compared with
the Proposed Land Use Plan. As shown in Table 5.0 -4 of the RP -EIR, the existing
General Plans total number of housing units is greater than the Proposed Land Use
G F: N E R A 1., P i... A N U P I) A'1'1-.,
FINAL PROGRAYl EIR
AECrNIB -, R 201'1
PAGE 106
CITY OF
LsINOIJE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT
Plan. As a result, the traffic levels anticipated under the existing General Plan would be
greater than the Proposed Land Use Plan.
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
Implementation of the No Project Alternative would not meet the objective of the General Plan
Update to create a General Plan consistent with state law that guides city planning until 2030.
Specifically the City is required by state law to periodically update the General Plan. In
addition, under the No Project alternative, the City would continue to function under the
direction of the existing adopted General Plan policies.
Certain policies of the proposed project that may result in a reduction of impacts from that
associated with the existing general plan would not be implemented. As a result,
implementation of the No Project Alternative would not allow the City to achieve the following
objectives of the proposed project:
• Update the City's environmental baseline (i.e., existing) conditions to the year 2005 (2007
for the Housing Element).
• Update the Housing Element of the General Plan.
• Establish District Plans as part of the Land Use Element to allow for more focused
planning of the City's many diverse neighborhoods.
• Incorporate a Downtown Master Plan into the Historic District Plan to guide the future
development of the City's historic downtown core.
• Establish new land use designations including Gateway Commercial, Downtown
Recreational, Commercial Mixed Use, Residential Mixed Use, and Lakeside Residential.
• Create a Land Use Plan that encourages the creation of a vibrant and active downtown
and a lake destination.
• Create a plan to preserve the unique topography and visual character of the City
through the preservation of steep slopes, ecologically significant areas, and public open
space.
• Incorporate a program for sustainable development into the General Plan, drawn from
the City's Climate Action Plan (2011).
• Create a General Plan that recognizes the rich history of the City and seeks to preserve
its historical resources.
• Create a userfriendly plan for City officials, staff, residents, and stakeholders of the City
of Lake Elsinore.
CiF - NFRA 1, hL,AN IT PDA'rE
1�']NAL PIt0GIt AM 1?
Dr CHINi13L• R 201 1
PA <:I -107
FINDINGS OF FACT.
CITY OF
LAKE(LSI� IYOIZE
DREAM EXTREME
In addition, implementation of the No Project Alternative would not eliminate or substantially
reduce impacts of the Proposed Land Use Plan. Considering that implementation of the No
Project Alternative would also allow for increased development within the City that would
exceed that proposed as a part of the Proposed Land Use Plan the No Project Alternative would
not reduce the severity of impacts from those identified for the Proposed Land Use Plan.
FEASIBILITY
This alternative is feasible.
COMPARATIVE MERITS
Implementation of the No Project Alternative which consists of implementation of the existing
General Plan has no comparative merits to implementing the Proposed Land Use Plan and the
goals and policies of the proposed project. Certain policies of the proposed project that may
result in a reduction of impacts from that associated with the existing general plan would not be
implemented. Considering that implementation of the No Project Alternative would also allow
for increased development within the City that would exceed that proposed as a part of the
Proposed Land Use Plan, the No Project Alternative would not reduce the severity of impacts
from that identified for the Proposed Land Use Plan.
3.4.2 ALTERNATIVE 1- LOW DENSITY ALTERNATIVE
The Low Density Alternative allows for up to 18 dwelling units per acre. The Low Density
Alternative includes the low end of the ranges of permitted density/ intensity of use per acre in
each land use designation. The Low Density Alternative differs from the Proposed Land Use
Plan because the densities are lower than the mid -range densities of the Proposed Land Use
Plan. This alternative would allow for fewer dwelling units for those lands designated
residential, including hillside, low, low- medium, medium, high, residential mixed use, and
commercial mixed use. The Low Density Alternative includes commercial, industrial, and other
non - residential. Under the Low Density Alternative, there would be approximately 45,099
dwelling units and a population of 135,159 people at buildout.
SUMMARY OF MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The following is a summary comparison of Alternative 1 - Low Density Alternative with the
Proposed Land Use Plan as well as the new goals and policies of the GPU.
• Less aesthetic impacts.
4
P.N GI 108
G EN I, It 1.. PI_AN t11'DA 9'E
FINAL PROGRAINI GIK.
DECEN1RE•,it 2011
CITY OF
AI\-E ` , LSII`IOIZE FINDINGS 01. 1,ACT
' `n DREA
• Less impacts to air quality. Significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality would not
be avoided by implementation of this alternative.
• Less greenhouse gas emissions impacts. Since the Low Density Alternative will generate
a lower level of greenhouse gas emissions than that of the Proposed Land Use Plan,
implementation of the Climate Action Plan (CAP) would enable the City to more easily
meet or exceed the overall service population target set forth in the CAP.
• Less impacts to biological resources. A uniform reduction in permitted density would
not in and of itself result in substantially different impacts compared to those
anticipated under buildout of the Proposed Land Use Plan. If development on more
environmentally sensitive parcels was more highly restricted, this alternative could have
less impact than the proposed project on those parcels; however, these impacts would
still be potentially significant.
• Similar historic, cultural and paleontological resources impacts.
• Similar impacts to geology and soils and mineral resources.
• Less impacts relating to hazards and hazardous materials.
• Less impacts to population and housing.
• Less impacts to hydrology and water quality.
• Less impacts to land use. At its maximum, the Low Density Alternative allows for up to
18 dwelling units per acre. This alternative includes the low end of the ranges of
dwelling units per acre in each land use designation. The Low Density Alternative
differs from the Proposed Land Use Plan because the residential land use densities are
lower than the mid -range densities than the Proposed Land Use Plan. As a result there
would be substantially less housing units than that proposed by the Proposed Land Use
Plan. Overall, the community character of the area would not significantly change with
the implementation of the Low Density Alternative Land Use Plan, but rather would be
enhanced, updated, and improved. Established communities will not be divided or
changed significantly in a negative way with the implementation of the Low Density
Alternative.
• Similar agriculture and farmland impacts.
• Less noise impacts.
• Less impacts to public services, parks and recreation, and utilities and service systems.
• Less impacts to transportation and circulation.
C: F.NEa,a r. P1,AN L'PDAT C..
1NA1, PRIDCRAna 1,112.
I�EC1, M 11ER 2011
PAGE 109
FINDINGSOF FACT
PROJECT 013JECTIVES
CITY OF
LAKE LLSIIZE
= DREAM EXTREME
Implementation of Alternative 1 - Low Density Alternative would not meet the objective of the
General Plan Update to Create a General Plan consistent with state law that guides City
planning until 2030. The proposed project is intended to provide adequate housing and
commercial services for the anticipated growth within the City and surrounding Sphere of
Influence. Implementation of the Low Density Alternative and the associated reduction in the
number of housing units would not allow the City to achieve housing goals anticipated for the
City and Sphere of Influence as a part of the proposed Housing Element.
The goals and policies of the proposed project would not change with implementation of the
Low Density Alternative. As a result, it is anticipated that the following objectives of the
proposed project could be achieved with implementation of the Low Density Alternative:
• Update the City's environmental baseline (i.e., existing) conditions to the year 2005 (2007
for the Housing Element).
• Create a General Plan consistent with state law that guides City planning until 2030 and
update the General Plan development projections for the year 2030, including
projections for dwelling units, non - residential square footage, population and
employment.
• Update the Housing Element of the General Plan (separately bound).
• Establish District Plans as part of the Land Use Element to allow for more focused
planning of the City's many diverse neighborhoods.
• Incorporate a Downtown Master Plan into the Historic District Plan to guide the future
development of the City's historic downtown core.
• Establish new land use designations including Gateway Commercial, Downtown
Recreational, Commercial Mixed Use, Residential Mixed Use, and Lakeside Residential
• Create a. Land Use Plan that encourages the creation of a vibrant and active downtown
and a lake destination.
• Create a plan to preserve the unique topography and visual character of the City
through the preservation of steep slopes, ecologically significant areas, and public open
space.
• Incorporate a program for sustainable development into the General Plan, drawn from
the City's Climate Action Plan (2011)
• Create a General Plan that recognizes the rich history of the City and seeks to preserve
its historical resources.
G I,N k: R A 1., PLAAN U PDATI.,
NI NAL PROG RA NI E I R.
DECY,N1rsr•,R 201 1
PAGF 110
CITY OF
LADE ' � LSIN ORE
DREAM EXi REME
1 L DI'y( `; OF FACT
• Create a user - friendly plan for City officials, staff, residents, and stakeholders of the City
of Lake Elsinore.
FEASIBILITY
Although initially identified as a potentially feasible alternative, this alternative is infeasible
because it does not enable the City to meet its affordable housing targets under the Regional
Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan adopted by the Southern California Association of
Governments (SLAG) for the 2008 -2014 "fourth" planning period. The City's RHNA was
addressed in the City's draft Housing Element which was recently approved by the California
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). The Low Density Alternative is
infeasible because it includes only 67 percent of the High Density Residential land uses that are
permitted in the proposed Project which, in turn, reflects the approved Housing Element.
The High Density Residential land use acreage shown on the proposed project is required
because density is a critical factor in the development of affordable housing. As a practical
matter, maintaining low densities typically increases the cost of construction and land per unit,
decreasing the likelihood that the market will produce affordable housing and increasing the
amount of public subsidy needed to induce such development. Conversely, higher density
development lowers per -unit land cost, thereby facilitating affordable housing construction in a
market - driven economy of scale.
The highest residential density permitted by the City's General Plan is 24 units per acre in the
High Density Residential land use designation. Density bonuses allow for a density of up to 35
units per acre in the High Density Residential categories. These density ranges encourage the
development of housing for low- and very -low income households given factors such as land
values and construction costs in Lake Elsinore and the surrounding area are substantially lower
than in other Metropolitan Statistical Areas, such as Los Angeles County. Therefore, the
reduction in the amount of land designated for High Density Residential uses will adversely
affect the City's ability to provide affordable housing and meet its RHNA targets.
Additionally, this alternative is infeasible because although the Low Density Alternative Land
Use Plan reflects most of the existing land use entitlements that were established by the City's
18 adopted Specific Plans and existing Development Agreements, it does not include all of the
adopted Specific Plans and Development Agreements densities. Inasmuch as the Low Density
Alternatives does not reflect all of these land use commitments it could not be implemented
without amending Specific Plans and breaching existing Development Agreements, and
therefore is found to be infeasible.
4
G)- 'NF PLAN UPDATE
I' IN.A L... PROGRAM 1s" I J;t
Dr('EM13Eii 201 1
P.AG F I I I
FINDINGS OF FAC.`f
COMPARATIVE MERITS
CITY OF
LPLLSIT ORZE
V____ DREAM EXTREME
Implementation of Alternative 1 - Low Density Alternative would reduce impacts of the
Proposed Land Use Plan related to aesthetics, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, biological
resources, hazards and hazardous materials, population and housing, hydrology and water
quality, land use, noise, transportation and circulation, public services, parks and recreation and
utilities and service systems due to the decrease in the amount of housing and population
anticipated within the City and Sphere of Influence. Potential impacts related to historic,
cultural and paleontological resources, geology and soils and mineral resources, and agriculture
and farmland would be similar to those of the proposed project. However, implementation of
this alternative would not avoid significant and unavoidable impacts of the Proposed Land Use
Plan related to air quality, noise and transportation and circulation.
3.4.3 ALTERNATIVE 2 - HIGH DENSITY ALTERNATIVE
The High Density Alternative allows for a buildout that reflects the high end of the ranges of
permitted density/ intensity of use per acre in each land use designation described in the
proposed GPU. This alternative is different from the Proposed Land Use Plan in that the
densities for land use designations are higher and would allow a larger number of dwelling
units for those areas designated residential, including hillside, low, low- medium, medium,
high, residential mixed use, and commercial mixed use. The High Density Alternative includes
commercial, industrial, and other non - residential uses. Under the High Density Alternative,
there would be approximately 99,559 dwelling units and a population of 296,703 people at
buildout.
SUMMARY OF MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The following is a summary comparison of Alternative 1 - Low Density Alternative with the
Proposed Land Use Plan as well as the new goals and policies of the GPU.
• Greater aesthetic impacts.
• Greater impacts to air quality. However significant and unavoidable impacts of the High
Density Alternative would be similar to those of the Proposed Land Use Plan,
• Greater greenhouse gas emissions impacts. Since this alternative will generate a higher
level of greenhouse gases than that of the proposed project, it would be more difficult
for the City to meet or exceed the overall service population target described in the
Climate Action Plan.
• Greater impacts to biological resources.
•. Greater historic, cultural and paleontological resources impacts.
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
FINAL PROCRANI EIR
1E)rc:,i7mnr,R 2011
P A. G F. "1 1 2
CITY OF
LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS Ol F;IC,l.
• Similar impacts to geology and soils and mineral resources.
• Greater impacts relating to hazards and hazardous materials.
• Greater impacts to population and housing.
• Greater impacts to hydrology and water quality.
• Greater impacts to land use.
• Similar agriculture and farmland impacts.
• Greater noise impacts.
• Greater impacts to public services, parks and recreation, and utilities and service
systems.
• Greater impacts to transportation and circulation.
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The goals and policies of the GPU would not change with implementation of Alternative 2 -
High Density Alternative. As a result it is anticipated that the following objectives of the GPU
could be achieved with implementation of the High Density Alternative:
• Update the City's environmental baseline (i.e., existing) conditions to the year 2005 (2007
for the Housing Element).
• Create a General Plan consistent with state law that guides City planning until 2030 and
update the General Plan development projections for the year 2030, including
projections for dwelling units, non - residential square footage, population and
employment.
• Update the Housing Element of the General Plan (separately bound).
• Establish District Plans as part of the Land Use Element to allow for more focused
planning of the City's many diverse neighborhoods.
• Incorporate a Downtown Master Plan into the Historic District Plan to guide the future
development of the City's historic downtown core.
• Establish new land use designations including Gateway Commercial, Downtown
Recreational, Commercial Mixed Use, Residential Mixed Use, and Lakeside Residential
• Create a Land Use Plan that encourages the creation of a vibrant and active downtown
and a lake destination.
Ci L•:N F_RA A., PLAN IT PDA TE
FENA1. PROGRAM EE. E2
DE.CE'.NinrR 2011
PACr 113
FINDINGS OF FACT,
CITY OF
LADE LSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
• Incorporate a program for sustainable development into the General Plan, drawn from
the City's Climate Action Plan (2011)
• Create a General Plan that recognizes the rich history of the City and seeks to preserve
its historical resources.
• Create a user - friendly plan for City officials, staff, residents, and stakeholders of the City
of Lake Elsinore.
However, visual impacts on aesthetics would be greater under the High Density Alternative
than under the Proposed Land Use Plan. This alternative would allow for more development at
a higher density, which would likely block more views because of height or proximity to
adjacent development. Fewer view corridors would exist between buildings, which would
impact views. Development of vacant or underutilized land under this alternative could also
result in a significant change to the visual character of the City. Light and glare impacts
associated with development of vacant land would be more than the proposed project. As a
result, it is not anticipated that the following objective would be achieved with implementation
of Alternative 2 - High Density Alternative:
• Create a plan to preserve the unique topography and visual character of the City
through the preservation of steep slopes, ecologically significant areas, and public open
space.
FEASIBILITY
This alternative is feasible.
COMPARATIVE MERITS
Implementation of Alternative 2 - High Density Alternative would result in greater impacts
than the Proposed Land Use Plan related to aesthetics, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions,
biological resources, historic, cultural and paleontological resources, hazards and hazardous
materials, population and housing, hydrology and water quality, land use, noise, public
services, parks and recreation, utilities, service systems and transportation and circulation, due
to the increase in the amount of housing and population anticipated with the City and Sphere of
Influence. Potential impacts related to geology and soils and mineral resources, and agriculture
and farmland would be similar to those of the proposed project. Implementation of this
alternative would also result in the same significant and unavoidable impacts as the Proposed
Land Use Plan related to air quality, noise and transportation and circulation.
PAtYE 114
GENURAr PLAN UPDATE
1'7N A l.. PROC; RA IVI E1. K.
Drc: rmRE:R 201:1
CITY OF
LACgLSIH KE FINDINGS OF I-ACT
` DREAM EXTREME
4.0 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the Project consists of
the following documents, at a minimum:
• The November 15, 2005 and December 5, 2005 Notice of Preparation (NOP) issued by
the City in conjunction with the proposed project.
• All comments and correspondence submitted by public agencies and members of the
public during a City- hosted public scoping meeting held on November 30, 2005.
• The December 2007 Draft Program EIR and April 2008 Draft Final Program FIR,
including appendices and technical studies included or referenced in the December 2007
Draft Program EIR.
• All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the 45 -day public
comment period on the Draft Program FIR which began on or about December 6, 2007.
• All comments and correspondence submitted by members of the public during a City -
hosted public meeting on the GPU and Draft EIR held on January 10, 2008.
• All comments and correspondence submitted to the City with respect to the proposed
project and the December 2007 Draft Program EIR during public hearings held before
the Planning Commission and the City Council.
• The May 26, 2011 Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report
(Reissued) distributed to the State Clearinghouse, responsible agencies, and other
interested parties on or about May 26, 2011.
• All comments received from the public and agencies during the public review period for
the Reissued NOP.
• The August 2011 Recirculated Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ("RDP -
EIR") and December 2011 Final Recirculated Program Environmental Impact Report
( "RP- EIR "), including appendices and technical studies included or referenced in the
August 2011 RDP -EIR.
• All comments and correspondence submitted by responsible and trustee agencies,
interested panties and jurisdictions, or members of the public during the 45 -day public
comment period on the RDP- EIR which began on or about September 7, 2011.
C: F,N IC RA I., 1'1., .AN LI PD Al E
INA1.. PIt C: RAM 1.,
DI cI:,mui[:2 201 1
PACE 1 IS
[INDINGS OF F %(.'I.
CITY OF AS
LADE FiLSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
• The mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) for the proposed project.
• All findings and resolutions adopted by the City decision makers in connection with the
proposed project, and all documents cited or referred to therein.
• All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents
relating to the proposed project.
• All documents and information submitted to the City by responsible, trustee, or other
public agencies, or by individuals or organizations, in connection with the proposed
project, the August 2011 Recirculated Draft Program Environmental Impact Report
( "RDP -EIR ") or the December 2011 Final Recirculated Program Environmental Impact
Report ( "RP- EIR ") through the date the City Council approved the proposed project.
• Matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to federal, state,
and local laws and regulations.
• Any documents expressly cited in these findings, in addition to those cited above.
• Any other materials required to be in the Record of Proceedings by Public Resources
Code section 21167.6, subdivision (e).
The custodian of the record of proceedings is the City of Lake Elsinore Community
Development Department, Planning Division; whose office is located at 130 South Main Street,
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530.
The City has relied on all of the documents listed above in reaching its decision on the proposed
project, even if every document was not formally presented to the City Council decision - makers
as part of the City's files generated in connection with the proposed project.
PACE 116
G Y-N U M A L P)-AN' U e� n A r i•;
FINAL Pnoc ;IZAN1 EIR.
131zc't; -Ni Bielix 2011
CITY OF
LADE (�jLSINOIZE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT
5.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
5.1 UNAVOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan Update has identified and
discussed significant effects that may occur as a result of the proposed project. With
implementation of the proposed project including its goals, policies and implementation
programs and project - specific mitigation measures identified for each environmental topic,
most of the potentially significant impacts can be reduced to a level considered less than
significant, except for unavoidable significant impacts as discussed below and in Section 3.0 of
the Findings.
The City of Lake Elsinore has made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate or
substantially mitigate the potential impacts resulting from the proposed project. Impacts, in
these and all other cases, have been mitigated to the extent considered feasible. Environmental
impacts identified in the Final EIR as potentially significant but which the City finds cannot be
fully mitigated to a level of less than significant, despite the imposition of all feasible mitigation
measures identified in the Final EIR and set forth herein, are described in this section.
5.1.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
The City, County of Riverside, and Caltrans use different standards to define intersection
deficiency. The majority of the study intersections are located within the City (and are thus
subject to City criteria for intersection deficiency); four intersections are in the County of
Riverside (subject to County criteria). Twelve intersections located on SR 74 have been
evaluated based on Caltrans' LOS criteria.
The City of Lake Elsinore, in general, requires that peak -hour intersections operate at LOS "D"
or better to be considered acceptable. Therefore, any City intersection operating at LOS "E" or
LOS "F" will be considered deficient. However, LOS "E" will be considered acceptable in both
the Main Street Overlay area and the Ballpark District Planning Districts in an effort to increase
activity and revitalize these areas. Any intersection operating at LOS "F" will be considered
deficient.
The Riverside County General Plan established, as a countywide target, a minimum LOS "C"
on all County- maintained roads and conventional state highways. As an exception, LOS "D"
may be allowed in Community Development areas, at intersections with any combination of
Secondary Highway$, Major Highways, Arterials, Urban Arterials, Expressways, conventional
state highways, or freeway ramp intersections. LOS "E" may be allowed in designated
GLNERAL. PLAN UPDATL
FINAL. PROC:RAM E,IR.
D EcL Mi R ER 2011
PA G L 7 1 7
FINDINGS OF FACI
CITY OF
L�Ir9 LS11 0RJE
` DREAM EXTREME
community centers to the extent that it would support transit - oriented development and
walkable communities.
Caltrans defines LOS "D" with delay less than 45 seconds per vehicle (mid -point of LOS "D ") at
signalized intersections to be acceptable; any delay longer than this is deficient.
At buildout of the proposed GPU in 2030, all study area intersections are projected to operate at
acceptable LOS during the peak hours with improvements that are consistent with the proposed
roadway system and the implementation of the GPU Circulation Element and Capital
Improvements Program. Therefore, with implementation of the improvements and goals and
policies set forth by the Circulation Section of the Community Form Chapter and
implementation of the City -wide Capital Improvements Program as a part of future
development, impacts of the project on traffic levels would be reduced to less than significant.
However, the actual construction of the required intersection and roadway improvements
cannot be determined with certainty. It is anticipated that as development that implements the
proposed Land Use Plan proceeds, each development will pay for and construct general plan
level road improvements on roads adjacent to the development sites. However, the timing of
road improvements needed to improve level of service on a regional basis will be determined
by the City of Lake Elsinore, other cities in western Riverside County, the County of Riverside
and the Riverside County Transportation Commission based upon need and the availability of
funding. Thus, it is possible that the required improvements will not be constructed in time to
mitigate the proposed project's traffic and circulation impacts to below the level of significance.
Therefore, the proposed project will cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation
to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase
in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections) and even after mitigation, project - related and cumulative impacts will remain
significant and unavoidable.
5.1.2 NOISE
An increase in traffic volume throughout the local and regional circulation system as a result of
GPU implementation has the potential to generate noise levels along roadway corridors that
would exceed standards set forth in the Zoning Code and the General Plan's Noise and Land
Use Compatibility Matrix and Interior and Exterior Noise Standards. The corridors of I -15, SR-
74, and Railroad Canyon Road are particularly sensitive to additional traffic noise due to the
substantial noise levels currently generated along these routes. At 2030 traffic levels associated
with buildout of the GPU, the ADT on the freeways and roadways would increase. As shown
by comparing Figures 3.5 -2 and 3.5 -4 in the RP -EIR, the increase in traffic at GPU buildout
would extend the 70 dBA, 65 dBA and 60dBA Ldn contours beyond existing conditions. As
GE* NL''RA L PLAN UPDATE
I'INAL PROGRAM E'IR.
DL:(:: LM R LR 2011
P.AG13 1 18
CITY OF
LsINORE
DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT..
shown in Table 3.5 -4 and Table 3.5 -5 in the RP -EIR, residential uses are generally incompatible
within the 65 Ldn contour. Considering that the 65 Ldn contour would extend beyond existing
conditions, additional existing and planned residential areas in proximity to major public
roadways could be subject to exterior noise levels that exceed City standards. As a result, traffic
levels at buildout of the GPU could result in significant noise impacts on existing land uses.
The intent of the GPU and the Zoning Code is to provide relevant objectives, policies, and
standards that would be applied to individual development projects to reduce the traffic noise
associated with buildout of the GPU to a less - than - significant level. Many future development
projects implemented pursuant to the policies of the GPU and zoning regulations will require
project -level analysis of traffic noise impacts, and any related impacts will require project -
specific mitigation to assure that receptors are not exposed to traffic noise exceeding allowable
levels. However, in some cases where realignments or upgrades of roadways are proposed or
traffic levels will increase substantially, such as that anticipated for I -15, Riverside Drive, and
Grand Avenue, there may be no mitigation that would adequately reduce future traffic noise as
experienced by existing land uses or future development projects, leading to identification of
significant and unmitigated impacts at the project level.
Developments implemented in accordance with the GPU have the potential to place new
receptors in areas that would receive traffic noise (both existing and future) exceeding
standards set forth in the Zoning Code and the General Plan's Noise and Land Use
Compatibility Matrix and Interior and Exterior Noise Standards. GPU policy sets forth the
City's intent to enforce the Zoning Code and other noise standards and to reduce traffic- related
noise. Placement of new uses in areas subject to excessive traffic noise would be considered a
significant impact.
On a programmatic basis, all noise impacts would be less than significant if GPU policies are
followed. It is the ultimate intent of the GPU policies and the mitigation measures detailed
above to reduce significant noise impacts for GPU and 3rd Street Annexation projects to less -
than- significant levels. However, due to the programmatic level of noise analysis for this EIR it
is impossible to make a definitive statement that all noise - related impacts associated with
increased traffic noise on existing land uses and future development projects would be reduced
to a less - than - significant level through policies proposed in the GPU. This increased traffic noise
would be contributing to significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts.
5.1.3 AIR QUALITY
As shown in Table 3.6-10 in the RP -EIR, GPU buildout would drastically exceed project -level
emissions thresholds established by the SCAQMD for all criteria pollutants resulting in
significant adverse impacts. The goals, policies and implementation programs contained within
GENERAL PLAN LIPDATE
FINAL PROGRAM EIR
Di,Cc LMI3ER 2011
PAGE•. :1 19
CITY OF
FINDING'S OF FACT
LSINOIZE
DREAM EXTREME
the proposed GPU, including those listed in Table 3.6 -8 and Table 3.4 -5 in the RP -EIR include
measures that will reduce criteria pollutant emissions, including the reduction of vehicle trips
through compatible land use planning, encouragement of alternative transportation methods,
and improvement of traffic infrastructure to increase efficiency through coordination with
regional and state governments. Future development projects in the City will be evaluated for
conformance with the GPU policies related to air quality These measures include cooperating
with regional and state governments to develop mitigation measures region -wide, and reducing
air quality emissions from future development. The regional and cumulative impacts on CO,
NOx, and 03 concentrations related to conflicts or obstruction of the applicable air quality plan,
violation of air quality standards set forth by the SCAQMD AQMP, and contributions to a
cumulatively considerable net increase of a criteria pollutant in a nonattainment region would
be considered significant.
The 2007 AQMP established a program to reduce the SCAB'S emissions based on 2004 SCAG
population projections. As discussed in Section 3.1 (Land Use and Planning) and Section 3.13
(Population and Housing) of this PEIR, the GPU would accommodate a population increase
that surpasses current SCAG projections. The GPU would obstruct implementation of the
AQMP by not contributing to its goals of regional reductions of air pollutant emissions in the
region, and it would conflict with the AQMP in its inconsistency with AQMP projections for
pollutant emissions. Control measures in the AQMP include: promotion of lighter color roofing
and road materials; requiring clean fuels, supporting alternative fuels, and reducing petroleum
dependency; pursuit of long -term advanced technologies measures; process modifications and
improvements; best management practices; and market incentives. However, no mitigation is
available that would make the GPU consistent with the AQMP and reduce this impact to a less -
than- significant level. This obstruction and conflict are a significant air quality impact that
cannot be mitigated through implementation of the air quality- related measures set forth in the
GPU.
Non - vehicular operational emissions resulting from activities associated with residential and
nonresidential development anticipated under the GPU would incrementally add to total air
emissions. Implementation of the policies set forth in the GPU would reduce operational
emissions impacts associated with future development in the City; however, considering that
the region is in federal and state nonattainment status for certain criteria pollutants, such
policies do not ensure that future development and associated emissions will not continue to
contribute to regional nonattainment status for these pollutants. As a result, the contribution of
development and associated operational emissions anticipated with buildout of the GPU to
violation of state and federal ambient air quality standards would be a significant impact on air
quality.
G LN LRAL PLAN UPDATL•"
FINAL PROGRAM EIR.
Dt_cr•:MUrR 2011
PAGL 120
CITY OF
LADE C?2LSIN OIZE
` DREAM EXTREME
5.2 OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FINDINGS OF I': \CT
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(a), the City Council must balance, as
applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits" of the proposed project
against its unavoidable environmental risks" in determining whether to approve the project. If
the specific benefits of the proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental
effects, those environmental effects may be considered "acceptable."
Having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the proposed project to the
extent feasible by adopting the mitigation measures; having considered the entire
administrative record on the project, the City Council has weighed the benefits of the proposed
project against its unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation in regards to air quality, noise
and transportation and circulation. While recognizing that the unavoidable adverse impacts
regarding air quality, noise and transportation and circulation are significant under CEQA
thresholds, the City Council finds that the unavoidable adverse impacts that will result from
adoption and implementation of the proposed project are acceptable and outweighed by
specific social, economic and other benefits of the project. The City Council further finds that
except for the proposed project, all other alternatives set forth in the RP -EIR are infeasible
because they would prohibit the realization of project objectives and /or of specific economic,
social, and other benefits that this City Council finds outweigh any environmental benefits of
the alternatives.
In making this determination, the factors and public benefits specified below were considered.
Any one of these reasons is sufficient to justify approval of the proposed project. Thus, even if a
court were to conclude that not every reason is supported by substantial evidence, the City
Council would be able to stand by its determination that each individual reason is sufficient.
The substantial evidence supporting the various benefits can be found in the preceding
findings, which are incorporated by reference into this section, and in the documents found in
the Records of Proceedings, as defined in Section 4.0.
The City Council finds that for each of the significant impacts which are subject to a finding
under CEQA Section 21081(a)(3), that each of the following social, economic, and environmental
benefits of the project, independent of the other benefits, outweigh the potential significant
unavoidable adverse impacts and render acceptable each and every one of these unavoidable
adverse environmental impacts.
5.2.1 PROJECT BENEFITS
• The proposed project will create a General Plan that is consistent with State law and
which will guide City planning until 2030.
GLNF ZAL PLAN UPDATE
FINAL PROCRANI 1:112
D E C ENIL3 ER 2011
PAGF: 121
FINDINGS OF FAC1 ..
CITY OF
LADE COLSINORE
= fFREAM EXTREME
• The proposed project and Proposed Land Use Plan would create a user - friendly plan for
City officials, staff, and the community of Lake Elsinore.
The Community Form chapter of the GPU would provide goals and policies as well as a
strategic framework to ensure that future development will be designed to encourage
land use compatibility, and implementation of an adequate transportation and
circulation systems as well as provision of parks and recreation, housing, growth
management strategies, and district plans.
• The Public Safety and Welfare chapter of the GPU includes goals and polices to ensure
that future development will address issues associated with the safety and welfare of the
City's general public. The sections include air quality, hazards and hazardous materials
(including natural disasters), community facilities and services and noise.
• The Resource Protection and Preservation chapter sets forth policies and programs to
ensure that future development will be designed to encourage preservation of biological
resources, open space, water resources, cultural, historical and paleontological
resources, aesthetics and a sustainable environment.
• The proposed project and Proposed Land Use Plan would create a General Plan that
recognizes the rich history of the City and preserves historical resources.
• The proposed project would create a Land Use Plan and policies that encourage the
creation of a vibrant and active downtown and a lake destination.
• The proposed project includes the adoption of a Downtown Master Plan which creates a
vision and strategy that benefits the City of Lake Elsinore by identifying the goals,
objectives and desires of the community and developing an urban design framework
and guidelines that implement them; thereby assuring that future development within
the plan area will celebrate the lake, create a vibrant and sustainable downtown, create a
civic identity, and improve walkability and connectivity.
The proposed project and Proposed Land Use Plan will provide housing for the City of
Lake Elsinore and Inland Empire's growing population.
• The proposed project and Proposed Land Use Plan will provide for a variety of housing
opportunities, ranging in size and affordability to meet the housing needs of the region.
• The proposed project includes an updated Housing Element that is consistent with State
law and which will provide an action -plan for maintaining and expanding the housing
supply for all income levels in the City of Lake Elsinore for the planning period of July 1,
4C;LN1`RA1, PLAIN UPDATE
I� INAL PROGRAM I?IR.
D E CE Yin Liz 2011
PAGE 122
CITY OF
LADE �LSINOKE
` DREAM EXTREME
FINDINCS OF FACT
2008 to June 30, 2014. The Housing Element includes policies and programs that
provide for the Identification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs,
resources and constraints; a statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives, and
scheduled programs for preservation, improvement and development of housing;
Identification of adequate sites for housing; and adequate provision for existing and
projected needs of all economic segments of the community, including both lower and
higher incomes.
• The GPU and Proposed Land Use Plan will provide for increased acreage for recreation
uses and open space.
• The proposed project establishes goals, policies and implementation programs that will
reduce potential growth - related impacts by providing the framework for a growth
management strategy that promotes and maximizes mobility, livability, prosperity, and
sustainability in the City. Compliance with these goals, policies and implementation
programs and with federal, State and local regulatory requirements will assure that
necessary services and infrastructure sufficient to serve the planned growth will be
development over the projected buildout period of 20 years. Therefore, the proposed
project will direct growth and development so that it occurs in a manner that is
manageable for the City and avoids significant physical impacts that result from
population growth.
• The proposed project includes a Climate Action Plan (CAP) which will be the City of
Lake Elsinore's long -range plan to reduce local greenhouse gas emissions that contribute
to climate change. Implementation of the CAP will guide Lake Elsinore's actions to
reduce its contribution to climate change and will support the State of California's
emissions reduction targets. The CAP is also intended to support tiering and
streamlining of future projects within Lake Elsinore pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15152 and 15183.5.
• The proposed GPU provides for an estimated 19,420,687 square feet of commercial uses,
16,424,826 square feet of industrial uses and 9,344,617 square feet of public institutional
uses. By GPU buildout in 2030, there would be an estimated 118,792 employees working
within the City and its SOI. The jobs -to- housing ratio based on the GPU would be 1.26,
compared to 0.68 based on current SCAG projections. The proposed project's framework
for improving the Jobs /Housing Balance in the City of Lake Elsinore will benefit the
environment by reducing commute times and distances between residential areas and
employment centers and associated environmental effects such as noise, air quality and
traffic and wi31 create a higher quality of life for current and future residents of the City.
G EN E RA L.PL AN 11 PD.A'I L'
FINAL. FROG RAM I.LI.I;(
au(:LMllER 2011
PAGL 123
CITY OF �n
FINDINGS OF 1: c: r LADE �LS1N0P\E
` DREAM EXTREME
• Implementation of the existing General Plan has no comparative merits to implementing
the Proposed Land Use Plan and the goals and policies of the proposed project. The
total number of housing units permitted with the existing general plan would be 103,395
compared with 94,616 for the Proposed Land Use Plan. The proposed buildout housing
level represents a reduction in total housing units from that anticipated by the existing
1990 General Plan. The population projected within the City under the existing General
Plan would be 287,400 compared with 318,856 for the Proposed Land Use Plan.
However, this is due to an increase in projected average household size from 2.78
persons per dwelling unit to 3.37 persons per dwelling unit. Otherwise due to the
overall reduction in the number of housing units, the projected buildout population
level would be anticipated to be less than that anticipated by the existing 1990 General
Plan. Considering that implementation of the Existing General Plan would allow for
increased development and population growth within the City that would exceed that
proposed as a part of the Proposed Land Use Plan, development in accordance with the
existing General Plan alternative would result in greater impacts to the environment
from that identified for the Proposed Land Use Plan.
• The proposed project will facilitate completion of Annexation No. 81 (also referred to as
the "3rd Street Annexation') consisting of the proposed annexation of approximately
320 acres from the County to the City. The proposed annexation would allow increased
efficiency in service provision to the area, which is almost completely surrounded by
incorporated land, and would represent a more orderly planning and development
pattern than would occur if the land remained in the County's jurisdiction.
4
PAGC 124
GENERAL PLAN UPAA.-I'E
FINAL. PROGRAM FIR
D E:C EM R6R 2011
CITY OF
LSINOKE
DREAM EXI -REME
6.0 CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL RP -EIR
FINDINGS OF FACT
The City of Lake Elsinore has reviewed and considered the Final RP -EIR in evaluating the
proposed project. The City Council finds that the Final RP -EIR is an accurate and objective
statement that fully complies with CEQA (California Public Resources Code, Sections 21000 et
segJ the State CEQA Guidelines and the City's Procedures for Implementing the State CEQA
Guidelines; and that the Final RP -EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City of Lake
Elsinore; and that no new significant impacts as defined by State CEQA Guidelines Section
15088.5 have been received by the City after circulation of the Recirculated Draft Program EIR
which would require recirculation.
The City Council certifies the Recirculated Program Environmental Impact Report based on the
following findings and conclusions:
6.1 FINDINGS
The following significant environmental impacts have been identified in the RP -EIR and,
although subject to all goals, policies and implementation programs set forth in the proposed
project and all applicable and feasible mitigation measures, the impacts cannot be mitigated to
less- than - significant levels:
6.1.1 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
a. Impact: With implementation of the Land Use Plan all roadways within the study area
would be expected to have substantial traffic volumes and nearly all of the intersection
analysis locations would require improvements. Therefore, implementation of the GPU
and Land Use Plan could result in potentially significant impacts on traffic levels within
the City and SOI.
b. Impact: With implementation of the Land Use Plan all roadways within the study area
would be expected to have substantial traffic volumes and nearly all of the intersection
analysis locations would require improvements. However, the actual construction of the
required intersection and roadway improvements cannot be determined with certainty.
Thus, it is possible that the required improvements will not be constructed in time to
mitigate the proposed project's traffic and circulation impacts to below the level of
6.1.2 NOISE
a. Impact: Implementation of the GPU would increase the number of vehicles utilizing the
local circulation system and place new receptors (including residences, commercial
developments, etc.) near roadways that experience varying levels of traffic noise.
Additional vehicles on roadways would result in additional noise generated along the
affected roadways, and more receptors adjacent to noisy roadways would mean that
more people would potentially be affected by traffic noise conditions.
GLNERAL PLAN UPDATL
FINAL PROGRAM IiIR
DEC1:M13LR 2011
PAGE 125
FINDINGS OF FACT
CITY OF .�
LAKE iroLSINORE
DREAM EXTREME
In accordance with the GPU, projects will be required to demonstrate their compliance
with the relevant noise standards, but where projects do not comply, specific mitigation
measures will be required. Due to the programmatic nature of noise analysis on this
project, such impacts and mitigation measures cannot be identified at this time.
b. Impact: Since the traffic associated with the proposed project in conjunction with the
increased traffic generated by cumulative growth would extend the 70 dBA, 65 dBA and
60dBA Ldn contours beyond existing conditions, cumulative long -term traffic- related
noise impacts would be significant and unavoidable.
6.1.3 AIR QUALITY
a. Impact: The development shown in the proposed Land Use Plan will generate
additional regional area- and mobile- source emissions over time from both stationary
sources and mobile sources.
GPU buildout would drastically exceed project -level emissions thresholds established
by the SCAQMD. The discrepancy between thresholds and estimated emissions are
somewhat misleading, however, as the thresholds are intended to identify individual
projects that emit excessive amounts of regulated pollutants, and the GPU is a much
larger endeavor than a stand -alone development project.
Buildout of the GPU would also result in emission of pollutants for which the SCAB is in
nonattainment of federal and /or state standards.
The GPU would obstruct implementation of the AQMP by not contributing to its goals
of regional reductions of air pollutant emissions in the region, and it would conflict with
the AQMP in its inconsistency with AQMP projections for pollutant emissions.
b. Impact: The regional and cumulative impacts on CO, NOx, and 03 concentrations
related to conflicts or obstruction of the applicable air quality plan, violation of air
quality standards set forth by the SCAQMD AQMP, and contributions to a cumulatively
considerable net increase of a criteria pollutant in a nonattainment region would be
considered significant.
C. Impact: The land use designation changes would result in more commercial areas,
which could increase traffic emissions. Development proposed in accordance with the
Land Use Plan within the 3rd Street Annexation could result in short- and long -term
impacts related to air quality that would be considered significant.
d. Impact: New development under the GPU could result in the exposure of sensitive
receptors to air pollutants.
e. Impact: The policies would reduce the impact of implementation of the GPU in
association with the future development process. However, the regional and cumulative
C;ENI RA L. PLAN UP UA'PE
1''I NAL P It OG rL A 111 B 1 R
D is ('. L: IN I3 L: R 2 0 1 1
PAGE 126
CITY OF
Lp LSI� N0RE
` DREAM EXTREME
FINDINGS OF FACT
impacts on other criteria pollutants concentrations related to conflicts or obstruction of
the applicable air quality plan, violation of air quality standards set forth by the
SCAQMD AQMP and contributions to a cumulatively considerable net increase of a
criteria pollutant in a nonattainment region would be considered significant.
6.2 CONCLUSIONS
1. All significant environmental impacts from the implementation of the proposed project
have been identified in the RP -EIR and will be mitigated to less - than - significant levels
with implementation of the identified mitigation measures, except for the impacts listed
above and described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
2. Other reasonable alternatives to the proposed project that could feasibly achieve most of
the basic objectives of the project have been considered. Some of the alternatives were
feasible but did not meet the project objectives; others met the project objectives but
were determined not to be feasible. Since the alternatives considered either did not
serve to reduce or avoid potentially significant impacts, or because the alternatives offer
no feasible means of avoiding the significant effects identified in the Statement of
Overriding Considerations, the alternatives are rejected in favor of the proposed project.
Environmental, economic, social, and other considerations and benefits derived from the
development of the proposed project override and make infeasible any alternatives to
the project or further mitigation measures beyond those incorporated into the project.
G L N CH A L P L,\ N U P D A "r E
FIN.AI. PttoGaAnl 1 ?.1:R.
DEcL.mut:Ez 2011
PAG[: 127