Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
ID# 14-527 Tentative Tract Map 36567 Proposing Subdivision of 67.69 Acres APN 363-020-002, 003, 011 thru 015, & 018 into 147 Single Family Residential Lots
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: Honorable Mayor And Members of the City Council FROM: Grant Yates City Manager DATE: April 14, 2015 PROJECT: Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 - Proposing the Subdivision of 67.69 Acres (APN 363- 020 -002, 003, 011 Through 015, and 018) Into 147 Single - Family Residential Lots, Two Open Space Lots, Three Open Space Lots for a Park and One Open Space/Water Quality Basin Lot; the Grading and Use of a City -Owned Parcel (APN 363- 020 -011) as Part of the Park; Located Northeast of Interstate 15 at Main Street; approximately One - Quarter Mile Northeast of Camino Del Norte. APPLICANT/ Erik Lunde, South Shore II, LLC, 515 Avocado Avenue OWNER Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 Recommendation The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council take the following actions: Adopt Resolution No. 2015-; A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California Regarding Tentative Tract Map 36567 Located Northeast of Interstate 15 at Main Street approximately One - Quarter Mile Northeast of Camino Del Norte, Adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2015 -02. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2015 -; A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California Regarding Tentative Tract Map 36567 Located Northeast of Interstate 15 at Main Street approximately One - Quarter Mile Northeast of Camino Del Norte, Adopting Findings of Consistency with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Adopt Resolution No. 2015 -_, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California Approving Tentative Tract Map 36567 Located Northeast of Interstate 15 at Main Street Approximately One - Quarter Mile Northeast of CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 April 14, 2015 Page 2 of 4 Camino Del Norte, Dividing Approximately 67.9 Acres Into 147 Single- family Residential Lots, Two Open Space Lots, Three Open Space Lots for a Park and One Open SpaceMater Quality basin lot, and the Grading and Use of an Adjacent City -owned Parcel as Part of the Park. Background On March 17, 2015, the City of Lake Elsinore Planning Commission unanimously (5 -0) recommended approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 for the subdivision of 67.69 acres into 147 single - family residential lots, two open space lots, three open space lots for a park and one open space /water quality basin lot; and the grading and use of a City -owned parcel as part of the park. Project Location The project site is located northeast of Interstate 15 (I -15) at the Main Street interchange in the City of Lake Elsinore. More specifically, it is located approximately one - quarter mile northeast of Camino Del Norte Street and one mile northeast of Lake Elsinore. The project site is comprised of primarily ungraded, undeveloped land, with hillside terrain and natural drainage channels that generally flow in a southwesterly direction. An open excavation area is present in the southeastern -most portion of the project site Project Description Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 (referred to as South Shore II) proposes the subdivision of 67.69 acres (APN 363- 020 -002, 003, 011 through 015, and 018) into 147 single - family residential lots, two open space lots, three open space lots for a park and one open space /water quality basin lot. The overall average single - family lot size is 7,566 square feet with lots ranging from 6,000 square feet to 16,163 square feet. The proposed 3.63 -acre park site consists of 1.63 acres of on -site property and 1.9 acres of an adjacent City -owned parcel (APN 363- 020 -011). The City -owned parcel was previously used as a borrow site to provide cover material for the closed landfill that is immediately south of the City -owned parcel. Analysis General Plan & Zoning Consistency There are two General Plan Land Use Designations and zoning designations for the subject property. The 67.69 -acre subdivision site is designated Low- Medium Density Residential ( "LMR ") and zoned R -1 (Single - family Residential) and the City -owned parcel being used as part of the park site is designated Open Space (OS) and zoned OS (Open Space). CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 April 14, 2015 Page 3 of 4 The maximum lot yield for the LMR designation is 6.0 du /ac.; thereby generating a maximum yield for the overall site of 406 dwelling units. Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 is consistent with the LMR land use designation and the R -1 zoning with its proposed maximum of 147 dwelling units. The use of the City -owned parcel for part of the park site is consistent with its OS land use designation and zoning. Access Access to and from Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 requires the construction of roads within the adjacent Spyglass Ranch Specific Plan (Tentative Tract No. 35337), specifically Elsinore Hills Road, and the construction of Camino Del Norte from Main Street to Elsinore Hills Road. The project has been conditioned to construct the required access roads if they have not already been completed prior to the first building permit. Although the proposed project will not utilize a future extension of La Strada for access, the tentative map has been designed to incorporate a potential future alignment of La Strada along the southern edge of the project site. Land Use Compatibility The proposed tentative tract map is an extension of the single - family residential development approved within the Spyglass Ranch Specific Plan immediately to the west of the project site. Natural open space lots, with identified fuel modification zones adjacent to residential lots, provides a buffer with adjacent undeveloped areas. For these reasons, the proposed project is compatible with adjacent existing and approved land uses. Environmental Determination The City conducted an Initial Study to determine if the Project would result in significant impacts on the environment. Based upon the results of the Initial Study, there was substantial evidence that any potential impacts to the environment associated with the Project could be mitigated to less than significant levels. For this reason,- Mitigated Negative - Declaration No, 2015 -02 was prepared in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.: 'CEQK) and the State Implementation Guidelines for CEQA (14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15000, et seq.: "CEQA Guidelines ") and applicable requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore, to disclose potential environmental impacts and to propose mitigation for those impacts. City staff received seven comment letters on the MND during the 30 -day public review comment period which began on December 10, 2013 and ended on January 8, 2014. Copies of the comment letters and responses to those letters included in the attached Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration document. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 April 14, 2015 Page 4 of 4 Fiscal Impact The time and costs related to the processing Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 have been covered by the Developer Deposit paid for by the applicant. No General Fund budgets have been allocated or used in the processing of this application. In order to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on public safety operations and maintenance issues in the City, the project has been conditioned that the applicant consent to the formation of a Community Facilities District or annex into the proposed Community Facilities District No. 2015 -1 (Safety) the Law Enforcement, Fire and Paramedic Services Mello -Roos Community Facilities District (TTM 36567 Condition of Approval No. 169). Additionally, TTM 36567 Condition of Approval 170 requires the applicant to consent to the formation of a Community Facilities District or annex into the proposed Community Facilities District No. 2015 -2 (Maintenance Services) to fund the on -going operation and maintenance of the public right -of -way landscaped areas and neighborhood parks to be maintained by the City and for street lights in the public right -of -way for which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to Southern California Edison, including parkways, open space and public storm drains constructed within the development and federal NPDES requirements to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project. The proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 is also conditioned for payment of all applicable development impact fees at the rate in effect at the time of payment. Prepared by: Richard J. MacHott, LEED Green Associate Planning Manager Grant Taylor Director of Community Development Approved by: Grant Yates City Manager Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Aerial Photo 3. Aerial Composite Project Map 4. City Council Resolutions 5. Conditions of Approval for TTM 36567 6. Tract No. 36577 7. Letter from Riverside County Waste Management Department dated 3 -6 -15 8. Initial Study for Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2015 -02 9. Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program 10. Planning Commission Staff Report 3 -17 -15 t . Riverside County Waste Management Department Hand W. Kernkanip, General Manager- ChiefLngineer March 6, 2015 Richard MacHott, Planning Manager Community Development Department City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 RE: Tentative Tract Map 36567 (South Shore I1) Dear Mr. MacHott: The Riverside County Waste Management Department's (RCWMD) original letter, dated January 30, 2014 (see attached), identified that the proposed Project is located immediately north of the closed Elsinore Landfill, with a portion of the landfill property located within the Project's boundary- APN 363- 020 -011, We also provided information on the closed landfill, and recommended several conditions of approval designed to ensure public safety, as well as protect the City of Lake Elsinore (City), and the County of Riverside (County), from potential liability stemming from developing a residential tract adjacent to, and on -top of (future park/road re- alignment), a closed landfill. While the information in the original letter remains relevant and should be considered at all stages of project approval, as requested, the RCWMD has revised the original proposed conditions to reflect the following: 1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit an updated Phase I Environmental Assessment that includes the "head parcel" of the closed Elsinore Landfill (i.e., APN #363 - 020 -011). A copy of the Report shall be submitted to RCWMD. 2. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall conduct a subsurface investigation on the "head parcel" to determine the presence of buried waste and subsurface soil conditions for the presence of landfill gas constituents. A report of the investigation shall be submitted to the City, RCWMD, the Local Enforcement Agency (Riverside County Environmental Health) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The Report shall be subject to approval by the RWQCB. 3. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall provide the City with a letter from the RCWMD documenting the coordination between the RCWMD and Applicant as it relates to the - abandonment of a groundwater monitoring well located within the tract's grading limits. 4. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall provide the City with a letter from the RCWMD documenting that the tract's drainage flows will not jeopardize the landfill's integrity and /or operation of its drainage facilities. Prior- to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall make a deposit of $40,000 to the RCWMD for the financing of the installation of at least nine (9) additional perimeter gas probes on the landfill boundary, in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 1150.1. 14310 Frederick Street - Moreno Valley, CA 92553 • (951) 486 -3200 • Fax (9.51) 486 -3205 -Fax(951) 486 -3230 www. ri veo wen. m e 4printed on recycled paper Richard MacHott, Planning Manager TTM 36567 — South Shore lI March 6. 2015 Prior to issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall provide the City with a letter from the RCWMD documenting that either no housing units are within the 300 -foot limit from the refuse disposal footprint or landfill gas migration will not affect any of the proposed housing units. Otherwise, the applicant shall submit a vapor barrier design and construction plan to the RCWMD for review and approval. Such design and plan shall be prepared by a licensed professional engineer and meet the applicable building standards. The vapor barriers shall be installed in the foundations of the housing units on lots that are facing the landfill and within 300 feet from the refuse disposal footprint. 7. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the Applicant shall provide the City with a letter from the RCWMD documenting that the additional perimeter gas probes required per SCAQMD Rule 1150.1, were installed and fully funded. 8. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, if applicable, the Applicant shall provide the City with a letter from the RCWMD documenting that vapor barriers have been installed according to the approved design and construction plan for the designated housing units. Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me directly at (951) 486 -3280. Sincerely, ' ._ Ryan Ross Principal Planner Enclosure cc: Accounts Receivable, RCWMD Joe McCann /Ryan Ross /Mark Hunt /Todd Shibata /Fouad Mina, RCWMD PD #148323v4a L�„�. L Riverside County Waste Management Department Hans W. Xernkaing General Mwrager-ChlefEngineer January 30, 2014 Richard MacHott, Planning Manager Community Development Department City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 RE: Tentative Tract Map 36567 (South Shore In Dear Mr. MacHott: Tract Map 36567 is located immediately north of the closed Elsinore Landfill and includes the smaller of the landfill property's two original parcels (APN #363- 020 -011) within the tract's boundary. The nearest habitable structure (residence) within the tract is ±300 feet from the edge of the disposal footprint, which extends to the boundary of the larger parcel of the landfill property (APN #363 - 090 -005). The Elsinore Landfill started operation in 1956 as a burn site and later became a sanitary landfill. The landfill is unlined, and at the time of closure, there were approximately 1.14 million tons of municipal solid waste (MSW) in place. This landfill produces landfill gas (LFG) from bio- degradation of the buried trash, which is an ongoing process and will continue for many years. The landfill facility currently has an operating LFG collection and disposal system that consists of a flare station, twenty-eight (28) gas monitoring wells, and thirty-one (31) perimeter gas monitoring probes in fourteen (14) bore - holes. In addition, a network of 4 groundwater monitoring wells is located on the perimeter of the landfill property. Groundwater flow underneath the landfill site is toward the southwest and away from the proposed tract map. Due to its close proximity to the Elsinore Landfill and certain design features, the Riverside County Waste Management Department ( RCWMD) recommends that the following issues be addressed by the applicant and conditions of approval considered by the City of Lake Elsinore: 1. The tract development proposes to develop the small parcel (a.k.a. the "head parcel;" APN #363 -020- 011) of the original landfill property into a park site. According to our records, this parcel was not used for waste disposal, nor was it part of the landfill's final closure. However, due to its close proximity to the landfill mass; it is possible that waste may have been inadvertently buried on this parcel. The Phase I Environmental Assessment for the tract project should be updated to include this parcel in its investigation. In addition, we recommend that the applicant conduct a subsurface - investigation to determine the presence of waste and subsurface soil conditions for the presence of - -- landfill gas ingredients, This is to ensure the safe use of the proposed park by the tract's residents. 2. The tract map shows that substantial grading will be done immediately north of the landfill parcel. An existing groundwater monitoring well is located within the tract's grading limit in this area. The RCWMD plans to abandon the well in the summer of 2014. Should the tract's grading in this area occur before the well abandonment, the applicant shall notify and coordinate with the RCWMD to ensure no conflicts between both operations would occur. 3. The tract map's drainage plan shows some drainage benches and drainage structures located near the landfill site both inside and outside of the "head parcel." The flow directions /patterns are not clearly 14310 Frederick Street = Moreno !Valley. CA 92553 • (951) 486 -3200 • Fax (951) 486 -3205 • Fax (951) 486 -3230 innrow. rivcnwm. org &prinled on recycled paper Richard MacHott TTM 36567 —South Shore 11 January 30,2014 Page -2- shown, but it appears that they are directed toward the future La Strada road alignment. The RCWMD is concerned that the planned road alignment is not likely to be built before these drainage structures are put in place. As a result, these flows are very likely directed toward the landfill structure. The applicant shall clarify this issue for us. If this is the case, the applicant shall evaluate the adequacy of the existing drainage structures on the landfill property and their ability to handle the additional run -on from the tract site. 4. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1150.1 requires installation of additional perimeter probes at 100 -foot intervals, if residences are located within 1,320 feet of the edge of the landfill disposal footprint in order to eliminate any potential threat of gas migration. As such, the applicant of TTM 36567 shall finance the installation of an estimated nine (9) gas probes, with the RCWMD responsible for the installation, monitoring, and maintenance. Based on estimated costs to install these gas probes, which includes preparation of a Work Plan and Compliance Plan, and approval from multiple regulatory agencies, a deposit of $40,000 is required. The check should be made payable to the Riverside County Waste Management Department and sent to the attention of Accounts Receivable at the address identified on this letterhead. Once the deposit is received, we will notify the City of Lake Elsinore that the probes have been financed, as well as provide a detailed timeline for the installation. Additional conditions will be placed on the project, tied to occupancy permits, to ensure that if additional costs above the deposit amount are incurred, the applicant will fund the remaining balance. 5. Recent landfill gas (LFG) monitoring results show no detectable level of methane gas in any of the existing perimeter probes on the northern landfill boundary. However, LFG could migrate under extreme conditions. For example, a major earthquake or wildfire could cause significant damage to the on -site LPG collection and flare facilities, making them inoperable for an extended period of time. Under this special circumstance, LEG could build up within the landfill and then migrate off -site, possibly affecting the nearest residences within TTM 36567. It is the recommendation of the RCWMD that the applicant/developer install vapor barriers in the foundations of the housing units on those lots that are facing the landfill and within 300 feet from the refuse disposal footprint. 6. The RCWMD is concerned about landfill security. The close proximity of the proposed tract may increase illegal trespassing on the landfill site, which presents safety and liability concerns for the RCWMD: The applicant shall provide the RCWMD a fencing plan that deters illegal trespassing onto the landfill property from the tract property. The RCWMD recommends the following conditions of approval for TTM 36567: L Prior to project approval, the applicant shall submit an updated Phase I Environmental Assessment that includes the "head parcel' of the closed Elsinore Landfill (i.e., APN #363- 020 -011). A copy of the Report shall be submitted to RCWMD. 2. Prior to project approval, the applicant shall conduct a subsurface investigation on the "head parcel' to determine the presence of buried waste and subsurface soil conditions for the presence of landfill gas ingredients. A report of the investigation shall be submitted to the RCWMD for review and clearance for project approval. Richard MacHon TTM 36567 — South Share 11 January 30, 2014 Page - 3 - 3. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide evidence to the RCWMD that the tract's drainage flows will not jeopardize the landfill's integrity and /or operation of its drainage facilities. 4. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall make a deposit of $40,000 to the RCWMD for the financing of the installation of at least nine (9) additional perimeter gas probes oil the landfill boundary. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit evidence to the RCWMD that proves that either no housing units are within the 300 -foot limit from the refuse disposal footprint or landfill gas migration will not affect any of the proposed housing units. Otherwise, the applicant shall submit a vapor barrier design and consu'uction plan to the RCWMD for review and approval. Such design and plan shall be prepared by a licensed professional engineer and meet the applicable building standards. The vapor barriers shall be installed in the foundations of the housing units on lots that are facing the landfill and within 300 feet from the refuse disposal footprint. 6. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the applicant shall obtain a clearance from the RCWMD that shows that the applicant has fully financed the installation of the required additional perimeter gas probes on the landfill site. 7. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, if applicable, the applicant shall provide evidence to the RCWMD that shows that vapor barriers have been installed according to approved design and construction plan on the designated housing units. Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me directly at (951) 486 -3283. Please notify the RCWMD of the public hearing of the tract map before the City Council. In addition, we will appreciate a copy of the staff report on the tract map, prior to the public hearing. Sincerely, Planner IV cc: Accounts Receivable, RCWMD Joe McCann /Ryan Ross /Mark Hunt /Todd Shibata/Fouad Mina, RCWMD Kirt Coury, Planning Consultant, City of Lake Elsinore PD 4 14 8323 v3 fia Environmental Planning South Shore II Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 Final Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration October 2014 Prepared for: City of Lake Elsinore Planning Division 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Applicant: South Shore II, LLC 1200 Quail Street, Suite 220 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Prepared by: HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. 7575 El Cajon Boulevard, Suite 200 La Mesa, CA 91942 South Shore 11 Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2013 -02 Prepared for: City of Lake Elsinore Planning Division 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Applicant: South Shore II, LLC 1200 Quail Street, Suite 220 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Prepared by: HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. 7578 El Cajon Boulevard, Suite 200 La Mesa, CA 91942 October 2014 DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PURSUANT TO: CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT PROJECT TITLE: South Shore II Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 LEAD AGENCY: City of Lake Elsinore PROJECT SPONSOR: South Shore 11, LLC PROJECT LOCATION: The project site is located northeast of Interstate 15 (1 -15) at the Main Street interchange in the City of Lake Elsinore (City), in Riverside County. More specifically, it is located approximately one - quarter mile northeast of Camino Del Norte Street and one mile northeast of Lake Elsinore, in Township 6 south, Range 4 west, Section 4 as shown on the Lake Elsinore U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute quadrangle maps. The project site is comprised of assessor's parcel numbers (APNs) 363 - 020 -002, -003, -011, -012, -013, -014, -015, and -018. The project site is located within the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Criteria Cell 4459 of Cell Group B'. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The South Shore II project comprises approximately 67.7 acres owned by the project applicant and 4.0 acres owned by the City. The proposed residential subdivision would include 147 single - family detached residential units to be constructed on approximately 44 acres of the site. The land surrounding the residential development would include 19.0 acres retained in natural open space, approximately 14.0 acres of which would be conveyed to the Regional Conservation Authority (RCA; via either fee conveyance or conservation easement) for long -term conservation and management. The project also would construct an approximately 3.5 -acre public park, and an approximately 1.2 -acre extended detention basin. Landscape of common areas, passive open space areas, and park areas would be maintained by the project Home Owners' Association (HOA), as appropriate. The detention basin would be constructed in the southwestern corner of the project site. The detention basin and storm drain system would maintain water quality, manage stormwater runoff, and ensure that there is no increase in flows from the project to off-site drainages. Utilities (sewer, water, storm drain, gas, and electricity) would be provided through connection to existing lines located adjacent to the project site. Access to the project site would be from the proposed Elsinore Hills Road via Street "C" and Street "D," through the Spyglass Ranch Specific Plan project (Tentative Tract Map No. 35337), which is proposed to be constructed just west of South Shore IL Elsinore Hills Road would be extended from its existing terminus, approximately 850 feet south of Rosetta Canyon Drive, to Camino Del Norte by the project opening year. The project would be built in one phase and is anticipated to begin construction in 2015. Grading is anticipated to occur over a 6 -month period, followed by approximately three months for construction of streets, utilities, etc., and approximately three months for construction of the model home complex. Approximately 50 to 60 homes are anticipated to be constructed annually, which would result in a three -year build out period. Grading and development of the project site has been designed to maintain the natural drainage patterns as much as practical. Grading would require cut and fill of up 100 feet to achieve proposed finish grades and would be balanced on site. Soutlt Share 11 ('Tentative Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Mitigated Negative Declmntion Page 1 FINDINGS The City of Lake Elsinore finds that the South Shore 11 Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 project WILL NOT have a significant effect on the environment for the following reasons: 1. The proposed project would not conflict with existing surrounding land uses. 2. The proposed project would not violate any air quality standard, or substantially contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. 1 The proposed project would not result in a cumulative contribution to fugitive dust emissions and diesel exhaust; moreover, implementation of Mitigation Measures Air 1 axe through Air 32, below, would contribute to a reduction in fugitive dust emissions from project construction activities. 4. The proposed project may potentially result in significant direct or indirect impacts to birds protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA); however, implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology I, below, would reduce associated impacts related to migratory birds to below a level of significance. 5. The proposed project may potentially result in construction - related impacts to Riversidean sage scrub; however, implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 2, below, would reduce associated impacts related to this sensitive vegetation community to below a level of significance. 6.—The proposed project may potentially result in significant impacts to wildlife movement corridors as well as migrating birds covered by the MBTA; however, implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 1, below, would reduce associated impacts related to wildlife corridors to below a level of significance. 6,7 The proposed project would be consistent with the Western Riverside MSHCP; implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 3, below, would further minimize potential indirect impacts to the MSHCP Conservation Area. 7-.8.The proposed project may potentially result in significant impacts to unknown buried archaeological resources; however, implementation of Mitigation Measures Cultural 1 through Cultural 5, below, would reduce associated impacts related to cultural resources to below a level of significance. &9.The proposed project may potentially result in significant impacts to unknown human remains; however, implementation of Mitigation Measure Cultural 6, below, would reduce associated impacts related to human remains to below a level of significance. 9..10, The proposed project may potentially result in significant impacts from exposure of surficial soils and alluvium on site to wind and water erosion; however, implementation of Mitigation Measure Air 1, below, would reduce associated erosion impacts to below a level of significance. 4&11 The proposed project would implement Mitigation Measures GHG 1 through GHG 75, below, to achieve consistency with the City's Climate Action Plan (CAP), and thus, would not conflict with applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted to reduce GHG emissions. 44-.L2. The proposed project may potentially result in significant impacts related to hazardous material spill or release during project construction; however, implementation of Mitigation Measure Sowh Shore U (7entative Tract flap No. 36567) Ocmher 2014 Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 2 Hazards 1, below, would reduce associated impacts from potential accidental release of hazardous materials to below a level of significance. �13_The proposed project may potentially result in significant impacts related to fire hazards; however, implementation of Mitigation Measure Hazards 2, below, would reduce associated impacts from €rent potential fire hazards to below a level of significance. 4-3714. The proposed project would comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) guidelines for municipal storm water runoff. 4515 The proposed project may potentially result in significant impacts associated with construction noise and groundborne vibration; however, implementation of Mitigation Measure Noise 1, below, would reduce associated impacts to below a level of significance. 1 -S:16. The proposed project may potentially result in significant impacts to fire and police services, schools, recreational facilities, and other public facilities; however, implementation of Mitigation Measure Public Services 1, below, would reduce associated impacts to public services to below a level of significance. 46.17. The proposed project may potentially result in significant impacts related to compliance with the City's applicable plans, ordinances, and policies establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, due to the project's contribution to unacceptable levels of service for project area intersections; however, implementation of Mitigation Measure Traffic 1, below, would reduce project- related operational traffic impacts to below a level of significance. 4-18 The proposed project would not result in safety issues, propose a dangerous design feature, or propose connections to existing roadways in such a way that would pose a danger to increased traffic; moreover, implementation of Mitigation Measure Traffic 2 would ensure that no hazardous design features are introduced. 4519. The proposed project would not result in significant impacts to aesthetics, agricultural and forestry resources, historical resources, geology, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, population and housing, and utilities and service systems. MITIGATION MEASURES Implementation of the project- specific mitigation measures identified below would reduce potentially significant impacts to below a level of significance. MM Air 1: To control fugitive dust, the proposed project shall adhere to best management practices (BMPs), which shall include, but are not limited to, the following: • Water, or non -toxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications, shall be applied to exposed soils (including unpaved parking or staging areas, unpaved road surfaces, and active construction areas) at least three times per day as required per SCAQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust). • Soil stabilizers or water shall be applied to inactive disturbed areas. • A high wind dust control plan shall be prepared and implemented. • All stock piles shall be covered with tarps at the end of each day or as needed. South Share II Uenlative Tract Map No. 36569) October 2014 Alitigated Negative Declaration Page 3 • Water spray shall be provided during loading and unloading of earthen materials. • In -out traffic shall be minimized from the construction zone. • Gravel pads will be installed at all construction access points. • Trackout control devices will be installed at unpaved construction access points from public streets. • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks and other similar improvements will be completed as soon as is feasible and possible. • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, or loose material shall be covered and /or required to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. • Streets shall be swept daily if visible soil material is carried out from the construction site. • A contractor's representative will be designated as the dust control manager and signage will be erected to identifv the means of dust control manager contact. Developer shall use its best efforts to take remedial action within twenty -four (24) hours after notification of any dust control issues related to the project. MM Air 2: To control diesel exhaust, the proposed project shall include the following combustion emission control measures: • Well -tuned off -road construction shall be utilized. • The use of Tier 3 of ^leaneF heavy All diesel powered construction equipment in use shall -be prefe...oa require control e ui ment that meets, at a minimum, Tier 111 emission requirements... • Developer shall use its best efforts to require and ensure that the contractor or builder shall restrict truck operation to "clean" trucks, such as a 2007 or newer model year or 2010 compliant vehicles. • Developer will require that all contractors turn off all construction equipment and delivery vehicles when not in use and prohibit idling in excess of three minutes. Easily visible signs will be posted at the project site informing contractors and operators of this requirement. 14M,e fl-A-i-n-ute, idling limits for both en Fead trucks and off read equipment shall bR, MM Air 3: The project would implement the following measures to further reduce construction air quality impacts: • Project construction will commence in conjunction with the completion of Streets "C" and "D" pursuant to the specific plan requirements for the Spyglass Ranch Specific Plan. • Temporary traffic controls including, but not limited to, flag persons will be utilized as necessary for safety and smooth traffic flow. • All construction haul routes will be selected to minimize conflicts with off-site congestion and avoid, to the extent feasible and possible, pollution sensitive areas. • Developer will provide construction parking on the project site. • Construction worker ride - sharing will be encouraged and monitored by Developer. • Developer will allow for on -site lunch opportunities, including, without limitation, food trucks, for construction workers during the period of project construction. South Shore 11 (Tentative Tract Map Ato. 36567) October 2014 Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 4 • Developer will work with the City to as and where necessary, ensure that traffic signals are synchronized to minimize to the extent feasible and possible additional congestion as a result of construction of the project. • Developer will work with Caltrans to ensure to the extent feasible and possible adequate Levels of Service ( "LOS ") at impacted freeway on- and off -ramps close to the project site MM Biology 1: Clearing and grubbing shall occur outside of the bird breeding season (February 1 to August 31), unless a qualified biologist demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City that all nesting is complete through completion of a Nesting Bird Clearance Survey. A Nesting Bird Clearance Survey report shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to initiating clearing and grubbing during the breeding season. MM Biology 2: Impacts to Riversidean sage scrub shall be mitigated through payment of the MSHCP Local Mitigation Development Fee. The MSHCP Local Mitigation Development Fee in the amount of $1,938 per dwelling unit must be paid at the time a certificate of occupancy is issued for the residential unit or development project or upon final inspection (whichever occurs first). MM Biology 3: The following measures shall be undertaken to further minimize potential indirect impacts associated with project construction and operation: • In the event that pre- construction surveys reveal the presence of sensitive species within the project footprint and including a 100 -foot buffer, grading for future development adjacent to the MSI-ICP Conservation Area or proposed Open Space Areas during the nesting season shall include temporary noise barriers that provide at least 10 dBA in attenuation or other measures shown to similarly minimize noise impacts to sensitive species Any such barriers shall break the line of sight from noise generators to the Conservation or Open Space area • Enclosure fences (e.g. wood, tubular steel) shall be installed adiacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area and any Open Space areas along with other barriers such as native landscaping. Signs shall be posted at potential access points of the MSHCP Conservation Area and the project Open Space area informing residents of the wildlife habitat value of open space and other language appropriate to minimize unauthorized public access pet encroachment domestic animal predation illegal trespass or dum iinng (e.g. "no trespassing," "pets to be kept on leash," "no dumping "). • Developer shall not install invasive species listed at Volume 1 Table 6 -2 of the MSHCP Developer shall provide language in any covenants. conditions and restrictions (CC &Rs) created for the Project which states that non - native plants and invasive species specified at Volume I Table 6 -2 of the MSCIIP shall be prohibited within the limits of the project Table 6 -2 shall be appended to the CC &Rs for reference. • Night lighting shall be directed awav from the MSHCP Conservation Area and any proposed Area and Open Space Areas is not increased MM Cultural 1: 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 identify any unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultrual resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation. South Shore 11 (Tentative Tract Nfap Ago. 36567) October 2014 Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 5 MM Cultural 2: At least 30 days prior to seeking a grading permit, the project applicant shall contact the appropriate' Native American Tribal Representative (Representative) to notify the Representative of the intention to pull permits which signifies the initiation of grading, excavation and the monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Lake Elsinore and the Representative to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the 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 hwnan remains discovered on the site. MM Cultural 3: 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 with the agreement required in MM Cultural 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 groundbreaking activities, and shall also have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities in consultation with the project archaeologist. MM Cultural A: The landowner or its authorized representative shall agree to return all cultural resources, including Native American ceremonial and cultural artifacts, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project site to the Appropriate Tribe for proper treatment and disposition. The landowner or its authorized representative shall agree to waive any and all claims to ownership of Native American ceremonial and cultural artifacts that may be found on the project site within a reasonable time period agreed to by the parties involved, not to exceed 30 days from the initial recovery of items. MM Cultural 5: All sacred sites, should they be encountered within the project area, shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation, if feasible. MM Cultural 6: In the event that human remains are encountered during the course of the project, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur at the location of the find until the Riverside County Coroner has been notified and made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5079.98, 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 County Coroner determines the remains to be prehi taFieNative American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which shall deteFmine and identify the person or persons it believes to be the a - "Most Likely Descendant_ (M T ). The xat D shall eamplete inspection or the find within no hors of notifieatian by the NArrG 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. MM GHG 1: The project shall provide pedestrian infrastructure, including sidewalks along new streets, that provides connections to existing and /or proposed adjacent uses. MM GHG 2: The project shall provide connectivity to area -wide bikeway networks It is anticipated that the Pechanga Tribe would be the "appropriate' Tribe due to their prior and extensive history with the City on this and outer projects in determining potentially significant impacts and appropriate mitigation measures; due to their previous MI-1) calls within the City and the proximity of tribal reservations lands to the City. Swath Shore 11 (7e.atative Tract Hap No. 36567) Oclober 2014 Mitigated Negative Declaration Page 6 MM GHG 3: The project shall provide 15- gallon non - deciduous, umbrella -form trees in strategic locations around buildings, as shade for parking lot and street pavement, and on landscaped slopes or at the future park site. Trees shall be planted one per 30 linear feet of boundary length near buildings, pursuant to Measure E -1.1 of the City's Climate Action Plan. MM GHG 4: The pfejeet- Developer shall use its best efforts to require c ffstroc4-new homes constructed within the project to exceed the 2013 California Building Energy Ca4e-Effcienev Standards requirements by a minimum of 5 percen t, La ea the 2nno c r_rf e a a MM GHG 5: The project shall comply with the City's Uniform Building Code requirements to reduce indoor water consumption by 30 percent from the existing default baseline. MM GHG 6: Electrical outlets will be installed on the exterior walls of all residential building to promote the use of electric landscape maintenance equipment. Went MM GHG 7: Electrical outlets will also be installed in all garages and at or adjacent to carports to facilitate and encourage the charging of electric vehicles MM Hazards 1: All spills or leakage of petroleum products during construction activities shall immediately be contained, the hazardous material identified, and the material remediated in compliance with applicable state and local regulation regarding cleanup and disposal of the contaminant released. The contaminated waste shall be collected and disposed of at an appropriately licensed disposal or treatment facility. MM Hazards 2: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall comply with the following: • The project applicant shall participate in the Development Impact Fee program, as adopted by the City of Lake Elsinore, to the extent applicable. • All water mains and fire hydrants shall be constructed in accordance with Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 and /or No. 787.1. • The project shall provide an alternate or secondary access. Before combustible materials are brought to the site, the applicant shall provide two points of access acceptable to the Riverside County Fire Department. MM Noise 1: The construction contractor shall complete the following to reduce construction noise to the levels specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code: • During all project site excavation and grading, the construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment (fixed or mobile) with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers' standards. The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site. • The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction - related noise sources and noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. South Shore 77 (Tentative Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 A4itigated Negative Declar alion Page 7 Temporary noise barriers with an Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of at least 20 (e.g., vinyl acoustic curtain [STC rating 221 or quilted blanket [STC rating 221) will be installed when project construction occurs within 100 feet of existing sensitive receptors. Any such barriers will break the line of sight from noise generators to sensitive receptors. They will also be constructed as close to the sensitive receptor as possible to achieve the greatest attenuation effect and have no gaps or openings Such barriers will be maintained so long as construction occurs in the area adjacent to an existing xisting sensitive receptors. Provisions of the City's Noise Ordinance shall be satisfied during all site preparation and construction activity. Site preparation activity and construction shall not commence before 7:00 a.m. and shall cease no later than 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Only finish work and similar interior construction may be conducted on Saturdays and may commence no earlier than 8:00 a.m. and shall cease no later than 4:00 p.m. Construction activity shall not take place on Sunday, or any Legal Ilolidays. The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to the same howl specified for construction equipment. To the extent feasible, haul routes shall not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. If construction would occur in close proximity to already occupied Spyglass Ranch homes, measures such as the use of smaller grading equipment or the erection of temporary barriers would be employed. For the duration of construction activities, the construction manager will serve as the contact person should noise levels become disruptive to local residents Developer will post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact regarding noise complaints The construction manager, within seventy -two (72) hours of receipt of a noise complaint, will either take corrective actions or, if immediate action is not feasible provide a plan or corrective action to address the source of the noise complaint. MM Public Services 1: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the Development Impact Fee program as adopted by the City of Lake Elsinore to the extent applicable. MM Traffic 1: 'fire project shall participate in the phased construction of the off -site intersection improvements (e.g., traffic signals) through payment of established City of Lake Elsinore fees, participation in the Western Riverside Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees program, payment of the project's fair share traffic contribution, assessment district and /or community facilities district financing, and construction of off -site facilities under appropriate fee credit agreements. MM Traffic 2: Sight distance at project access shall be reviewed with respect to standard Caltrans and City sight distance standards. The final grading, landscaping, and street improvement plans shall demonstrate that sight distance standards are met. Such plans must be reviewed by the City and approved as consistent with this measure prior to bestowal of grading permits. South Shoe 11 (Tentative Tract Nlap AV 36567) October 2014 Mitigated Negative Declm ation Page 8 South Shore 11 Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 Initial Study No. 2013 -02 Prepared for: City of Lake Elsinore Planning Division 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Applicant South Shore 11, LLC 1200 Quail Street, Suite 220 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Prepared by. HELIX Environmental Plarming, Inc. 7578 El Cajon Boulevard, Suite 200 La Mesa, CA 91942 October 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS No. Section Pate 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... ............................... I 1.1 California Environmental Quality Act ................................................. ............................... 1 1.2 Intended Uses of Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration ... ............................... 2 1.3 Public Comments.... ................................................................................... 1.4 Availability of Materials ....................................................................... ..............................3 1.5 Contents of Initial Study ...................................................................... ............................... 3 1.6 Scope of Environmental Anal ysis ........................................................ ............................... 4 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................ ..............................5 2.1 Project Title .......................................................................................... ............................... 5 2.2 Lead Agency Name and Address ......................................................... ............................... 5 2.3 Contact Person and Phone Number ..................................................... ............................... 5 2.4 Project Location .................................................................................... ..............................5 2.5 Project Sponsor's Name and Address .................................................. ............................... 5 2.6 General Plan Land Use Designation ..................................................... ..............................5 2.7 Zoning District... ............................ .................................................................................... 5 2.8 Project Description .............................................................................. ............................... 6 2.9 Project Objectives ................................................................................ ............................... 8 2.10 Surrounding Land Uses ....................................................................... ............................... 8 2.11 Environmental Setting ......................................................................... ............................... 8 2.12 Required Approvals .............................................................................. ..............................9 3. DETERMINATION ....................................................................................... .............................10 3.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ...................................... ............................... 10 3.2 Determination .................................................................................... ............................... 10 4. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS .............................. ............................... 11 4.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................. .............................11 4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ................................................... ............................... 13 4.3 Air Quality ......................................................................................... ............................... 15 4.4 Biological Resources ......................................................................... ............................... 22 4.5 Cultural Resources ............................................................................... .............................27 4.6 Geology and Soils .............................................................................. ............................... 31 4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................ ............................... 34 4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..................................................... ............................... 38 4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality .............................................................. .............................41 4.10 Land Use and Planning ........................................................................ .............................45 4.11 Mineral Resources ............................................................................... .............................46 4.12 Noise .................................................................................................... .............................47 4.13 Population and Housing ..................................................................... ............................... 54 4.14 Public Services..._ .............................................................................. ............................... 55 4.15 Recreation ............................................................................................ .............................57 4.16 Transportation and Traffic ................................................................. ............................... 58 4.17 Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................... .............................64 4.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................................. ............................... 66 5. REFERENCES ................................................................................................ .............................70 5.1 List of Preparers ................................................................................... .............................70 5.2 References ............................................................................................ .............................71 6. RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT IS/ MND ..................... .............................73 South Share 11 (Tentative Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial SntdY Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES No. Title Follows Pace 1 Regional Location Map ..................................................................................... ............................... 6 2 Project Location Map ........................................................................................ ............................... 6 3 Aerial Project Location Map ............................................................................. ............................... 6 4 MSHCP Criteria Map ....................................................................................... ............................... 6 5 Site PlanTentative Tract Mao ........................................................................... ............................... 6 6a Representative Site Photographs ....................................................................... ............................... 8 6b Representative Site Photographs ....................................................................... ............................... 8 7 Vegetation and Sensitive Resources /Grading Plan ......................................... ............................... 24 8 Project Area Roadways ..................................................................................... .............................40 LIST OF TABLES No. Title Paee 2.1 Public Service Providers .................................................................................... ..............................7 4.3.1 South Coast Air Basin Criteria Pollutant Attainment Status .......................... ............................... 16 4.3.2 Maximum Daily Emissions Thresholds .......................................................... ............................... 16 4.3.3 Construction Activity Maximum Daily Emissions ......................................... ............................... 17 4.3.4 Daily Operational Emissions .......................................................................... ............................... 19 4.3.5 Localized Significance Thresholds and Project Emissions ............................. ............................... 20 4.4.1 Vegetation Communities on the South Shore 11 Project Site ............................ .............................24 4.7.1 Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions ......................................................... .............................35 4.7.2 Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions ........................................................... .............................36 4.9.1 Receiving Waters and 303(d) Impairments .................................................... ............................... 42 4.12.1 Noise and Land Use Compatibility Standards .................................................. .............................48 4.12.2 Interior and Exterior Noise Standards ............................................................. ............................... 49 4.16.1 Level of Service and Delay for Project Area Intersections ............................. ............................... 60 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A: Air Quality and GHG Impact Analyses Appendix B: General Biological Resources Assessment Appendix C: Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Appendix D: Preliminary Paleontological Survey Appendix E: Geotechnical Evaluation Appendix F: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Appendix G: Preliminary Hydrology Study Appendix H: Preliminary Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan Appendix 1: Noise Impact Analysis Appendix J: Traffic Impact Analysis Appendix K: Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Will -serve Letter Appendix L: Freeway Ramp Merge/Diver ee Analysis South Shore H (Tentative Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Studv page ii 1 Introduction This Initial Study (IS) has been prepared to assess the environmental impacts resulting from implementation of proposed land use applications related to the South Shore II Project (Tentative Tract No. 36567). This report has been prepared to comply with Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, which sets forth the required contents of an Initial Study. These include: • A description of the project, including the location of the project (see Section 2); • Identification of the environmental setting (see Section 2.11); • Identification of environmental effects by use of a checklist, matrix, or other methods, provided that entries on the checklist or other form are briefly explained to indicate that there is some evidence to support the entries (see Section 4); • Discussion of ways to mitigate significant effects identified, if any (see Section 4); • Examination of whether the project is compatible with existing zoning, plans, and other applicable land use controls (see Section 4.10); and • The name(s) of the person(s) who prepared or participated in the preparation of the Initial Study (see Section 5)-.Land • Responses to each of the comment letters received during public review of the Draft IS /MND (see Section 6). 1.1 — California Environmental Quality Act As defined by Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines, an Initial Study (IS) is prepared primarily to provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for determining whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration (ND) or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) would be appropriate for providing the necessary environmental documentation and clearance for any proposed project. The City of Lake Elsinore is designated the Lead Agency, in accordance with Section 15050 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Lead Agency is the public agency, which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project, which may have significant effects upon the environment. According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15065, an EIR is deemed appropriate for a particular proposal if the following conditions occur: • The proposal has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment. • The proposal has the potential to achieve short -term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long- term environmental goals. • The proposal has possible environmental effects, which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. • The proposal could cause substantial direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings. According to Section 21080(c)(1) of CEQA and Section 15070(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, a Negative Declaration can be adopted if it can be determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. South Share II (Tentative 2) act Alai) No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page I According to Section 21080(c)(2) of CEQA and Section 15070(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, a Mitigated Negative Declaration can be adopted if it is determined that although the Initial Study identifies that the project may have potentially significant effects on the environment, revisions in the project plans and/or mitigation measures, which would avoid or mitigate the effects to below a level of significance, have been made or agreed to by the applicant. This IS has determined that the proposed project may result in potentially significant environmental effects, but that said effects can be reduced to below a level of significance through the implementation of mitigation measures and, therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is deemed the appropriate document to provide the necessary environmental evaluations and clearance. This IS and proposed MND document is prepared in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.); the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines), as amended (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000, el. seq.); applicable requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore; and the regulations, requirements, and procedures of any other responsible public agency or agency with jurisdiction by law. 1.2 — Intended Uses oflnitial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration This IS and proposed MND are informational documents intended to infornr the City of Lake Elsinore decision - makers, other responsible or interested agencies, and the general public of the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. The environmental review process has been established to enable public agencies to evaluate enviromnental consequences and to examine and implement methods of eliminating or reducing any potentially adverse impacts. While CEQA requires that consideration be given to avoiding enviromnental damage, the Lead Agency and other responsible agencies must balance adverse environmental effects against other public objectives, including economic and social goals (CEQA Guidelines Section 15021). The City of Lake Elsinore, as the Lead Agency, has determined that environmental clearance for the proposed project can be provided with a Mitigate Negative Declaration. The IS and Notice of Availability and hrtent to Adopt prepared for the MND will hFwere circulated for a period of 30 days for public and agency review as described below. Comments received on the document will be considered by the Lead Agency before it acts on the proposed project. The Final MND includes revisions to clarify and correct the Draft MND, where necessary. Those revisions are shown in sue# /underline format to shmify and inserts in the text of the MND. No new significant information has been presented in the Final MND that would require recirculation of the Draft MND pursuant to Section 15073.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines. 1.3 — Public Comments The Draft IS /MND for the proposed South Shore II project was circulated for public review from December 8, 2013. to January 8, 2014. Interested persons, organizations, and public agencies had an opportunity to submit written comments on the Draft IS /MND to the City during this period. Comments were received and have been addressed in Section 6 of this Final IS /MND in side -by -side format, as required by CEQA Section 15088. As necessary, the text of the Draft IS /MND has been updated to address comments received during public review and to correct typographical errors. These modifications are indicated in sha1,-eot /underline format. No significant new information, as defined by CEQA Section 15088.5, has been added. None of the current changes to the Draft IS /MND represent substantial changes in the project, nor do they result in any new Sowli Shore H (Tenia[ive Tract Map No. 3656 7) October 2014 Initial StudJ' Page 2 environmental impacts Mitigation is included to reduce all significant environmental impacts to below a level of significance. Comments firom R-11 agencies and individuals aFe invited regarding the infaffflation Pentained in this I& Such comments should explain any perceived depp'ianpieq in the, asspssuflem of impaets, idenfif�' the infoFination that be qub mi#p'l ts. 1.4 — Availability of Materials All materials related to the preparation of this Final IS/MNDinitial Study are available for public review. To request an appointment to review these materials, please contact: Richard J. MacHott— Planning Manager City of Lake Elsinore Planning Division 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, California 92530 951- 674 -3124 x209 1,5 — Contents of Initial Study This IS /MND is organized to facilitate a basic understanding of the existing setting and environmental implications of the proposed project. In compliance with criteria, standards, and procedures of CEOA (California Public Resources Code Sections 15000 et seq.), the Final IS /MND is comprised of the following_ -as f011OWS: 1. Introduction presents an introduction to the entire report. This section identifies City of Lake Elsinore contact persons involved in the process, scope of environmental review, environmental procedures, and documents incorporated by reference. 2. Project Description describes the proposed project and provides a list of discretionary approvals and permits required for project implementation. 3.—Environmental Checklist Form presents the results of the environmental evaluation for the proposed project and those issue areas that would have either a potentially significant impact, a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated, a less than significant impact, or no impact. 14. Determination that a mitigated negative declaration will be prepared for the proiect South Shore 11 (Tentative Tract Hap No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 3 45. Environmental Analysis provides the background analysis supporting each response provided in the environmental checklist form. Each response checked in the checklist form is discussed and supported with sufficient data and analysis. As appropriate, each response discussion describes and identifies specific impacts anticipated with project implementation. In this section, mitigation measures are also recommended, as appropriate, to reduce adverse impacts to levels of "less than significant" where possible. -5-. Mandatory Findings presents the background analysis supporting each response provided in the environmental checklist form for the Mandatory Findings of Significance in accordance with Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines. (r7 Persons an(! Organizations Consulted List of Preparers identifies those persons consulted and involved in preparation of this IS and MND. 7-8. References lists bibliographical materials used in preparation of this document. 89. Mitigated Negative Declaration contains the City's proposed finding that, with the incorporation of the identified mitigation measures, the project would not have a significant effect on the environment. 1— Responses to Comments provides the mitigation measures derived from the Final IS /MND for the proposed protect. 1.6 — Scope of Environmental Analysis For evaluation of environmental impacts, each question from the Environmental Checklist Form is stated and responses are provided according to the analysis undertaken as part of the IS. All responses take into account the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project- level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. Project impacts and effects will be evaluated and quantified, when appropriate. To each question, there are four possible responses, including: 1. No Impact: A "No Impact" response is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to the proposed project. 2. Less Than Significant Impact: Development associated with project implementation would have the potential to impact the environment. These impacts, however, would be less than the levels of thresholds that are considered significant and no additional analysis is required. 3. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: This applies where incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures and explain how the measures reduce the effect to a less than significant level. 4. Potentially Significant Hnpact: Future implementation would have impacts that are considered significant and additional analysis and possibly an EIR are required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. South Shore Il (Tentative Tract Map No. 96567) October 2014 Initial Snudy Page 4 2 Project Description 2.1 — Project Title South Shore II (Tentative Tract Map No. 36567) 2.2 — Lead Agency Name and Address City of Lake Elsinore Planning Division 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, California 92530 2.3 — Contact Person and Phone Number Richard J. MacHott — Planning Manager 951- 674 -3124 x209 2.4— Project Location The project site is located northeast of Interstate 15 (I -15) at the Main Street interchange in the City of Lake Elsinore (City), in Riverside County (Figure 1). More specifically, it is located approximately one - quarter mile northeast of Camino Del Norte Sheet and one mile northeast of Lake Elsinore, in Township 6 south, Range 4 west, Section 4 as shown on the Lake Elsinore U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute quadrangle maps (Figures 2 and 3). The project site is comprised of assessor's parcel numbers (APNs) 363 - 020 -002, -003, -011, -012, -013, -014, -015, and -018; and 0.1-9. The project site is located within the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Criteria Cell 4459 of Cell Group B' (Figure 4). 2,5 — Project Sponsor's Name and Address Erik Lunde South Shore II, LLC 1200 Quail Street, Suite 220 Newport Beach, CA 92660 2.6 — General Plan Land Use Designation The General Plan land use designation for the proposed project site is Low - Medium Density Residential. This category of residential use is primarily intended to provide for the development of traditional single - family subdivisions with one dwelling permitted per lot, but with an increased density allowance between one to six dwelling units per acre. 2.7 — Zoning District The project site is zoned as R -1, Single - Family Residential. The R -1 district is intended to accommodate low density single- family residential projects developed in an urban environment with available public services and infrastructure. This zoning district has a range of permitted uses, including, but not limited to, single- family detached dwelling units with one dwelling unit per lot and public parks and /or playgrounds. In general, the South Shore 11 (Tentative Tract Uop No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 5 minimum lot areas for any new lot created in the R -1 district are 6,000 SP for interior lots and 7,700 SF for corner lots; however, the required average lot size for any subdivision is 7,260 SF. 2.8 — Project Description The South Shore 11 project comprises approximately 67.7 acres owned by the project applicant and 4.0 acres owned by the City. The proposed residential subdivision world include 147 single - family detached residential units to be constructed on approximately 44 acres of the site (Figure 5). The land surrounding the residential development would include 19.0 acres retained in natural open space, an approximately 3.5 -acre public park, and an on -site detention basin. Access to the project site would be from the proposed Elsinore Hills Road via Street "C" and Street "D," through the Spyglass Ranch project (Tentative Tract Map No. 35337), which is proposed to be constructed just west of South Shore II. Elsinore Hills Road would be extended from its existing terminus, approximately 850 feet south of Rosetta Canyon Drive, to Camino Del Norte by the project opening year. Each of the primary project components are described below. Single - family Residential The single - family residential units would predominantly consist of typical one- or two -story wood - framed structures with conventionally reinforced slab -on -grade and /or spread and continuous wall footings. The average residential lot size would be 7,566 SF, and the proposed lots would range from 6,000 (Lot 99) to 16,163 (Lot 147) gross SF. Outdoor light fixtures, including streetlights and residential and park lighting, would be uni- directional, shielded and situated so as to not cause glare or excessive light spillage on neighboring properties or conserved habitats along the northern and eastern portions of the project site. Wood or tubular steel fences would be installed along the interface where residential development abuts conserved habitat. Signs would be posted at potential access points into the MSHCP conservation area informing residents of the wildlife habitat value of the open space to minimize intrusions. On -site traffic signing and striping would be implemented in conjunction with detailed construction plans for the project site. Neighborhood Park and Open Space An approximately 3.5 -acre neighborhood park would be developed in the southeast portion of the project site, which is currently an open excavation area that appears to have been used as a borrow site. The park would include passive recreational opportunities and trails, and may include amenities such as play areas, turf, multi - purpose courts, and picnic facilities. The approximately 19 acres of the site retained in open space would preserve the natural characteristics of the site and while functioning as a buffer between the residential uses and adjacent undeveloped land to the east and north. Hillside areas that would be disturbed by development of the residential areas would be revegetated with deep - rooted, drought - tolerant plant species selected for erosion control. Existing drainage patterns and topography would be maintained within these areas, as applicable. Within the 19 acres of open space, approximately 140 acres of conservation land would be conveyed to the Regional Conservation Authority (RCA: via either fee conveyance or conservation easement) for long -term conservation and management, consistent with the MSHCP. If the 14.0 acres of conservation land would be conveyed as a conservation easement. RCA would be the easement holder. Landscape of common areas, passive open space areas, and park areas would be maintained by the project Home Owners' Association (FICA), as appropriate. Manufactured slopes would not extend into any MSHCP conservation areas. No plants included on the California Invasive Plant Council's list of invasive species (or in South Shore 11 (Tentative Tract Afal) No. 36567) October 2014 Initial StI dy Page 6 ��y \ Et \\ Cc E / \ : ) & ID & j >? k � \ \ |. _ 2 } .. . \ \ Q / : � � \\ 2� K HELIX /�° ' ° °° Oro,t Environmental Planning Project Location Map SOUTH SHORE II rieure z Aerial Project Location Map SOUTH SHORE II HELIX o F, OPT N Figure 3 Emranmenlal Planning MSHCP Criteria Map SOUTH SHORE II HELIX N ° °oo Oreet Figure 4 <ieN ks esia aJe ! jj �z . 3a HoRrHeaw ilnF'sEcrloH n Tes�- -Raw hB 105134 - -37 5 L 7_ ,YAlz! i 6 A ILDTAI ir LOT N fURI4 e 1 �:T 353..-0� VAKASIT 1 (` e"� �I Igo p� R IP, e� Ll v> w i� elf' F � •z � �. 1 ATYRAL � A6JV _ s M I %5:h Q OZO O R/T 124 B� b O�G 011, lAr �,!+I�� �g �l` y { f PROPOSED PARKSE (f }p 1 IL PfA P / l BL3lY r r 9aors'KY+A ZUginaariiy.2111J Tentative Tract Map SOUTH SHORE II HELIX „ Figure Table 6 -2 of the MSHCP) would be used anywhere on the site, and only native species or non- invasive non - native species would be planted adjacent to conservation areas. Detention Basin and Storm Drain System An approximately 1.2 -acre extended detention basin would be constructed in the southwestern corner of the project site (Figure 4). This basin is included as a part of the proposed project in order to maintain water quality, manage stormwater runoff, and ensure that there is no increase in flows from the project to off -site drainages. A mainline storm drain system, located within project roadways, would direct runoff from the developed area of the project to the detention basin via a system of drainage pipes located throughout the development. All runoff from the storm drain system would be discharged into the basin, which has an overall volume capacity of about 40,000 cubic feet. Additionally, an emergency overspill structure, located downstream of the basin, would be provided in case of an outlet structure failure. A 15 -foot access road would be provided adjacent to the basin to allow for maintenance. A concrete channel would be constructed adjacent to the back of the most easterly residential lots, between the residences and open space areas. This storm drain line would intercept and convey natural runoff from the open space areas, but would not mix with runoff from the developed areas. Runoff from the channel would ultimately discharge back into the existing flow1me at the southern boundary of the project site. Public Services and Utilities Utilities (sewer, water, storm drain, gas, and electricity) would be provided through connection to existing lines located adjacent to the project site. The required public services and anticipated providers for the proposed project are listed in Table 2.1. Water mains and fire hydrants would be constructed in accordance with Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 and /or No. 787.1. Table 2.1 PUBLIC SERVICE PROVIDERS Service Provider Gas Southern California Gas Company Water Elsinore Valley Water District Sewer Elsinore Valley Water District Solid Waste City of Lake Elsinore Telephone/Cable Verizon /Comeast Police Protection Riverside County Sheriff Department Fire Protection Riverside County Fire Department, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Library Riverside Count Schools Lake Elsinore Unified School District Construction The project would be built in one phase and is anticipated to begin construction in 2015. Grading is anticipated to occur over a 6 -month period, followed by approximately three months for construction of streets, utilities, etc., and approximately three months for construction of the model home complex. Approximately 50 to 60 homes are anticipated to be constructed annually, which would result in a three -year build out period. South Shoe 11 (I'entatine 7) act Map No 3656 7) October 2014 Jnitial Sfndy Page 7 Grading and development of the project site has been designed to maintain the natural drainage patterns as much as practical. Grading would require cut and fill of up 100 feet to achieve proposed finish grades and would be balanced on site. 2.9 — Project Objectives The overall purpose of the proposed project is to provide single - family residential units, a public park, and passive open space on a 6-771.7 -acre property, in a manner that is compatible with the surrounding environment, commensurate with future need, and in conformance with the applicable policies and regulations of the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Update and Zoning vrdinarice. The specific objectives of the project are to: • Develop a single - family residential community which complements and responds to the unique topography and character of the project site and surrounding area. • Provide recreation areas to serve the recreation needs of the future residents. • Incorporate sustainable design features where feasible to conserve natural resources and promote a healthy natural environment. • Design a safe and efficient circulation system that is pedestrian safe and that adequately supports the anticipated level of traffic in and around the project site. • Provide public services, roadways, and utilities infrastructure to support the proposed project in a timely and efficient manner that is concurrent with need. 2.10— Surrounding Land Uses Surrounding properties to the north, east, and south of the project site are ungraded and undeveloped with similar vegetation and topography. A former landfill (Elsinore Sanitary Landfill) is located adjacent to the project site to the southeast. The project site is bordered on the west by land that is currently undeveloped but within the approved Spyglass Ranch Specific Plan project. Regionally, the project is located southeast of Highway 74 (Central Avenue) and north of I -15 in the foothills overlooking the historic core of the City of Lake Elsinore to the southwest. The neighborhoods of Tuscany Hills and Ramsgate are located approximately 0.4 mile to the east and 0.8 mile to the north, respectively, and the old Delaney Estate is to the west. 2.11— Environmental Setting The City of Lake Elsinore is located in southwestern Riverside County. The City lies on either side of 1 -15 and is pocketed by the surrounding hillsides, including the Cleveland National Forest to the west. I -15 provides access to the regional highway network. The City has seen substantial development in the past 20 years, however large amounts of vacant areas still exist within the City. The topography of the City varies between flat areas amongst the core and downtown areas of the City north and east of Lake Elsinore and transitions to steeper terrain elsewhere in the City. The project site is comprised of primarily ungraded, undeveloped land, with hillside terrain and natural drainage channels that generally flow in a southwesterly direction (Figures 6a and 6b). An open excavation area is present in the southeastern -most portion of the project site. The property is crossed by several trails and unimproved dirt roads that are primarily only passable by off - highway vehicles (OHV). Portions of the northern and western boundaries of the property are delineated by wire and chainlink fences. Except for the dirt roads, the property is covered with moderate to dense Riversidean sage scrub. Two large, intermittent drainages transect the property from north to south converging in the southwest quarter of the property. Numerous dry gullies dissect the slopes that flank the drainages. Elevations range from approximately 1,500 feet above mean South Shore If (Tentative Tract iVap No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 8 Photo 1 — Southward view from the northern portion of the project site. Depicts rolling topography, vegetation, and unpaved roads characteristic of the site, and the adjacent undeveloped areas, former landfill site, and portions of the City of Lake Elsinore and 1 -15 south of the project site. Photo 2 — Southwestern view from the central portion of the project site, near the western project boundary. Depicts views of Lake Elsinore and the Santa Ana Mountains southwest of the project site. 1 \GjJI GJGil1Al1VG 011G i llulun y SOUTH SHORE II IA HEL Figure 6a FfivUniunenlfJYlYrning Photo 3 — Southeastern view from the northwest corner of the proposed park site. Depicts the open excavation area within the project site, as well as the adjacent undeveloped areas, former landfill site, and portions of the City of Lake Elsinore and 1 -15 south of the project site. Photo 4 — Southwestern view from the central portion of the project site. Depicts the trails and unimproved dirt roads present throughout the project site, as well as City and mountain views beyond. HELIX fliv,'romrtanede�r!b,q Representative 61te rnotos SOUTH SHORE 11 Figure 6b sea level (AMSL) toward the southwestern edge of the property, to 1,820 feet AMSL near the northern site boundary. 2.12— Required Approvals • Statewide Construction General Permit Coverage • Western Riverside MSHCP Consistency Approval • City of Lake Elsinore: Lake Elsinore Application Package (LEAP) • Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB): National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction Permit, Order No. 99- 08 -DWQ c Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 401 Water Quality Certification o State General Waste Discharge Requirements • Grading permit • Building permit Smth Shore 11(Tcwative Tract May No 36567) October 2014 Initial Stud, Page 9 3 Determination 3.1 — Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a `Potentialiv Significant Impact' as indicated by the checklist on the following! uaees. ❑ I Aesthetics 1 ❑ i Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality C. j Biological Resources Greenhouse Gas Emissions Land Use Planning Population / Housing Transportation/Traffic 3.2 — Determination j Cultural Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Mineral Resources Public Services Utilities /Service Systems Mandatory Findings of ❑ Significance I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ri I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Q' I find that the proposed project MAY have a 'potentially significant impact' or 'potentially significant unless mitigated' impact on the environment, but at least one effect U has been adequately analyzed in an earlier '.. document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is requited, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. i I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. 2,1)1V V Name: Richard J= acl -lott, Planning Manager Date South Shore II (Tentative Tract Map Na. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Paso 10 Geology /Soils Hydrology / Water ❑ Quality (� Noise Recreation .._. Utilities /Service Systems Mandatory Findings of ❑ Significance I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ri I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Q' I find that the proposed project MAY have a 'potentially significant impact' or 'potentially significant unless mitigated' impact on the environment, but at least one effect U has been adequately analyzed in an earlier '.. document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is requited, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. i I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. 2,1)1V V Name: Richard J= acl -lott, Planning Manager Date South Shore II (Tentative Tract Map Na. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Paso 10 4.1 — Aesthetics Would the project: 4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Less Than potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact a) Less than Significant Impact. Scenic vistas can be impacted by development in two ways. First, a structure may be constructed that blocks the view of a vista. Second, the vista itself may be altered (i.e., development on a scenic hillside). The primary scenic vistas in the City are of the surrounding hillsides and Lake Elsinore. In some cases, views of the hillsides and, in particular, the lake are generally obstructed by trees, utility poles, and other buildings. As determined by the City of Lake Elsinore's General Plan EIR, development pursuant to the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts to scenic vistas with the implementation of existing General Plan policies requiring or encouraging the preservation of scenic vistas and viewsheds and mitigation requiring the preparation of visual simulations for development located within the scenic viewshed of I -15 (City 2011). There are no recognized scenic vistas on the project site or in the immediate project vicinity. Since the site is not considered a part of a scenic vista, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on a scenic vista. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is not located within view of a state scenic highway, as there are no designated state scenic highways or eligible state scenic highways, as identified on the California Scenic hIighway Mapping System, located in the City. The project is located within the vicinity of 1 -15, which is designated as an eligible state scenic highway; however, it is not officially designated as a state scenic highway by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The project would not adversely impact or decrease the potential for 1 -15 to be designated as a state scenic highway. The project also would not result in impacts to trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings within a state scenic highway. Accordingly, no impact to scenic resources would occur. C) Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the proposed project could result in a significant impact if it resulted in substantial degradation of the existing visual character or quality of the site and its Sovah Shore 11 (Tentative Tract Nlap No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 11 surroundings. Degradation of visual character or quality is defined by substantial changes to the existing site appearance through construction of structures such that they are poorly designed or conflict with the site's existing surroundings. The project site is currently ungraded and primarily comprised of undeveloped land, with hillside terrain, moderate to dense Riversidean sage scrub, and natural drainage channels that generally flow in a southwesterly direction (Figures 6a and 6b). An open excavation area is present in the southeastern -most portion of the project site (Figure 6a). The project would introduce single - family homes and associated infrastructure, a park, and a detention basin in an area characterized by rolling terrain. The developed portion of the site would be relatively flat, with low density single- family housing bounded by landscaping and manufactured slopes. The project would, however, maintain the natural topography and east - west - trending ridges and drainages within the eastern- and northernmost portions of the site. Moreover, development of the project would be similar in visual character to what currently exists in the City and the project characteristics would be consistent with the proposed adjacent residential developments. Impacts would be less than significant. d) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would result in new sources of lighting. Typical light sources from a single- family home would include outdoor accent and security lighting. Additional sources include street lamps and light from the proposed public park. Per applicable standards, the proposed project roadways would require approximately 80 street lights which would be standard 9,500-lumen lights of of glare during the day would be minimal. The project site is located approximately 34 miles northwest of the Mount Palomar Observatory in Zone B which includes land within a 45 -mile radius of the observatory. The observatory depends on dark skies in order to conduct research. Urbanization tliroughout Riverside and San Diego Counties has resulted in an increase in fj4hting standards which regulate the use of certain light fixtures that emit undesirable light rays into the night sky that have a detrimental effect on operations at the observatory. Such standards include the use of shielding so that illumination does not extend beyond the property boundaries and incorporation of low - intensity exterior lighting Section 15 42 020 of Chapter 15 42 Title 15; Section 17.112.040 of Chapter 17.112, Title 17' and Section 17.148.010 of Chapter 17.148, Title 17 of the City's Municipal Code provide standards intended to minimize glare, conflict, and light pollution (City 2013) The project would be in compliance with these standards, existing City practices, procedures, and policies for lighting, and would provide outdoor light fixtures that are uni- directional, shielded and situated so as to not cause glare, e -- excessive light spillage on neighboring properties, or excessive sky glow. Lighting and glare impacts associated with the project would be less than significant. South Shore 11 (Tentative T matt Map No. 35567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 12 4.2 — Agriculture and Forestry Resources In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept-. Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board C( ARB). Would the project: b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than ❑ Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact - - - -- a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or ( Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), j as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the (as defined by Public Resources Code section ( ❑ El Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of ❑ ❑ �' ❑ f the California Resources Agency, to non- Production (as defined by Government Code agricultural use? j b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? ❑ ❑ ❑ C) Cordial with existing zoning for, or cause i rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section ( ❑ El El 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104 (g))? ch Result in loss of forest land or conversion of j forest land to non- forest use? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to El El El non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land j to non - forest use? a) No Impact. The proposed project would be developed on an undeveloped property that does not contain Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Therefore, there would be nc conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Statewide Importance to a non - agricultural use as a result of this project. No impact would occur. b) No Impact. The California Department of Conservation indicates that no Williamson Act contracts are active for any area within the City. The Lake Elsinore General Plan does not identify any specific designation for agricultural uses. The Lake Elsinore Zoning Code does not contain any agricultural zones or any zone that principally allows agricultural uses. Therefore, the project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. No impact would occur. South Shore 11 (`fentalive "Tract May Aro. 36567) October 2019 burial Study Page 13 c -d) No Impact. Public Resources Code Section 12220(g) identifies forest land as land that can support 10- percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, trader natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits. The project site is not currently being managed or used for forest land as identified in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g). The Lake Elsinore General Plan does not identify any specific designation for forest land or timberland uses. The Lake Elsinore Zoning Code does not contain any forest or timberland zones. The USDA Forest Service vegetation maps identify most of the city as urban, herbaceous, or shrub type, indicating that it is not capable of growing industrial wood tree species. Portions of the City are designated as hardwood forest /woodland. These areas of vegetation are primarily located within drainage, hillside, and other similar areas within the City. The project is located within areas identified as urban, herbaceous, or shrub type. Therefore, the project would have no impact to timberland zoning or result in loss of forest land. C) No Impact. There are no agricultural operations or timberland production operations within the project site or vicinity. The project does not propose any changes that could result in conversion of Farmland to non - agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non - forest use. No impact would occur. South Shore H (Tentative T iact Map AV 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Pa e 14 R 4,3 — Air Quality Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: This section is based on the Air Quality and GHG Impact Analyses report prepared for the proposed project by Giroux & Associates (2013a), included as Appendix A. The project's construction and operational emissions were calculated using the CalEEMod20l3.2 computer model. The results and conclusions of the report and calculations relative to pollutant emissions are summarized herein. a) No Impact. The City is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District ( SCAQMD). SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG) are responsible for formulating and implementing the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the SCAB. The AQMP is a series of plans adopted for the purpose of reaching short- and long -term goals for those pollutants the SCAB is designated as a `nonattainment' area because the SCAQMD does not meet federal and /or state Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS). Projects such as South Shore II do not directly relate to the AQMP in that there are no specific air quality programs or regulations governing general development. To determine consistency between the project and the AQMP, the project must comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations, comply with all proposed or adopted control measures, and be consistent with the growth forecasts utilized in preparation of the AQMP. For long -term operational activity, the project would not have a significant air quality impact, as defined by regional and localized daily emissions thresholds set forth by the SCAQMD (see Section 4.1b). The project does not propose residential densities higher than is already permitted in the existing General Plan that could result in a greater increase in population and households over that contemplated in the AQMP. These increases are within the growth assumptions estimated by SCAG and, therefore, would not result in a substantial conflict with or obstruction of the AQMP. South Shm-e 11 (Tentative Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial sluay Page 15 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impai a Conflict with or obstruct implementation � of the a applicable air quality man? p El El El b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or ❑ ❑ ! ❑ projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air El i ❑ ❑/' I El quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? j d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? - ❑ ❑ ❑ _ - - - - -__ e) Create objectionable odors affecting a .; - -- .._...__._ substantial number of people? ❑ ❑ I ❑ This section is based on the Air Quality and GHG Impact Analyses report prepared for the proposed project by Giroux & Associates (2013a), included as Appendix A. The project's construction and operational emissions were calculated using the CalEEMod20l3.2 computer model. The results and conclusions of the report and calculations relative to pollutant emissions are summarized herein. a) No Impact. The City is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District ( SCAQMD). SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG) are responsible for formulating and implementing the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the SCAB. The AQMP is a series of plans adopted for the purpose of reaching short- and long -term goals for those pollutants the SCAB is designated as a `nonattainment' area because the SCAQMD does not meet federal and /or state Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS). Projects such as South Shore II do not directly relate to the AQMP in that there are no specific air quality programs or regulations governing general development. To determine consistency between the project and the AQMP, the project must comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations, comply with all proposed or adopted control measures, and be consistent with the growth forecasts utilized in preparation of the AQMP. For long -term operational activity, the project would not have a significant air quality impact, as defined by regional and localized daily emissions thresholds set forth by the SCAQMD (see Section 4.1b). The project does not propose residential densities higher than is already permitted in the existing General Plan that could result in a greater increase in population and households over that contemplated in the AQMP. These increases are within the growth assumptions estimated by SCAG and, therefore, would not result in a substantial conflict with or obstruction of the AQMP. South Shm-e 11 (Tentative Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial sluay Page 15 b) Less than Significant Impact. The primary sources of air pollutants generated by the proposed project would be emissions associated with grading and construction activities, and operational emissions associated with residential use. Rough grading, paving, building construction, architectural coatings, and construction worker commuting activities would result in carbon monoxide (CO), reactive organic gases (ROGs), nitrogen oxides (NO,), sulfur oxides (SOx), and particulate matter (PMre and PM2 s) emissions that could impact regional and localized air quality. Impacts to regional and localized air quality could also occur through operational emissions from vehicle use, natural gas use, landscape maintenance, consumer products, and architectural coatings, including CO, ROGs, NOx, SOx, PMre, and PM2J. The SCAQMD has thresholds for emissions of each of these pollutants, as identified below. Thresholds and Attainment Status The attainment status for criteria pollutants in Western Riverside County is shown in Table 4.3.1. SCAQMD daily emissions thresholds are presented in Table 4.3.2. Table 4.3.1 SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN CRITERIA POLLUTANT ATTAINMENT STATUS Criteria Pollutant'' Federal Designation = State Designation Ozone (03) — I -hour standard N/A Extreme nonattainment Ozone (03) — 8 -hour Standard Extreme nonattainment Nonattainment Carbon Monoxide (CO) Serious maintenance Attainment Particulate Matter 10 microns in diameter (PMI,) Serious nonattainment Nonattainment Particulate Matter 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) Nonattainment Nonattaimnent Nitrogen Dioxide (NO,) Primary maintenance Attainment Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Attainment Attainment Sulfates N/A Attainment Lead Attainment Attainment Hydrogen Sulfide (112S) N/A Unclassified Somme: City 2011 Table 4.3.2 MAXIMUM DAILY EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS (pounds per day) Pollutant; Construction Operations Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) 75 55 Nitrogen Oxides(NOx) 100 55 Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 550 Particulate Matter 10 microns in diameter (PM1e) 150 150 Particulate Matter 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2,$) 55 55 Sulfur Oxides (SOx) 150 150 Lead 3 3 Source: Giroux & Associates 2013a Sou[h Shmre 11(lentative Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 hvitial Study Page 16 Construction Emissions Analysis Dust is typically the primary concern during construction of new homes and infrastructure. Because such emissions are not amenable to collection and discharge through a controlled source, they are called "fugitive emissions." Fugitive dust emissions include PM10 and PM2.5. Average daily PMia emissions during site grading and other disturbance average about 10 pounds per acre. This estimate presumes the use of reasonably available control measures (RACMs). The SCAQMD requires the use of best available control measures (BACMs) for fugitive dust from construction activities. With the use of BACMs, fugitive dust emissions can be reduced to one to two pounds per day per acre disturbed. A limited amount of construction activity particulate matter is in the PM25 range. PMzs emissions are estimated to comprise 10 to 20 percent of PMT,. The estimated construction emissions calculated for the proposed project are presented in Table 4.3.3, below. Table 4.3.3 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY MAXIMUM DAILY EMISSIONS (pounds per day) Maximal Construction Emissions , ROG NOx CO SOz PMJn _ I'M2,S 2015 Unmitigated 7.2 79.2 52.3 0.1 21.4 12.9 Mitigated 7.2 79.2 52.3 0.1 10.3 6.8 2016 Unmitigated 4.7 30.2 23.5 0.0 2.7 2.1 Mitigated 4.7 30.2 23.5 0.0 2.7 2.1 2017 Unmitigated 4.3 27.9 22.7 0.0 2.5 1.9 Mitigated 4.3 27.9 22.7 0.0 2.5 1.9 2018 Unmitigated 38.1 24.6 21.7 0.0 2.2 1.6 Mitigated 38.1 24.6 21.7 0.0 2.2 1.6 SCA MD Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceeds Tbresbold? No No No No No No Source: Giroux & Associates 2013a As shown in Table 4.3.3, peak daily construction activity emissions are estimated to be below SCAQMD CEQA thresholds and construction - related air quality impacts would be less than significant. Nonetheless, the project would implement the following mitigation measures to further reduce effects related to the project's cumulative contribution to fugitive dust emissions: MM Air 1: To control fugitive dust, the proposed project shall adhere to best management practices (BMPs), which shall include, but are not limited to, the following: Water, or non -toxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications, shall be applied to exposed soils (including unpaved parking or staging areas, unpaved road surfaces, and active construction areas) at least three times per day as required per SCAQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust). Soil stabilizers or water shall be applied to inactive disturbed areas. A high wind dust control plan shall be prepared and implemented. .Sowh Shore 11 (Tentative Tract ddap No. 36567) October 2014 lnitial Sfndy Page 17 • All stock piles shall be covered with tarps at the end of each day or as needed. • Water spray shall be provided during loading and unloading of earthen materials. • In -out traffic shall be minimized from the construction zone. • Gravel pads will be installed at all construction access points • Trackout control devices will be installed at unpaved construction access points fiom public streets • All roadways driveways sidewalks and other similar improvements will be completed as soon as is feasible and possible. • All trucks hauling dirt, sand, or loose material shall be covered and /or required to maintain at least two 2 feet of freeboard. • Streets shall be swept daily if visible soil material is carried out from the construction site. • A contractor's representative will be designated as the dust control manager and signage will be erected to identify the means of dust control manager contact. Developer shall use its best efforts to take remedial action within twenty -four (24) hours after notification of any dust control issues related to the rpto ect. MM Air 2: To control diesel exhaust, the proposed project shall include the following combustion emission control measures: • Well -tuned off -road construction shall be utilized. • —The use of Tier ] of elean°° h.».. All diesel powered construction equipment in use shall be prefeFredreguire control equipment that meets, at a minimum, Tier III emission requirements. • Developer shall use its best efforts to require and ensure that the contractor or builder shall restrict truck operation to "clean" trucks, such as a 2007 or newer model year or 2010 compliant vehicles • Developer will require that all contractors turn off all constriction equipment and delivery vehicles when not in use and prohibit idling in excess of three minutes Easily visible signs will be posted at the project site informing contractors and operators of this requirement Five minute idling limits G« both on read tFue s and off read equipment shall be f .J MM Air 3: The project would implement the following measures to further reduce construction air quality impacts: • Project construction will commence in conjunction with the completion of Sheets "C" and "D" pursuant to the specific plan requirements for the Spyglass Ranch Specific Plan • Temporary traffic controls, including, but not limited to. flag persons will be utilized as necessary for safety and smooth traffic flow. • All construction haul routes will be selected to minimize conflicts with off -site congestion and avoid to the extent feasible and possible, pollution sensitive areas. • Developer will provide construction parking on the project site • Construction worker ride - sharing will be encouraged and monitored by Developer, • Developer will allow for on -site lunch opportunities, including, without limitation, food trucks for construction workers during the period of project construction • Developer will work with the City to, as and where necessary, ensure that traffic signals are synchronized to minimize to the extent feasible and possible additional congestion as a result of construction of the project. • Developer will work with Caltrans to ensure to the extent feasible and possible adequate Levels of Service (LOS) at impacted freeway on- and off -ramps close to the project site South Share 11 (Tentative Tract Mop No 3656 7) October 2014 Initial Study Page 18 Operational Emissions Analysis Project uses would generate 1,399 daily trips according to trip generation estimates provided by the project traffic consultant. Operational emissions for the proposed residential use (which assume inclusion of gas hearths rather than wood burning fireplaces) are shown in Table 4.3.4. Table 4.3.4 DAILY OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS Source Op rational Emissions ounds per da ROG I NOx CO SOii PMib PMzs COz Area 6.4 0.1 12.2 0.0 0.2 0.2 2,841.0 Energy 0.1 1.3 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 1,609.6 Mobile 14.6 13.5 54.3 0.2 10.4 2.9 12,545.2 TOTAL 21.2 14.9 67.1 0.2 10.7 3.2 16,995.8 SCA MDTlareshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 - Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No NA Somme: Giroux & Associates 2013a The project would not cause any operational emissions to exceed their respective SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds. Note that relative to CO, the SCAQMD has demonstrated in the CO attainment redesignation request to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that there are no "hot spots," i.e., locations where emission concentrations expose individuals to elevated risks of adverse health effects, anywhere in the SCAB. Project - related maximum one -hour and eight -hour CO concentrations were estimated to be 3.2 ppm and 1.1 ppm, which are well below the established standards of 20 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. Operational emission impacts would be less than significant. C) Less Than Significant Impact. The portion of the SCAB within which the project is located is designated as a non - attainment area for ozone, PMto and PM,,, under state standards, and as a non - attainment area for ozone, PMio, and PM2,5 under federal standards. As described in Section 4.3.b, the project's projected emissions would be below the applicable SCAQMD thresholds for all criteria air pollutants. Therefore, short -term construction and long -term operational emissions from the proposed project would not result in air quality impacts. Since the project is not expected to exceed the emissions thresholds set forth by the SCAQMD, it is assumed that the project and other cumulative developments would not result in a cumulatively significant impact during long -term operational activity. Moreover, the proposed project would be required to comply with SCAQMD rules and regulations aimed at reducing construction - related pollutant emissions, including fugitive dust and other particulates, as well as reactive organic compounds and other ozone precursors found in paints and a variety of coatings. Additionally, Section 21100(e) of CEQA, which states that "previously approved land use documents including, but not limited to, general plans, specific plans, and local coastal plans, may be used in cumulative impact analysis," can also be considered as it relates to the subject project. The AQMP for the SCAB is the most appropriate document to use to evaluate cumulative impacts of the proposed project. This is because the AQMP evaluated air quality emissions for the entire region using a future development scenario derived from land use, population, and employment characteristics defined in consultation with local governments and sets forth a comprehensive program that would lead the region, including the project area, into compliance with all federal and state air quality standards. The project would be consistent with the development projections of the Lake Elsinore General Plan Update and the breadth of existing standards and regulations. As such, implementation of South Shore 11 (Tentative Tract Map AV 3656 7) October 2014 Initial Study Page 19 the project would not change or otherwise interfere with the regional pollutant control strategies of the AQMP. The project's impact on cumulative levels of regional ozone or particulates is therefore less than significant. d) Less Than Significant Impact. Air quality impacts are analyzed relative to those persons with the greatest sensitivity to air pollution exposure. Such persons are called `sensitive receptors." Sensitive population groups include young children, the elderly, and the acutely and chronically ill (especially those with cardio- respiratory disease). Residential areas are considered to be sensitive to air pollution exposure because they may be occupied for extended periods, and residents may be outdoors when exposure is highest. Schools are similarly considered to be sensitive receptors. The closest existing sensitive use to the proposed project is approximately 2,400 feet to the east, within the Tuscany Hills residential community. It is possible that parts of the Spyglass Ranch and South Shore residential developments could be constructed and occupied before South Shore II is built; residents of this development would be sensitive receptors relative to impacts from the proposed project. The SCAQMD has developed analysis parameters to evaluate ambient air quality on a local level, called Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs). LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that could occur, beyond which the project would cause or contribute measurably to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. LSTs are only applicable to the following criteria pollutants: NOx, CO, PMT,, and PM2.5. LSTs are developed based on the ambient pollutant concentrations for each source area and distance to the nearest sensitive receptor, and are applicable for a sensitive receptor where it is possible that an individual could remain for 24 hours such as a residence, hospital, or convalescent facility. For the proposed project, the primary source of possible LST impact would be during construction. Construction emissions are based on the number of equipment hours and the maximum daily soil disturbance activity possible for each piece of equipment. The applicable thresholds and emissions are shown in Table 4.3.5. As indicated, emissions would be below the LST thresholds for construction, and LST impacts would be less than significant. Table 4.3.5 LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS AND PROJECT EMISSIONS (pounds per day) CO NOx PMio T PM2.5 Mcmimum On Site Emissions* 26,693 985 193= 95 Site Pre Unmitigated 43 57 18 10 Mitigated 43 57 10 7 Grading Unmitigated 51 79 12 7 Mitigated 51 79 7 5 Construction Unmitigated ated 19 29 2 2 Mitigated 19 29 2 2 Paving Unmitigated 14 17 1 1 Mitigated 14 17 1 1 SOUtCe: Giroux & Associates 2013a Sowh Shmre 77 (Tentative Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Stzidv Page 20 Construction equipment exhaust contains carcinogenic compounds within diesel particulate matter (DPM). The toxicity of diesel exhaust is evaluated relative to a 24 -hour per day, 365 days per year, 70 -year lifetime exposure. P'or DPM exhaust emissions, adopted policies require the gradual conversion of delivery fleets to diesel alternatives, or the use of cleaner diesel engines whose emissions are demonstrated to be as low as those from alternative fuels. Similarly, off-road equipment used in construction activities also is becoming progressively cleaner every year. Because health risks from toxic air contaminants (TAC's) are cumulative over an assumed 70 -year lifespan, measurable off -site public health risk from diesel TAC exposure associated with the project would occur for only a brief portion of a project lifetime, and only in dilute quantity; impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures Air Quality -1 and Air Quality -2 would further ensure that impacts to sensitive receptors would be below a level of significance. e) Less than Significant Impact. Residential land uses typically do not create objectionable odors. Objectionable odors are typically associated with agricultural and heavy- manufacturing activities. A common potential source of odor from residential development projects comes from outdoor solid waste disposal bins. In accordance with current practices, all residential waste would be disposed of in covered receptacles and routinely removed, thereby limiting the escape of odors to the open air. 'therefore, the potential for the project to create objectionable odors is considered less than significant. The project site is located directly north of the Elsinore Sanitary Landfill. The landfill was closed in 1986. A landfill gas collection and combustion system continues to operate although a substantial proportion of any biodegradable waste has long completed its decay cycle in the last 27 years since the landfill was closed. There are no known odor complaints from the existing residential community most often downwind of the closed landfill. Except for occasional technical visits to obtain water samples from four monitoring wells or maintenance to the gas collection blower or the waste gas burner, there are no activities on the landfill that would impact the surrounding community. The project would not result in objectionable odors associated with the adjacent former landfill. Soulh Skm ell (Tentative Tract flap AV 36567) October 2014 lnilial SludY Page 21 4.4 — Biological Resources Would the project: Less 'Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, . sensitive, or special status species in local1 j ! or regional plans, policies, or regulations, ❑ ! ❑ ❑ or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife j Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any j riparian habitat or other sensitive natural,, community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the ❑ ❑ ❑ California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act ! (including, but not limited to, marsh,,. ❑ ❑ ❑ _ vernal pool, coastal, etc) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, j ! or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native', I { ! resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or ❑ ❑ impede the use of native wildlife nursery ( sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ! ordinances protecting biological resources, I such as a tree preservation policy or ❑ ❑ ❑ ordinance? I f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted'i ! 1 Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural I. I Community Conservation Plan, or other ❑ ❑ Qj El approved local, regional, or state habitat ! conservation plan? A General Biological Resources Assessment (GERA) for the project was prepared by HELIX (2013; Appendix B) to document the existing on -site biological conditions, including a delineation of jurisdictional waters, a Riparian /Riverine and Vernal Pool habitat assessment, burrowing owl habitat assessment, and vegetation mapping, along with a general habitat assessment of the potential for sensitive species to occur on the property. The results and conclusions of the survey and report are summarized herein. South Shore 11 (Tentative "Tract ddap No 36567) October 2014 Initial Simdy Page 22 a) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. A summary of the status of sensitive species within the project site and vicinity, as well as potential impacts to these species, are presented below. Sensitive plant Species: Sensitive plant species are those listed as federally threatened or endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS); state listed as threatened or endangered or considered sensitive by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW); included in the MSHCP as Covered Species, Non- Covered Species, Criteria Area Species, and /or Narrow Endemic Plant Species; and /or are California Native Plant Species (CNPS) List IA, 1B, or 2 species, as recognized in the CNPS's Ii ventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California and consistent with the CEQA Guidelines. There are 13 sensitive plant species, 6 of which are federally and /or state listed species, which were determined to have potential to occur in the project vicinity. A complete list of sensitive plants known to occur in the area, along with their potential to occur within the biological study area, is provided in Table 3 and Appendix A of the project GBRA. The federally listed as endangered and state listed as threatened Munz's onion (Allium niunzii), as well as the federally listed as threatened and state listed as endangered thread- leaved brodiaea ( Brodiaea falafolia) have a low potential to occur on site; none were observed. The remainder of the listed species does not have potential to occur on site. The project site is not within an area that requires rare plant surveys under the MSHCP. Munz's onion and thread- leaved brodiaea are covered species and no mitigation is required for potential impacts as long as the project is in compliance with the MSHCP. Sensitive Animal Species: Sensitive animal species are those listed as threatened or endangered, proposed for listing, or candidates for listing by the USFWS; considered sensitive animals by the CDFW; and /or included in the MSHCP as Covered Species, Non - Covered Species, and /or Criteria Area Species. There are 26 sensitive animals with potential to occur within the study area, 3 of which were observed on site. A complete list of sensitive animals known to occur in the area, along with their potential to occur within the biological study area, is provided in Table 4 and Appendix B of the project GBRA. The coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) is a federally listed as threatened species, and a single individual was observed singing on the northeastern portion of the site (Figure 7). Northern harrier and loggerhead shrike are California state species of concern, and were observed in the study area. Of the remaining 23 species, although 7 are listed at the federal and /or state level, none of the listed animal species has potential to occur within the proposed impact area except the aforementioned coastal California gnatcatcher and the Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydrvas editha quino). Both of these species are fully covered by compliance of the project with the MSHCP. Nesting Migratory Birds: Given the location of Lake Elsinore within the City, there are a variety of birds that migrate seasonally through the City on the Pacific flyway, as well as certain birds that permanently reside locally. Pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), development of the proposed project could disturb or destroy active migratory bird nests if ground disturbance occurs during the identified breeding season (between February 15 and August 31). Disturbance to or destruction of migratory bird nests are in violation of the MBTA and are, therefore, considered to be a potentially significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 1 would ensure that potential impacts to birds protected under the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code are avoided during project construction. MM Biology 1: Clearing and grubbing shall occur outside of the bird breeding season (February 1 to August 31), unless a qualified biologist demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City that all nesting is complete through completion of a Nesting Bird Clearance Survey. A Nesting Bird Clearance Survey report shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to initiating clearing and grubbing during the breeding season. b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Sensitive natural communities include land that supports unique vegetation communities or the habitats of rare or endangered species or subspecies of animals or plants as defined by Section 15380 of the CEQA Guidelines. As depicted on Figure 7, the biological South Shore 11(Tentatire Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 23 study area supports three vegetation communities, including Riversidean sage scrub, non - native grassland, and disturbed habitat. Riversidean sage scrub comprises over 90 percent of the study area (66.8 acres). Approximately 0.4 acre of non - native grassland occurs on the project site (Table 4.4.1; Figure 7). The disturbed habitat mapped on site consists of dirt roads, and totals approximately 4.5 acres in the project area (Table 4.4.1; Figure 7). As shown in Table 4.4.1, the proposed project would result in 3 2 57.7 acres of vegetation impacts comprised of 34.8 -53_3 acres of Riversidean sage scrub, 0.4 acre of non - native grassland, and 4.0 acres of disturbed habitat (Figure 7). hnpacts to Riversidean sage scrub include approximately 2 4 acres proposed to be impacted for brush management (Table 4.4.1). Approximately 44 -414.0 acres of habitat would be preserved on site. Table 4.4.1 VEGETATION COMMUNITIES ON THE SOUTH SHORE II PROJECT SITE Habitat Impacts ac Brush 1Mana ement Inc) Avoided/ Conserved ac Total ac Riversidean sage scrub 50.99 2.4 4§013.5 66.8 Non- native grassland 0.4 0 0 0.4 Disturbed habitat 4.0 0 0.5 4.5 TOTAL 55.33 2.4 4"14.0 71.7 Sourec: HELIX 2013 Impacts to disturbed habitat and non - native grassland would be less than significant because of the small area of impact. Impacts to Riversidean sage scrub would be considered significant. hnplementation of Mitigation Measure Biology 2 would reduce potential construction- related impacts to Riversidean sage scrub to less than significant levels. MM Biology 2: hnpacts to Riversidean sage scrub shall be mitigated through payment of the MSHCP Local Mitigation Development Fee. The MSHCP Local Mitigation Development Fee in the amount of $1,938 per dwelling unit must be paid at the time a certificate of occupancy is issued for the residential unit or development project or upon final inspection (whichever occurs first). C) No Impact. No federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) occur within the project area. The jurisdictional delineation revealed that no habitat or water features jurisdictional to USACE or CDF W occur within the project area. No impacts to jurisdictional waters would occur. d) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. According to the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Update FIR, there are numerous identified or potential wildlife movement corridors located within the City, especially where development is sparse and open space or ephemeral watercourses are available. In addition, the City provides forage and nesting sites for both locally common and rare birds species and migrating birds covered by the MBTA. The project site has the potential to function as a wildlife corridor. The conserved habitat along the northern and eastern boundaries of the project would allow for continued wildlife movement. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Biology I would ensure that potential impacts to birds protected under the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code are avoided during project construction, and impacts to wildlife corridors would be less than significant. South Shone II (Tentative Tract Map Na. 30567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 24 X SOUTH SHORE II HIELIA A' Figure 7 eomw�is�uu�nno,ne e) No Impact. The City of Lake Elsinore has a palm tree preservation program (City Ordinance 1044); however, no palm trees covered under the ordinance occur on site. The City does not have any other local policies protecting biological resources. Therefore, no impact would occur. f) Less Than Significant Impact. The Western Riverside County MSHCP is a comprehensive, multi - jurisdictional Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) focusing on conservation of species and associated habitats in western Riverside County. The MSHCP serves as a HCP pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, as well as a Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) under the NCCP Act of 2001. The MSHCP will result in a MSHCP Conservation Area in excess of 500,000 acres and focuses on conservation of 145 species. On June 22, 2004, the USFWS approved the Section 10(a)(1)(B) permit and a Natural Community Conservation Planning permit was issued by the CDFW. These permits provide take authorization for those species listed as threatened or endangered and identified in the permits as "Covered Species Adequately Conserved." Take of habitat for bird species is also permitted. The City is a participating entity and permittee of the Western Riverside County MSHCP. The MSHCP establishes "Criteria Area" boundaries in order to facilitate the process by which properties are evaluated for inclusion in the MSHCP Conservation Area. The Criteria Area is an area significantly larger than what may be needed for inclusion in the MSHCP Conservation Area, within which property will be evaluated using MSHCP Conservation Criteria. The Criteria Area is an analytical tool that assists in determining which properties to evaluate for acquisition and conservation under the MSHCP. The proposed project site is located with Subunit 5 (Ramsgate) of the Elsinore Area Plan of the MSHCP. The project site is located within an area that has been previously reviewed with respect to the MSHCP prior to the implementation of the MSHCP. The review was conducted in anticipation of the approval of the MSHCP and to provide the City with the preliminary findings of project consistency with the MSHCP (Sauk Company and HELIX, 2004). The project was found to be consistent with the conservation goals of the MSHCP and no conservation was required on the project site. An application has been submitted under the Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process to confirm this conclusion. The project proposes impacts to 35.257.7 acres of habitat that occurs within MSHCP Criteria Cell 4459 of Cell Group B', the western cell of the two -cell group (Figure 4). The Cell Group criteria state that 70 to 80 percent of the Cell Group is targeted for conservation focusing on the western eastern portion of the Cell Group, which allows for impacts to 20 to 30 percent. As the project would result in impacts to 4-7-18 percent of the western portion of the Cell Group, project design would ensure compliance with the conservation goals of the Cell Group. The proposed project would conserve 44:514.0 acres of land that is contiguous with remaining 1553162 acres of undeveloped land on the central portion of the Cell Group. Moreover, a majority of the eastern portion of the Cell Group would be available to contribute to the MSHCP reserve. h"aOt_Dnect impacts to MSHCP Criteria Cells would be less than significant. The project is a residential development, and as such does not have the potential to cause the release of hazardous materials from accidental conditions because residential uses do not commonly contain or use hazardous materials in sufficient quantities that could cause an accidental release endangering the public During construction construction activities do have the potential to cause release of toxics that could impact the MSHCP Conservation Area To address these potential short-term impacts the project is required to adhere to standard BMPs and stage construction operations as far away from the MSHCP Conservation Area to the maximum extent feasible. The following project design measures would minimize potential indirect impacts and ensure compliance with the MSHCP, including: Soath Shore 11 (Tentative Duct Map No. 36567) Octohet 2014 Initial Study Page 25 • All eject runoff would be treated prior to exiting the site to reduce toxins. • The detention basin proposed within the project footprint would ensure that there is no increase in flows from the project into off -site drainages. • Only native species or non - invasive non- native species would be planted adjacent to conservation areas. • The proposed project has been designed so that no additional take of conserved habitat would be necessary for fuel modification imposes. • Manufactured slopes associated with the proposed site development would not extend into the MSHCP conservation area. The above measures would serve to minimize the adverse effects of the project on conservation configuration and would minimize management challenges that can arise fi-om development located adjacent to conserved habitat. In addition, Mitigation Measure Biology 3 would further minimize potential indirect impacts. MM Biology 3: The following measures shall be undertaken to further minimize potential indirect impacts associated with project construction and operation: • In the event that pre - construction surveys reveal the presence of sensitive species within the project footprint and including a 100 -foot buffer, grading for future development adjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area or proposed Open Space Areas during the nesting season shall include temporary noise barriers that provide at least 10 dBA in attenuation, or other measures shown to similarly minimize noise impacts to sensitive species. Any such barriers shall break the line of sight from noise generators to the Conservation or Open Space area. • Enclosure fences (e.g., wood, tubular steel) shall be installed adjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area and any pen Space areas along with other barriers such as native landscaping. Signs shall be posted at potential access points of the MSHCP Conservation Area and the project Open Space area informing residents of the wildlife habitat value of open space and other language appropriate to minimize unauthorized public access, pet encroaclnnent, domestic animal predation, illegal trespass or dumping (e.g. "no trespassing," pets to be kept on leash," "no clumping" ). • Developer shall not install invasive species listed at Volume 1, Table 6 -2 of the MSHCP. Developer shall provide language in any covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC &Rs) created for the project which states that non - native plants and invasive species specified at Volume I. Table 6 -2 of the MSHHP shall be prohibited within the limits of the project. Table 6 -2 shall be appended to the CC &Rs for reference. • Night lighting shall be directed away from the MSHCP Conservation Area and any proposed Open Space Areas to protect species from direct night lighting. All outdoor lighting shall be uni- directional, fully shielded, and situated to ensure ambient lighting in the MSHCP Conservation Area and Open Space Areas is not increased. Soiali Shore 11 (Tentative Tract Map No. 36567) Ocla6er 2014 Initial Srut�v Page 26 4.5— Cultural Resources Would the project A Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment was prepared by John Minch and Associates, Inc. (JMA) to identify all potentially significant cultural resources within the project study area (2013a; Appendix Q. A Preliminary Paleontological Survey was prepared by JMA to determine if the project would adversely affect paleontological resources (2013b; Appendix D). The cultural and paleontological resources study areas include the project site and land within a one -mile radius of the project boundary. The results and conclusions of these surveys and reports are summarized herein. a) Less Than Significant Impact. Historical background research and a pedestrian survey were conducted as part of the Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment for the project. Historical research was based on published literature in local and regional history and historic maps of the project vicinity. Review of historic maps of the Lake Elsinore area indicated that the project site has historically been comprised of vacant land and is relatively low in sensitivity for cultural resources from the historic period. The Phase I records search indicated that the project property had not been previously surveyed for cultural resources and no historic resources have been previously recorded on site. No properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), California Historical Landmarks (CHL), or California Point of Historical Interest (CPHI) have been recorded within a one -mile radius of the project. Two historic buildings listed on the California State Directory of Properties that have been previously evaluated for historical significance were identified within the cultural resources study area. One is a Colonial Revival house that was constructed in 1926. This property is located approximately 0.75 mile southwest of the project site, and was assigned a California Historic Resources Status Code of 5, "Properties Recognized as Historically Significant by Local Government." The second historic building, located approximately 0.66 mile west of the project's western boundary, is a Mediterranean /Spanish -style, 6,500 -SF residence with equestrian uses constructed in 1930. This property was assigned a California Historic Resource Status Code of 4, "Appears Eligible for National Register (NR) or California Register (CR) through other evaluation." No unrecorded historical resources were identified within the project boundaries. As demonstrated in the Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, no historical resources exist within or adjacent to the project area, and thus the project as currently proposed would not cause a substantial adverse change to South Shore II (Tentative Trac! Vfop No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 27 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the I j significance of a historical resource as El El El defined in Section 15064.5? - to Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource ❑ El ❑ pursuant to Section 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique ❑ El El feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? ❑ ❑ j ❑ A Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment was prepared by John Minch and Associates, Inc. (JMA) to identify all potentially significant cultural resources within the project study area (2013a; Appendix Q. A Preliminary Paleontological Survey was prepared by JMA to determine if the project would adversely affect paleontological resources (2013b; Appendix D). The cultural and paleontological resources study areas include the project site and land within a one -mile radius of the project boundary. The results and conclusions of these surveys and reports are summarized herein. a) Less Than Significant Impact. Historical background research and a pedestrian survey were conducted as part of the Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment for the project. Historical research was based on published literature in local and regional history and historic maps of the project vicinity. Review of historic maps of the Lake Elsinore area indicated that the project site has historically been comprised of vacant land and is relatively low in sensitivity for cultural resources from the historic period. The Phase I records search indicated that the project property had not been previously surveyed for cultural resources and no historic resources have been previously recorded on site. No properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), California Historical Landmarks (CHL), or California Point of Historical Interest (CPHI) have been recorded within a one -mile radius of the project. Two historic buildings listed on the California State Directory of Properties that have been previously evaluated for historical significance were identified within the cultural resources study area. One is a Colonial Revival house that was constructed in 1926. This property is located approximately 0.75 mile southwest of the project site, and was assigned a California Historic Resources Status Code of 5, "Properties Recognized as Historically Significant by Local Government." The second historic building, located approximately 0.66 mile west of the project's western boundary, is a Mediterranean /Spanish -style, 6,500 -SF residence with equestrian uses constructed in 1930. This property was assigned a California Historic Resource Status Code of 4, "Appears Eligible for National Register (NR) or California Register (CR) through other evaluation." No unrecorded historical resources were identified within the project boundaries. As demonstrated in the Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, no historical resources exist within or adjacent to the project area, and thus the project as currently proposed would not cause a substantial adverse change to South Shore II (Tentative Trac! Vfop No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 27 any known historical resources. No further cultural resources investigation is necessary for the proposed project. Therefore, impacts to historic resources would be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. A records search conducted at the Eastern Information Center at the University of California, Riverside, did not identify any prehistoric resources within the project site. No prehistoric resources were identified during the field study conducted at the project site. Outside of the project study area, a total of 13 cultural resources studies have been conducted within a one -mile radius, covering approximately 75 percent of the surrounding area. four archaeological sites have been documented within a one -mile radius of the project site. These sites include: • Three man -made rock piles and two pits, with artifacts including flakes, a hammerstone, and a scraper; • A loge lithic scatter originally considered to be associated with a quarry site with artifacts including producing tool blanks or percussion tools, but further identified as the result of the decomposition of the naturally occurring shale and slate that cover the ridge top near which the site is located; • A second lithic scatter also identified to be the result of naturally decomposing slate; and • A concentration of over 140 soldered -dot cans, 4 glass bottle bases, 3 bottle rims, and one porcelain saucer fragment located within an area measuring 38 by 8 feet, and believed to post date 1945. A search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File indicated that no sacred Native American sites have been recorded within the project site; however, there are Native American cultural sites that have been identified on the land adjacent to the project site. In order to learn more about the potential archaeological sensitivity of the project site, letters of inquiry were sent to 14 Native American individuals and groups from the consultation list provided by the NAHC for the project. The three responses received to date were from the Pechanga Band of Luiseho Indians, Rincon Band of Luisefio Indians, and Soboba Band of Luisefio Indians. The Pechanga Band indicated that the project site is within a sensitive region of Luiseflo territory containing multiple villages and a Traditional Cultural Property, and is located less than three miles from Pechanga Reservation lands. The Pechanga Band has requested (1) notification of the start of the entitlement process; (2) copies of all archaeological reports, site records, proposed grading plans, and environmental documents; (3) consultation with the City (including regarding the treatment and disposition of artifacts, if found); and (4) monitoring by a Riverside County qualified archaeologist and a professional Pechanga Tribe monitor during earthmoving activities. The Rincon Band noted that the project site is not located within Rincon's historic boundaries, and recommends consultation with the Pechanga and Soboba Bands of Luisefto Indians who are closer to the project site. They also recommend a Native American monitor be present during any and all ground disturbing activities. The Soboba Band indicated that the project site is located within the boundary of the Luiseno Tribal Traditional Use Areas. The Soboba Band requested (1) additional consultation; (2) information regarding the progress of the project; (3) inclusion of Native American monitor(s) during ground disturbance, including surveys and archaeological testing; and (4) that proper procedures detailed in the letter are taken to honor the Tribe's requests. Sowh Shore 77 (Tentative Traci Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 28 According to the findings of the Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, the chance of finding an unknown archaeological resource on site is unlikely; however, the following mitigation measures would be implemented to ensure that impacts to unknown archaeological resources would be less than significant: MM Cultural 1: 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 identify any unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation. MM Cultural 2: At least 30 days prior to seeking a grading permit„ the project applicant shall contact the appropriate i Native American Tribal Representative (Representative) to notify the Representative of the intention to pull permits which signifies the initiation of grading, excavation and the monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Lake Elsinore and the Representative to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the 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 3: 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 with the agreement required in MM Cultural 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 groundbreaking activities, and shall also have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities in consultation with the project archaeologist. MM Cultural 4: The landowner or its authorized representative shall agree to return all cultural resources, including Native American ceremonial and cultural artifacts, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project site to the Appropriate Tribe for proper treatment and disposition. The landowner or its authorized representative shall agree to waive any and all claims to ownership of Native American ceremonial and cultural artifacts that may be found on the project site within a reasonable time period agreed to by the parties involved, not to exceed 30 days from the initial recovery of items. MM Cultural 5: All sacred sites, should they be encountered within the project area, shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation, if feasible. C) No Impact. As identified on the Geologic Map of Lake Elsinore 7.5- minute Quadrangle, Riverside County, California (Morton and Webber 2003), the property is underlain by metasedimentary and granitic rocks that are part of the granitic /metamorphic basement complex of the Peninsular Ranges. The granitic rocks consist of hornblende gabbro and granodiorite. The metasedimentary rocks consist of mostly slate and phyllite that were recrystallized and deformed by the intrusion of granitic rocks. These formations are non- fossiliferous and have no potential to contain paleontological resources. A small patch of sedimentary rocks on the project site is mapped as Qog. These Older Quaternary Alluvium and Older Terrace Deposits are considered to have a low potential for the discovery of paleontological resources as they are too young geologically to contain significant fossils. South Shore ti ('Tentative Tract 21'fap No. 36567) October 2074 Initial Study Page 29 A field survey of the project site was conducted by JMA in June 2013. The walkover and inspection of exposures on the project site did not result in the discovery of any fossils on the site. No published fossil localities are known to exist on the project site. As such, no impacts to paleontological resources would occur. d) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The project is not located on or adjacent to a known formal or informal cemetery. No impacts to human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries are anticipated. In the unlikely event that unknown human remains are uncovered during project construction, the following mitigation measure, pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, would ensure that the project's impacts would be less than significant. MM Cultural 6: In the event that human remains are encountered during the course of the project, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur at the location of the find until the Riverside County Coroner has been notified and made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5079.98, 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 County Coroner determines the remains to be prep s °:cNative American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which shall aid identify the person or persons it believes to be the a "Most Likely Descendant._ (n —fLD). The P461) ,.hall ,. .. plete inspection of the find within no hour of notification by the N PC- The Most Likely Descendant rnay then make recommendations, and engage in consultations concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98. Implementation of this mitigation measure, in addition to Mitigation Measures Cultural 1 through Cultural 5, would ensure that impacts to buried remains would be less than significant. Smith Shore 11 (Tentative D-act Map No. 36567) Octoher 2014 Initial Studv Page 30 4.6 — Geology and Soils Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Lnpact Incorporation Impact Impact a) Expose people or structures to potential j substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i Ru p earthquake Rapture of a known eat i i delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the i State Geologist for the area or based on other El ❑ El evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42 ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? i El ❑ ❑ l iii) Seismic- related round failure, inclu ding g � liquefaction? ❑ ❑ i ❑ iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ❑ -- - -- c) -- -..._. ------ ---- Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is _ ------ -- ---- -- unstable, or that would become unstable as a j result of the project, and potentially result in El F-1 Lie El on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d Be located on expansive � e soil, as defined in I Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or ❑ ❑ 7� ❑ property? 1 -- e) -- --- - - --- Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or I I alternative waste water disposal systems sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? This section is based on the geotechnical evaluation prepared for the proposed project by GeoTek, Inc. (2013a), included as Appendix E. This evaluation included field exploration and sample collection, laboratory testing, and aerial photograph and literature review. The results and conclusions of the geotechnical evaluation are summarized herein. a.i) Less Than Significant Impact. The geologic structure of the entire southern California area is dominated mainly by northwest- trending faults associated with the San Andreas system. While the project site South Share 11(Tenlative Tract,lap No. 36567) October 3014 Initial Study Page 31 is located in seismically active region, it is not located within an Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones or Special Studies Zone. No County of Riverside designated fault or fault zones have been designated or are known to exist on the site. No active or potentially active fault is known to exist at this site or in the immediate vicinity. The closest known fault, the Elsinore fault zone, is located several miles west of the project site. Therefore, the potential for a rupture of a known earthquake fault impacting the proposed project site is less than significant. a.ii) Less Than Significant Impact. As with most of the southern California region, the project site may be subject to strong seismic ground shaking. Ground shaking can vary greatly due to the variation in earth properties. While the closest known fault, the Elsinore fault zone, is located several miles west of the project site, an earthquake along active fault zones could result in severe ground shaking and consequently cause injury and /or property damage in the project vicinity. This could potentially result in significant impacts to the proposed residential development. The project design, however, would incorporate applicable measures and guidelines from the International Building Code (IBC; International Conference of Building Officials 2012) and California Building Code (CBC; California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2) in preparation of the final grading plan, erosion control plan, and final geotechnical report, as applicable. These regulations are designed to ensure the safety of newly constructed structures and alterations to existing structures, as well as protect building occupants and limit the damage sustained by buildings during seismic events. The referenced guidelines, while not comprising formal regulatory requirements per se, are widely accepted by regulatory authorities and are regularly included in related standards such as municipal building and grading codes. Use of these requirements is further supported by policies in the General Plan. Application of these codes and policies would ensure that impacts to residential development due to strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant. a.iii) Less Than Significant Impact. Liquefaction is a phenomenon that occurs when soil undergoes transformation from a solid state to a liquefied condition due to the effects of increased pore -water pressure. This typically occurs where susceptible soils (particularly the medium sand to silt range) are located over a high groundwater table. Affected soils lose all strength during liquefaction and foundation failure can occur. According to the geotechnical evaluation prepared for the project, the potential for liquefaction and associated settlement on the project site is considered low since on -site undocumented fill soils, alluvium, and colluvium would be removed or recompacted, and the underlying materials are relatively dense (GeoTek 2013a). Additionally, the groundwater depth within the project site and vicinity is expected to be well over 100 feet below natural ground surface elevations. Impacts associated with liquefaction would be less than significant. a.iv) Less than Significant Impact. Evidence of ancient landslides or slope instabilities within the vicinity of the project site were not documented as part of the project geotechnical assessment (GeoTek 2013a). Additionally, given the absence of active faults in the project area, the potential for seismically induced landslides is low. While no landslides have been identified on the project site, near surface slope instabilities may occur. Implementation of existing CBC and City practices and policies related to landslides during the environmental review process would assure that appropriate design measures are incorporated where necessary. Implementation of these existing regulations and policies would ensure that potential landslide impacts would be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. During construction, there is the potential to expose surfrcial soils and alluvium on site to wind and water erosion due to the looseness of the soils and lack of soil cohesion. Wind erosion is required to be minimized through soil stabilization measures required by SCAQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), such as daily watering. This would include implementation of Mitigation Measure Air Quality - 1, described in Section 4.3.b, above. Water erosion would be prevented through the City's standard erosion control practices required pursuant to the CBC and the NPDES, such as silt South Shore 11 (Centative Traci Map No 36567) October 2014 /nitial Study Page 32 fencing or sandbags. Impacts related to soil erosion would be Tess than significant with implementation of existing regulations and project mitigation measures. C) Less Than Significant Impact. Impacts related to liquefaction and landslides are discussed above in Section 4.6.a. Lateral spreading is the downslope movement of surface sediment due to liquefaction in a subsurface layer. The downslope movement is due to gravity and earthquake shaking combined. Such movement can occur on slope gradients of as little as one degree. Lateral spreading typically damages pipelines, utilities, bridges, and structures. As the potential for liquefaction on site would be low, impacts related to lateral spreading would be less than significant. As discussed in Section 4.6.a.iii, the project would be subject to less than significant impacts from liquefaction and other settlement hazards due to the requirement for geotechnical engineering and soils reports for future development. The project geotechnical evaluation notes that while the County has designated a portion of the project site as being susceptible to subsidence, the susceptibility to subsidence is an issue that affects large regions within Riverside County and no site specific designation constraints are generally imposed by this designation. The project site is almost entirely underlain by hard bedrock, and all "soft' sediments are recommended to be completely removed as part of remedial site earthwork. The project would incorporate standard engineering techniques, as appropriate, to guard against seismic - related hazards. The potential for impacts from subsidence is less than significant. d) Less Than Significant Impact. Expansive soils are generally high in clays or silts that shrink or swell with variation in moisture. Expansive (or shrink- swell) behavior is attributable to the water - holding capacity of clay minerals and can adversely affect the structural integrity of facilities including underground pipelines. According to the geotechnical analysis prepared for the project (GeoTek 2013a), the project site is characterized by metasedimentary and granitic bedrock covered with a variable thickness layer of colluvial and /or alluvial materials. The majority of on -site soils are classified as very low or low expansive soils. Accordingly, substantial risks to life or property resulting from expansive soils are not anticipated and impacts would be less than significant. e) Less Than Significant Impact. The City has been developed with urban uses for many years, and a sewer system has been integrated into the infrastructure of much of the City. The proposed project would connect to the sewer system proposed to be constructed by the Spyglass Ranch project and therefore would not require an alternative wastewater disposal system. No impact would occur. South Shore H ('Tentative Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 33 4.7— Greenhouse Gas Emissions This section is based on the Air Quality and GHG Impact Analyses report prepared for the proposed project by Giroux & Associates (2013a), included as Appendix A. The project's construction and operational emissions were calculated using the CalEEMod20I3.2 computer model. The results and conclusions of the report and calculations relative to GHG emissions are summarized herein. a) Less Than Significant Impact. Global climate change refers to changes in average climatic conditions on Earth as a whole. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) contribute to an increase in the temperature of the earth's atmosphere by allowing solar radiation (sunlight) into the Earth's atmosphere, but preventing radiative heat from escaping. The principal GHGs include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N,O), ozone, and water vapor. For purposes of planning and regulation, Section 15364.5 of the California Code of Regulations defines GHGs to include CO,, C114, N20, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride (SF,). GHGs are emitted by both natural processes and human activities. Fossil fuel consumption in the transportation sector (on -road motor vehicles, off - highway mobile sources, and aircraft) is the single largest source of GHG emissions, accounting for approximately half of GHG emissions globally. Industrial and commercial sources are the second largest contributors of GHG emissions with about one - fourth of total emissions. Emissions of GHGs in excess of natural ambient concentrations are thought to be responsible for the enhancement of the greenhouse effect and contributing to what is termed "global warming," the trend of warming of the Earth's climate from anthropogenic activities. SCAQMD established a working group to develop an interim significance threshold for GHG emissions under CEQA. On December 5, 2008 the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted an interim quantitative GHG significance threshold for industrial projects (where SCAQMD is the lead agency; e.g., stationary source permit projects, rules, plans, etc.) of 10,000 Metric Tons (MT) COz equivalent (CO20 emissions per year. In September 2010, the Working Group released revisions, which recommended a threshold of 3,500 MT CO,e for residential projects. This 37500 MT per year recommendation is used as a guideline for this analysis. This threshold is used for both short- and long -term project - related GHG emissions, which are analyzed below. Short -terra Construction Activity GHG Emissions Greenhouse gas emissions would be released by equipment used for demolition, grading, paving, and other building construction activities. GHG emissions also would result from worker and vendor trips to and from project sites and from demolition and soil hauling trips. Construction activities are short -term and cease to emit The effect each GiIG has on climate change is measured as a combination of the volume of its emissions, and its global warming potential. The global warming potential is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere, and is expressed as a function of how much warming would be caused by the same mass of COc. For instance, CH, has a global warming potential of 21, meaning that] gram of CI -h traps the same amount of heat as 21 grans of COz. South Shore II ("Tentative D act klap No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Fage 34 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No a... .a Impact _. Incorporation --- Impact Imps Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a 0 El significant impact on the environment? - b Conflict applicable plan, policy or adopted or the purpose regulation adopted f p p se of � � I nt reducing ions of greenhouse gases? ( This section is based on the Air Quality and GHG Impact Analyses report prepared for the proposed project by Giroux & Associates (2013a), included as Appendix A. The project's construction and operational emissions were calculated using the CalEEMod20I3.2 computer model. The results and conclusions of the report and calculations relative to GHG emissions are summarized herein. a) Less Than Significant Impact. Global climate change refers to changes in average climatic conditions on Earth as a whole. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) contribute to an increase in the temperature of the earth's atmosphere by allowing solar radiation (sunlight) into the Earth's atmosphere, but preventing radiative heat from escaping. The principal GHGs include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N,O), ozone, and water vapor. For purposes of planning and regulation, Section 15364.5 of the California Code of Regulations defines GHGs to include CO,, C114, N20, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride (SF,). GHGs are emitted by both natural processes and human activities. Fossil fuel consumption in the transportation sector (on -road motor vehicles, off - highway mobile sources, and aircraft) is the single largest source of GHG emissions, accounting for approximately half of GHG emissions globally. Industrial and commercial sources are the second largest contributors of GHG emissions with about one - fourth of total emissions. Emissions of GHGs in excess of natural ambient concentrations are thought to be responsible for the enhancement of the greenhouse effect and contributing to what is termed "global warming," the trend of warming of the Earth's climate from anthropogenic activities. SCAQMD established a working group to develop an interim significance threshold for GHG emissions under CEQA. On December 5, 2008 the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted an interim quantitative GHG significance threshold for industrial projects (where SCAQMD is the lead agency; e.g., stationary source permit projects, rules, plans, etc.) of 10,000 Metric Tons (MT) COz equivalent (CO20 emissions per year. In September 2010, the Working Group released revisions, which recommended a threshold of 3,500 MT CO,e for residential projects. This 37500 MT per year recommendation is used as a guideline for this analysis. This threshold is used for both short- and long -term project - related GHG emissions, which are analyzed below. Short -terra Construction Activity GHG Emissions Greenhouse gas emissions would be released by equipment used for demolition, grading, paving, and other building construction activities. GHG emissions also would result from worker and vendor trips to and from project sites and from demolition and soil hauling trips. Construction activities are short -term and cease to emit The effect each GiIG has on climate change is measured as a combination of the volume of its emissions, and its global warming potential. The global warming potential is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere, and is expressed as a function of how much warming would be caused by the same mass of COc. For instance, CH, has a global warming potential of 21, meaning that] gram of CI -h traps the same amount of heat as 21 grans of COz. South Shore II ("Tentative D act klap No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Fage 34 GHGs upon completion, unlike operational emissions that are continuous year after year until operation of the use ceases. Because of this difference, SCAQMD recommends in its draft threshold to amortize construction emissions over a 30 -year operational lifetime. This normalizes construction emissions so that they can be grouped with operational emissions in order to generate a precise project GHG inventory. A construction period of slightly less than four years was used for the CalEEMod calculations of GHG emissions relative to project construction activities. Approximately 1,570.1 MT COze would be emitted over the four -year construction period, as shown in Table 4.7.1, below. The amortized COZC emissions would be 52.3 MT per year. Table 4.7.1 CONSTRUCTION GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Year COZe Emissions (MT) 2015 549.5 2016 430.0 2017 421.0 2018 170.5 TOTAL 1,570.1 Amortized 52.3 Source: Giroux & Associates 2013a Long -term Operational GHG Emissions Once the proposed project is constructed, continuous GHG emissions would result from mobile, area, and other operational sources. Area sources, including architectural coating, consumer products, fireplaces, landscaping, and other sources, would result primarily in emissions of CO2. Energy utilization (i.e., electricity and natural gas) and water consumption also would result primarily in emissions of CO,. Mobile sources, including vehicle trips to and from the project site, would result primarily in emissions of CO,, with minor emissions of CH4 and N20. Disposal of solid waste would result in emissions of CH4 from the decomposition of waste at landfills, coupled with COz emission from the handling and transport of solid waste. These sources combine to define the long -term GHG emissions for the project. The total operational and annualized construction emissions are identified in Table 4.7.2, below. South Shone 11 (Tentative 7i-act Map Na. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 35 Table 4.7.2 OPERATIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Consumption Source COZe Emissions (MTkeac Area Sources 34.5 Ener gy Utilization 590.8 Mobile Source 1,971.4 Solid Waste Generation 78.3 Water Consumption 67.0 Annualized Construction 52.3 TOTAL 2,794.3 Sign once Threshold 3,500 Source: Giroux & Associates 2013a Total annual project GHG emissions would be approximately 2,794.3 MT per year, less than the significance threshold of 3,500 MT. GHG emissions impacts for the proposed project would be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The City has adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) that identifies the City's baseline and forecasted GHG emissions and provides GHG emission reduction strategies and measures to reduce the City's proportionate share of statewide emission reduction targets identified in Assembly Bill (AB) 32 and Executive Order S -3 -05. The CAP incorporates all the applicable GHG plans, programs and policies; as such, project consistency with the CAP would ensure consistency with all applicable state and local GHG emissions reduction requirements. The CAP identifies a combination of state -level regulations and local strategies and measures in the focus areas of Transportation and Land Use, Energy, Solid Waste, and Public Education and Outreach. Each focus area includes emissions reduction strategies with a series of implementation measures. Measures define the programs, policies, and projects that the City will implement to accomplish its reduction targets. Each measure is presented with its GHG emissions reduction potential, performance criteria to track progress, and estimated implementation costs and savings. The CAP is not intended to be a mechanism to limit planned growth, but rather to minimize the carbon footprint of that growth through reasonably available control measures. CAP consistency is evaluated for an individual project based on the following criteria: 1. Is the project consistent with the General Plan land use designation? 2. Is the project consistent with the General Plan population and employment projections for the site, upon which the CAP modeling is based? 3. Does the project incorporate the applicable CAP measures as binding and enforceable components of the project? Until these measures have been formally adopted by the City and incorporated in to applicable codes, the requirements must be incorporated as mitigation measures applicable to the project (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15183.5(b)(2)). The General Plan land use designation for the proposed project site is Low - Medium Density Residential, which allows for a density of between I to 6 dwelling units per acre. The project proposes 147 single - family detached residential units to be constructed on approximately 44 acres of the site, or approximately 3.3 dwelling units per South Shore H (Tentative Tract A4op No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 36 acre, which would be within the density allowance of the designated land use. Land use consistency is further detailed in Section 4.10.b, below. The following measures, adapted from the GHG emission reduction strategies provided in the CAP Implementation Plan, would be incorporated into project design to achieve consistency with the CAP: MM GHG 1: The project shall provide pedestrian infrastructure, including sidewalks along new streets, that provides connections to existing and /or proposed adjacent uses. MM GHG 2: The project shall provide connectivity to area-wide bikeway networks. MM GHG 3: The project shall provide 15- gallon non - deciduous, umbrella -form trees in strategic locations around buildings, as shade for parking lot and street pavement, and on landscaped slopes or at the future park site. Trees shall be planted one per 30 linear feet of boundary length near buildings pursuant to Measure E 1 1 of the City's Climate Action Plan. MM GHG 4: The prejee0eveloper shall use its best efforts to requireeet+s+F 4 new homes constructed within the project to exceed the 2013 California Building Energy Efficiency Standards requirements by a minimum of 45 percent, based an the 2009 Energy 944sien y Standards �" gp.,,'' . MM GHG 5: The project shall comply with the City's Uniform Building Code requirements to reduce indoor water consumption by 30 percent from the existing default baseline. MM GHG 6: Electrical outlets will be installed on the exterior walls of all residential buildings to promote the use of electric landscape maintenance equipment. MM GHG 7: Electrical outlets will also be installed in all garages and at or adjacent to carports to facilitate and encourage the charging of electric vehicles. With incorporation of these measures into project design, the proposed project would be consistent with the CAP, and thus would not conflict with applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted to reduce GHG emissions. A less than significant impact would occur. South Shore 11(hntative Tract yUap No. 36567) October 2014 hfitial Sludy Page 37 4.8— Hazards and Hazardous Materials c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle - hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, - substances, or waste within one - quarter mile ❑ ❑ ❑ of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a ! list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section i 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a '.. ❑ ❑ ❑ significant hazard to the public or the j environment? e) For a project located within an airport land Less Thin use plan or, where such a plan has not been Potentially Significant with Less Than adopted, within two miles of a public airport Significant Mitigation Significant No or public use airport, would the project result _ Impact Incorporation _._.. Impact Impact significant hazard a) Create asign.... to the public or � the environment through the routine '� transport, use, or disposal of hazardous ❑ ❑ ❑ materials? _ i b) Create significant hazard to the public or El E] ❑ the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions ❑ ( ❑ ❑ involving the release of hazardous materials t ❑ ❑ Se ❑ into the environment? _ c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle - hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, - substances, or waste within one - quarter mile ❑ ❑ ❑ of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a ! list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section i 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a '.. ❑ ❑ ❑ significant hazard to the public or the j environment? e) For a project located within an airport land j use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result _ ❑ ❑ ❑ in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? t) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety _ hazard for people residing or working in the t El E] ❑ project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency ❑ ❑ Se ❑ response plan or emergency evacuation plan9 l h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are ❑ ❑ ❑ adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was prepared for the proposed project by GeoTek (2013b) to identify and evaluate actual and potential environmental conditions within the project site and vicinity. The assessment included site reconnaissance, review of geologic and hydrogeologic settings, an environmental database search to identify documented "hazardous waste" facilities within 0.5 to I mile of the project site Soaah Shore ll (Tentative 1 ract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 38 (depending on the search), and a review of historical records to assess historical land use and indications of potential contamination or sources of contamination within the project site. The results and conclusions of the assessment are summarized herein. a) Less Than Significant Impact. Residential development is not expected to require the manufacturing, use, transportation, disposal, or storage of dangerous quantities of hazardous materials. Residential uses do not generate hazardous wastes or emissions, except for very small quantities of typical household cleaning agents, automotive maintenance products, paints, pesticides, and herbicides. No hazardous wastes or emissions would off site, and would not require the use, transport, or storage of hazardous materials. The proposed project would not conflict with any hazardous materials regulations or create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. During construction, the proposed project would involve the use and /or generation of materials including fuels (gasoline and diesel), equipment fluids (oils and antifreeze), concrete, cleaning solutions, solvents, adhesives, human waste, and chemical toilets within the construction site, on an as- needed basis. In addition, workers would commute to and from the project site via private vehicles, and would operate construction vehicles and equipment within the project site. While the potential exists for indirect impacts to human health and biological resources from accidental spills of small amounts of hazardous materials, the proposed project would follow existing federal and state standards that regulate the handling, storage and transport of these materials and a less than significant impact would occur. b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project is located adjacent to proposed residential development that could be impacted by a hazardous material spill or release during project construction, creating a potential hazard to people and the environment. As discussed below in Section 4.9.a, however, the proposed project would comply with state and local NPDES regulations, which would ensure that necessary BMPs and best available technology would be developed and implemented to reduce or eliminate this potential hazard. Mitigation Measure Hazards 1 would ensure that potential impacts from the potential accidental release of hazardous materials would be less than significant. MM Hazards 1: All spills or leakage of petroleum products during construction activities shall immediately be contained, the hazardous material identified, and the material remediated in compliance with applicable state and local regulation regarding cleanup and disposal of the contaminant released. The contaminated waste shall be collected and disposed of at an appropriately licensed disposal or treatment facility. C) No Impact. The proposed project consists of residential development located at least a mile from any existing or proposed schools. As a result, no impact related to handling or emissions of hazardous materials near a school would occur. d) No Impact. According to the records and database searches conducted as part of the Phase I ESA, no listed sites that would result in significant hazard to the public or the environment are located within the project site or vicinity. The former Elsinore Sanitary Landfill, located adjacent to the southeast side of the project site, operated from 1953 to 1971 as a city operated burn dump, at which time the site was converted to a County operated disposal area and was permitted to receive class three wastes. The landfill is reported to have received and disposed of approximately 1. 10 million tons of refuse. The site stopped accepting waste on October 31, 1986. Closure construction, including the final cap, was completed in November of 1992. A gas collection system was completed in 1993, and final closure certification was completed in 1994. According to a report by the County of Riverside Waste Management Department (2012), contamination of groundwater was not detected above the established limits, except for downgradient of the landfill in one monitoring well location, where a substance called Dichlorobenzene was detected. Additionally, there was a South Shore It (Tentative Tract Afap No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 39 500- gallon diesel tank located along the west side of the former Elsinore Sanitary Landfill site that was removed on February 6, 1991. Some evidence of surface spillage was found around the tank, but the contaminated soils were "approved" and used within the foundation layer portion of the closure cap for the landfill. Based on the location of this landfill (down groundwater gradient) from the project site, and the limited nature of the reported contamination, this landfill is not considered a concern to the project site. No impact would occur. e) No Impact. The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or within 1wa-2 miles of a public airport. The nearest public airports are Perris Valley Airport located approximately 7 miles to the northeast, Hemet -Ryan Airport located approximately 12 miles to the east, and French Valley Airport located approximately 12 miles to the southeast. No impact would result from any public airport. f) No Impact. The proposed project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. The nearest private airstrip, Skylark Field, is located approximately three miles from the project site. No impact would result from any private airstrip. g) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not change or interfere with the emergency response plans of the City and the project components do not propose any alteration to vehicle circulation routes that could interfere with such plans. No impact would occur. h) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. A large portion of the City, including the project site, is located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) pursuant to the latest maps prepared by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE). The site and surrounding areas support vegetation that serves as a prime fuel source for wildfire, and the wildfire susceptibility in this area is defined as very high. The steep terrain in these areas also contributes to rapid spread of wildfire, when one occurs. Development of adjacent property with residential, commercial or light industrial uses, however, would eliminate the natural areas adjacent to the proposed project in those areas. The proposed project would have primary and secondary fire access to the proposed Elsinore Hills Road via Street "C" and Street "D" through the adjacent Spyglass Ranch residential development (Tract 35337), which would ultimately connect to I -15 via Camino Del Norte and Main Street (Figure 8). These roadways would provide adequate access and evacuation routes in the event of wildland fire. Until such time as the surrounding areas are developed, Mitigation Measure Hazards 2 would reduce impacts from potential fire hazards to the proposed structures and inhabitants, as identified in the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan, to less than significant levels. MM Hazards 2: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall comply with the following • The project applicant shall participate in the Development hnpact Fee program, as adopted by the City of Lake Elsinore, to the extent applicable. • All water mains and fire hydrants shall be constructed in accordance with Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 and /or No. 787.1. The project shall provide an alternate or secondary access. Before combustible materials are brought to the site, the applicant shall provide two points of access acceptable to the Riverside County Fire Department. In addition to implementation of the above measure, the project would comply with CBC requirements for fire protection in areas prone to wildfires, in particular Section 701A that requires construction with fire resistant materials and methods to minimize property damage. Fire protection services would also continue to be provided for residences in Gitvof the development and is further discussed in Section 4.14. With the implementation of existing building code requirements and adequate fire protection services, impacts from wildfire on the proposed residential development and its inhabitants would be less than significant. Sorah Shore 11 (Tentative Tract Alap No. 36567) October 2014 In7tlal JYudy Page 40 1 �1 41 =4 vl of NI wl NTS Kunzman HELI Inc 2013 i i © = Intersection Reference Number ect Area Roadways SOUTH SHORE II r 1 / ` I I f t I � � 1 reet "C• Ir • r - - -�� Site ; et °D °-- ._..i—-- --- r - - - -� NTS Kunzman HELI Inc 2013 i i © = Intersection Reference Number ect Area Roadways SOUTH SHORE II 4.9— Hydrology and Water Quality Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies _ or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the ❑ ❑ ❑ production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not I support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c Substantially alter the existing drainage Substantial] t including pattern of th e site or area, g through � the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in ❑ ❑ ❑ substantial erosion or siltation on- or off - site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or ❑ ❑ ❑ amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which i !! would exceed the capacity of existing of I planned stormwater drainage systems or ❑ ❑ ❑ provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard j area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard ! Boundary or Flood insurance Rate Map or - ❑ j ❑ ❑ other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area i structures which would impede or redirect ❑ ❑ i ❑ flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant f risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the '.. El El El failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seichc, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ South Shore 11 (I entative Duct Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 41 This section is based on a Preliminary Hydrology Study and Preliminary Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan prepared by K &A Engineering, Inc. (2013a and 20136; Appendix G and H, respectively). The results and conclusions of these documents are summarized herein. a) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project site is located within the San Jacinto River Basin Sub - Watershed of the Santa Ana River Watershed. The site currently is undeveloped with three major drainages that generally flow from northeast to southwest. Section 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S. Code 1250, et seq., at 1313(d)) requires states to identify and list waters that do not meet water quality standards after applying certain required technology -based effluent limits (impaired water bodies). The list is known as the Section 303(d) list of impaired waters. The proposed project is an indirect tributary to 303(d) listed water bodies, as shown in Table 4.9.1. Receiving waters that the project site is tributary to are shown in order from upstream to downstream. Table 4.9.1 RECEIVING WATERS AND 303(d) IMPAIRMENTS Receiving Waters USEPA Approved Designated Beneficial Uses Proximity to RARE i 303 d List Im Impairments �: Beneficial Use Lake Elsinore Nutrients, Unknown REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD Not a RARE water Toxicity, PCBs body San Jacinto River None Intermittent -MUN, AGR, Not a RARE water Reaches 1 -4 GWR, RECI, REC2, WARM, body WILD Temescal Creek None RECI, REC2, WARM, 17 miles Intermittent -ARG, RARE, GWR, WARM Santa Ana River Reach 3 Pathogens ARG, GWR, RECI, REC2, 18 miles WARM, WILD, RARE, SPWN Notes: Contact Water Recreation (RECD: Includes water used for recreational activities involving body contact with water where ingestion of water is reasonably possible. Specific uses may include swimming, waterskiing, skin diving, scuba diving, surfing and fishing. Nan - contact Water Recreation (REC -2): Includes water used for recreational activities with proximity to water but typically no body contact, where ingestion of water is reasonably possible. Specific uses may include picnicking, sunbathing, hiking, beachcombing, camping, boating and hunting. Warm Freshwater Habitat (WARM): Includes uses of water that support warn water ecosystems, including the preservation or enhancement of aquatic habitats, fish and wildlife. Wildlife Habitat (WILD): Includes uses of water that support terrestrial ecosystems, including the preservation or enhancement of terrestrial habitats, wildlife and related food /water sources. Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species (RARE.): Includes habitats necessary, at least in part, for the survival and successfid maintenance of plant and animal species established nuclei- state or federal law as rare, threatened, or endangered. Spawning, Reproduction and/or Early Development (SPPVN): Includes waters that support high quality habitats used for fish reproduction and /or early development. Municipal and Domestic Supply (bfUN): includes uses of water for community, milikny, or individual water supply systems including, but not limited to, drinking water supply. Agricultural Supply (AGR): Includes uses of water for farming horticulture, or ranching including, but not limited to, irrigation, stock watering, or support of vegetation for range grazing. Ground Water Recharge (GWR): Includes uses of water for natural or artificial recharge of ground water for purposes of future extraction, maintenance of water quality, or halting of saltwater intrusion into ficshwater aquifers. Source: K &A 20136 South Shore II (Tentative tract Nlop No 35567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 42 Project water quality treatment and conveyance is to be provided in accordance with NPDES requirements to be implemented per the RWQCB standards and guidelines for the Santa Ana Watershed. The proposed project also would be subject to the State's General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activities and would be required to comply with conditions for new development that are identified through the City of Lake Elsinore and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District's implementation of their Municipal Separate Storinwater Sewer System (MS4) Permit. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) that includes construction BMPs would be prepared prior to construction in order to minimize potential impacts to water quality during construction. A Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan has been prepared for the project that details how the proposed project would comply with these regulations during operation. Post - construction BMPs are included for compliance with the state and local regulations, as detailed below. The pollutants of concern for the proposed project are sediment, nutrients, trash and debris, oxygen demanding substances, bacteria and viruses, oil and grease, and pesticides. Since one of the waterways that the project would contribute to, Santa Ana River Reach 3, is on the 303(d) list for pathogens, bacteria and viruses are of highest concern. The following source control BMPs world be used to address these potential pollutants: water quality education, activity restrictions (car washing and maintenance prohibited on site), irrigation system and landscape maintenance and design, common area litter control, irrigation system and landscape management. common area litter control, MS4 stenciling and signage, street sweeping, drainage facility inspection and maintenance, efficient irrigation, and protection of slopes and channels (revegetation). Treatment control BMPs include extended detention basin with underground filtration devices. The HOA would fund and maintain the BMPs. Construction and post - construction BMPs that are developed and implemented by the project in compliance with state and local regulations would effectively reduce any adverse impacts to water quality to levels that are considered to be less than significant. Therefore, the potential impacts to beneficial uses indicated in Table 4.9.1 would also be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact. If the project removed an existing groundwater recharge area or substantially reduced runoff that results in groundwater recharge, a potentially significant impact could occur. The proposed project is not anticipated to substantially interfere with groundwater recharge, because project storm water run -off in excess of existing conditions would be directed to the proposed detention basin where the water would percolate into the ground, thereby recharging subsurface aquifers. The proposed project does not include the construction of wells or other activities that would deplete groundwater supplies. Impacts related to groundwater recharge and depletion would be less than significant. C) Less Than Significant Impact. The hillside terrain and natural drainage patterns were considered in developing the project design. The majority of 24 acres surrounding the single - family units would be preserved as natural open spaces. Grading and drainage design of the project site have been developed to maintain the natural discharge patterns as much as practical. An extended detention basin would be constructed at the downstream end of the on -site drainage system as a structural BMP to treat stormwater prior to discharge off site. A SWPPP would be prepared for the project that would include erosion and siltation reduction measures would be required during construction in order to demonstrate compliance with the City's NPDES permit. The project would include construction and operational BMPs based on the City's General Plan Update policies and NPDES requirements, to address and reduce impacts of potential erosion. With the implementation of these existing regulations and practices, impacts to drainage patterns and erosion would be less than significant. d -e) Less Than Significant Impact. The soil type for the majority of the project site has a high runoff potential, designated by the U.S. Soils Conservation Service as Soil Groups C and D. These areas are characterized as having a low capacity to transmit water, thereby resulting in a slow to very slow rate of infiltration, and a relatively high volume of runoff. The existing on -site terrain is mountainous with significant hill and valley formations. Storm runoff from the site takes several different local paths from the project site prior to reaching Lake Elsinore, the ultimate discharge point. Well- defined ridgeline formations divide the site South Shore O (1'errtative Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 43 into distinct drainage areas that create flow paths primarily in a southerly direction. There are three substantial natural flowlines that outlet across the south boundary of the project. The proposed project would develop approximately 44 acres of the project site with single- family homes. The project proposes to construct an approximately 1.2 -acre extended detention basin with an overall volume capacity of about 40,000 cubic feet in the southwestern corner of the project site to capture and convey storm water runoff from the proposed development (Figure 4). The project's mainline storm drain system, located within project roadways, would direct runoff from the developed areas of the project to the detention basin via a system of drainage pipes located throughout the development. The proposed storm drain system has been designed to adequately capture, convey, and discharge the existing runoff flow rates and volumes. The required water quality treatment volumes and basin capacities are determined per the City's adopted Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) handbook. The proposed detention basin would be required to provide an outlet designed to retain a minimum of half the water quality design volume for a minimum of 24 hours and the remaining water quality design volume for a minimum of 24 hours, but no longer than 72 hours. Overall, the project site would be designed to safely convey a 100 -year storm through the site should failure of the underground storm drain system occur. As such, the project would not alter the existing drainage pattern or increase surface runoff such that on- or off -site flooding would occur. The Preliminary Hydrology Report compared the existing and developed condition flow rates at runoff outlet points and noted that flow rates are either (1) equal to or less than the existing condition, or (2) do not exceed the existing condition by more than one cubic - feet -per- second (cfs). Accordingly, there is no need for storm mitigation at any of the project's outlets and the projected flows that would be discharged to the existing properties and facilities downstream of the proposed project would be less than significant. f) No Impact. The project does not propose any uses that would have the potential to otherwise degrade water quality beyond those issues discussed in Section 4.9 herein. A SWPPP would be prepared for construction activities to ensure no degradation to water quality would occur during construction. Water quality management plans have been prepared and would be implemented to ensure that no impact to water quality would occur during the operation of the proposed project. No impact is anticipated. g -h) No Impact. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the project site is not located within a 50- or 100 -year flood plain. No housing or structures would be placed within a 100 -year flood zone; therefore, no impact would occur. i) No Impact. The site is not located downstream from a levee or a dam. Therefore, no impact from a levee or dam failure is expected. j) Less than Significant Impact. The City is not subject to tsunami due to its elevation, intervening topography, and distance (over 20 miles) from the ocean. The project site is located at a higher elevation than Lake Elsinore and would not be subject to flooding from the Lake. Canyon Lake is an open reservoir located to the northeast of the project site. Although the project may be subject to dam inundation from this reservoir, due to the distance from the reservoir and the relatively lower amount of water, impacts from potential inundation from seiche at the reservoir would likely not occur. Mudflows require a slope, water, and unconsolidated soil to occur. Standard requirements for grading design and slope stability as well as for flood protection as previously discussed in Sections 4.6 and 4.9 would limit any potential mudflow hazards that may be present on site. Impacts from seiche and mudflow would thus be less than significant with the implementation of these standard requirements. South Shore 11 (Tentative 7) act Map Na 36567) October 2014 lnittnl Study Page 44 4.10— Land Use and Planning Would the project: Less Phan Potentially S Significant with L Less Than Significant M Mitigation S Significant N No Impact I Incorporation I Impact I Impa, a) Physically divide an established community? � �. ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with I jurisdiction over the project (including, but 1 1 not limited to the general plan, specific plan, E El ❑ ❑ [ [ji E El local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c Conflict with a) No Impact. A significant impact would occur if the proposed project were sufficiently large or configured in such a way so as to create a physical barrier within an established community. The proposed project is surrounded primarily by vacant land, with planned residential land uses proposed adjacent to the project to the north and west. The project would not create any sort of physical barrier within the Lake Elsinore community. Moreover, project implementation would not provide for infrastructure systems such as new roadways that would divide or disrupt neighborhoods or any other established community elements in a previously developed and urbanized area. No impact would occur. b) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is designated as Low- Medium Density Residential (one to six dwelling units per acre) in the City's General Plan and zoned as R -1, Single- Family Residential (20,000 SF minimum lot size). The proposed project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of the City of Lake Elsinore. C) Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 4.4.f above, the proposed project would be consistent with the Western Riverside County MSHCP. A less than significant impact would occur. Sozah Shan 11 (Tentative Tract klap No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 45 4.11— Mineral Resources Would the project a) No Impact. The project site does not contain any known mineral resource and is not located within an area that has been classified or designated as a mineral resource area by the State Board of Mining and Geology. The City's General Plan does not designate the project site as a significant mineral resource site. There are no known operating mines on or near the project site. Therefore, no impact to mineral resources would result from implementation of the project. b) No Impact. Substantial mineral resources have been identified within the City and are noted within the City's General Plan, in particular aggregate type mineral resources. The General Plan indicates that regionally significant construction aggregate deposits are located within McVicker Canyon and Rice Canyon; and clay resources are located in the Alberhill area. These resource areas are primarily designated as MRZ -2 pursuant to the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) and California Mineral Land Classification System Diagram based on available geological information. Areas located within MRZ -2 indicated the area is underlain by mineral deposits where geologic data shows that significant measured or indicated resources are present. The project is located in an area designated as MRZ -3, considered to have moderate potential for the discovery of economic mineral deposits; however, because the project site is not located within one of the designated locally- important mineral resource areas within the City, no impacts to locally- important mineral resources would occur. Sough Shore 11 (Tentative Tract Map No, 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 46 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to L1 ( El El region and the residents of the state? � b Result in the --- he e loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific ''� ❑ ❑ ❑ plan or other land use plan? a) No Impact. The project site does not contain any known mineral resource and is not located within an area that has been classified or designated as a mineral resource area by the State Board of Mining and Geology. The City's General Plan does not designate the project site as a significant mineral resource site. There are no known operating mines on or near the project site. Therefore, no impact to mineral resources would result from implementation of the project. b) No Impact. Substantial mineral resources have been identified within the City and are noted within the City's General Plan, in particular aggregate type mineral resources. The General Plan indicates that regionally significant construction aggregate deposits are located within McVicker Canyon and Rice Canyon; and clay resources are located in the Alberhill area. These resource areas are primarily designated as MRZ -2 pursuant to the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) and California Mineral Land Classification System Diagram based on available geological information. Areas located within MRZ -2 indicated the area is underlain by mineral deposits where geologic data shows that significant measured or indicated resources are present. The project is located in an area designated as MRZ -3, considered to have moderate potential for the discovery of economic mineral deposits; however, because the project site is not located within one of the designated locally- important mineral resource areas within the City, no impacts to locally- important mineral resources would occur. Sough Shore 11 (Tentative Tract Map No, 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 46 4,12 — Noise Would the project result in: Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact a) Exposure of pers o n s t o or ge n eration of noise j levels in excess of standards established in ' the local general plan or noise ordinance, or ❑ ❑ ( ❑ applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of j excessive groundborne vibration or ❑ ❑ ( ❑ groundborne noise levels? i c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above El ❑ I r ❑ levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity '�, ❑ ( ❑ ❑ above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport : ( or public use airport, would the project ❑ ❑ ❑ expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? -- ... --------- f) For a project within the vicinity of a private ..- -- ----- - -- -- airstrip, would the project expose people ` residing or working in the project area to ❑ I ❑ ❑ excessive noise levels? This section is based on the Noise Impact Analysis prepared for the proposed project by Giroux & Associates (2013b), included as Appendix I. The results and conclusions of the report are summarized herein. Fundamentals ofSound and Environmental Noise Noise can be defined as unwanted sound. Sound (and therefore noise) consists of energy waves that people receive and interpret. Sound pressure level has become the most common descriptor used to characterize the loudness of an ambient sound level. Sound pressure levels are described in logarithmic units of ratios of sound pressures to a reference pressure, squared. These units are called hels. In order to provide a finer description of sound, a bel is subdivided into ten decibels, abbreviated dB. To account for the range of sound that human hearing perceives, a modified scale is utilized known as the A- weighted decibel (dBA). Since decibels are logarithmic units, sound pressure levels cannot be added or subtracted by ordinary arithmetic means. For example, if one automobile produces a sound pressure level of 70 dBA when it passes an observer, two cars passing simultaneously would not produce 140 dB. In fact, they would combine to produce 73 dBA. This same principle can be applied to other traffic quantities as well. In other words, doubling the traffic volume on a sheet or the speed of the traffic will increase the traffic noise level by 3 dBA. Conversely, halving the traffic volume or speed will reduce the traffic noise level by 3 dBA. A 3 dBA change in sound is the level where South Share H (Tentative Tract 42ap No, 36567) October 2014 Initial Studn Page 47 humans generally notice a barely perceptible change in sound and a 5 dBA change is generally readily perceptible. Time variations in noise exposure are typically expressed in terms of a steady -state energy level equal to the energy content of the time varying period (called Lr,Q), or alternately, as a statistical description of the sound pressure level that is exceeded over some fraction of a given observation period. Because community receptors are more sensitive to unwanted noise intrusion during the evening and at night, state law requires that, for planning purposes, an artificial dB increment be added to quiet time noise levels in a 24 -h0ur noise descriptor called the Ld„ (day- night) or the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). More precisely, Ls„ is the average equivalent A -- weighted sound level during a 24 -hour day, obtained after the addition of ten decibels to sound levels in the night after 10:00 p.m. and before 7:00 a.m., and CNEL is the average equivalent A- weighted sound level during a 24 -hour day, obtained after addition of five decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and after addition of ten decibels to sound levels in the night from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. The CNEL metric has gradually replaced the La„ factor, but the two descriptors are essentially identical. CNEL and Ld„ are utilized for describing ambient noise levels because they account for all noise sources over an extended period of time and account for the heightened sensitivity of people to noise during the night. LcQ is better utilized for describing specific and consistent sources because of the shorter reference period. CNEL -based standards are generally applied to transportation - related sources because local jurisdictions are pre - empted from exercising direct noise control over vehicles on public streets, aircraft, trains, etc. The City therefore regulates the traffic noise exposure of the receiving property through land use controls. a) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The City's guidelines for interior and exterior noise exposure standards are presented in Tables 4.12.1 and 4.12.2, below. For new residential uses, the City recommends an exterior noise level of up to 60 dB Ld„ /CNEL and an interior noise level of 45 dB L,d„ /CNEL; however, noise levels of up to 70 dB Ld„ /CNEL are permissible after a detailed analysis of noise reduction features is made. The exterior level applies to outdoor recreational uses such as back yards, patios, spas, etc. Interior standards apply to habitable rooms. Table 4.12.1 NOISE AND LAND USE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS Land Us Categories Day-Night Noise Level L,, Categories Uses X55 601ii 65 70 75 80> Residential Single, Family, Duplex, Multiple A A B B C D D Family Residential Mobile Homes A A B C C D D Commercial Regional District Hotel, Motel Transient Lodging A A B B C C D Commercial Regional Village, Commercial, Retail, Bank, District Special Restaurant Movie Theatre A A A A B B C Commercial, Industrial Office Building, Research and Institutional Development, Professional A A A B B C D Offices City Office Building Commercial Regional, Amphitheatre, Concert Hall, Institutional Civic Center Auditorium, Meeting Hall B B C C D D D Children's Amusement Park, Commercial Recreation Miniature Golf Course, Go -cart A A A B B D D Track, Equestrian Center, Sports Club South Shore 11(Tenmlive Tract ,blap No. 3656 7) October 7014 Initial S'[udy Page 48 Table 4.12.1 (cont.) NOISE AND LAND USE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS Land Use Categories Day-Night Noise Level L;,, Categories Uses <55 60" 65 70 75 80> Interior Automobile Service Station, Auto Single Family, Duplex, Multiple Family Mobile Homes 4535 60 Residential Mobile I Ionics — Commercial General, Special Dealership, Manufacturing, A A A A B B B Industrial Institutional Warehousing, Wholesale. Utilities 45 — Institutional General Hospital, Church, Library, A A B C C D D Schools. Classroom Open Space Parks A A A B C D D Golf Course, Cemeteries, Nature Open Space Centers, Wildlife Reserves, A A A A B C C Wildlife Habitat Agriculture Agriculture A A I A 1 A 1 A A A Notes: Lone A: Clearly Compatible Zone B: Normally Compatible Zone C: Normally Incompatible Lone D: Cleaa'ly incompatible Source: Giroux & Associates 2013b Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction without any special noise insulation requirements. New wnstniction at development should be undertaken only alter detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements are made and needed nose insulation features in the design are determined. Conventional consnzaction, with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning, will normally suffice. New construction or development should generally be discouraged. if new constriction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. New construction or development should generally not be undertaken. Table 4.12.2 INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR NOISE STANDARDS Noise Level Ld Category Uses Interior Exterior Single Family, Duplex, Multiple Family Mobile Homes 4535 60 Residential Mobile I Ionics — 60 Hotel, Motel, Transient Lodging 455 — Commercial, Hospital, School's classroom 45 — Institutional Church, Library 45 — Notes: 1. Indoor environment excluding: Bathrooms, toilets, closets, corridors. 2 Outdoor environment limited to: Private yard of single family, multi- family private patio m balcony which is served by a means of exit from inside. Mobile flame Park. 3. Noise level requirement with closed windows. Mechanical ventilating system or other means of natural ventilation shall be provided as ofChapon 12, Section 1205 ofUBC. 4. Exterior noise level should he such that interior noise level will not exceed 45 CNEL. 5. As per California Administrative Code, Title 24, Part 6, Division T25, Chapter 1, Subehaptor I, Article 4, Section T25 -28. Somce: Giroux & Associates 2013b Two characteristic noise sources are typically identified with residential development projects. Initially, construction activities, especially heavy equipment, will create short -term noise increases near the project site. These impacts may be important if there is phased development and one phase is under construction adjacent to South Shore 11(Tewalive Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial S[ud1) Page 49 an already completed and occupied phase. Upon completion, project - related traffic will cause an incremental increase in area -wide noise levels throughout the Lake Elsinore area. Traffic noise impacts are typically analyzed both to ensure that a project will not adversely impact the acoustic environment of the surrounding community, as well as to ensure that the project site is not exposed to an unacceptable level of noise resulting from the ambient noise environment acting upon the project. Typically, project - related, off -site noise impacts are evaluated as part of area -wide (community plan or specific plan) development planning. Construction and operational noise effects of the proposed project are described below. Construction Noise Construction noise is typically governed by ordinance limits on allowable times of equipment operations. Construction noise impacts therefore will be less- than - significant if they comply with the applicable ordinance limits. The Lake Elsinore Municipal Code restricts and regulates hours of construction operation and levels of construction noise. In Chapter 17.78, Section 17.78.080 (F) of the Code, construction noise is restricted from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and at any time on Sundays or holidays, when it creates a noise disturbance across a residential or commercial property line. Section 17.78.080 (F)(2) regulates construction activity noise levels as follows: B. Noise Restrictions at Affected Structures. When technically and economically feasible, the contractor sliall conduct construction activities in such a manner that the maximum noise levels at the affected buildings will not exceed those levels listed in the following schedule: 1. At Residential Structures. a. Mobile Equipment. Maximum noise levels for non - scheduled, intermittent, and short-term operation (less than 10 days) of mobile equipment: b. Stationary Equipment Maximum noise level for repetitively scheduled and relatively long -term operation (period of 10 days or more) of stationary equipment: Single- family Multi - family Semi- residential/ Residential Residential Commercial (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) Daily, except Sundays and legal 75 80 85 holidays, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. 60 65 70 Daily, 8:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and 60 65 70 all day Sunday and legal holidays. b. Stationary Equipment Maximum noise level for repetitively scheduled and relatively long -term operation (period of 10 days or more) of stationary equipment: Temporary construction noise impacts would vary because the noise levels produced by construction equipment ranges widely as a function of the equipment used and its activity level. The earth- moving activities would produce the most substantial construction noise, with equipment noise typically ranging from 75 to 90 dB at South Shore H (Tentative Tract Alap No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 50 Single - family Multi- family Semi - residential/ Residential Residential Commercial (dBA) (dBA) (dBA) Daily, except Sundays and legal holidays, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. 60 65 70 Daily, 8:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and 50 55 60 all day Sunday and legal holidays. Temporary construction noise impacts would vary because the noise levels produced by construction equipment ranges widely as a function of the equipment used and its activity level. The earth- moving activities would produce the most substantial construction noise, with equipment noise typically ranging from 75 to 90 dB at South Shore H (Tentative Tract Alap No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 50 50 feet from the source. Short -term construction noise impacts are expected to occur in discrete phases relative to the proposed construction phases (i.e., grading, construction of streets and utilities, construction of homes). The City regulates construction noise when it creates a noise disturbance across a residential or commercial property line. While there are currently no nearby residential receivers in the project vicinity that would be affected by construction noise, residential developments are proposed that could be affected. Moreover, with the site development occurring over time (i.e., construction of approximately 50 to 60 homes annually), any existing tenants of already completed homes could be subject to construction noise from subsequent development. The following mitigation measure would be implemented to ensure that construction noise impacts would be less than significant: MM Noise 1: The construction contractor shall complete the following to reduce construction noise to the levels specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code: • During all project site excavation and grading, the construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment (fixed or mobile) with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers' standards. The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site. • The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction- related noise sources and noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. Temporary noise barriers with a Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of at least 20 (e.g., vinyl acoustic curtain fSTC rating 221 or quilted blanket [STC rating 221) will be installed when project construction occurs within 100 feet of existing sensitive receptors. Any such barriers will break the line of sight from noise generators to sensitive receptors. They will also be constructed as close to the sensitive receptor as possible to achieve the greatest attenuation effect and have no gaps or openings. Such barriers will be maintained so long as construction occurs in the area adjacent to any existing sensitive receptors. • Provisions of the City's Noise Ordinance shall be satisfied during all site preparation and construction activity. Site preparation activity and construction shall not commence before 7:00 a.m. and shall cease no later than 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Only finish work and similar interior construction may be conducted on Saturdays and may commence no earlier than 8:00 a.m. and shall cease no later than 4:00 p.m. Construction activity shall not take place on Sunday, or any Legal Holidays. • The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours specified for construction equipment. To the extent feasible, haul routes shall not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. • If construction would occur in close proximity to already occupied Spyglass Ranch homes, measures such as the use of smaller grading equipment or the erection of temporary barriers would be employed. For the duration of construction activities, the construction manager will serve as the contact person should noise levels become disruptive to local residents. Developer will post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact regarding noise complaints. The construction manager. within seventy -two (72) hours of receipt of a noise complaint, will either take corrective actions or, if immediate action is not feasible, provide a plan or corrective action to address the source of the noise complaint. South Share ll ('Centalive Tract A4ap No. 36567) October 2014 Initial S7um Page 51 Operational Noise Long -term noise concerns from the introduction of residential uses at the project site would primarily be from vehicular operations on project area roadways. The most stringent General Plan noise /land use compatibility standard is 60 dB CNEL in usable outdoor space for single family residences With subdivision perimeter walls and under typical suburban vehicle mixes and travel speeds (maximum 35 miles per hour) it requires approximately 10,000 vehicles per day (VPD) to reach this threshold in back vards of tract hones abutting the access streets Proposed Street "C" and Street "D" are anticipated to carry a maximum of 3,800 and 3,700 VPD respectively. As such operational noise impacts from these roadways would be less than significant As described in the Noise Impact Analysis, the project could create a substantial increase in noise on Camino del Norte east of Main Street. There are currently only 200 vehicles per day utilizing this roadway segment as it dead ends shortly beyond the Main Street intersection. The addition of project traffic would increase noise levels by 8.1 dB CNEL, resulting in an "existing with project" traffic noise level of less than 58 dB CNEL at 50 feet from roadway centerline. This is less than the suggested compatibility threshold for sensitive use. Additionally, there are no existing sensitive uses along this roadway segment. All other local area roadway segments would experience project- related traffic noise level increases of less than 0.9 dB CNEL at 50 feet from the centerline. Therefore, traffic noise level increases attributable to the project would be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Groundborne vibration can result in a range of impacts, from mind annoyances to people to major shaking that damages buildings. The primary source of project - related groundborne vibration would be heavy construction activities. Residential uses do not utilize machinery that would generate substantial amounts of vibration, and impacts during project operation would not occur. Groundborne vibration generated by construction projects is usually highest during activities such as pile driving, rock blasting, soil compacting, jack- hammering, and demolition- related activities. Next to pile driving, grading activity has the greatest potential for vibration impacts if large bulldozers or large trucks are used. Vibration impacts are temporary and rare except in cases where large equipment is used near existing, occupied development. Grading of the project site would occur in a single phase, prior to construction of any of the residences. While no residential uses are currently located adjacent to the project site, residential developments are proposed that could be affected by construction activities such as grading. Construction noise and associated vibration would be controlled through the time restrictions currently established in the City's Noise Control requirements. As described in Section 4.12a, above, Section 17.176 of the City's Municipal Code establishes noise standards for construction activity that occurs between 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Therefore, potential construction - related vibration impacts would be minimized to daytime hours. Additionally, implementation of Mitigation Measure Noise 1 would ensure that impacts related to groundborne vibration would be less than significant. C) Less Than Significant Impact. The project area is currently undeveloped and surrounded by other undeveloped properties. Traffic on 1 -15, one of the significant contributes to area -wide noise levels, is more than one -half mile away and almost completely screened by intervening terrain. Noise measurements conducted for Spyglass Ranch environmental studies found baseline noise levels in the mid -30 dB range at the approximate set -back distance of South Shme II from 1-t5. Therefore, existing noise levels at the project site can be assumed to be low since there are no major roadways or other noise generators in proximity. The project would introduce residential land uses that would not produce excessive noise or result in a substantial increase in permanent ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. As discussed in Section 4.12.x, traffic noise increases from project operation would be below the applicable threshold. Impacts related to permanent increases in ambient noise levels would be less than significant. South Shore IJ (l enlative Tract Ut7p No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Stardy Page 52 d) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project would result in temporary increases in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above existing levels due to construction activities. However, implementation of Mitigation Measure Noise 1 would ensure that impacts related to temporary increases in ambient noise levels would be less than significant. C) No Impact. The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport. The nearest public airports are Perris Valley Airport located approximately 7 miles to the northeast, Hemet -Ryan Airport located approximately 12 miles to the east, and French Valley Airport located approximately 12 miles to the southeast. No impact would occur. f) No Impact. The proposed project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. The nearest private airstrip, Skylark Field, is located approximately three miles from the project site. No impact would occur. South Share 17 (l'erttatine Pracl Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 53 4.13— Population and Housing Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impa, a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or El 1-1 El i ndirectly (for example, through extension of I toads or other infrastructure)? j b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of ❑ ❑ j El replacement housing elsewhere? l c) Displace substantial numbers of people, neeessitatmg the construction of replacement El El El housing elsewhere? a) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not directly result in population growth. Population growth is a complex interaction between immigration, emigration, birth, deaths, and economic factors. The Census indicated that the City had a population of 28,930 in 2000 and 51,821 as of 2010, which would represent an approximately 79 percent increase. The Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG) Regional Transportation Plan /Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP /SCS) estimated a 2008 population for Lake Elsinore of 50,200 and projects an estimated population of 70,500 and 93,800 by 2020 and 2035, respectively. The proposed project would add 147 single - family homes to the existing housing supply in the City. Assuming 3.4 people per residential unit (2010 Census), the proposed project would add approximately 500 residents to the City. The project would construct roads on site that would connect to roads proposed to be constructed by adjacent proposed residential developments. These roads would not provide a thoroughfare connection to locations beyond the project boundaries. Similarly, the project would only include the construction of on -site utilities, which would not extend beyond the project boundaries. Although the proposed project would introduce more population into the area, this increase would represent an increase of less than one percent of the existing population within the City. This increase in population is not considered substantial and impacts would be less than significant. b) No Impact. The proposed project site is currently undeveloped. No existing housing would be displaced upon implementation of the project. No impact would occur. C) No Impact. As described in Section 4.13.b, above, because the project site is currently developed, no displacements would occur. No impact would occur. South Shore 11 (Tentative Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 54 4.14— Public Services Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact I a) Fire protection? b) Police protection ?' El Ei c) Schools? Li _.... F H _...0 _.... d) Parks ?._.. El. 0 e) Other public facilities? El a) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The City contracts for fire services with the Riverside County Fire Department ( RCOFD) and California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire). The RCOFD operates 93 fire stations in 17 battalions, providing fire suppression, emergency medical, rescue, and fire prevention services. Equipment used by RCOFD has the ability to respond to both urban and wildland emergency conditions. Specifically, Battalion 2 on the Southwest Division of RCOFD services the City. A total of four fire stations (three existing, one proposed) serve the City and the proposed project area; Stations 10, 60, 85, and 94. The closest City fire station to the project site is Station 10, located at 410 West Graham Avenue. The Ramsgate Specific Plan also incorporates a new fire station (Rosetta Canyon Station), to be located south of Ramsgate Drive. The fire stations are operated by RCOFD, and also are staffed by CDF and store CDF fire- fighting equipment. Both agencies respond to all types of emergencies, depending on the need and equipment available. The City's current fire service response time goals are 5 minutes for heavy urban areas; 7 minutes for urban areas with a broad mix of uses including residential, commercial, and industrial; 11 minutes for rural land uses; and 17 minutes for outlying areas generally located near large tracts of publicly -owned land (General Plan Public Safety and Welfare Element). The project applicant would be required to construct their fair share of infrastructure in order to provide fire - fighting capabilities to the proposed project and ensure adequate response times. The project is located within the boundaries of Community Facilities district No. 2003 -01, which provides for the operation and maintenance of public services, including fire protection services, from funds generated through annual fees assessed on property. Moreover, Mitigation Measure Public Services I would be implemented to ensure that impacts to fire services would be less than significant. MM Public Services I: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the Development Impact Fee program as adopted by the City of Lake Elsinore to the extent applicable. b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The City contracts for police protection with the County of Riverside Sheriff's Department. The closest City Police Department/Sheriffs South Shore Il (Tentative Tract Map Ago. 36567) October 2014 lnitial Studv Page 55 Station is located at 333 Limited Avenue in Lake Elsinore. The California Highway Patrol provides traffic enforcement to the County of Riverside with additional support from the local County Sheriff s Department. According to the City's General Plan Update FIR, police services were provided at a ratio of 0.85 sworn officer for every 1,000 residents during fiscal year 2010 through 2011, and the same staffing levels were budgeted for 2012. As noted above, the proposed project would add approximately 500 residents to the City; therefore, the proposed project would cause the City to need approximately 0.43 additional police officer. The proposed project would comply with applicable law enforcement requirements and standards to ensure adequate law enforcement protection is available to the future residents of the proposed project. The project site is located within the boundaries of Community Facilities District No. 2003 -01, which provides for the operation and maintenance of public services, including police protection services, from funds generated through annual fees assessed on property. Moreover, implementation of Mitigation Measure Public Services 1 would ensure impacts to police services would be less than significant. C) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD) covers a 140 - _square mile area within the City of Lake Elsinore, City of Canyon Lake, and a Portion of the unincorporated County of Riverside. LEUSD is composed of 25 schools including 12 elementary, 2 K -8 schools, 4 middle, 3 comprehensive high schools, a continuation school, and two alternative education centers. There are plans to expand and upgrade existing facilities and build new schools to accommodate future growth. In addition, the Ramsgate Specific Plan is anticipated to include an elementary school. Development of 147 residential units proposed by the project would generate new students. Students generated by the proposed project would attend Earl Warren Elementary School, Tuscany Hills Elementary School, Elsinore Middle School, and Temescal Canyon High School. The proposed project would cause the schools to need expanded facilities to accommodate the growth. To offset impacts, required school development fees would be collected prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure Public Services 1 would reduce project impacts to schools to less than significant. d) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. According to the City of Lake Elsinore, Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2008 -2030 (adopted July 14, 2009), a standard requirement of 5 acres of usable park land per 1,000 persons has been established for the City. Since the project proposes additional residences that would add 500 new residents, the proposed project would require the addition of 2.5 acres of park land. The proposed project would provide an approximately 3.5 -acre neighborhood park, which would lessen any substantial physical deterioration to existing recreation facilities in the area and fulfill this requirement. Moreover, Mitigation Measure Public Services 1 would ensure impacts to parks would be less than significant. e) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project would be serviced by the Riverside County Library System. The County of Riverside operates a system of 35 libraries and 2 book mobiles to serve unincorporated populations. The closest libraries include Lake Elsinore Library located on West Graham Avenue, northeast of the Lake; Lakeside Library located on Riverside Drive, just northwest of the Lake; and Canyon Lake Library, located on Railroad Canyon Drive. The proposed project would potentially impact the County's library system though the addition of 500 residents. To offset impacts to library facilities and services, the City requires residential developers to pay a fee for capital library facilities of $150 per unit to fund a city operated library facility. Mitigation Measure Public Services 1 would reduce impacts to library facilities and services to less than significant. No other public facilities other than those analyzed in Sections 4.14 are anticipated to be adversely impacted by project implementation. South Shore II (Tentative Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 56 4.15— Recreation Less Than Potentially Signifieantwith Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Imps a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that El El El substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? j b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which El yL7 ❑ might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? I I a) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Section 4.14.d, the project has the potential to result in the indirect need for recreational facilities due to the introduction of new residential uses. The proposed project would add 2.5 acres of parkland demand within the City due to the estimated 500 new residents, but also would provide an approximately 3.5 -acre public park. Therefore, the proposed project would not cause a significant deterioration of parkland facilities. To further offset potential impacts to recreational facilities, the proposed project would provide payment of developer impact fees. Mitigation Measure Public Services I would ensure that impacts would be less than significant. b) Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 4.15.a, the project would provide an approximately 3.5 -acre public park. Potential impacts to the environment from the proposed park have already been addressed by this environmental document. Mitigation measures have been incorporated as appropriate, and impacts would be less than significant. Soulh Shore II (Tenialwe Tract Allop Ato. 36567) October 2014 Initial Stuffy Page 57 4.16— Transportation and Traffic Would the project: Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass ( i transit and non - motorized travel and relevant ! ❑ ❑ ❑ components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion j management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards Li El El established by the county congestion 'i , management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels _ or a change in location that results in ❑ i El ❑ substantial safety risks? i d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or r dangerous intersections) or incompatible ❑ I ❑ I ❑ uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease ❑ ❑ ❑ the performance or safety of such facilities? This section is based on the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared for the proposed project by Kurtzman Associates, Inc. (2013), included as Appendix J. The results and conclusions of the report are summarized herein. a) Less than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Project - related traffic impacts have the potential to occur during both construction and operation of the project. Impacts are addressed below. Construction Traffic During construction, the project would generate traffic on local roadways due to vehicle trips from construction equipment, hauling vehicles, and worker vehicles. While congestion during construction may be experienced by South Shore 11(['emative Tract Hap No. 36567) October 2014 Initial study Page 58 travelers along roadways within the project area, additional vehicle trips during construction would not be considered substantial in relation to the existing traffic load in the project vicinity. Construction activities would adhere to applicable local ordinances related to traffic control, as well as the standards set forth in the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices established by Caltrans (2012). Operational Traffic The City of Lake Elsinore requires intersections to operate at' Level of SevN,iee LOS) D or better. The County of Riverside requires County - maintained roads and conventional highways to operate at LOS C or better. LOS D is allowed for community development areas at intersections of Secondary Highways, Major Highways, Arterials, Urban Arterials, Expressways, conventional State Highways, or freeway ramp intersections. LOS E is allowed in pedestrian oriented community centers. LOS D with a less than 45- second delay per vehicle is acceptable to Caltrans at signalized intersections along Caltrans facilities. The addition of more than 50 peak hour trips is considered a significant contribution to traffic. Intersection Analysis The traffic study area for the project includes the following intersections, as shown in Figure 8 • Main Street (NS) at: o Camino Del Norte - 41 0 1 -15 FFO& 'B}' northbound 44B4-ramps - #2 o I -15 Ereesva) southbound (SB}ramps - #3 • Elsinore Hills Road at: o Street "C" (future intersection) - #4 o Street "D" (future intersection) - #5 o Camino Del Norte (future intersection) - #6 The traffic study analysis prepared by Kunzman Associates (Appendix T) includes the LOS intersections for Existing , Existing Plus Project, Opening Year (2017) With and Without Project, and Opening Year (2017) Plus Ambient Growth Plus Project conditions (Table 4.16.1). South Share /! (Tentative D act Map Ago. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 59 oy. 0 O U y a O y O 4. 9 ° F � F > a b➢ oo° 0� lr� m a ° o U J a r c V p O N a N u O V v W U y u � T O � O o G a = N o �y V b➢ In � G b_➢ N3a�' N � m p (41 C� p d, p� r- O; N O1 O M t\ � (-v � m b➢ e E OWN OlM O�� ffi d G vyi G 9 u U U b M CJ N G w N " V N W N G � t,J r�ii s E0 U F U U a o�❑ .n a s m 'tl� h � "■°Oa rn06 0 ova .. 1 w¢ m m U Ywi 1!1 CO M M O 4 F C0.t� ! vi t� r %1 w cc � ¢ � �.� �� � � r �a �a � N o0 0, 7 W �0 m WU VU d d ¢ a bkyZ w q � O:1 � U w q cO W ¢ ¢ ¢ 45 A. t. w +n N V m V m ti n cd ctl (d <d V oy. 0 O U y a O y O 4. 9 ° F � F > a b➢ y - � m a ° o U J a r c V p O U � p N u O V v W U y u U O � O o G a = N o �y V b➢ In � G b_➢ N � m O y T W k r F C a O X F (-v � m b➢ e E z g ° Ei � y a ➢� F o� a ffi G vyi G 9 u U U b M CJ N G w N " V N W N G � t,J r�ii s E0 U F a o�❑ .n a s m 'tl� h � The proposed project would incrementally increase the overall traffic volume on local roadways. The project is projected to generate approximately 1,399 daily vehicle trips, 110 of which would occur during the morning peak hour and 147 of which would occur during the evening peak hour. For Existing traffic conditions, the study area intersections are currently operating at acceptable '° °e'° of sppvie° (LOS) during peak hours, except for the intersection of Main Street at the I -15 Freeway northbound ramps, which currently operates at an unacceptable LOS during the morning peak hour. This intersection would continue to operate at unacceptable levels in the morning peak hour in Existing Plus Project traffic conditions; all other study area intersections would operate at acceptable LOS. Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Project traffic conditions include existing traffic combined with area -wide growth and project traffic. Area -wide growth is calculated based on a two percent annual growth rate of existing traffic volumes over a four -year period. Under these conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of seFvise LOS) during peak hours, except for the intersection of Main Street at the 1 -15 Frey T IFLnorthbound ramps, which is projected to operate at an unacceptable LOS during the peak hours. The study area intersections are projected to operate within acceptable LOS during the peak hours with improvements. A traffic signal is projected to be warranted at the intersection of Main Street and the I -15 ;Tsouthbound ramps for the Existing Plus Project and Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Project conditions; however, constructing a northbound right turn lane would eliminate the need for a traffic Signal and is more pragmatic during this timeframe. Opening Year (2017) With and Without Project traffic conditions include existing traffic combined with area -wide growth and other development traffic, including the Spyglass Ranch and South Shore residential developments. Opening Year (2017) traffic conditions assume that Elsinore Hills Road would be extended from its existing terminus, approximately 850 feet south of Rosetta Canyon Drive, to Camino Del Norte by the project opening year. The proposed Elsinore Hills Road extension would be constructed prior to development of the adjacent Spyglass Ranch and South Shore I projects to provide the two access points necessary for adequate emergency access. Similarly, the proposed Street "C" and Street "D" would be constructed prior to the project opening year to provide two access points. Under these conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels (LOS) during peak hours, except for the following intersections: • Main Street (NS) at: • Camino Del Norte - #1 • I -15 Freeway- northbound (N33- }ramps - #2 o I -15 Freeway- southbound (SB) -ramps - #3 According to the Traffic Impact Analysis, traffic signals would be warranted at each of these intersections. A traffic signal is projected to be warranted under cumulative traffic conditions (Opening Year) with or without the northbound right turn lane proposed to be installed during Existing Plus Project conditions. Since the cumulative traffic conditions more closely reflect what is expected to occur, the recommended improvements at the Main StreeU1-15 Ffeeway southbound Rramps intersection consist of installing a traffic signal only. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Traffic 1 would ensure that project- related operational traffic impacts would be less than significant, and ensure compliance with the City's applicable plans, ordinances and policies establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system. MM Traffic 1: The project shall participate in the phased construction of the off -site intersection improvements (e.g., traffic signals) through payment of established City of Lake Elsinore fees, participation in the Western Riverside Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees program, payment of the project's fair share South Shore II (Ten(ative Tract Map No. 36567) Oclober 2014 Initial Study Page 61 traffic contribution, assessment district and /or community facilities district financing, and construction of off -site facilities under appropriate fee credit agreements. In addition to implementation of Mitigation Measure Traffic 1, several of the measures contained in Mitigation Measure Air 3 would reduce construction- related traffic effects Freeway Ramp Merge /Diverge Analysis A ramp merge and diverge analysis dated March 30 2014 was conducted by Kunzman Associates for the G15 northbound and southbound on- and off -ramps at the Main Street/1 -1.5 interchange The results of this analysis are contained in a letter provided by Kurtzman, which is included as Appendix L of this Final IS /MND A significant project- specific traffic impact would occur if the project causes a decrease from a standard LOS to a less than standard LOS based on a study area intersection fireewav mainline lane or freewav merge /diverge analysis As shown in Table 1 of the ramp merge /diverge analysis the study area merge /diverge areas currently operate at LOS D or better during the peak hours These areas would continue to operate at LOS D under Existing Plus Project traffic conditions, but would reduce to LOS E under Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Project traffic conditions. For Opening Year (2017) in both the With and Without Project traffic conditions scenarios, the 1 -15 southbound on -ramp at Main Street would further reduce to LOS F during morning peak hours. Since the I -15 southbound on -rainy at Main Street would operate at a less than standard LOS with or without the project project- related impacts would be less than significant Moreover, the stud Alternative Modes of Transportation As noted, a connection to local area roadways would be provided via Street "C" and Street "D" to be constructed as part of the Spyglass Ranch project (Tentative Tract Map No. 35337), which would enable residents of the project to utilize alternative modes of transportation such as pedestrian traffic, bicycle paths, and mass transit. The streets will provide sidewalks for pedestrians and future bikeways (Class II and Class 111) alone Camino Del Norte In the future the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) may provide bus service along Elsinore Hills Road. The proposed project would not conflict with the City's applicable plans, ordinances and policies establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system relative to alternative modes of transportation, and impacts would be less than significant. b) Less than Significant Impact. See discussion of Section 4.16.x, above. Since the project would generate a Tess than substantial increase in operational traffic and a short-term increase in construction traffic, the project would not impact existing performance of the System of Highways and Principal Arterials governed by the Riverside County Congestion Management Plan (CMP). Thus, implementation of the project would not conflict with the Riverside County CMP and project - related impacts would be less than significant. C) No Impact. The proposed residential development project would not change air traffic patterns. No impact would occur. d) Less than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project is compatible with surrounding uses (including proposed) and roadway usage. No safety issues are anticipated with the proposed on -site circulation system. The project does not propose a dangerous design feature, nor would the proposed roadways connect to existing roadways in such a way that would pose a danger to increased traffic. Nonetheless, the project would implement the following mitigation measure to ensure that no hazardous design features are introduced: South Shore 11(Tentative 7 ) act Map No. 36567) Octoher 2014 Initial Study Page 62 MM Traffic 2: Sight distance at t4ic-project access should shall be reviewed with respect to standard Caltrans and City sight distance standards. The during pFopai-ation of final grading, landscaping, and sheet improvement plans shall demonstrate that sight distance standards are met. Such plans must be reviewed by the City and approved as consistent with this measure prior to bestowal of rig permits. e) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would provide two emergency access routes via Street "C" and Street "D" through the Spyglass Ranch project (Tentative Tract Map No. 35337), which is proposed to be constructed just west of South Shore 11. These two access routes have been deemed sufficient by the City of Lake Elsinore Fire and Police Departments. In conjunction with the review and approval of building permits, the City of Lake Elsinore Fire and Police Departments would review all plans to ensure compliance with applicable emergency access and safety requirements. With application of project review procedures, impacts involving emergency access would be less than significant. f) No Impact. The project would not conflict with any policy regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. No impact would occur. South Shore 11(Ternative D'act May AV 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 63 4.17— Utilities and Service Systems Would the project: a) No Impact. The Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) would provide sewer service to the proposed project site (Appendix K). The proposed project construction activities could become a source of typical urban pollutant's, as indicated in Section 4.8.a. Since these pollutants are not expected to be released into the sewer system, no significant impact to a wastewater treatment plant is anticipated. Impacts to wastewater treatment would be less than significant. b) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would incrementally increase water demand and wastewater discharges. As indicated in the will -serve letter (Appendix K), the proposed project water and sewer service would be provided by EVMWD. The proposed 147 single - family residences would pose a less than significant adverse impact regarding demand for existing water and sewer treatment facilities. EVMWD is anticipated to have the capacity to service the proposed project. Project water pipelines would connect to "existing" water lines within the proposed Spyglass Ranch project. The proposed connections would occur per .South Shore 11 (Tentative Tract lfap No. 36567) October 2614 bulial Study Page 64 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact incorporation Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements ! of the applicable Regional Water Quality ❑ ❑ El Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the ❑ ❑ construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion i of existing facilities, the construction of ❑ ❑ which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded ❑ i ❑ entitlements needed? j ._-- e) _...... _..._. .._. .__ -. Result in a determination by the wastewater -------._..._ treatment provider which serves or may i serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in ❑ ❑ addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the ❑ ❑ project's solid waste disposal needs? g) _.- ---- ............ Comply with federal, state, and local statutes _... _. and regulations related to solid waste? ❑ ❑ ! ❑ a) No Impact. The Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) would provide sewer service to the proposed project site (Appendix K). The proposed project construction activities could become a source of typical urban pollutant's, as indicated in Section 4.8.a. Since these pollutants are not expected to be released into the sewer system, no significant impact to a wastewater treatment plant is anticipated. Impacts to wastewater treatment would be less than significant. b) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would incrementally increase water demand and wastewater discharges. As indicated in the will -serve letter (Appendix K), the proposed project water and sewer service would be provided by EVMWD. The proposed 147 single - family residences would pose a less than significant adverse impact regarding demand for existing water and sewer treatment facilities. EVMWD is anticipated to have the capacity to service the proposed project. Project water pipelines would connect to "existing" water lines within the proposed Spyglass Ranch project. The proposed connections would occur per .South Shore 11 (Tentative Tract lfap No. 36567) October 2614 bulial Study Page 64 City of Lake Elsinore and EVMWD standards and BMPs such that impacts would be below the level of significance. No additional facilities or upgrades are anticipated and impacts would be less than significant. C) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would construct an approximately 1.2 -acre extended detention basin in the southwestern corner of the project site (Figure 5). This basin is proposed to maintain water quality and manage stormwater runoff. The project's mainline storm drain system, located within project roadways, would direct runoff from the developed areas of the project to the detention basin via a system of drainage pipes located throughout the development All runoff from the storm drain system would be discharged into the basin, which has an overall volume capacity of about 40,000 cubic feet. This is considered sufficient to meet the stormwater treatment needs of the project Additionally, an emergency overspill structure, located downstream of the basin, would be provided in case of an outlet structure failure. These storm water drainage improvements are included within the project's design, and no other storm water drainage facility improvements are anticipated. Impacts associated with these improvements would be less than significant. d) Less than Significant Impact. EVMWD would provide water service to the proposed project site (Appendix K). As indicated in the will -serve letter (Appendix K), EVMWD has sufficient capacity to serve the project without any additional expended entitlements. Impacts to water supplies would be less than significant. e) Less Than Significant Impact. EVMWD also would provide wastewater service to the proposed project site. As indicated in the will -serve letter (Appendix K), EVMWD has sufficient capacity to serve the project. The Regional Reclamation Facility operated by EVMWD would service the proposed project site. The proposed project impact to this facility would be less than significant due to the project's size and service needs. f) Less Than Significant Impact. Lake Elsinore is served by a number of landfills, including El Sobrante Landfill, Badlands landfill, and Lamb Canyon Landfill. El Sobrante Landfill is expected to reach capacity by 2045. Badlands Landfill is expected to reach capacity by 2024 and Lamb Canyon Landfill by 2021. Both Badlands and Lamb Canyon Landfills have the potential to expand their facilities and capacity. Solid waste disposal is managed at the regional level; therefore, generation of solid waste within the City, including by the proposed project, is one part of a regional issue. The project would be required to comply with applicable State and local regulations, including Section 40050 et seq. of the California Public Resources Code, to reduce the volume of solid waste entering landfills. Impacts would be less than significant. g) No Impact. Waste collection in Lake Elsinore is disposed of in regional landfills, as described above. The project would be required to comply with State mandates and City regulations regarding reduction /recycling of household waste. No impact would occur. South Shore 11 (Tentative ')-act A4ap No. 36567) Oemher 2014 Initial Stardy Page 65 4.18— Mandatory Findings of'Significance a) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would alter the site from natural /vacant land to an urbanized site with 147 residences and a park. While this conversion of land would potentially impact sensitive biological resources (including migratory birds and Riversidean sage scrub), these impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance through mitigation (see Section 4.4, Biological Resources). Therefore, the proposed project would not significantly reduce wildlife habitat or cause a population to drop below self - sustaining levels, nor would it threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community. Two sensitive plant species, the federally listed as endangered and state listed as threatened Munz's onion and federally listed as threatened and state listed as endangered thread- leaved brodiaea, have a low potential to occur on site but were not observed. No endangered plant species were observed on the property. Sensitive animal species observed in the project study area include the coastal California gnatcatcher, (federally listed as threatened), northern harrier, and loggerhead shrike (bell) California state species of concern). The Quino checkerspot butterfly, federally listed as endangered, also has potential to occur. The project would not reduce the number or restrict the range of these species because are fully covered by compliance of the project with the MS11CP. The Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment indicated that the project site is relatively low in sensitivity for cultural resources from the historic period. There still is, however, the potential for significant buried historical resources and /or Native American cultural resources to exist on site. The soils and formations on -site have a low potential for prehistoric resources. Mitigation would reduce potential historic and prehistoric impacts to below a level of significance. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact to historical resources. b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Cumulative impacts can result from the interactions of environmental changes resulting from one proposed eject with chances resulting from other past, present, and future projects that affect the same resources utilities and infrastructure systems public South Shone II (Tentative Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 66 Less'fham Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact a Does the rojecthav p � e the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, ( j substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining _ ( levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal ❑ ❑ ❑ community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively ❑ j ❑ ❑ considerable? i I c) Does the project have environmental effects j which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or ❑ ( ❑ ( ❑ indirectly? I a) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would alter the site from natural /vacant land to an urbanized site with 147 residences and a park. While this conversion of land would potentially impact sensitive biological resources (including migratory birds and Riversidean sage scrub), these impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance through mitigation (see Section 4.4, Biological Resources). Therefore, the proposed project would not significantly reduce wildlife habitat or cause a population to drop below self - sustaining levels, nor would it threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community. Two sensitive plant species, the federally listed as endangered and state listed as threatened Munz's onion and federally listed as threatened and state listed as endangered thread- leaved brodiaea, have a low potential to occur on site but were not observed. No endangered plant species were observed on the property. Sensitive animal species observed in the project study area include the coastal California gnatcatcher, (federally listed as threatened), northern harrier, and loggerhead shrike (bell) California state species of concern). The Quino checkerspot butterfly, federally listed as endangered, also has potential to occur. The project would not reduce the number or restrict the range of these species because are fully covered by compliance of the project with the MS11CP. The Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment indicated that the project site is relatively low in sensitivity for cultural resources from the historic period. There still is, however, the potential for significant buried historical resources and /or Native American cultural resources to exist on site. The soils and formations on -site have a low potential for prehistoric resources. Mitigation would reduce potential historic and prehistoric impacts to below a level of significance. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact to historical resources. b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Cumulative impacts can result from the interactions of environmental changes resulting from one proposed eject with chances resulting from other past, present, and future projects that affect the same resources utilities and infrastructure systems public South Shone II (Tentative Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 66 services, transportation network elements, air basin, watershed, or other physical conditions. Such impacts could be short-term and temporary, usually consisting of overlapping construction impacts, as well as long g erm, due to the permanent land use changes involved in the project. In order for a project to contribute to cumulative impacts, it must result in some level of impact on a project- specific level. The following discussion addresses project- related effects for which some level of potential impact was identified. This includes topics for which "Less than Significant Impacts" were identified, as well as those for which a potential "substantial" or "Significant" effect was considered. Future development within the City would be required to comply with the General Plan Update goals. policies, and implementation programs to ensure that impacts on visual quality from public viewsheds and vantage points are minimized. Establishment of the Citv's MSHCP conservation areas ensures that passive and active open space uses are incorporated into development areas while preserving the City's visual character in the surrounding hillsides. The policies of the General Plan Update protect the citywide visual character from potentially significant impacts of future buildout and ensure that project - related visual effects are less than cumulatively considerable. Although sources of light and glare would increase within the project area, each eject would be required to comply with Sections 15.42.020, 17.112.040, and 17.148.010 of the City's Municipal Code, which require that lighting is designed to minimize glare, conflict, and light pollution and encourage the use of low pressure sodium lighting in non - residential development. Thus, compliance with these policies would reduce potential impacts from light and glare to less than significant, and the project's contribution to light and glare effects would not be cumulatively considerable. The proposed eject would contribute to regional cumulative impacts relative to the loss of Riversidean sage scrub habitat, as well as foraging and nesting sites for both locally common and rare bird species and migratin birds covered by the MBTA. Local development projects would be required to comply with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan, applicable local ordinances and regional plans, as well as project -level mitigation measures. With coverage under the MSHCP, and with the additional mitigation measures in this studv (Mitigation Measures Biology I through Biology 3), impacts attributed to the project would less than cumulatively considerable. Although the cumulative total of all related project development creates the potential for additional impact to cultural and paleontological resources, each eject would develop adequate mitigation measures to substantially decrease or avoid impacts through the CEQA process and City and Countv standard conditions. The project would implement measures (Mitigation Measures Cultural 1 through Cultural 6) to ensure that impacts to unknown cultural and paleontological resources would be less than significant. Therefore, no Significant cumulative loss of cultural or paleontological resources would occur and cumulative impacts would be Tess than significant. Geology and soils impacts are inherently restricted to the project site and would not contribute to cumulative impacts associated with other planned or proposed development; thus, it is not necessary to address this issue on a cumulative scale. With regard to hazards and hazardous materials. increased development within the City and surrounding areas would contribute to cumulate exposure of people to significant hazards from use and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes, and to hazards related to wildland fires. Potential cumulative impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials would be reduced to less than significant levels due to local, regional, State, and federal regulations, such as those that control the production, use, and transport of hazardous materials and wastes. Compliance with these policies and implementation of Mitigation Measures Hazards 1 and Hazards 2. would ensure that the project's contribution to these effects would be less than cumulatively considerable. Cumulative development within the City and surrounding areas could change drainage patterns and have an adverse impact on hydrology. Futtne projects would also increase contamination hom urban sources construction activity, and vehicle use, resulting in degradation of water quality. Additionally. future residences Saeah Shoe 7! (Tentative Tract dlap Ago. 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 67 and structures may be subject to hazards from flooding Project -level assessment of h drology and groundwater and surface water quality effects; compliance with applicable goals policies and implementation programs; and application of project- specific mitigation measures would ensure that impacts to water resources and drainage patterns would ensure that impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable. Cumulatively, traffic noise will increase substantially along many roadways both from area growth and from the implementation of this and other area projects. Cumulative area growth may cause exceedances of the traffic noise threshold for noise sensitive land uses Because of the limited size of the proposed project the cumulative contribution to traffic noise is correspondingly small The exterior noise exposure along project area roadways would substantially exceed the City of Lake Elsinore standard of 60 dB CNEL with or without the project's contribution Considering that the City of Lake Elsinore regulates noise impacts through the General Plan and Municipal Code and that the project's potential noise impacts would be mitigated with identified mitigation Mitigation Measure Noise 1), the project would not incrementally contribute to a significant cumulative noise impact. As noted in Item 4.13, the project's contribution to increased population in the area would represent an increase of less than one percent of the existing population within the City; this increase in population is less than cumulatively considerable The project would generate revenue though participation in the Development Impact Fee program and property taxes along with other development to compensate for cumulative fire police and school facility needs (Mitigation Measure Public Services 1) The project would provide an approximately 3.5 -acre neighborhood park which would be larger than the 2.5 acres of park land required for the addition of 500 new residents and would lessen any substantial physical deterioration to existing recreation facilities in the area and reduce the overall cumulative impacts to parks within the City. Public services and recreational impacts world be less than cumulatively considerable According to the City's General Plan Update EIR the Elsinore Valley Water District which provides water, wastewater, and reclaimed water service to the City and other jurisdictions has sufficient water supplies to serve existing and future water needs within its service area Elsinore Valley Water District also has prel2ared a Wastewater Master Plan to provide long range planning for the provision of wastewater services Compliance fees would ensure that impacts to water supply wastewater, and infrastructure associated with the proposed project and future developments would be less than cumulatively considerable Regarding solid waste impacts implementation of the proposed project in conjunction with regional growth would result in population increases and increases in commercial, industrial and other non - residential uses that could potentially impact solid waste disposal services and the capacity of landfill facilities that serve the City• however, upon compliance with City and Countv waste reduction programs as well as applicable State and local laws and regulations project -level contribution to cumulative impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable With curd to project- specific impacts that are not localized to the immediate project area including air quality and GHG emissions, the baseline analysis often addresses the cumulative condition---it is the contribution to the larger picture that is assessed in analyses of consistency with regional air quality strategies and pollutant dispersal. This includes the effects of air pollutants, which disperse from their original source and affect entire contribution to construction and operational emissions would be below SCAOMD CEOA thresholds for criteria pollutants; thus, project - related air quality impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable Mitigation Measures Air 1 through Air 3 would be implemented to further reduce effects related to the project's cumulative contribution to air pollution. With regard to GHG emissions the discussion in Item 4.7 indicates that annual project GHG emissions would be below the SCAOMD threshold and the project would incorporate the measures provided in Mitigation Measures GHG 1 through GHG 7 into project design to South Shore 11(Teniative Tract Nap No 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 68 achieve consistency with the City's CAP. As such, the proposed project would result in less than cumulatively considerable air quality or GHG impacts. pfo,jeel[S in tile , tile PFOjeOt's eantFibutien to cumulatively considerable impasts (e.g., tFaffie rieise)-is . ,,, n The merge /diverge analysis conducted for the project indicated that I -15 southbound on -ramp at Main Sheet would operate at LOS F during the morning peak hours in Opening Year (2017) in both the With and Without Project traffic conditions scenarios. The project's contribution to traffic impacts at this location would not be cumulatively considerable, since the 1 -15 southbound on -ramp at Main Street will operate at a less than standard LOS with or without the project. Moreover, the study area merge /diverge areas are projected to operate within acceptable LOS during the peak hours for both scenarios if the currently constructed southbound auxiliary is striped to the Railroad Canyon Road interchange. The proposed project would cause a cumulative impact to intersections through the addition of traffic to intersections operating at unacceptable levels, as detailed in Section 4.15, Transportation /Traffic. The proposed project would provide payment of fees and fair -share contributions to roadway improvements that would bring these intersections up to operating standards (Mitigation Measure Traffic 1). Implementation of individual projects and associated population growth could result in significant impacts on traffic levels. Future projects, including the South Shore II project, would be required to incorporate measures to address potential impacts on roadways and intersections associated with cumulative population growth (Mitigation Measure Traffic 2). After mitigation, the proposed project's cumulative impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance. C) Less Than Significant Impact. Based on the analysis of the project's impacts in the responses to items 4.1 thru 4.17, there is no indication that this project could result in substantial adverse effects on human beings. Under each environmental consideration addressed in the preceding analysis, the proposed project is considered to have little or no adverse impacts on people and the environment. Smeh Shore II (Tewalive D'ac1 Map A'o. 36567) Oclober 2014 lailial Study Page 69 5 References S.1 — List. of Preparers City of Lake Elsinore (Lead Agency) Planning Division 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, California 92530 951- 674 -3124 • Richard J. MacHott, Planning Manager HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. (Environmental Analysis) 7578 El Cajon Boulevard, Suite 200 La Mesa, California 91942 619- 462 -1515 • Andrea Bitterling, Senior Project Manager • Vanessa Brice, Project Manager South Shore JJ (Tentative Duet 21 fap AV 36567) October 2014 Initial Study Page 70 5.2— References California Department of Conservation 2008 Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. The City of Lake Elsinore is indicated either as Other Land, Urban and Built -Up Land, Grazing Land, or Farmland of Local Importance in 2010 maps of western Riverside County. 2012 Williamson Act Program, 2011/2012. California Department of Transportation Caltrans 2009 Basics of Highway Noise: Technical Noise Supplement. November. City of Lake Elsinore 2011 City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Update Final Recirculated Program Environmental Impact Report. December 13. 2013 Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. As amended, July 23. Available at: littp://www.code]2ublishing.com/CA/lakeelsiiiai-c/ County of Riverside 2013 "Riverside County Land Information System. htLtp://www3.tlnia.co.rivei-side.ca.us/pa/relis/index.htiiil [Accessed August 2013] Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVM W D) 2013 Service Planning Letter # 2539 -0 (Will -serve Letter). August 19. GeoTek,Inc. 2013a Geotechnical Evaluation for South Shore II Project, Tract 36567, Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California. April 8. 2013b Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, South Shore II Project, Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California. August 16. Giroux & Associates 2013a Air Quality and GHG Impact Analyses, TTM 36567 South Shore II, City of Lake Elsinore, California. August 21. 2013b Noise Impact Analysis, TTM 36567 South Shore 11, City of Lake Elsinore, California. August 21. HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. (HELIX) 2013 South Shore II Project General Biological Resources Assessment. August 12. South Shore If (I-mlative Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 hn6al Study Page 71 John Minch and Associates, Inc. (JMA) 2013a A Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment of 67.69 Acres As Shown On Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 Located Immediately North of the Elsinore Sanitary Landfill, City of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County. July 24. 2013b Preliminary Paleontological Survey For Tentative Tract 36567, Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California. July. K &A Engineering, Inc. 2013a Preliminary Hydrology Study for T.T.M. 36567, City of Lake Elsinore, State of California. April. 2013b Preliminary Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan, South Shore II, TTM No. 36567, City of Lake Elsinore Kunzman Associates, Inc. 2013 Tentative Tract Map No. 36567, Traffic hnpact Analysis. July 15. Morton, D.M. and Weber, FH 2003 Preliminary Digital Geologic Map of the Elsinore 7.5' Quadrangle, Riverside County, USGS Open -File Report 03 -281 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) 2012 Air Quality Management Plan. December. Southern California Association of Governments S( CAG). 2013 Integrated Growth Forecast. http: // www. scag.ca.gov /forecast/index.htin [Accessed August 22, 2013] U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census 2012 Households and Families: 2010. April. http: // www. google. com /url ?sa &rct= j &g= &esre= s &frm =1 &source= web &cd= 1 &ved =0CCw0 FiAA &url= httn %3A %2F %2Fwww.census. ov%2Fprod%2Fcen2010%2Fbiiefs%2Fc2010br- 14.pdf &ei =1 GcgUojGF- boiAKd2IDYAg &us -- AFQjCNI-luIS6zLkGQx6U INLf3eucH8Xt5Q &sig2= as8iEXWGaCp1x BJBBnmZpQ &bvm= bv.51773540.d. cGE. Soaah Shore 11(Tentalive Tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 huffal Study Page 72 6 Responses To Comments on the Draft IS /MND The Draft MND for the South Shore Il Tentative Tract Map No. 35676 project was circulated for public review by the City of Lake Elsinore from December 8, 2013 to January 8, 2014. The Draft IS /MND included an analysis of 147 single - family detached residential units, a 3.5 -acre public park, and a 1.2 -acre extended detention basin to be constructed on a 71.7 -acre property. Copies of the Draft MND and the supporting technical appendices were made available for review at the City of Lake Elsinore Planning Division The Draft MND and appendices were also available for review and downloading from the City's website at: http://www.lake-elsii)ore.orp/iiidex.aspx?page-246, Seven letters were received in response to issuance of the Draft MND from the following parties: California Department of Fish and Wildlife. California Department of Transportation, Native American Heritage Commission, Pechanga Band of Luisefio Indians, Rincon Band of Luisefio Indians, Johnson & Sedlack Attornevs at Law, and Southern California Edison. This Final MND has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq., [revised December 19981 herein CEQA) and the State of California CEQA Guidelines, as amended February 1999 (California Administrative Code, Title 14, Section 15000, et seq.). The purpose of the Final MND is to provide the decision - making body, in this case the City of Lake Elsinore, responsible agencies, and the public with environmental impact information relative to the proposed South Shore 11 Tentative Tract Map No. 35676 project. The City must consider the information contained in this Final MND prior to approving the proposed project. SouUi Slime U (l entaave D act A1ap No. 36567) Oember 2014 Initial Studli, Page 73 South Shore 71 (Tentative tract Map No. 36567) October 2014 Lnitia! Snidy Page 74 Ln W V) O 0. CIO W O a° o c� ro❑ o ro �� °' ".n bb N a N.� '• % O cJ ran y G T a d i>G ro o 4� � U❑ N >, c N -- N .L-• ro C a� mE- U ❑„0. >m3a moro�'C °❑ ro y on � � Y ° N c � d ° -o ° � ❑ a �o v = v m o v a N �� �z VOA ON O>nOC N m¢°Yw.° U E ° -oN E `o_ �wEv w NN E °° 5 o m° v C U �N CL to Wti O3 ON@ m '?I v_ -on° E mip N cp5UUN voU ov °a vL°° 7H LO ¢oU o �Nti- va ova v...Nwoo Naa rn^ ;m' -m Z t '- a vt ° nv bw CU �10�d10 o Ntw va:2 `u_rN VDU a �m. °_`m o _ avl -vv��m w 3a5 vb�w33u3 U K�N�i� m Oscc mT U r �' mamico cm J w��a c�vaH K cZOV 0�3 cnOw "co`? Tod ai d v-- v,°�S�vE E= o rtrnm�n�5w v o°v'f �— ms rl Q Q O N V C N V U r W z O a. W O d o d U b n F N C ro .O O V1 ti 6 N L m- E o Z'5 E E c E -` °_. a m rn E% m Evo£��m 3.— °''Now.- °Oio �•�'��YE � oE.o��" y °- aNi 3 �—''U •o 'b N � a dE R V °j5'°3oe 3v.. LN...ry�o�ct Nam nm UE bb No n. �°am'��dCm2a- E'mEv °ca Q U O N'E Ewa °'oQ. a'o C1 C "- M m p m- m�w'm vim= d o d U b n N .J 6 o `o L m- E o Z'5 m c E -` °_. a m rn E% m Evo£��m °Oio �vmC m••�°v9?v'm � oE.o��" °' ;r cm_uva dE V °j5'°3oe 3v.. LN...ry�o�ct Nam nm UE n. �°am'��dCm2a- E'mEv °ca EN °cucEao EEa N'E Ewa °'oQ. a'o E E « m a E r d r "- m p m- m�w'm vim= 'am°' �2 �o c y vocvd�mavN..� o.vc5£wE.o'mm o•. o x� aa`O@ ay ww -o-2 rn._ m._ Uv�v on P.o `0E� - to a- n E'c= a E E° E .Z E o` E-, n -c E o°.E U E a EG m c m v °° v= n m 'a0 ta i° a E o Eu o.- ... -E °m> a` �° `E v °E ° �. o� rn m- cm °m° ° t0 16 h o 2 oc° .. ai a'c Ec`o`�N- co66 =w m °-rn'E `O^ 0M.... ma vcNEo =N�t E6cv o-o v °rn8 N Eaco_ S m v p c `e c -_c E o oaSc a 8 w y v `3=o'. m o 0 mo:_ o o E_-m co_ U N m E. '- mEm ava � 10 wo v ov - c •�ovo ° 0> t nc �5 z �v dt °c'E EmVx o w E E mat..° m ==' E 52 �`n�?N mvaa msm am amen v° .N x °vv.D ° o'°a n'o n° ��51a w�'mz t=n�a mwv3U ..O� v =.m °FE sN v oN w`ma F=mn UiicoD yy� pomooS r EnvEoo., 12 v'6 F E d o d U b n W 0. r 1� r W U Q O V U � J V � M m - w U ° � T E `o m n 0 o a E U y a� c O y o ^ U v ai X v bn ~v0 WUQ .aY O.WN�U vU%.d O Pr v O' m 7c-. ❑'O 4 O P. � Q � F in .� Q Q Q E �rn cvn O DD `mo ECG v m:_ D) � �cna 3c Fini a r`m Q O V m �mm w AEU = N�V a EBB u�yUo «a �Ua�in `"yo 'OUaLo cy� cNSO� N N v E m �wQ -cU mW w m r w Z � v v . v ¢mma 1- m °<UO5 ho.�v. >_�aavobo�O,a a,a v aam omc '"`m mmm omc °E`� o °m�ocN- 'c c °o�EN am'o avc m U N O ¢ W� Q 1 o V N rn��E° °•a �mcmu •' 2 0 c a a m a uu� Q Q Q U � J V � M � T U y O U v ai X v bn ~v0 WUQ .aY O.WN�U vU%.d O Pr v O' m 7c-. ❑'O 4 O P. � Q � F in .� Q Q Q m �mm w AEU = N�V a EBB u�yUo «a �Ua�in `"yo 'OUaLo cy� cNSO� N N v E m �wQ -cU mW w m r w Z � v v . v ¢mma 1- m °<UO5 ho.�v. >_�aavobo�O,a a,a v aam omc '"`m mmm omc °E`� o °m�ocN- 'c c °o�EN am'o avc m U N O ¢ W� Q 1 o V N rn��E° °•a �mcmu •' 2 0 c a a m a uu� Q Q Q CIO w a. w FL z w O C ° 'tic •.¢o° ;n 'd T boo tm T .c O N ti W O.00 N N �d O O O O b Oy O C O O y 0 N N °� 02 0 0 ° °' N ❑ C � ❑ " N 3 c y~> �o c O y N y F�Q-+ N F b4 o O G bb c bp ° C u OE O C 'n .-O ._ N 2 O O L '.• o4 N b T° aci n, o 0 o o..n o `o C7p7 oz W Q w F. W U N a`. d 0 'o tm o o� c M O N N t0 6 mZ oN L N � m Z � e v`o �Uv �fna On U = y C G G C Vt -d A O ro iL Lz O O' U U v Y v sv. Y O O b O 0 0 0 vi a0i y y O C 41 V N U rq v w U R L U � c o n o °a - u ? A 0 0 0 w J c dZE ad �a a`anoE mt_ v2o -nay m� �zm a �`c° -LLNs O � N E�mUr° �w U O t G � N m � m o v � G b 3 y F o C G aCi U O . b K V C O N E D itl 3 F' E � c a U ti C K O a O N !C C V N O C Q m a u ? d a Na V 5 °n `m o� �a 6'o a r N w ov -aE 'E _cN3 La�o� EN �_ ain`w c N 3 �.v °Aam ort_ � O v E E m o ma cma `c°mv°O -a uli mEty x O ESC 72� mom_ _ ry Nov —u u Qo Q .3 ry ti N ab � y ro U � N c - o a o ° aS N y �— ,Uoc3Scti3oG U U U Y Q d a 2 caLO a m N 2 Ecu $ac v c N m q N EE - - m o u o N v Ti _ s v ?NCaa _n ua 21 NZ N p N c N v�yyvo °� Oa? N n w N°o m ocrn m o O N E mwEi°v p op as � C VN _ °'w CJo EaawE hr of -o m a t e c °, , R cogs EE z 0 0 Z o N N¢ a O` c vt NUma o'v C.L U m a a o c WO 'w N N ' Ea' NmNNmO �ro ° maw EEr m`mU 1-m uuuuu u o Q Q N C U Gy G L w C v y w Y T U N U U a G U y ro U dbnt-S E _ N o U `mom CIO 0 Cl. FOP ME N z w O Y Uw0u=U m N O O bl y ps �•°<... oI.- , obi =' roses o ti ... R.t 5 .0 ? •T'O Q¢ O O a "`�' c y c y N O• b N 0 � U ❑ O N bb c c s m W � c W O a F- CzU O U ti y4'l voI � y�l a 0 ma oz+ N m ai C C C 2 S _ J 3oi'OQ'�'oo y >" >, C' c - t e i cd >, twin a�i K' �� 3v is ,N b❑ ,� N� G N �' T ti N C N N S O ro C 0 bb 0 U y N m ai C C C 2 S _ J C' c - t e i u_ uuu w P. AI z w O U U m G G a o'o3 E o� o� mL T U G ° U ° - 3 ° ° > ro o U O❑ o= o m� tt c°� yw °O�� °d aw ago eCA U .0 'D m ti Sti ti C Y r1 > Oro j v sU, p, F F <1 U o • a ❑° m w b vmi c 30 m .y b9'O p Co p m O m m Cn W O H z W 0 u G N y N N cc � E0 ftl �.. s., V� N •� .' 7� V b O b c' o m �' • F- ° 'a � ci. U 3 b ❑ '� �3�.� Y tC u U U i. W� ro S U N •b (d •U C Y N U F y U U V LL N E 0. M C � O Y � i •� G ro N O ro L (d O ro V bq � N O U sU. v�,�s >3�o3Y W ro Q ro O uv ✓�'' � t1. bq sU, 0. y C b_A�bb� ti bJ G s bA I W 0 m uo A W U RfdMNL'y N " N c N N b V U f s a aN '? N @ T U N C y N N .0 E Z a 6 E N M v Q d OI N .p O C w a m .O _ m _ a n p Ci N� R N` b` N N U WL• N v G O d O U'O O Q }° o Q �n°i N >'W C Uc�oa ouvW N E Q m ^y m.0ROm� > C d p 0 m 0 E 0 07 W o N m G U �n m U F,?' ov m.!? "'ate RUC c.0 mom asvi °�: ---Z— E O 0. m U S��oO E`o c Y Qi O Emo�m£ p <- o 000w m u C E p= Q L N 0 N -p @ t � . o p yRi .O I I E C�CY o� E �> m oo aiQ QO� - EE E- y�nQ www o,WO - co°, @rm E �� am�n co 7 ESN OOb O ZWO UNOCO Um UDR d`p .��U -p E�R En � n ® aw U m o c E °c� E m°1 °'"OCCm i > - � O U' G G Qoo'nvcc .•MAN W0O. trO iU u u Y W Q W of roQ Xwb� am wt. ro`� o o N N �z a.b asi �^�CG � a0i (j row i v p '> vi u c N y ° M O. N '� z ro P7 Q ,bll O 9 0 ,b9 N G M <F ul l0 c« o a N o p m o a L Z@ c C0 ID N E J ' 2 o [dJ C N p N m O O- N p U fl N «c m N_ O N N w di NQO.- aOd1 O'NO OLL _C N O E N a U N 0 N- v U` f- Q'ow - moa,X M N N G O N @ c N v = @ 3 E n N O � N U O N Y O C N 0 O w yu>aLU E O Ol D� m U N d> Q V 0 0 0 ma m N d o pO W D.V L N G m E O m � m m N u m ° N mU m �c.O aai Z 9 O@ N N r � U N O yL > @ @ C J N om. m9 U m m a N O U a a O ON N O L L V ~ N U O c m' N C N - 0o m m m m o N > E o 0 `�mvN 00 C D O Ve V N O —Cic o' OW' O V rVi U N N � o' N O N y'w N m 3 N T U a Q N@ U U m m N N C N J NN N N G En cc¢ a N Q O C U � = N N C � N Eon _ o o m N N y N 9 ry O N Z , @ E O N O 3 N I E C O 9 N m O 9 N m U @ m E�_ma W N C N N a m @ U C N N y Y m aEi .n �o m � a U E N O N a Y U O U U N N 6 Q L N m .> N � Z N .. Yn E U U Q b �J O ..0 •U ti ti � cd S .�• C C O O U id N Y f 00 O O L ro C � Q cd O � N N y id bO U N G U N N M 0 Q Q c 7i re zt 7 O � n O [ L N M u CG G b �J W Q a W [-r W O U �r )n � Q <d U U t O o L R o3U o¢Y•oo''�°^'o U U bA U U rn 4-, id y y C �yh _ � N 3� F ORoAYU Y �r )n � Q c = o H u r J s^ •G 7 G V G C C O ^} $ •E J 1 U V) LL� \ \� 6 \\ \\ � \ \ \\ E \� \\ \ \ \\ /)\) I RA� > -S \ \ \ \ \ \. zn , Ti � � \� � \\ � \ \� � \\ \ \ \ \ \� \� � \� \� \\ \ \ } \ \ \ \� \\ C/) CIO LLJ \ \ \\ `\ / ~� \� \ \) \\ w � / ��\� \\ / \ / } \ \� _ \� \ \\\ \\ \ \ \� \ \ \ \\ 43 \ \ \\ f O P, a A H W O U 'i VTR } u125 ry� eA A A 1� �3 a p�1 d .y O U �i u K� v N j u0�� LLI Y L9 Yai U� a [a7 Lc7 Ccl G O ry J� 3 O c E y F ° m E's N J J C U .O L O o N 0 bq Zm on.Y U cL Yv� c�aQQU o`n o4 [a7 Lc7 uu uu _ U G� z d N 0 U .7 A .fir 0 d- O ^ � w O' y c o JO O U O N Y W cNd cam^ O w '`7 'c3 N ro a c t G O ro E C O F c W Ccl G O ry J� 3 y F J J C uu uu _ U G� z d N 0 U .7 A .fir 0 d- O ^ � w O' y c o JO O U O N Y W cNd cam^ O w '`7 'c3 N ro a c t G O ro E C O F c W Ccl C a a 0 v w CIO CIO z O w IYi z w 0 v Q \ \ $ ■ \ 7 2 / / _ -- \ _ \ 22 \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \ \ \\ \ \ \\ \\ } \ \ \\ V) W Q. a F-' z O U °cam Oa o os s � a oCY z b a v c ro s >_ .vc .:_ v .), ro c ro m - .c. a s n v o 'o -m m -a E� m _ _ 0 yL pyVO Q � Cy ='jv dOO y .:Y � N "C_ia a T S O d� o to cn _ �u uI H M C\ j U C td W i U O 0 U u id G � >- U w y W � G � v G � w ❑ � .O. U .� � bD.B d a y obN°W°��oc o� U N O rob' b O OJ N N N Q y N (J N 0 O U � tUtl U� U O N U m7 ` oQ $ > oV'? °cam Oa o os s � a oCY z b a v c ro s >_ .vc .:_ v .), ro c ro m - .c. a s n v o 'o -m m -a E� m _ _ 0 yL pyVO Q � Cy ='jv dOO y .:Y � N "C_ia a T S O d� o to cn _ �u uI H M C\ a v G d N i❑ N N ^❑ , N bA _^ 4J N m a N❑ O p %+ 'Y T) O V A V. CL N O '""j ❑j= itl fA" Y > .� 7 N •C O O .� <J .^ vOi « .._C, N p +O-' pvo- vo' =AOW� w3o °'m'Eo�C,y �.�o E.E v o ,�' v ,x y 5 ❑ " � ... sv, c 3 m - � .� .Y Y 'E no ro � p `v a� o a ❑ b 3 � >,� g ,� � '� i cC 3 � a• . -can°. o t � a a � � . °- `'�' .°? y ¢W N G biD bO M 'E c � .Ew o.� ti o �Q•�w n.= �'°`� o �A t�o�.E v o ��_, � Q•eQ'm v � �cP3aoa3 `°�a...— „ov °3�,c3v;°v. -.a' aai � .o m o �, v y v o .� .� � � a a � •ti too U' � � ,� bq "� m C d aj ”) "� U O N O ❑ > :d O U .°� � �. �. G ab � � V � � G �qq Q o �� o a.. ¢„� 'a o.v �, v tn❑ � � o cvo 3w 3o v.. � p a�, o� �9��'ONk° i��— °oro��ob3°Nroo O ctl ¢, C O A a 3 O� O fl. N iC M U E bi) Q N C m N C m W E ._ ° cl O N M A U ;3r ❑ G N N a• ti N C A ¢ N. °� o E +' p .ti v ❑ E E Y 1 b Sao aci w a�° -bc�i N_ >,o o Svc bb v .v o Ca 'ro a:E o •o -° 3 .N o �' o c u M `m O' ^ate ^�� Ecaa.?o p =° o�vM°m nct4' p, 7 p— p N 0 0� L m O m 'ate v, s. O y E N N to N Id cv F- E Q , C7 a. cG .s < .E Y u; v ri w s s m N N 09 C N= E N � •• 2 c on .4 y .= .NO o E � a F- .E n � � n 'O c _ LLJ s o n s — E 3 N � o Eg cn y 5$ o 2 s o9 m — o i" >°o G °� 5 �� m ° `k o 'E -" - E v •a � uu I W O a it .�J z w o'. 'tTj 0 X A U lb E tb i� 'O � � ❑ .�'U' U � '�'D bA bA L N ti •D b b a r- oA c o ti ro 3 L V Y U N iC ;-• O p ro U ti ti 'o 'o_ c' •c avi .3 ro �.m r k. G O y p 0 V U •O 'DXk ate+ bA�O`w tad � � 3 ° °L' ❑ b cO� °3 �,on Y ti G •C p �� N w H �, .L' N row N ° ro «' N f°d L7 �.: •�? b o. U � rob . � U O U � � •�' U ro W Q C a U Y d 0 •t} O Q ' O '6 N E N N 3eA'o czL ^�N��� O Ol t� W s O C. C4 W 5_ U p � � `n M y 0j y 3 U cd p C N T p U C O O' 0 In 7 P. y CO C z o w° • °.c `� ° >, ° ti N °0,x'8 0 °c o ai ° Oq C L o3 p O d L U cd 13 bh C^O'dz o� ^ G ry O )r M G n J y F N � M O t` vt N .-• c0 r. O � aPl cV N N V M W h O F' 0 G, O cn M N c y U o E n r y: 7 W r, 0 •x N t` 7 .pE a� `E s d d � o y � y U L U R � L N a —.�•_ T J en ^ G ry O )r M G n J y F N O F' 0 N c o n .pE 'o� `E o J � N � —.�•_ T J en 1 9 y J b-NO .n T tatl 3 d y `J Q ti = O Yil O O 3 O N J O 'O O n C V w _ �'C a F N F C �O'yN- N 6FFC i+ Ci G� 'R OII L G Cv GN s Q'E Ey ❑ c e+� T vl �O 1� 9 P � — � .-. � � r a0 ^ G ry O w c. U] CC i-" W U Vim] A G E � O w •C � N � S1 W � � N N � •b�4 O � ca O g ro 7 N 0 C4 > ,� N ❑ o o - G a o r ° G F S C F td p v C .n ✓� U S O .O E N 00 YOJ '� V O by `. _ o o '� � m. %. +- � C O N y NEJ _9 �,j 0 C� •D O 'O G G O_ 5 j d Y.c Gv V `.�3 c o d o� o T yY,s�a uass c,Y s nv � b V N v ❑ 6. N N N N I Cl N l N N M m en fi O D '> C O 5�5E�, U O�'� bA v to 3 rov �� �w�•o t E i" Q vUi Y U U> rN •.. � � G O N EoW OL m [tl M .� U b m .G .U..� sU. a E bq'— p., � Q � N � ❑ � cd O � U � vi sU.< ❑. O N U T T to c N E z L p F° Co N M w v: 9 3 n O Q S = O � Y V n o E c F ou m Is oll `m Y v o 0 OON CLY Sti NG�C 1 O u MU7 C Jd OO'OJ�C c ii', -. g on • 'o � J '� N O 'O � '_m S U O a O °� Y w y �_ � � � N F t E L S O C 3 F S W P. W CJ `0 0 N N O N� i0 N N G RG,9 N G p'd' h N O O O O � i6 ro O O m❑ m N N N ❑ O O O 3° .� T O ti o y '° ,� N cl 3 ro ❑ p d i6 v: 4 8 >.bb Y T ^0.YU N� tz C O O 'a ^� bA s°, .0 O V R N O on .� ❑ .. p �. ° �. d N o m ❑ EU a a,N��+ Y r Nm w. me 3 R ° 06 o a m Q �. Emy my L �_.a m =oy - cw- vt`on`o NE Nc �J O O � v' w 12 v 9 ° c o c`�� >•— cri _ cii N .v �-. su�;� E Y a �sU� 5 «mL�' Inc Er m'FFVZ5�9 Da a w c C ° v O° ° p 3 w L v _] O_'O o ❑ Z u o vii a"i .� o . U o o •� o .� w fl.. co ° c c^ °' a°i o '� v N °� > ° •v " 3 'y a,D '� v o 7 > � ° s. U c m sv, �, R. ^' m ca ❑ i. '-' id .b N ° .p ° U ^' cr w ov' ❑GVN�b �' >A `[C .n •vim 'C ,��''� dONNN�Y'�....� a O o CA 3 ❑ ° o v�•o b? �d9 � o c a oo'�,�ir ro,, cY "Y Y °oN •o b a. `�°° •� ` . ' aci h Y .o ° ro ° '' al 3 'c'w�. o'obnrAo%OC�3oP- ^FF -3a`. nyNyN °off � y . � a � ° � � s`i.•� a,�i cis .� cS .o � � � ° � � .ti ,� Ni o � .� v � °' O 0 a> ° ,0'3�aro'c7 o�c,�acioc�s�� J '�_ °-`* vw v' °v E•�. -.�'° U� 0 • °- c ° 3 o°n c o aci U o° "' c .°c° `� •o w ° m 'no y 5 v s. v .� v v v •v b ,G v C L .� o 8,p �O v �y -' W G .1 s oQ^. p=, .'�-• a) 0 •y : _ 3 cvC •� '� v pco o o °> �' W u: E-' z w O U W Q a n h W Q U e� w O y, w rob ro 0 U u U a U O O Y• a. 'm O U , GO Lv, M U ^ G C on O N U G p E'o � pU � O � U U A 0 � y ° L G N R N > c O b ¢ wU+ G a, O N V] h U Uw >+ C ro w w G U O p p — ^ G U U G OED °s'o rU+ U G U aroi 3 w � 3 a, o N G b U ro C p U N U b O U Q NoY�,ti°J�o N ro ro ^ o ' 0 U aGi id w U U 'O U id G ro O N G p w broUO b � rot v„� w C A X U ti .Si b O •� T ° ro U N 7 z� G y:, � o O •p N 3 a o G U ° � O O L� � N N y �b O C U O U o M ti 0 3 U yN U O o a. G 'O O N o � V G U .n cn ro ro N ro ro b � O. v°i w ° o y ro � N ro m E' :E �p o o o V 8 n y� ✓� _° _ a o � � �'= .o a � a� Y A c- v 'a °. Q L° ro � E�� 5 E °_ s a E m _ G O 0, Q a� "-UOa p aU cS an, a ��a o"roo maoo'ao � m moo t � a .`° � v .o .. c o � •-' :. � m 'c � m o m O ` � a :� 3 'r i� r a° a -- a E � a ,c-, s c c v� N J �' u c � `u• c a ca o -. 5° w v o .' `c"' � 3 c S a"i s ° n o o _ N N N N c .- ti ro t°'° V E G U vUi ctl � N °� U •G •� � w . N id O� N U ^r a U 'N —w L N ii' OL L ^ Vy, U o � G O N � cLd ro G ai ° G b U ro C p U N U b O U Q NoY�,ti°J�o N ro ro ^ o ' 0 U aGi id w U U 'O U id G ro O N G p w broUO b � rot v„� w C A X U ti .Si b O •� T ° ro U N 7 z� G y:, � o O •p N 3 a o G U ° � O O L� � N N y �b O C U O U o M ti 0 3 U yN U O o a. G 'O O N o � V G U .n cn ro ro N ro ro b � O. v°i w ° o y ro � N ro m E' :E �p o o o V 8 n y� ✓� _° _ a o � � �'= .o a � a� Y A c- v 'a °. Q L° ro � E�� 5 E °_ s a E m _ G O 0, Q a� "-UOa p aU cS an, a ��a o"roo maoo'ao � m moo t � a .`° � v .o .. c o � •-' :. � m 'c � m o m O ` � a :� 3 'r i� r a° a -- a E � a ,c-, s c c v� N J �' u c � `u• c a ca o -. 5° w v o .' `c"' � 3 c S a"i s ° n o o _ N N N N c O P. A N z w O U O b G itl O � � L L °p o a ❑ � o o Q CIE O. G o c � o N E C p wo LJ t P 0 3° ro oLJ o N G O N w o p G' Uj O N .— .= o�x3��¢0z O� E R. p 7 Y y 0 N N Q C ^ �d G LL7 U CQ O s0. id 'G ry tr. c W O 0. W F' rW G O U V 0 43 af- at � cGO �� o � o °dam ti � °'`�'o c �.. ° � 'E � 3 ❑.� b 'D 'D U -• � Y ^ Y ,��. � 'E '� c�a on � o � 'o 3 0�, .� ° a� o° 3 � Y aci �_' .� 3 aroi °•' N ° v '�.Noa•= woyyy'o row.�w °mc'Dwc°i y' ^af'- '-d�'o.'� y,o 0.Y.. .�'p R. .° X ,�.� � ❑ a�i .ti m v � � aci 'm o , Eow ° oEna°on °E Eo^ ti b >O�o °"° c a°°' °3 E To a o ° 0 ° a , C7 a> c °J > ."-. •�' a� c0.' ._ of ° � V w o ° ,� E � ° m _S2 K Y " a`i y .E °''L' o �_ c o EEi v .�� � W F Y V] E G I N A N V W .E c ❑ O� ,O y � � N� C N � O 'i7 ti� Q ❑ >�� A N a� F 0 E S3. o'000 �E c• ° a. ^b� N cn d In v N N N N N M C m � _ O F s_ " 3 c m— d o. O o R' o_ L 3 c a b V V N o mss°_, V A N E •• o n ° Y V au 'm i c O r on o c o a '£ - o c E sr •� Q .� C O 9 G� � 'O E N c F v° ` � c S_ E' �� C�J C E E O � L � C 'G O' O sr Cj (' F Ofl L tE p ty O 4 °• c .0 V 4-. 'U N O v y .- O` �'E L �uuuLi uu u N❑ N N N N N N M C w O a C� z w O U, o° c 3 ' L c m s, fi N A O N L1. C 'O ro `++ b O •N O G ou E Q 't7 N N O 0 '. 8 ° U N N Y E uv' 8ro 3 N U « boU 0.0 O ti N LL Y y aC.` =.-Z� 0 D �.G o °H5 � U`" N S T (n b � cad' ° N � +•�-+ G' N r _ N 6 N fi W O P. CG F W O'. ad ro � � v G c c � o � ° � " o m ❑ N ro a°i � � �.a � � E �y •- ro > say o ��. °`'0. o ° W� 3 o 0. o._ � ro � � o d a� � v � � ,i• a. bb ti N ❑ G .D O. O N U b O. bA 0,F) � � nt i � U N iC � '�" '� ro ...� � U •� V] •p O U 71 dvi9f�� d oF-� ao � °'..5� °.�'�, F- o cV °Y H dv�� � ❑ 41 O N N M M M LL C4 CL LL ° � v .w m p� m p u � N o 0 N F m a 0❑ v� c em u_ T ° _ °•' a° c a o m ° 3° c a ° E E � Z E El H '-� c c_n � '� r 9 ° �' v y D E v � ` ❑ � m ° ❑ E o m �°� c y a ❑ m .°c °c v � E 'V^ � `° C] s z a F2 u u u_ uui �u u L- N M M M M M M M M w O 0. CL CIO F" z w O U ro i j L4 p 'Y U 'D N '+_ N C N _O G O bb bA ti � m..c •o Q"O V. °' o �, .�— a, �, ...� Q..c c._ � 3 L ro o ys ro bZ 0 3 ."c..•o� �, ow °..�°', o awi �-o Era c 3 � w 0 6 m m b N cL n. o > � ri a? s>^., o u u E oQ Y o � �o aU�.ocUa' �, gym°, o3i 3.9 °'`-' b4� aVi •n,�ro_`�' bAU � bb a. ° -o ca •� °�.' a y° 3 0 :b '� � ro j �'Ta ❑ O ,,�»_ _ y CG v j .. O �G v0 •� ° O— N 5 0 a�i a m ,� 'D y m v U y a`i v .F •� 3 0 '�' y �., v° o U U -o b E c a� b °' '�' w ^° °o c° a3i -cs „°, °' �' m v ti °• as M.-c-' °E v 3'p,N oro 00F, 0 o❑ w rn O c o c w o Y °' .� ° ° " .D •v ai °Fro E o 0 c O❑ .0 F o0 33W�.�ti33a° °aow °�°Y 3° 3o °aY M M LL W O a LQ LQ F z s 0 u N aJ Z4 ' C 'O r i- *n W N N 5- �, 4!Y c°�' Za.0o.= x���a�ao�n� on a¢ C� �-' N N� N O� M N 0. t✓ p v' .� N� ° ro p e '� � N Y3 � �bn G � 8 >� o. CID �' tz� ••db�v� LL: p E c dY� °> tM � Q .c � o o •o p on'o U�' m a� m .� :° �'� °3 s' z 'O � .� a�i `� a"i of •y'�'�' •o a � c °'• 8 ��o m o � � c °°' � oU.�p.3� o ony >,° � °' ❑ww � °> o❑ E E 8 o a a w F 7 p b CA bb U N o � O 0 0 ° m 'T .^ ❑ rn � � � � � '� <y c � � � '3 a°i ° c � � W' � � � � � � .b � � v c is •`� .,-• �? � .� �" _¢` ° .� .'�-• °- v°i U ro N � V] � .� � ° � y '� ❑ � vi � �:°_'y Gam°.- °- a�i � lei, �' � o N o °,°, .c a._ ate° �o•�. �h ❑����o.ro �. 5 Uvn m y G.' o M M M M W O a WI 64 z W O U E- Di U i ❑7 .° 0 0. o . tb ° ° n (d ..N-. ro .M Cy u �w ... .b EU °°E cN c; ° ;-o b ❑ " E 'ti bn >, m y c `m A a°i = E afli °� bO E 3 E o cy b 3 Y K y^ w❑ � o0 M p M CL U W m .. � ❑ E y 1 T p U ma a m n m ❑ s o 4 s o o .. vFi o n > E L N O o. ti E o c o o m❑ � s ° °' s n o v$ o .g .c. 1. � 72, O to .n ^J "1 '.: .'-. U m n. .. y 'n O .= U 49 ❑ .Q ..V�' ❑ ❑ .O ❑ ti N L ... 'O N C O i ❑ ON J n M CL a N .CZC N O ,Z .CZ 7 G N O J iE c` n F i s a H ro bL- n F 3 m 5 c � Li Li I w O P. A F-' z w O U ti � api N � � Y ° p U � � •° U rUi� ON � O � � ° °' O. �C C7 � E y L � � . � � m ❑. O N {L .� O w ttl ... g ��.•o °.° �c �E- "v � z xOaUdoU° � G �l O G J� '� y G � � � .D � N Y b11 N '� .'�-• A '%n .bU O 5 G' .O `� `�' 'D > sU. U O cbd U O. cGd w Y N A• L A 'O Y j O U 'o a�i •f.. .,�°�, � o-A , ^ ° c o �' �°., a°i o b ° � wo p 3 3 '� v 0 3 3 U a, o M V 7 N N E O U 0 ° 0 n. L Y ° ° N ro ° N w \ g 2 j :) \\ \ /00 ) \\C) } ƒ\\ ` «44®«22e \ g 2 j W O R. C4 F G O U •p rn ❑ ` N � m N 27 G >• O „m m m m N N b0 N ❑ N . .-. m N N ro FU .c > p> 9 E > G m Q-[L- b ° °'° o ro y`N, °'�b.� o y°-• moo° o o' >sw o-cJb v ms .. .o £ c m o d o Y° > N a` K•w ,E O bAw o v W T G G o 9 p➢ O C 0. � -2 'O 2 rri `C � oo .n bb 0-0 o> 3 0 bQ mvi G :°_' ,L CA °'- ai ° o,9 0- _0 to G y N N 'd 'O N N L Y •.• w U �^ "' N i0 ro G cyd O L ro 0 L ro O 'U w �, G n N N• ro ° oTLC�u�mo ti roow�L. o° Wy3 Q > > p G o ., ' � L ro �¢ g �¢ °' °x° �b 03 0 M� 3 o vNi i. ro G cF' T O G tNC U 4l 0 0 0 °o `C v y0 ° � r s Z ;-da ����,� �G�cL °ebb ❑mx �xro'o Q'G F-� >� �lj"w ° ❑. ro > G ° G°- °>LCl N N m. N_ mL ro °' °�o.o bn° ;- G ro o uO sU- "' O a � v � � w D y o c a `Sj• c ro FU .c > p> 9 E > G m S C ms .. .o £ c m o d o o v o 9 p➢ O C 0. � -2 'O 2 rri `C � oo .n 0- _0 to y" a` ° °o `C v ° � r s Z � V � W 0 ti F z w O U N U m � ro O N O N a ti U � N tNi N ro O ro N N � � p d .� ro N b �pY N n � w W O N � �y ti N cd r a N c a � y N r � N N J N G — � O `^ c � o cd N F T bq OV w N � ro O N G N N Y Qb O N � id N b4 U N Y w Cy, w v, td td .= E AV >. o a— G 4. .. fl = � U F�o3.Eoo� p m G m m N O N G"�O G.. Np .�•� V O td C U 'n O N O > C 6 GU � cu N � N ctl a3 y N b ti ro a o 0 bA O N O G N ro U N« w (d O G N G Y O O F3�GO<nyYT�o � aC Yp � W G W A bUA ttl M W O 0. W CG F W U u, ° C aG�' u m r� V `tl pA'o aFi v0 O ti CL .O ;.ro y N L1 �. U ro .0 .-• Q. w � U � id G,Q (]] F o ro� Nry ❑ O Ta.m�'^ c V Uw �b � GAO by 'y � ❑ � w "� vMi G � a w N � .-V, V F �, N � v, i .� _�' U � m � s ."-° '' o o. F" �•o :n b0.' a �, a, a � a• � o o ti� '- c �' o o.� o ro a 3 ro m g ro ;� � U> •v ro U w N ro ❑� .� U A m y �3w '� o.� c.o'Y w abi o o ti�'3 `�•o � � 3•�z .�%F � m � s OV bf) Gyro z ~' R. L ° `0 U wd w a�i o o c `d a> a• ¢ ° p i> vi c�a R. bh4.c'niN"�'S . °o.��Ym'"E Lw� •E• °- "'o`°mcEca a a w o: V p E L s. vi E O °G c 3.2 enw A bj 6 v d a Ea D > t O y OV O N O' ✓N`a E .� D vO =•G r EI .(n D ° .O N" m D bll F O � °c � c � � r tO '� c o v � 'o y o• °- 3 .Y or 'U' D o .. r � � v � Fa o ° J OC C- .�W) «N lw. «U09 ��L Dy QL �•9> O'.�C ��E O OG � F iy 9 u 'v '�+ � f r .� Ll1 G W D �. � .� E� G D D a 'S h E 9 d Q O .� U F-• '�` U1 uL �� Lw W 0. F z w O a w y N w Y N a N Y G G N Y G N ro a� p U o er a�i" °�' y -d c o= •w N a"i '� w o a o 3 N O G Q' 'fl r' fa Vl fA Q. u�cu�ca °c3° �aGO��oc�tb N G YNy G•-�L NYC Yun mU >•.. Eo ro�NE� .d-� -. .G m v s. too N N p 0Q y N N N� y' O 'p .n U m y„ � i' ._ OL Y N W N � .� � N � L c��V •� � � .0 .� � y U c ro W a N L c G bh tm'o QV � o u: � U ro W � N ro Q r ro U N o �a L N G_ � L a� c � o w y O U N o d T CIO w O a ii A h z w 0 v L (�/ QJ y Vi V N N N ♦'SJ Q' N V1 G ¢ o cw a'y t ro ro W ro -o w e Y a ��Y u :E aou°o �.G a-O° E U "' ctl 4.O O.5 .r"n .� '0.• m C i 'O' E CD 'b CY p �o w U Cti LLB O a F Lcl 5 U ro O N� Y U bjD b �J bA y m G U G'O O c b .,. axi o 3 NrA a,roU ❑ fL G','j T� N'O W m U ro' -'"' U G— ti m ❑ ...n s. ❑.... V —iC O�^o .>•O m .D T •c � � bn � ro ,. C7 ro N E > o'> bb m ._ E A v-n U U O E G O E� C ro Tm N'9 bA'O >' O ro ro� L -• b _ M �n w O N O N RS U A M N ro G ro n cd 0. '9 N Gi N fYV'• G N U y U 0 U M •N N ro ° C7 c o � ❑ V U U ro ro O p 3 me > U �n [i L V o � s� 3 oN 3 `� 90 Em � ' O T. y G ro > > ° ro u • U > G a � ro ro C N U ttl N > G (i ro U N O T R O U N E E U O G pUj � ro �j F aci 3 w° w o o L_ ro,Y� G b •� ro � L U ro U U� G ro ro A U U U fl, a> m s E aci E > a°i bb c Cy- ro ro U G 'tC O N y p N °o. 3 E N w ro G' b C N p 7 vv'i O Vl � n ° U r..2 O 0 b E v m - v c o v c 7 - P U b y F Q QG N O= 0 uu u u �n G vi in in O N O N RS U A M N ro G ro n cd 0. '9 N Gi N fYV'• G N U y U 0 U M •N N ro ° C7 c o � ❑ V U U ro ro O p 3 me > U �n [i L V o � s� 3 oN 3 `� 90 Em � ' O T. y G ro > > ° ro u • U > G a � ro ro C N U ttl N > G (i ro U N O T R O U N E E U O G pUj � ro �j F aci 3 w° w o o ro,Y� G b •� ro U ro U U� G ro ro A U U U fl, a> m s E aci E > a°i bb Cy- ro ro U G 'tC °o. 3 E N °• ro G' b C N p 7 vv'i O Vl � ° U r..2 O 0 b \ 2 2 j P7 bO »o \ ƒ \ ® \ ®a 3 * \ 2 2 j CA / $ ■ \ > / u { \ ° - , { { ) )> )\ 77 \ \\ \\ 0 cq z w z 0 a, w cr w U ❑C 9 W a U o 9 O U D m N w V N w e1 � Q P z V w E C v m c m w a� �U T a � n O o �p L � .a wro X � � C 'b o N N > � v p G N n s � O '� on c P. C � C � � U a Y U n D W O w a V C C ." O� D� o D � o ❑N ti �' x C '� C N � � o v o C o Z❑❑ ❑❑� V F ✓ N O C O' D l� N N a M W y ❑ 4 p q v� O D N C7 ro O V .i Ci IL N O N�� ro O O3 V K 'V D�> V V C O L U 3O3 3 v C \ / \ 7 2 / s / / _ / /\ z)/ \ i /)[ /§ /j\r):!: q r° ®: • z : :: ) \ \\/:7879 )\ F1 ±± ! \ \0 > ) ,,,,,,,,,, 0 \ \\ W z 0 a uj w x H w O CJ Da C o a ZZ E o ) av��E m-.ro a`ro.J o vm � o > $ E U o EP y N N E q o E v v o ro m V o v o r'A�in .a w >WU m w � �b o'� ea A o� ❑ A � m>, ° .". h RE -2 W.FU C .G. U a O u �'� C b d o 6 v m G N o i b i m b N a o °. 0.1 Z y Z P] y c c Eb o F C ro N o v 0 vo^ ttl V W� 0 C A N N tier: �- w'EC2a�W Ec�F --. m. m.�vu wv�mm� �a'Sa Wc7mm�` Vr.ada N CIO W r z 0 a w x H LU 0 U N U U o t�V °� � ° � C o � � '��0.5 ❑a❑'� v � ao C 78 b0 O O V N n �° Oma aSri °._ ma ti ov b a o'a°i m a 9 6.2 aNi a° o '�o�P'v 00 .5c :rip o`5 U 5b e 'v u" o p "ob Nib y o U x v .0 t E k oil O O ro ti N .� o k b v 0 "v o O G`v O.� + v C k v o o od mZ. .,J 35 al cva�. Moro ^fro .0 N.] @a Ua0 Q° kl a-1� B� °ron, c� N CA w V) CIOz 0 a w C24 F- w O V OA U V OA NC U 0. •] � o 0 ti Lx � U O Q Q'COCQ y N °'9 y CP. S C w Pte' S q e C .. E❑ �� y." � �a air � a o E v S 2,, F m io v eA 0 oa oNao mom.�Q.S E xo,x�a a� sj° oL 700 U C C p � b qu+ C S C d C o b o o.0 P.'CCC V V a O D U KG'a a.0 Q C o G� N N Obp N 7 9 ti �ym��q.dN � a � 'C ✓ '�' x o .. N q'C a ,y qq I W s z uo W U O O G E o ro ro V � o E Q.Q�> °.E o�v°i'Nxy a = o -w .. t�w o � U U rte--+ Cn. Q va O Y O> r1 N A > p Z Lp O > N EO v N E. E CD L _ I ID vN v � a '1 d`n ¢, t7 v m' � E S u, o mn v - v m� P» w wvpi�mv;" mNivva ya_ v °v_o _ =o� �dT � a`U O° �mLL °mwn N� v F v 1 w- LJ Y L _ I ID vN v � a '1 d`n ¢, t7 v m' � E S u, o mn v South Shore I1 Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Prepared for: City of Lake Elsinore Planning Division 130 South Main Sheet Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Applicant: South Shore 11, LLC 1200 Quail Street, Suite 220 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Prepared by: HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. 7578 El Cajon Boulevard, Suite 200 La Mesa, CA 91942 October 2014 The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, requires that a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) be established upon completing findings. CEQA stipulates that "the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance dining project implementation." This MMRP has been developed in compliance with Section 21081.6 of CEQA. The City of Lake Elsinore is the lead agency for the project under CEQA and will administer and implement the MMRP. The City is responsible for review of all monitoring reports, enforcement actions, and document disposition. The City will rely on information provided by the project site observers /monitors (e.g., construction manager, project manager, biologist, archaeologist, etc.) as accurate and up -to -date and will provide personnel to field check mitigation measure status, as required. The mitigation measures in this MMRP are derived from the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for the South Shore II project (proposed project) dated August 2014. To sufficiently track and document the status of mitigation measures for the proposed project, a mitigation matrix (Table 1) has been prepared and includes the following items: • Potentially Significant Impact • Mitigation Measure Number • Mitigation Measure (text) • Monitoring Responsibility Party /Action Notes • Mitigation Timing • Monitoring Schedule /Reporting Procedure • Mitigation Measure Implementation Date Mitigation measure timing has been noted in several specific timing increments, the most common being: • During the design phase • Prior to permit issuance • During construction • At completion of construction South Shore 11(Tenialive Tract Map No, 36567) Ooobei 2014 Alaigaiion Monitoring and Reporting Program Pagc 1 V ,IZhi V z H x O W z r� V z � 0 0 z H W O x x H O ry C OG C a q. b O O OG 4 .o q ° C va G oa s 'a O O y - o s a, O = u � O P. O V a0+ W Y R bDF EdJ Ly h •V C ".G � � ❑. C G � ❑ U G d - N N O iCtl �C C p U F a 6 F o bn c 0 bn 6 bn = a o I O U C = L C y a w y L E R •�- aCi G N� �6 iJ � p, � y bn O i .B 9 v a N J 6 R •j N C Q' I. O" .bn 'O A a b9 m O N 'C f' ro vO N C 'O. 0 y O O O a 0 = tC O 0 a O NT Z R v� V C 9 •C � t y V '„ •cl � m "' � m .v � ? c 'D x c � v � c 0 4=. v S � n. m .� _ v o_� y 0 bD CyJ O bnd O ry C OG C a q. b O O OG 4 .o q ° C va G oa s 'a O O y - o s a, Y R R M N 00 a 0 0 � Q M � 6 y o ,s O C d � o ` o S i s O � S O E U � U V Q aoa I O i Y R F U L Y R N t QO c G^ N C N C C G ti a G= 2 O V • o o — -o o a c O bD C O Y O p o T C G � c Lo C� o G v ib 9 c G .0 m R ` V b C GJ R 6 i O G u� V J Q O @ �'o o y ° 0 G N ro V C N O 4 A 3 'D a E � ti O L: •� b v � Q R M N 00 a 0 0 � Q M � 6 y o ,s O C d � o ` o S i s O � S ti R H ad_ V O C• R N en R E aS i U F a a ° E G 9 O a E F F C O r^ C bn'2 9q.O V "O O9 y'V° OUV F O � = O � C c'i M C 5 00 F U L'F � O G R G ° CG F - ❑ a E a ,.. o a N O G w N ° o U ✓+ X O c E n= a c o s 3 =n s 5 3 b a .°- O 47 R� N p� Y" '� - O O N N b➢+ - N� al N C .� O U N U c° E E . <a � C G y R V � G F b➢ Y "m � O L y UO O V Q e c b o' M � d 4 .y O r y h � > c no o N O A F H C C L V ^J U V O CL �oJ C• O � m O i i R R N Ir � N bC-A a• a 9 F U U U P _ U y0 U L/1 3- O O G O E E E itl U a E w N a Q m v w C c o _ ° E t➢ C a• � W a O � O y d bD O O O C) Ez E n '� ti° on e o 2a °- n C7 oo a N o o °1 0 U O Ll d n� c m .v. CO.D v `v N a bD U .E z N a v 6 W O 'UO a G .� 5 ro .b c ^m E' K i ai v c 0 O @ bb O N Vi i� O D U U 0 0 c'«• a � � v v v 0 bb 9 w O ➢ b n N m 'O O c O C yL` O R N 0 N 4 O n � � C b O y 1 `e GY C C C 00 r i o 0 Y O � h ti �U R E.y Y b O p� 4 -vo 0 V r ^, o d y a i a C w v tl e i o � o - o bo E � $ ra C. O � ❑ f en �a = c h p" C� 0 9 n. ro °� b➢ bD u a >. c aci v� v ° m F a°i G aUi O 8n O' O O C_ b bb V C ➢' by C h b➢?' O �' U O � C N 00'� �j y N 9 a L b➢ H i U� � ro N tC O y N 'O N bb° bq y ro c v G Q E F c -o b .y _ •3 U c. w° o 'a - o �' Q 'o ro 9 m ro E c o - N ° �? a. N m' E o ro b z m r o` a• Q aci _v o 'o ?➢ o ._ " u c ro m c a .. c Y ro ro N 0 ._ a� a mCCE6 °avcv�at °'a•_ .�a n.�cv ° =a ro O C > m N t U U G 9 C U bp a V Si _ � SS ro E � c `C F F v y � M 'A t7 Y b O p� 4 -vo 0 V r ^, o d y a i a C w v tl e i o � o - o bo Q / /} ; §i 2 /i) \ \\)(\ �� {[\ )� \ /) \ s \ \) /)\ ^\ 2! { ^AZ 2 \ \77 »±f / \{ ' !\ }m >\ {7 /j)2yj) } ) / /} p R( F C F O E N O C• F L � � F W R d m L y N L o w c G C bC9 N 'II U.R. C L R C d 9 N g 0 0 - �D E o u bDb ➢� � bn bD� v G R C w > > R W a• h N "n.G CLU O R 9: a.�n.UCa L] m V awl cG c y � w o aci � ❑ 4G "v � b 'E 9 C 9 Y tyJd aR.. W E w N Q .tJ O N p G. Q L cZ° jai URp�O ��.0 CHOW O> R b0 C M R y QO CCVen X ap.�y� E� U bL➢ �` p y� c y O a f N U U E C p A= � o 0 �a+➢ U N bb Q s bn o n. ro °' O c o ❑° G O E� v o o A m bD ._ U Cp�Cb b0 y R ❑ O,d �D F�iN�a npi �•• b➢ � N S 6 5 [� ..�' b 00 C TNO dR C''N �a� a � C p� dy 0 U h � C 1 M 00 O O � 4 U p > o 00 ti fi F O 1 v M1 r° R •� m o U � U u ❑ CCQ� O L Y fC R U u E }, d; N� s _ > p ❑ � � � a Ci O b bA N � � N O 'c a bA � c"'i ❑ o u c ro c`°i on � � i4 1m-. Q bUA N U N al Q M v b0 N a C C G bA ❑ 4. � O �.. O T ❑ � E O U Df1 bA O U O bA itl t➢ ` « 9 O O >, c p v bA O O N > > CS eU+ Q � �. N a. ll u a Q Y❑ 6A .D C y Q� ❑ v 0 0 id '> Q .0+ u .� � d N O N vOi ^ ' E � -O ❑' v d O ❑ Q � v ❑ m � � C >.� O 6 a+ '. � Fv.A.E O N � O E 47 a• y � � T.B .r ❑ tA.E 'C ttl O � C E v E ro N ❑' CvA ,= G N 4 �,um ❑ N❑ >nyia -cc d�mU> m ti�mE>"a_. v �� °_ °E �a mmm '�mmE ❑ a O tC N 'm N v ttl U N v❑ o O ❑bAa m iN O 9`�Y'r A U NCOCJV O �' o8"Eom Y.0 p0' 60 bb 'y 00 bb O C O O a• N bA L E > �y t �'. � r U d O F� L' '= � .O � :. U y0 .a v� y N X O a t a❑. v E � E N W Z. N ti b0 L L" U i N T .❑ v r�i. E v C u E `' ] CO t6 Q a .'^.' N bA bo F p r�i� ❑O W O A "O "' N Od W b N U '00 O G - Lvmi '.- .� '� '� '-viE '�' M v U v �tl O L 0.N o Ern b❑O N ._, bn d R y j v C N vi ro 0 N +L+ d o` � � �❑ O 3 N t0. 2 Y a ��. �� C m O E Y C �> iC E�� VE Q � ,. N •C ° °_ Q o of ° .0. .� y a'O+ ,o .0 .° - 4aJ bn 'czV s o w _ 5 o U O> 3 . � C bA U U L R F C s 0. C � V a C v � 'm C 0 O b O b L M � o y n r 0 v c b" c '> H � � O i O � S S Wi y a W rQI V z F x 0 �W. a A z r o ro� Fz �r z 0 h a F w a 0 x x rrN-� F� O C F 9 a p ? V R y V I C( O Q r c. F 9 a «n ti R E aS d� � 9 a a U O � L bn � G = L a.+ O Y O F d pa a� C F V R bn w o O E '5 �i 0. O a N U td u0 F R a C p bD w T O. o E R p G a R V � G bD �I C i C 0 O M Q O y- 4 op v v � C � r c cb, .c o y L J O � G s w O A H 9 y p U O CC boa : N W R } L y ate+ U .G u b9> E p M.0 O L ro Y O J O O O 9 V O b➢ C 00 O 0 C � E O _ h bD'.� � a b➢ ro : bn bl X ' . V O ❑ N Q U On �a U Q 9 O T F � za �Rroo� >o�� i U no U� Ua�ooa�ro: G.�G.Q �� J U R P.� W QUQQ bn •• D\ - 4 J O R° U �O 'a) `� N O N Cy 'D :s W ❑ o .o c J.^ o ° ciao :.'b — � bn — F o ah' `�om�romU `mSm hJ� h 18 c ro g `vim �zd : m 1 a'o a❑ O � bDU N O U II. J J O LE ;pG U W a' °moo vF a> �L ObDO �,?.�004= LJ °romOE VJ a'`nDO Y C N p� 0 O n b C1 M OG 0 d q' t Q S o V d fi v o c r r .y o "> r 0 0 7 h rE ci! t7 O a 0.i z H x 0 e� A z z �O a 0 z O H W a O x x F O C C O E � u = J ao° Q � c• = 9 i O i u R en <e EaS s° J � bn c o � o = a �a ° b➢ _ e➢ E z T G b➢ �' o � a N = c v m 5aa d 3 ccN �G 0 b➢ P w a E c c N F U t➢ IM G A o n N ° 5 bn o 'o N vl U t4 u v O N G (C N G b➢ U am _a�iN v [6 v N E c G y bnU u 9 Z U p> v 0 -- C U = W U � v 0. b➢ v 't30 Y � U c U _• G O v G > o C W N N U Ly D7 ° E° N � o c ro O v G G L y y s a T O a ° E E ° O y 4y U d N 3 v U � v O o N ro 'O 6U � L b➢ O V' 0.cl h N U a+ c w y t s G U O p N b➢ d 'O J 3, c a c w N C �' ro o � E td D N U en n � � G U W O � x 3 N O G 4xJ G G a 9 O N N td N G � N 4 9 O � � � U _ n > 3 � U U . N � U N 3 N N ° J W � N O p '°� b➢ U O bn N � CU m s N r � Y C7 N x bp I C7 E `� F bn � I R3 N � 1l ti N y. 0 O n � b U b d ry 4.j a C o 0 y C �„ aG ti V a z H x O z H R Z E" O z 0 Q' N x x H bdo 0 rz U O Q , c• _ •p w Er d i � nn bn o _ c ❑ c E o❑ a °m' o w t E E �'" °°' o o E E aci is 00 Q >° E O pp bn E n 2 g bn c c c G C _ O On bn C a Y M bn E> a c c c E> a. O ° v O Y .. d E' 0 9 O m v 0 0 a fJ G v G❑ N O a J O. v .° •O O v O N O O 4- ttl '. m �- o• c m o � E :n ° is _ — v ° °� zi D .5 m 73 'C o o m h bn C E RE A ' L i t z t n y ; z C � 00 0 O n � a o� M � O L C � r o a b c� cs be c a o n v o O S 0 L R F •0 m o I V � V v O N C 9 aY. O L aY+ R � U 2 E� a. O °a LO O v G 0• ._0 a u Y o o ro c o N c -o o• bD E bn o b o a ��;: V] � 0.l Vl U Q i� U fi.E ro � G 6• .E Y N a' o E m °':o ro c `° 'o E `° id -moo c ❑ v[—i c .° U ° � s ❑ " N F, .> Y i n � '3 0, o E ro o � aCi aNi is b' c rl 3 G m N o O v R O— c U b9 v C r y .. b9 0 F H a FY- U v ni 3 on °° bon R — y v a N — c b9 itl 69 S O O 9 9 O `* T O y 1 � . w O, O U n � b O Un Y `n O O � i Q O u 4 a c �9 fi a O O a h C G a v O O E � u c u C. C a m U Rh G u 01 L v v � u U � � L 0. C bL c y = o C d o m o bL c F T c c a � o T ,Z iy 5 L as 0 CL OO E o c o E E z o c OT aoi O .o a u�o o a o c w °_' h o R h o c � o .". d O� z bb o E" U W o v N U a O W O m— 0 ° 5 " a'� ° ro � ° .? '•� 'c' m � � Q m °c aci 3 `° � -. c aci .4 'z .,"o. o° o Y 'o o u c E E a`bi a�oi o° a, E �i `m of o k°- . °�.�°'.3 .°'.3 °E OO r o u x w � u c v N w v e � y 0 O n � b C h m on 0 o y 4 00 V G t` b v 'c bo r � o c o � x L F •y d O O E R w A r] C• G 9 � o i.01, is bD F E 4 G G '0 •o °- E v ° E m q R° n o m N a• a a°i N c« E o «« J F F bn w, F o 0 R n bp F F .,. 'uo Coq ,.'QO WrnUQQ mOmv,000 N ° c o � 0, N N a N N n•i q LL N �--i d [L N G — E O L i. a .. c A N N a V ll N- L a Q o R T- R E � eta p4'-�U'U� pitO v p�'U'V N � -0 4 • O n � b O 1 M 00 O ,c S ` 4 G y b oa ha o h � v pp h E.y •0 v o o E � V � V U O N G L � v m wr V N r dd I a O O~ U I v 0. 6 a0 _ c O b0 W O M O U_ b➢.� O C 0. ;'.. U O.7 ❑ � Q C .O O U o U nc 3 c.bw bD m 4 =•'_� E t � p u0i ���� .n s O E O U L a• O N 'O O O Y F a W G C V p.0 r✓ � U O Y O N O a0. b� tGJ t� E 9 �•d bD — _ U a o nn :. F E> O 4b'.D d W ti C N U d O WD r c ::. iC m c❑ ;� 3 o �y .- a a O E U U U •~ V �. L y N O H C U N p� m � O h 0 dry' a ,e 4 V pr S v o Q S s 'a O O � l s .o h Q L t7 S CITY OF LADE " " LSI NOIZE DREAM EXTREME. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION TO: Honorable Chairperson Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Richard J. MacHott, LEED Green Associate Planning Manager DATE: March 17, 2015 PROJECT: Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 - Proposing the Subdivision of 67.69 Acres (APN 363 -020 -002, 003, 011 Through 015, and 018) Into 147 Single- Family Residential Lots, Two Open Space Lots, Three Open Space Lots for a Park and One Open Space/Water Quality Basin Lot; the Grading and Use of a City -Owned Parcel (APN 363 - 020 -011) as Part of the Park; Located Northeast of Interstate 15 at Main Street; approximately One - Quarter Mile Northeast of Camino Del Norte. APPLICANT/ Erik Lunde, South Shore II, LLC, 515 Avocado Avenue OWNER Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: Adopt Resolution No. 2015 - ; A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California Regarding Tentative Tract Map 36567 Located Northeast of Interstate 15 at Main Street approximately One - Quarter Mile Northeast of Camino Del Norte, Recommending to the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2015 -02. Adopt Resolution No. 2015 - ; A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California Regarding Tentative Tract Map 36567 Located Northeast of Interstate 15 at Main Street approximately One - Quarter Mile Northeast of Camino Del Norte, Recommending to the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore Adoption of Findings of Consistency with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 March 17, 2015 Page 2 of 4 3. Adopt Resolution No. 2015-; A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California Recommending to the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore Approval of Tentative Tract Map 36567 Located Northeast of Interstate 15 at Main Street Approximately One - Quarter Mile Northeast of Camino Del Norte, Dividing Approximately 67.9 Acres Into 147 Single- family Residential Lots, Two Open Space Lots, Three Open Space Lots for a Park and One Open Space/Water Quality basin lot, and The Grading and Use of an Adjacent City - owned Parcel as Part of the Park. Proiect Location The project site is located northeast of Interstate 15 (1 -15) at the Main Street interchange in the City of Lake Elsinore. More specifically, it is located approximately one - quarter mile northeast of Camino Del Norte Street and one mile northeast of Lake Elsinore. The project site is comprised of primarily ungraded, undeveloped land, with hillside terrain and natural drainage channels that generally flow in a southwesterly direction. An open excavation area is present in the southeastern -most portion of the project site. Environmental Setting Proiect Description Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 (referred to as South Shore II) proposes the subdivision of 67.69 acres (APN 363- 020 -002, 003, 011 through 015, and 018) into 147 single - family residential lots, two open space lots, three open space lots for a park and one EXISTING LAND GENERAL PLAN; ZONING USE Project Vacant LMR (Low- Medium Density R -1 (Single - family Site Residential), OS (Open Residential), OS (Open Space) Space) North Vacant SP (Ramsgate SP), SP (Ramsgate SP), LMR (Low- Medium Density R -1 (Single - family Residential) Residential East Vacant SP (Spyglass Ranch SP (Spyglass Ranch Specific Plan ) Specific Plan South Vacant, Closed CMU (Commercial Mixed CMU (Commercial Mixed Landfill Site Use), OS (Open Space), Use), OS (Open Space), H -R (Hillside Residential) R -1 (Single - Family Residential West Vacant LMR (Low- Medium Density R -1 (Single - Family Residential), OS (Open Residential) Space) Proiect Description Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 (referred to as South Shore II) proposes the subdivision of 67.69 acres (APN 363- 020 -002, 003, 011 through 015, and 018) into 147 single - family residential lots, two open space lots, three open space lots for a park and one TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 March 17, 2015 Page 3 of 4 open space /water quality basin lot. The overall average single - family lot size is 7,566 square feet with lots ranging from 6,000 square feet to 16,163 square feet. The proposed 3.63 -acre park site consists of 1.63 acres of on -site property and 1.9 acres of an adjacent City -owned parcel (APN 363- 020 -011). The City -owned parcel was previously used as a borrow site to provide cover material for the closed landfill that is immediately south of the City -owned parcel. Analysis General Plan & Zoning Consistency There are two General Plan Land Use Designations and zoning designations for the subject property. The 67.69 -acre subdivision site is designated Low - Medium Density Residential ( "LMR ") and zoned R -1 (Single - family Residential) and the City -owned parcel being used as part of the park site is designated Open Space (OS) and zoned OS (Open Space). The maximum lot yield for the LMR designation is 6.0 du /ac., thereby generating a maximum yield for the overall site of 406 dwelling units. Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 is consistent with the LMR land use designation and the R -1 zoning with its proposed maximum of 147 dwelling units. The use of the City -owned parcel for part of the park site is consistent with its OS land use designation and zoning. Access Access to and from Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 requires the construction of roads within the adjacent Spyglass Ranch Specific Plan (Tentative Tract No. 35337), specifically Elsinore Hills Road, and the construction of Camino Del Norte from Main Street to Elsinore Hills Road. The project has been conditioned to construct the required access roads if they have not already been completed prior to the first building permit. Although the proposed project will not utilize a future extension of La Strada for access, the tentative map has been designed to incorporate a potential future alignment of La Strada along the southern edge of the project site. Land Use Compatibility The proposed tentative tract map is an extension of the single - family residential development approved within the Spyglass Ranch Specific Plan immediately to the west of the project site. Natural open space lots, with identified fuel modification zones adjacent to residential lots, provides a buffer with adjacent undeveloped areas. For these reasons, the proposed project is compatible with adjacent existing and approved land uses. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 March 17, 2015 Page 4 of 4 Environmental Determination The City conducted an Initial Study to determine if the Project would result in significant impacts on the environment. Based upon the results of the Initial Study, there was substantial evidence that any potential impacts to the environment associated with the Project could be mitigated to less than significant levels. For this reason, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2015 -02 was prepared in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.: "CEQA ") and the State Implementation Guidelines for CEQA (14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15000, et seq.: "CEQA Guidelines ") and applicable requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore, to disclose potential environmental impacts and to propose mitigation for those impacts. City staff received seven comment letters on the MND during the 30 -day public review comment period which began on December 10, 2013 and ended on January 8, 2014. Copies of the comment letters and responses to those letters included in the attached Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration document. Prepared By: Richard J. MacHott, LEED Green Associate Planning Manager Approved By: Grant Taylor, Community Development Director Attachments 1. Vicinity Map 2. Aerial Photo 3. Aerial Composite Project Map 4. Planning Commission Resolutions 5. Conditions of Approval for TTM 36567 6. Tract No. 36577 7. Letter from Riverside County Waste Management Department dated 3 -6 -15 8. Initial Study for Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2015 -02 9. Draft Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program VICINITY MAP TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) CITY OF iC`n LAI\7-E� LSir NOFZE DREAM EX]'REME AERIAL MAP TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) CITY OF LA ,,JLS� T ZE NOI DREAM EXI IUML s� r� RESOLUTION NO. 2015- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA REGARDING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 36567 LOCATED NORTHEAST OF INTERSTATE 15 AT MAIN STREET APPROXIMATELY ONE - QUARTER MILE NORTHEAST OF CAMINO DEL NORTE, ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2015 -02 WHEREAS, Erik Lunde, South Shore II, filed an application for Tentative Tract Map No. 36567, also referred to as South Shore II, (the "project') with the City of Lake Elsinore for a residential subdivision of 67.7+ acres of unimproved property located northeast of Interstate 15 at Main Street; approximately one - quarter mile northeast of Camino Del Norte (APN 363- 020 -002, 003, 011 through 015, and 018), which includes the development of an adjacent City -owned property (APN 363- 020 -011) as part of a park site; and WHEREAS, the Project is subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.: "CEQA ") and the State Implementation Guidelines for CEQA (14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15000, et seq.: "CEQA Guidelines ") because the Project involves an activity which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and involves the issuance of a lease, permit license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies (Public Resources Code Section 21065); and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, the City conducted an Initial Study to determine if the Project would have a significant effect on the environment. The Initial Study revealed that the project would have potentially significant environmental impacts but those potentially significant impacts could be mitigated to less than significant levels; and WHEREAS, based upon the results of the Initial Study, and based upon the standards set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, it was determined that it was appropriate to prepare and circulate Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2015 -02 for the Project (the "Mitigated Negative Declaration "); and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072, on December 10, 2013 the City duly issued a notice of intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration, and in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15073, the Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration was made available for public review and comment for thirty days beginning on December 10, 2013 and ending on January 8, 2014; and WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ( "MMRP ") for the Project has been prepared in accordance with Section 21081.6 of CEQA; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 16.24.110 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code ( "LEMC ") the Planning Commission has been delegated with the responsibility of CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -_ PAGE 2 OF 4 recommending to the City Council the approval, conditional approval or denial of tentative maps; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2015 at a duly noticed public hearing the Planning Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item; and made its recommendation to the City Council to adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2015- 02 and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Tentative Tract Map 36567 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2015 -16; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section LEMC Section 16.24.120 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code ( "LEMC ") the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore has the responsibility of acting on a tentative map after receipt of the Planning Commission action by either approving, conditionally approving or disapproving it; and WHEREAS, on April 14, 2015 at a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission as well as evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into these findings by this reference. SECTION 2. The City Council has evaluated all comments, written and oral, received from persons who have reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The City Council hereby finds and determines that all public comments have been addressed. SECTION 3. The City Council hereby finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project is adequate and has been completed in accordance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's procedures for implementation of CEQA. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration represents the independent judgment of the City. SECTION 4. The City Council further finds and determines that none of the circumstances listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5 requiring an additional recirculation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration are present and that it would be appropriate to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration as proposed. SECTION 5. The City Council hereby makes, adopts, and incorporates the following findings regarding the lack of potential environmental impacts of the Project and the analysis and conclusions set forth in the Mitigated Negative Declaration: CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -_ PAGE 3 OF 4 1. Revisions in the Project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study was released for public review and mitigation measures set forth in the Initial Study would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. Based upon the Initial Study conducted for the Project, there is substantial evidence suggesting that all potential impacts to the environment resulting from the Project can be mitigated to less than significant levels. All appropriate and feasible mitigation has been incorporated into the Project design. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan contains an implementation program for each mitigation measure. After implementation of the mitigation contained in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, potential environmental impacts are effectively reduced to less than significant levels. 2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the City Council including the initial study and any comments received, that the Project will have significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to the evidence received, including comment letters, and in the light of the whole record presented, the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. SECTION 6. Based upon the evidence presented and the above findings, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore hereby adopts Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2015 -02 and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Tentative Tract Map 36567. SECTION 7. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, on the 14th day of April, 2015. Steve Manos, Mayor City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Virginia J. Bloom, City Clerk CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -_ PAGE 4 OF 4 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Barbara Leibold, City Attorney 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. 2015 - was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of April, 2015, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Virginia J. Bloom, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 2015- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA REGARDING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 36567 LOCATED NORTHEAST OF INTERSTATE 15 AT MAIN STREET APPROXIMATELY ONE - QUARTER MILE NORTHEAST OF CAMINO DEL NORTE, ADOPTING FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) WHEREAS, Erik Lunde, South Shore II, filed an application for Tentative Tract Map No. 36567, also referred to as South Shore Il, (the "project ") with the City of Lake Elsinore for a residential subdivision of 67.7+ acres of unimproved property located northeast of Interstate 15 at Main Street; approximately one - quarter mile northeast of Camino Del Norte (APN 363- 020 -002, 003, 011 through 015, and 018), which includes the development of an adjacent City -owned property (APN 363- 020 -011) as part of a park site; and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP requires that all projects which are proposed on land covered by an MSHCP criteria cell and which require discretionary approval by the legislative body undergo the Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process ( "LEAP ") and a Joint Project Review ( "JPR ") between the City and the Regional Conservation Authority ( "RCA ") prior to public review of the project applications; and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 further requires that development projects not within an MSHCP criteria cell must be analyzed pursuant to the MSHCP "Plan Wide Requirements "; and WHEREAS, the Project is discretionary in nature and requires review and approval by the Planning Commission and /or City Council; and WHEREAS, the Project is located within MSHCP Criteria Cell 4459 of Cell Group 8', Core or Linkage, and is within the Elsinore Plan Area of the MSHCP, and therefore, the Project was reviewed pursuant to the MSHCP; and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP requires that the City adopt consistency findings prior to approving any discretionary project entitlements for development of property that is subject to the MSHCP; and WHEREAS, the Project was reviewed by the City through its Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process (LEAP) which determined that the Project was consistent with the conservation goals of the MSHCP and no conservation was required on the Project site; and WHEREAS, the Project was reviewed by the Regional Conservation Authority of Western Riverside County (RCA) through its Joint Project Review process, and the RCA determined that the Project would not preclude the ability of MSCHP conservation goals to be reached in the project area; and CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2015 - PAGE 2 of 6 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 16.24.110 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code ( "LEMC ") the Planning Commission has been delegated with the responsibility of recommending to the City Council the approval, conditional approval or denial of tentative maps; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2015 at a duly noticed public hearing the Planning Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item; and made its recommendation to the City Council to adopt findings that Tentative Tract Map 36567 is consistent with the MSHCP by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2015 -17; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section LEMC Section 16.24.120 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code ( "LEMC ") the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore has the responsibility of acting on a tentative map after receipt of the Planning Commission action by either approving, conditionally approving or disapproving it; and WHEREAS, on April 14, 2015 at a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission as well as evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council has reviewed and analyzed the proposed application and its consistency with the MSHCP prior to making a decision to adopt Findings of Consistency with the MSHCP for Tentative Tract Map 36567, SECTION 2. That in accordance with the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, and the MSHCP, findings for adoption have been made as follows: 1. The proposed project is a project under the City's MSHCP Resolution, and the City must make an MSHCP Consistency Finding before approval. The proposed project includes a tentative tract map that requires a discretionary approval from the City, including CEQA review. Pursuant to the City's MSHCP Resolution, the project has been reviewed for MSHCP consistency, including consistency with "Other Plan Requirements." These include the Protection of Species Associated with Riparian /Riverine Areas and Vernal pool Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 6.1.2), Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 6.1.3), Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP, Section 6.3.2), Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 64.4), Vegetation Mapping (MSHCP, Section 6.5. 1) requirements, Fuels Management CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2015-, PAGE 3 of 6 Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 6.4), and payment of the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee (MSHCP Ordinance, Section 4). 2. The proposed project was reviewed through the City's LEAP (Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process) and the County's Joint Project Review processes. The proposed project is located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell area, and a formal LEAP submittal was required. It was determined that the proposed project is consistent with the conservation goals of the MSHCP. Additionally, the project is also required to demonstrate compliance with "Other Plan Requirements." The project is in compliance as described further below. 3. The proposed project is consistent with the Riparian /Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. No vernal pools exist on the site and therefore vernal pool species are not expected to occur. Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP focuses on protection of riparian /riverine areas and vernal pool habitat types based on their value in the conservation of a number of MSHCP- covered species. The project will impact 0.13 acres of MSHCP riparian /riverine consisting of ephemeral streamed /swale. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 6.1.2, a Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Protection ( DBESP) was prepared. The DBESP concluded that avoidance of the impacted riparian /riverine areas is infeasible and that through the acquisition of mitigation credits supporting equal or superior values, the project would replace lost functions and values and would be considered a biologically equivalent or superior project. 4. The proposed project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines. The proposed project site is not located within the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area (NEPSSA) as shown on Figure 6 -1 of the MSHCP, and therefore no focused survey was required. . 5. The proposed project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. The MSHCP requires additional surveys for certain species if the project is located in CASSA, Amphibian Species Survey Area with Critical Area, Burrowing Owl Survey Areas with Criteria Area, and Mammal Species Survey Areas with Criteria Areas of the MSHCP. The project site is located outside of any CASSA for plants and mammals and no CASSA plant species were observed during the focused surveys for the site. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2015 - PAGE 4 of 6 The proposed project is located within the survey area identified for the burrowing owl. A survey for the western burrowing owl were conducted pursuant to the Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions as set forth by the MSHCP and resulted in negative findings of burrowing owl and sign and the lack of burrowing owl habitat. Based upon the above, it can be concluded that the proposed project is consistent with the provisions of the MSHCP. 6. The proposed project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines. The MSHCP Urban/Wildland Interface Guidelines are intended to address indirect effects associated with locating development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area. Indirect impacts to the off -site potential Conservation Area are discussed above under Item 4a, b for the following issues: Drainage, Toxics, Lighting, Noise, Invasive species, Barriers, and Grading /Land Development. As required by the MSHCP, mitigation has been included that would reduce indirect impacts to a less - than - significant level, and would be consistent with the MSHCP. 7. The proposed project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. Vegetation mapping was conducted as part of the biological surveys conducted on the entire - Project _Site and is consistent with the MSHCP Section 6.3.1 Vegetation Mapping requirements. 8. The proposed project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. The Fuels Management Guidelines presented in Section 6.4 of the MSHCP are intended to address brush management activities around new development within or adjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area and shall be implemented as part of the Project. As such, the Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. 9. The proposed project is conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. The developer will be required to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. 10. The proposed project overall is consistent with the MSHCP. The Project is consistent with all applicable provisions of the MSHCP. No further actions related to the MSHCP are required. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2015 - PAGE 5 of 6 SECTION 3. Based upon the evidence presented and the above findings, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore hereby adopts findings that Tentative Tract Map 36567 is consistent with the MSHCP. SECTION 4. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, on the 14th day of April, 2015. Steve Manos, Mayor City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Virginia J. Bloom, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Barbara Leibold, City Attorney CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -_ PAGE 6 of 6 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. 2015 - was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of April, 2015, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Virginia J. Bloom, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 2015- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 36567 LOCATED NORTHEAST OF INTERSTATE 15 AT MAIN STREET APPROXIMATELY ONE - QUARTER MILE NORTHEAST OF CAMINO DEL NORTE, DIVIDING APPROXIMATELY 67.9 ACRES INTO 147 SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, TWO OPEN SPACE LOTS, THREE OPEN SPACE LOTS FOR A PARK AND ONE OPEN SPACE/WATER QUALITY BASIN LOT, AND THE GRADING AND USE OF AN ADJACENT CITY -OWNED PARCEL AS PART OF THE PARK WHEREAS, Erik Lunde, South Shore II, filed an application for Tentative Tract Map No. 36567, also referred to as South Shore II, (the "project') with the City of Lake Elsinore for a residential subdivision of 67.7± acres of unimproved property located northeast of Interstate 15 at Main Street; approximately one - quarter mile northeast of Camino Del Norte (APN 363- 020 -002, 003, 011 through 015, and 018), which includes the development of an adjacent City -owned property (APN 363- 020 -011) as part of a park site; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 16.24.110 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code ( "LEMC ") the Planning Commission has been delegated with the responsibility of recommending to the City Council the approval, conditional approval or denial of tentative maps; and WHEREAS, the Project is subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.: "CEQA ") and the State Implementation Guidelines for CEQA (14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15000, et seq.: "CEQA Guidelines ") because the Project involves an activity which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and involves the issuance of a lease, permit license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies (Public Resources Code Section 21065); and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, the City conducted an Initial Study to determine if the Project would have a significant effect on the environment. The Initial Study revealed that the project would have potentially significant environmental impacts but those potentially significant impacts could be mitigated to less than significant levels; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072, on December 10, 2013 the City duly issued a notice of intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration; and in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15073, the Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration was made available for public review and comment for thirty days beginning on December 10, 2013 and ending on January 8, 2014. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2015 - _ PAGE 2 OF 5 WHEREAS, on March 17, 2015 at a duly noticed public hearing the Planning Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item; and made its recommendation to the City Council to approve Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2015 -18, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section LEMC Section 16.24.120 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (" I FMC') the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore has the responsibility of acting on a tentative map after receipt of the Planning Commission action by either approving, conditionally approving or disapproving it; and WHEREAS, on April 14, 2015 at a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission as well as evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council has reviewed and analyzed the proposed project pursuant to the California Planning and Zoning Laws (Cal. Gov. Code §§ 65000 et sec.), the Lake Elsinore General Plan and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and finds and determines that the proposed Tentative Tract No. 36567 is consistent with the requirements of California Planning and Zoning Law and with the goals and policies of the Lake Elsinore General Plan and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. SECTION 2. The City Council has considered Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2015 -02 and the Mitigation Measures appertaining thereto. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2015 -02 was prepared pursuant to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Appropriate findings were made, and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2015 -02 provides the necessary environmental clearance for Tentative Tract No. 36567. SECTION 3. That in accordance with the California Planning and Zoning Laws and the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the City Council makes the following findings for Tentative Tract No. 36567: 1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvements, is consistent with the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan (Government Code Section 66473.5). a. The design of the proposed map, approximately 67.7 acres divided into 147 single- family residential lots, two open space lots, three open CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2015 - _ PAGE 3 OF 5 space lots for a park and one open space /water quality basin lot is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Low - Medium Density Residential. b. The proposed use of the adjacent City -owned parcel for a portion of a park site is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Open Space. c. The overall average single- family lot size of 7,566 square feet with lots ranging from 6,000 square feet to 16,163 square feet associated with the Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 provide a variety of lots and potential variety of home size product type in order to implement the objectives of the City's General Plan and the project proponents. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvements, is consistent with the provisions of the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. a. The Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the adopted R -1 (Single - family Residential) zoning for the subject property. b. The use of the adjacent City -owned parcel for a portion of a park site is consistent with the property's OS (Open Space) zoning. c. The proposed project is consistent with the development standards set for tentative tract maps in Chapter 16 (Subdivisions) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 3. The effects this project is likely to have upon the housing needs of the region, the public service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and balanced. The Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the proposed General Plan's land use plan, development and design standards, and programs, and all other appropriate requirements contained in the General Plan. Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 is consistent with Housing Element Policy 3.1 to "Use the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, other land use and development plans, and the development process to provide housing sites that meet the identified local need." 4. Subject to the attached conditions of approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant environmental impact. The project has been adequately conditioned by all applicable departments and agencies and will not therefore result in any significant environmental impacts. The proposed use, together with the conditions CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2015 - _ PAGE 4 OF 5 applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 4. Based upon the evidence presented, both written and testimonial, and the above findings, and the attached conditions of approval, the City Council hereby approves Tentative Tract No. 36567. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, on the 14th day of April, 2015. Steve Manos, Mayor City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Virginia J. Bloom, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Barbara Leibold, City Attorney CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2015 - _ PAGE 5 OF 5 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. 2015 -_ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of April, 2015, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Virginia J. Bloom, City Clerk CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) GENERAL 1. The proposed project (Tentative Tract Map No. 36567) proposes the subdivision of 67.69 acres (APN 363- 020 -002, 003, 011 through 015, and 018) into 147 single - family residential lots, two open space lots, three open space lots for a park and one open space /water quality basin lot. It also proposes the grading and use of a City -owned parcel (APN 363- 020 -011) as part of the park. The proposed project is located northeast of Interstate 15 at Main Street; approximately one - quarter mile northeast of Camino Del Norte. Tentative Tract Map (TTM) No. 36567 is immediately east of the Spyglass Specific Plan. 2. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning the Vesting Tentative Tract No. 36567. 3. Within 30 days of project approval, the applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgment of Conditions" and shall return the executed original to the Community Development Department for inclusion in the case records. 4. The applicant shall submit a check in the amount of $2,260.00 made payable to the County of Riverside for the filing of a Notice of Determination. The check shall be submitted to the Planning Division for processing within 48 hours of the project's approval. PLANNING DIVISION 5. Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 will expire two years from date of approval unless within that period of time a Final Map has been filed with the County Recorder, or an extension of time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council in accordance with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 6. Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and applicable requirements contained in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), unless modified by approved Conditions of Approval. 7. The applicant shall provide all project - related on -site and off -site improvements as required by these Conditions of Approval. Planning Commission Approved Page 1 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) 8. All future development proposals shall be reviewed by the City on a project -by- project basis. If determined necessary by the Community Development Director or designee, additional environmental analysis will be required. 9. The applicant shall pay all applicable City fees, including but not limited to Development Impact Fees (DIF), at the rate in effect at the time of payment. Prior to Recordation of Final Tract Map(s) 10. All lots shall comply with minimum standards contained in Chapter 17.76 (R -1 Single - Family Residential District) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 11. A precise survey with closures for boundaries and all lots shall be provided per the LEMC. 12. Street names within the subdivision shall be approved by the Community Development Director or Designee. 13. All of the improvements shall be designed by the applicant's Civil Engineer to the specifications of the City of Lake Elsinore. 14. The applicant shall meet all requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) 15. Prior to recordation of a Final Map, the applicant shall initiate and complete the formation of a Homeowner's Association (HOA) which shall be approved by the City, recorded, and in place. All Association documents shall be shall be submitted for review and approval by City Planning and Engineering and the City Attorney; and upon City approval shall be recorded. Such documents include the Articles of Incorporation for the Association and Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC &Rs). a. At a minimum, all natural slopes and open space, all graded slopes abutting public street rights -of -way which are not part of residential lots, up slopes from public rights -of -way within private lots and all private streets, and all drainage basins shall be maintained by the HOA. b. CC &Rs shall prohibit front -yard microwave satellite antennas. Planning Commission Approved Page 2 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) c. CC &Rs shall prohibit the use of water - intensive landscaping and require the use of low water use landscaping pursuant to the provisions of LEMC Chapter 19.08 (Water Efficient Landscape Requirements), as adopted and any amendments thereto. Prior to Design Review Approval 16. All future structural development associated with this map requires separate Design Review approval pursuant to the provisions of LEMC Chapter 17.184. 17. The following architectural details shall be provided: a. All front fence returns will be decorative masonry walls. Wood fences will not be allowed along the front elevation. Wood, vinyl or steel (wrought iron or aluminum) gates are allowed in order to allow access to rear yards. b. The applicant shall provide four -sided articulation. Architectural enhancements and treatments shall be provided all residential elevations (front, rear and side) visible from streets and other public views. c. All fireplaces shall be natural gas fireplaces only. No wood burning fireplaces shall be allowed. 18. Design for all drainage or water quality basins proposed with TTM No. 36567 shall be approved by the City Engineer and Community Development Director or designees. Security fencing shall also be shown. Chain -link fencing is prohibited. Prior to Issuance of Gradinq Permits /Buildinq Permits 19. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall obtain all necessary State and Federal permits, approvals, or other entitlements, including obtaining the necessary authorizations from the regulatory agencies for proposed impacts to jurisdictional waters. Authorizations may include a Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and a Section 401 Water Quality Certification/Waste Discharge Requirement from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 20. Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall prepare a Final Wall and Fence Plan addressing the following: Planning Commission Approved Page 3 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) a. Show that a masonry or decorative block wall will be constructed along the entire tract boundary. b. Show materials, colors, and heights of rear, side and front walls /fences for proposed lots. c. Show that front return walls shall be decorative masonry block walls. Front return wood fences shall not be permitted. d. Show the location of all wood, vinyl or steel (wrought iron or aluminum) gates placed within the front return walls. e. Show that side walls for corner lots shall be decorative masonry block walls. f. Show that those materials provided along the front elevations (i.e. brick, stone, etc.) will wrap around the side elevation and be flush with the front return walls. 21. All signage shall be subject to Planning Division review and approval prior to installation. 22. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Building Division building plans that are designed to current UBC and adopted codes, and meet all applicable Building and Safety Division requirements. a. Driveways shall be constructed of concrete per Building and Safety Division standards. 23. The applicant shall prepare a list of proposed street names for review and approval by the Planning, Building, and Fire Departments of the City. 24. Provisions of the City's Noise Ordinance (LEMC Chapter 17.176) shall be satisfied during all site preparation and construction activity. Site preparation activity and construction shall not commence before 7:00 AM and shall cease no later than 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday. Only finish work and similar interior construction may be conducted on Saturdays and may commence no earlier than 8:00 am and shall cease no later than 4:00 p.m. Construction activity shall not take place on Sunday, or any Legal Holidays. 25. The applicant shall comply with all applicable City Codes and Ordinances. Planning Commission Approved Page 4 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE ll) 26. Prior to issuance of building permit, building plans for the Model Home Complex shall comply with all American Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, including provision of a handicapped - accessible bathroom. 27. Construction phasing shall be implemented in accordance with the approved Phasing Plan which avoids construction traffic from entering occupied neighborhoods within the tract. 28. A cash bond or irrevocable letter of credit in the City's name shall be required for the Model Home Complex. This bond is to guarantee removal of the temporary fencing material, parking lot, etc. that have been placed onsite for the Model Home Complex. The bond will be released after removal of the materials and the site is adequately restored, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director or designee. 29. A cash bond or irrevocable letter of credit in the City's name shall be required for any garage conversion of the model(s). Bonds will be released after removal of all temporary materials and the site is adequately restored, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director or designee. 30. A cash bond or irrevocable letter of credit in the City's name shall be required for any construction trailers used during construction. Bonds will be released after removal of trailers, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director or designee. 31. The applicant shall pay school fees to the Lake Elsinore Unified School District prior to issuance of each building permit. 32. The project shall connect to sewer and meet all requirements of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District ( EVMWD). The applicant shall submit water and sewer plans to the EVMWD and shall incorporate all district conditions and standards. 33. All mechanical and electrical equipment associated with the residences shall be ground mounted. All outdoor ground or wall mounted utility equipment shall be consolidated in a central location and architecturally screened behind fence returns, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director, prior to issuance of building permit. 34. All front yards and side yards on corner lots shall be properly landscaped with automatic (manual or electric) irrigation systems to provide 100 percent plant coverage using a combination of drip and conventional irrigation methods. Construction Landscape & Irrigation drawings shall be prepared, reviewed and approved by the City's Landscape Planning Commission Approved Page 5 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE ll) Architect Consultant and the Community Development Director or designee. A Cost Estimate for materials and labor shall also be submitted for review and approval. A Landscape Plan Check fee will be charged prior to final landscape approval based on the Consultant's fee, inspection, permit and administration fees. a. The applicant shall replace any street trees harmed during construction, in conformance with the City's Street Tree List, at a maximum of 30 feet apart and at least 24 -inch box in size. b. Perimeter walls shall be protected by shrubs and other plantings that discourage graffiti. c. The applicant shall ensure a clear line of sight at ingress /egress points by providing plantings within 15 feet of ingress /egress points whose height does not exceed three feet and whose canopy does not fall below six feet. d. The landscape plan shall provide for California native drought - tolerant ground cover, shrubs, and trees. Special attention shall be given to use of Xeriscape or drought resistant plantings with combination drip irrigation system to prevent excessive watering. e. No front -yard grass turf landscaping will be installed. f. All landscape improvements shall be bonded with a ten percent (10 %) Faithful Performance Bond of the approved estimated labor and materials cost for all planting. The bond shall remain in effect for one year from Certificate of Occupancy. g. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed within an affected portion of any phase at the time a certificate of occupancy is requested for any building. h. All Model Homes shall be Xeriscaped and signage provided identifying Xeriscape landscaping. Xeriscape is a method of landscape design that minimizes water use by: 1) Implementing hydrozones; 2) Minimizes high water -use plant material as identified by Water Use Classifications of Landscape Species (WUCOLS) (such as turf) and incorporates water- efficient ( "drought- tolerant" / climate- appropriate) plants; Planning Commission Approved Page 6 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) 3) Requires an efficient irrigation system that includes: a. ET -Based ( "Smart irrigation ") controller(s) with weather - sensing, automatic shut -off and seasonal adjustment capabilities; b. Efficient irrigation water application through use of: i. Low - volume point- source irrigation (such as drip irrigation and bubblers) for all shrub planter areas (maximum of 3:1 slope) with a minimum irrigation efficiency of 0.90 ; and /or ii. Spray or rotor -type nozzles for areas a minimum of eight (8) feet wide, for slopes 3:1 and greater, AND with a minimum irrigation efficiency of 0.71. 4) Improvement of soil structure for better water retention; and 5) Application of mulch to hinder evaporation. i. The Final landscape plan shall be consistent with any approved site and /or plot plan. j. The Final landscape plan shall include planting and irrigation details. k. All exposed slopes in excess of three feet in height within the subject tract and within private lots shall have a permanent irrigation system and erosion control vegetation installed, as approved by the Planning Division, prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. I. All landscaping and irrigation shall comply with the water - efficient landscaping requirements set forth in LEMC Chapter 19.08 (Water Efficient Landscape Requirements), as adopted and any amendments thereto. 35. The applicant shall place a weatherproof 3' x 3' sign at the entrance to the project site identifying the approved days and hours of construction activity and a statement that complaints regarding the operation can be lodged with the City of Lake Elsinore Code Enforcement Division (951) 674 -3124. The sign shall be installed prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Planning Commission Approved Page 7 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/ ENGINEERING DIVISION General 36. All slopes and landscaping within public right -of -way shall be maintained by the property owner or property owner's association or another maintenance entity approved by the City Council. 37. Any portion of the drainage system that conveys runoff from open space shall be installed within a dedicated drainage easement. 38. All open space and slopes except for public parks and schools and flood control district facilities, outside the public right -of -way shall be owned and maintained by property owner or property owner's association. 39. In accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste disposal & recycling, the developer shall be required to contract with CR &R Inc. for removal and disposal of all waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or all other phases of construction. 40. Developer shall mitigate to prevent any flooding and /or erosion downstream caused by development of the site and or diversion of drainage. 41. Any grading that affects "waters of the United States ", wetlands or jurisdictional streambeds, shall require approval and necessary permits from respective Federal and /or State agencies. 42. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained prior to any work on City, County and /or State right -of -way. 43. All required soils, geology, hydrology and hydraulic, and seismic reports shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer. Fees 44. The developer shall pay all Engineering Division assessed, Development Impact Fees, Plan Check and Permit fees (LEMC 16.34). Applicable Development Impact Fees include but are not limited to: Stephens Kangaroo Habitat Fee (K -Rat), Traffic Infrastructure Fee (TIF), Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF), and Area Drainage Fee. Planning Commission Approved Page 8 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) 45. Mitigation Fees will be assessed at the prevalent rate at time of payment in full. Storm Water Management / Pollutant Prevention / NPDES Design 46. The project is responsible for complying with the Santa Ana Region NPDES Permits as warranted based on the nature of development and /or activity. These Permits include: a. General Permit - Construction b. MS4 47. The 2010 SAR MS4 Permit requires implementation of LID Principles and LID Site Design, where feasible, to treat the pollutants of concern identified for the project, in the following manner (from highest to lowest priority) : (Section XII.E.2, XII.E.3,and XII.E.7) 48. Preventative measures (these are mostly non - structural measures, e.g., preservation of natural features to a level consistent with the MEP standard; minimization of Urban Runoff through clustering, reducing impervious areas, etc.) 49. The Project shall 'Infiltrate, harvest and use, evapotranspire and /or bio -treat the Design Capture Volume (DCV). 50. The Project shall consider a properly engineered and maintained bio- treatment system only if infiltration, harvesting and use and evapotranspiration cannot be feasibly implemented at the project site. 51. Any portion of [the DCV] that is not infiltrated, harvested and used, evapotranspired, and /or biotreated shall be treated and discharged in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section XII.G. 52. The project shall implement LID practices that treat the 85th percentile storm. 53. Project hardscape areas shall be designed and constructed to provide for drainage into adjacent landscape. 54. Hydromodification / Hydraulic Conditions of Concern — The project shall identify potential Hydraulic Conditions of Concern (HCOC) and implement measures to limit disturbance of natural water bodies and drainage systems; conserve natural areas; protect slopes, channels and minimize significant impacts from urban runoff. Planning Commission Approved Page 9 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) 55. CEQA — If CEQA identifies resources requiring Clean Water Act Section 401 Permitting, the applicant shall obtain certification through the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and provide a copy to the Engineering Division. Construction 56. Both a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post construction are required for this project. 57. SWPPP - A copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the project site, updated as necessary and be available for review upon request. Projects that are not subject to coverage under the General Permit — Construction will prepare and implement an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan in compliance with the California Building Code and Local Ordinances. 58. Prior to grading or building permit the applicant shall demonstrate that compliance with the permit has been obtained by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the letter of notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number or other proof of filing to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 59. Erosion & Sediment Control - Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit, the applicant shall submit for review and approval by the City Engineer, an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan as a separate sheet of the grading plan submittal to demonstrate compliance with the City's NPDES Program and state water quality regulations for grading and construction activities. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall identify how all construction materials, wastes, grading or demolition debris, and stockpiles of soil, aggregates, soil amendments, etc. shall be property covered, stored and secured to prevent transport into local drainages or waters by wind, rain, tracking, or dispersion. The plan shall also describe how the project will ensure that all BMPs will be maintained during construction of any future right of ways. A copy of the plan shall be incorporated into the SWPPP as applicable, kept updated as needed to address changing circumstances of the project site, be kept at the project site and available for review upon request. Post Construction 60. A preliminary WQMP shall be submitted during the project entitlement stage. The level of detail in a preliminary Project- Specific WQMP will depend upon the level of detail Planning Commission Approved Page 10 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) known about the overall project design at the time project approval is sought. At a minimum, the preliminary Project- Specific WQMP shall identify the type, size, location, and final ownership of Stormwater BMPs adequate to serve new roadways and any common areas, and to also manage runoff from an expected reasonable estimate of the square footage of future roofs, driveways, and other impervious surfaces on each individual lot 61. The applicant shall use the Water Quality Management Plan for the Santa Ana Region of Riverside County guidance document and template for preparation of both the preliminary and final WQMP. 62. The project shall complete and submit for review and approval to the Engineering Division a final WQMP, incorporating the LID Principles and Stormwater BMPs committed to in the preliminary Project- Specific WQMP. The final WQMP shall be approved prior to issuance of any grading or building permit. 63. Operation and Maintenance (O &M) Plan and Agreement that (1) describes the long- term operation and maintenance requirements for BMPs identified in the BMP Exhibit; (2) identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the referenced BMPs; and (3) describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the referenced BMPs. The City format shall be used. 64. All storm drain inlet facilities shall be appropriately marked "Only Rain in the Storm Drain" using the City authorized marker to prevent illegal dumping in the drain system. 65. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and /or occupancy: a. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with applicable NPDES permits for construction, industrial /commercial, MS4, etc. to include: I. Demonstrate that all structural Best Management Practices (BMP's) described in the BMP Exhibit from the project's approved WQMP have been implemented, constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. II. Demonstrate that the project has complied with all non - structural BMPs described in the project's WQMP. III. Provide signed, notarized certification from the engineer of work that the structural BMP's identified in the project's WQMP are installed and operational. IV. Submit a copy of the fully executed, recorded Operations and Maintenance (O &M) Plan for all structural BMPs. V. Demonstrate that copies of the project's approved WQMP (with recorded Planning Commission Approved Page 11 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) O &M Plan attached) are available for each of the initial occupants (commercial /industrial) or HOA as appropriate. VI. Agree to pay for a Special Investigation from the City of Lake Elsinore for a date twelve (12) months after the issuance of a Certificate of Use and /or Occupancy for the project to verify compliance with the approved WQMP and O &M Plan. A signed /sealed certification from the engineer of work dated 12 months after C of O will be considered in lieu of a Special Investigation by the City. b. Provide a recorded copy of one of the following: I. CC &R's (they must include the approved WQMP and O &M Plan) for the project's Home Owners Association. II. A water quality implementation agreement has the approved WQMP and O &M Plan attached; or III. The final approved Water Quality Management Plan and Operations and Maintenance Plan. Final Tract or Parcel Map 66. The developer shall submit for plan check review and approval a final map. 67. Streets to be dedicated will be shown as lettered lots on the tentative map. 68. Phasing plan, if any, shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any permits. 69. Prior to City Council approval of the final Tract Map the developer shall, in accordance with Government Code, have constructed all improvements or have improvement plans submitted and approved, agreements executed and securities posted. 70. The Final Tract Map shall include the phasing boundaries consistent with the parcels of the Tentative Tract Map. The phasing boundaries or parcels shall be processed as separate tract maps. Utilities 71. All arrangements for all required relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) out of the roadway shall be the responsibility of the property owner or his agent. 72. All overhead utilities shall be undergrounded in accordance with Chapter 12.16 of the Planning Commission Approved Page 12 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) 73. Underground water rights shall be dedicated to the City pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.52.030'(LEMC), and consistent with the City's agreement with the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. 74. The developer shall apply for, obtain and submit to the City Engineering Division a letter from Southern California Edison (SCE) indicating that the construction activity will not interfere with existing SCE facilities (aka SCE NIL). 75. The developer shall submit a copy of the "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division from the applicable water agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project and specify the technical data for the water service at the location, such as water pressure and volume etc 76. The developer shall provide, for City plan check, approval and execution, a grant of easement with legal description and exhibits, granting a storm drain easement for construction and maintenance to HOA or other developer approved maintenance entity. Improvements Design 77. The development of each Planning Area or Phase shall be subject for specific review and conditions of approval. 78. Sight distance into and out of the project location shall comply with CALTRANS Standards. 79. The developer shall install permanent bench marks per City of Lake Elsinore Standards and at locations to be determined by City Engineer. 80. The developer shall install blue dot markers in the roadway at a right angle to Fire Hydrant locations per Lake Elsinore Standards. 81. The developer shall coordinate with Riverside Transit Authority for location and installation of bus transit facilities. 82. 10 year storm runoff shall be contained within the curb and the 100 year storm runoff shall be contained within the street right -of -way. When either of these criteria are Planning Commission Approved Page 13 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) exceeded, drainage facilities shall be provided. 83. All drainage facilities in this project shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control District Standards. 84. A drainage study shall be provided. The study shall identify the following: identify storm water runoff from and upstream of the site; show existing and proposed off -site and onsite drainage facilities; and include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of the facilities. The drainage system shall be designed to ensure that runoff from a 10 -yr storm of 6 hours or 24 hours duration under developed condition is equal or less than the runoff under existing conditions of the same storm frequency. Both 6 hour and 24hour storm duration shall be analyzed to determine the detention basin capacities necessary to accomplish the desired results. 85. All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer. All off -site drainage, if different from historic flow, shall be conveyed to a public facility, accepted by adjacent property owners by a letter of drainage acceptance, or conveyed to a drainage easement. 86. Roof drains shall not be allowed to outlet directly through coring in the street curb. Roofs should drain to a landscaped area. 87. The site shall be planned and developed to keep surface water from entering buildings (California Green Building Standards Code 4.106.3). 88. All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) and Lake Elsinore Public Works Standard Plans. 89. If not complete at time of first building permit, the developer shall construct half width street improvements on Camino Del Norte from Main Street to Elsinore Hills Road such that the right -of -way width conforms to General Plan right -of -way cross sections. The cross section of roadway improvements with a raised median (if applicable, developer shall pay cash -in -lieu of construction of '/2 the raised median), parkway, street lights, and multiuse trail shall be consistent with other proposed development as recommended by the City. 90. If not complete at time of first building permit, the developer shall construct half -width street improvements on Elsinore Hills Road from Camino del Norte to the tract boundary Planning Commission Approved Page 14 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) per General Plan street right -of -way requirements. The cross section of roadway improvements with a parkway, street lights, and multiuse trail shall be consistent with other proposed development as required by the General Plan and the improvements shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 91. If not completed at time of first building permit, the developer shall construct the two points of access to TTM 36567. These streets are called out as Streets C & D in the traffic study, also known as CC Street and BB Street on TTM 35337, and called out as the primary and secondary access on Tentative Tract Map No. 36567. 92. The developer shall construct full width street improvements and dedicate the right of way on "Lots A — G ", as shown on the Tentative Tract Map No. 36567. 93. The developer shall implement mitigation measures identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis dated July 15, 2013, as specified in Section VI of this Study to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 94. The developer shall install a one -way stop sign at the Camino del Norte /Elsinore Hills Road intersection. 95. Street improvement plans shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and the plans shall include curb and gutter, sidewalk, ac pavement, street lighting, median, trail, and drainage improvements. 96. The developer shall provide signing and striping plans for the required improvements of this project. The plans shall also incorporate traffic calming measures on local streets. 97. This project shall provide trail and roadway connections to adjacent developments unless otherwise deemed unfeasible as concurred by the City. The trail cross section shall be per County standards unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Permitting /Construction 98. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained prior to any work on City and /or State right - of -way. The developer shall submit the permit application, required fees and executed agreements, security and other required documentation prior to issuance. 99. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie notes delineated on 8' /z" x 11" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering Division before final inspection of public works improvements will be scheduled and approved. Planning Commission Approved Page 15 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) 100. The developer shall be responsible for acquiring right -of -ways in which the developer or the City has no legal title or interest. If the developer is unsuccessful in acquiring such right -of -ways, the City could assist the developer in the Eminent Domain process at developer's cost. 101. All streets shall be constructed per Lake Elsinore City Standards and /or applicable specific plan. Any deviation from City standards shall be approved by the City Engineer. Acceptance of Improvements 102. The developer shall provide fair share costs, as approved by the City Engineer, if the ultimate road improvements are not subject to TUMF or established City of Lake Elsinore fees for the ultimate road improvements as follows: a. Main Street/1 -15 Ultimate Interchange Upgrade and Project Study Report 103. The developer shall submit a written request for acceptance to the City Engineer. 104. As -built plans shall be completed and signed by the City Engineer. Grading Design 105. A grading plan signed and stamped by a California Registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted for City review and approval for all addition and /or movement of soil (grading) on the site. The plan shall include separate sheets for erosion control, haul route and traffic control. The grading submittal shall include all supporting documentation and be prepared using City standard title block, standard drawings and design manual (available at www.lake- elsinore.org). 106. All grading plan contours shall extend to minimum of 50 feet beyond property lines to indicate existing drainage pattern. 107. The grading plan shall show that no structures, landscaping, or equipment are located near the project entrances that could reduce sight distance. 108. If the grading plan identifies alterations in the existing drainage patterns as they exit the site, a Hydrology and Hydraulic Report for review and approval by City Engineer shall Planning Commission Approved Page 16 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) be required prior to issuance of grading permits. All grading that modifies the existing flow patterns and /or topography shall be approved by the City Engineer. 109. A seismic study shall be performed on the site to identify any hidden earthquake faults, liquefaction and /or subsidence zones present on -site. A certified letter from a registered geologist or geotechnical engineer shall be submitted confirming the absence of this hazard. 110. The developer shall obtain all necessary off -site easements and /or permits for off -site grading and the applicant shall accept drainage from the adjacent property owners. Perm it/Construction 111. Developer shall execute and submit grading and erosion control agreement, post grading security and pay permit fees as a condition of grading permit issuance. 112. A preconstruction meeting with the City Public Works Inspector (Engineering Division) is required prior to commencement of ANY grading activity. 113. Developer shall provide the city with a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) and Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) letter issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program 114. Prior to commencement of grading operations, developer is to provide to the City with a map of all proposed haul routes to be used for movement of export material. All such routes shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. Haul route shall be submitted prior to issuance of a grading permit. Hauling in excess of 5,000 cy shall be approved by City Council. (LEMC 15.72.065) 115. All export material shall be discharged into a legal disposal site. No permittee shall process, including, but not limited to, crush, sift, or segregate, excavated earth materials on site for export and commercial sale without first obtaining a permit pursuant to Chapter 14.04 LEMC regarding surface mining and reclamation. 116. Export sites located within the Lake Elsinore City limits must have an active grading permit. 117. Applicant to provide to the City a video record of the condition of all proposed public City haul roads. In the event of damage to such roads, applicant shall pay full cost of restoring public roads to the baseline condition. A bond may be required to ensure Planning Commission Approved Page 17 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) payment of damages to the public right -of -way, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 118. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer. Slopes steeper than 2 to 1 shall be evaluated for stability and proper erosion control and approved by the City. 119. Review of the project Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) and sediment and erosion control plan shall be completed. A copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and be available for review upon request. 120. Approval of the project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post construction shall be received prior to issuance of a grading permit. 121. Submit an approved environmental clearance document to the Engineering Division. This approval shall identify and clear all proposed grading activity anticipated for this project. 122. Developer shall pay all grading permit applicable processing, permit, security and development fees including those fees identified in an applicable development agreement, and Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit: 121 All required public right -of -way dedications, easements, drainage easements and easement agreement(s) not processed on the final map for ingress and egress through adjacent property(ies) shall be recorded with a recorded copy provided to the City prior to building permit issuance. 124. Provide final soils, geology and seismic report, including recommendations for parameters for seismic design of buildings, and walls prior to building permit. 125. The primary and secondary access (Streets C and D identified in the Traffic Study), shown on Tentative Tract Map No. 36567 shall be completed, prior to first building permit, if they have not been improved by the Spyglass development. 126. The Parcel or Final Tract Map shall be recorded. 127. The developer shall pay all Capital Improvement TIF and Master Drainage Fees and Plan Check fees (LEMC 16.34). Planning Commission Approved Page 18 of 34 City Council March 17; 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE ll) Prior to Occupancv 128. All signing and striping and traffic control devices for the required improvements of this development shall be installed. 129. All public improvements shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans or as condition of this development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 130. The fair share cost of future improvements as a condition of this development shall be paid. 131. All water and sewer improvements shall be completed in accordance with Water District requirements. 132. Proof of acceptance of maintenance responsibility of slopes, open spaces, landscape areas, and drainage facilities shall be provided. 133. TUMF fees shall be paid. The TUMF fees shall be the effective rate at the time of payment in full in accordance with the LEMC. 134. As -built plans for all approved plan sets shall be submitted for review and approval by the City. The developer /developer /owner is responsible for revising the original mylar plans. 135. In the event of damage to City roads from hauling or other construction related activity, applicant shall pay full cost of restoring public roads to the baseline condition. 136. All final studies and reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie notes delineated on 8 '/2 x 11" mylar) shall be submitted in .tif format on a CD /DVD. Studies and reports include, Soils, Seismic, Hydrology, Hydraulics, Grading, SWPPP, WQMP, etc. 137. All plan sets and recorded maps shall be digitized and provided on CD /DVD as follows: a. Final Map(s) - GIS Shape files* and .tif of recorded map. b. Improvement Plans — GIS Shape files* and .tif of approved as built mylar. C. Grading Plans - .tif of approved as built mylar. *GIS Shape files must be in projected Coordinate System: NAD 83 State Plane California Zone VI U.S. Fleet. Planning Commission Approved Page 19 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) 138. Final soil report showing compliance with recommendations, compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie notes delineated on 8 '/ x 11" mylar) shall be submitted in .tif format on CD to the Engineering Division before final inspection will be scheduled. 139. Documentation of responsibility for slope maintenance along right -of -ways and open spaces to be maintained by the HOA or other entity shall be provided in a recordable format and recorded prior to occupancy /final. 140. All signing and striping and traffic control devices onsite and on Elsinore Hills Road and Camino del Norte shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 141. In the event of damage to City roads from hauling or other construction related activity, applicant shall pay full cost of restoring public roads to the baseline condition. 142. Prior to grading or building permit close -out and /or the issuance of a certificate of use or a certificate of occupancy, developer shall: a. Demonstrate that all structural BMPs have been constructed, installed and are functioning in conformance with approved plans and specifications and the WQMP; b. Demonstrate that they are prepared to implement all non - structural BMPs included in the conditions of approval or building /grading permit conditions; c. Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved project specific WQMP are available for the future owners /occupants; and d. The developer shall provide all education guidelines for Water Quality Management Practices to the tenants, operators and owners of the businesses of the development, regarding the environmental awareness on good housekeeping practices that contribute to protection of storm water quality and meet the goals of the approved WQMP in the Riverside County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. Contact the City NPDES Coordinator for handout/guideline information. 143. The property owner (aka Legally Responsible Party) shall execute and cause to be recorded a "Covenant and Agreement' in the form provided by the City to inform future property owners of the requirement to implement the approved final project- specific WQMP. 144. Developer shall pay all outstanding applicable processing and development fees including but not all inclusive: TUMF, MSHCP, TIF, Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat and Planning Commission Approved Page 20 of 34 City Council March 17; 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) area drainage prior to occupancy /final approval. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 145. Open space lots AA, BB and CC including trails shall be owned and maintained by the Homeowner's Association (HOA). 146. Community Services shall review and approve the proposed drainage easement on the off -site City owned property. 147. The public park shall be included in the Community Facility District for Maintenance Services. 148. At a minimum, the park shall provide on -site parking with 12 -15 spaces, security lighting, lockable entry gate, children's play area, covered picnic area, concrete walking paths and park monument sign. 149. The design of the proposed park site (Open space lots DD, EE, FF and the City owned property) shall provide pedestrian circulation and shall be in compliance with American with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. 150. Prior to submittal of construction plans, the developer shall meet with the Director of Community Services to determine the location and specifications of the park amenities to be provided. 151. Construction plans and specifications for the park shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Services prior to the approval of the final map. 152. The developer shall post security and enter into a park improvement agreement to improve the public park prior to issuance of the first building permit. 153. Construction of the park shall commence pursuant to a pre- construction meeting with the developer, the developer's construction contractor and City representatives. Failure to comply with the City's review and inspection process may preclude acceptance of the park by the City. 154. The developer, the developer's successor or assignee, shall be responsible for all maintenance of the public park, including the 90 day maintenance period, until such time as those responsibilities are accepted by the City. Planning Commission Approved Page 21 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) 155. The public park lots DD, EE and FF shall be improved and then conveyed to the City free and clear of any liens, assessment fees, or easements that would preclude the City from utilizing the property for public purposes. A policy of title insurance and a soils assessment report shall be provided with the conveyance of the property. 156. The public park shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Services, including the 90 -day maintenance period and fee title dedicated to the City prior to the issuance of the 75th building permit. FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING OFFICE General Conditions 157. Lake Elsinore Fire Protection Planning Office Responsibility - It is the responsibility of the recipient of these Fire Department conditions to forward them to all interested parties. The permit number (as it is noted above) is required on all correspondence. Questions should be directed to the Riverside County Fire Department, Lake Elsinore Fire Protection Planning Division at 130 S. Main St., Lake Elsinore, CA 92530. Phone: (951) 671 -3124 Ext. 225. The following fire department conditions shall be implemented in accordance with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and the adopted codes at the time of project building plan submittal, these conditions are in addition to the adopted code requirements. 158. Blue Dot Reflectors - Blue retro - reflective pavement markers shall be mounted on private streets, public streets and driveways to indicate location of fire hydrants. Prior to installation, placement of markers must be approved by the Riverside County Fire Dept. 159. Minimum Hydrant Fire Flow - Minimum required fire flow shall be 1,000 GPM for 2 hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. Average spacing between hydrants 500' and 250' maximum distance from any point on the street or road frontage to hydrant. Standard Fire hydrants shall be installed (6 "x4 "x2- 1/2 "). 160. Hazardous Fire Area - The proposed project is located in a high or very high fire zone as adopted in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. The project shall adhere to all high fire requirements as prescribed in the Title 24 Codes, any applicable state and local codes pertaining to high fire. The structures shall comply with Chapter 7A of the Building Code Planning Commission Approved Page 22 of 34 City Council March 17; 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) and or Section R327 of the California Residential Code. Roofing Materials shall be classified at not less than class "A ". 161. Minimum Access Standards - The following access requirements are required to be implemented to ensure fire department and emergency vehicular access. All roadways shall conform to the City of Lake Elsinore approved roadway standards but in no case shall the minimum fire department vehicular access be less the following provisions: 1. Twenty -four feet (24') clear width. Where parking is to be provided, each parking side shall be provided with eight (8') additional feet on each side of the fire department access. 2. Median openings or crossovers between opposing lanes of a divided highway or street shall be located only at approved intersections at intervals of not less than 500 feet. [Ord. 529 § 3.2(F), 1973]. 3. The required all weather vehicular access shall be able to support no less than 70,000 lbs. over 2 axles. 4. Roadway gradient shall not exceed 15% on any access road, driveways, and perimeter roads. 5. Turning Radius shall be 26' inside and 38' outside for all access roads. 162. Secondary Access - In the interest of Public Safety, this project shall provide an Alternate or Secondary Access. Said access shall be constructed in accordance to the City of Lake Elsinore Engineering Department standards to accommodate full fire response and community evacuation. Prior to Grading Permit Issuance 163. Fuel Modification Plan - Fuel modification plans shall be provided to the Lake Elsinore Fire Protection Planning office. Plans shall include fuels modeling and comprehensive details with regard to the vegetation management plan. The fuels modification zone shall be not less than 100' from all structures and may be required to be increased. Prior to Building Permit Issuance 164. Plan Check Fee — The building plan check fee made payable to the "City of Lake Elsinore" shall be submitted to the Fire Department at time plans are submitted to our office(s). 165. Water System Plans - Applicant and /or developer shall submit 2 sets of water system plans to the Fire Department for review. The plans must be signed by a registered Civil Planning Commission Approved Page 23 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) Engineer and /or water purveyor prior to Fire Department review and approval. Mylars will be signed by the Fire Department after review and approval. Two (2) copies of the signed and approved water plans shall be returned to the Fire Department before release of a building permit. 166. Prior to Building Construction Verification - Prior to bringing combustible materials on site, this project shall be inspected and approved by the Fire Marshal or designee During such inspection all permanent road signs shall be in place, all hydrants shall be operating and approved for use by the water purveyor, and all permanent road surfaces shall be completed including primary and secondary access circulation. Prior to Building Final Inspection 167. Residential Fire Sprinkler Systems for Single family and two - family 13D - Install a complete fire sprinkler system designed in accordance with California Residential Code, California Fire Code and adopted standards. A C -16 licensed contractor must submit plans, along with the current fee, to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to installation. 168. Designated Fire Lanes - The applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and/ or signs. DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Annex into CFD 2015 -1 (Safety) Law Enforcement Fire and Paramedic Services CFD 169. Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel Map, Site Development Plan, or Special Use Permit (as applicable), the applicant shall consent to the formation of a Community Facilities District or annex into the proposed Community Facilities District No. 2015 -1 (Safety) the Law Enforcement, Fire and Paramedic Services Mello -Roos Community Facilities District to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on public safety operations and maintenance issues in the City. Applicant shall make a seven thousand five hundred dollar ($7,500) non - refundable deposit to cover the cost of the formation or annexation process, as applicable. The applicant may propose alternative financing mechanisms to fund the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on public safety operations and maintenance issues in the City in lieu of creating /annexing into a district. Contact the Administrative Services Director at 951- 674 -3124. Planning Commission Approved Page 24 of 34 City Council March 17. 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) Form Community Facilities District No. 2015 -3 (South Shore) 170. Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel Map, Site Development Plan, Special Use Permit or building permit (as applicable), the applicant may form Community Facilities District to allow for the funding of (i) public facilities and (ii) the on -going operation and maintenance of the public right -of -way landscaped areas and neighborhood parks to be maintained by the City and for street lights in the public right -of -way for which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to Southern California Edison, including parkways, open space and public storm drains constructed within the development and federal NPDES requirements ( "Maintenance Services ") to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project. Alternatively, if a CFD is not formed pursuant to the preceding sentence, applicant shall: (a) form a CFD solely for Maintenance Services or annex into an existing CFD for such services (e.g. Community Facilities District No. 2015 -2 (Maintenance Services), or (b) the applicant may propose alternative financing mechanisms to fund the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project with respect to Maintenance Services. Applicant shall make a seven thousand five hundred dollar ($7,500) non - refundable deposit to cover the cost of the formation or annexation process, as applicable. Contact the Administrative Services Director at 951 - 674 -3124. RIVERSIDE COUNTY WASTE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT (RCWMD) 171. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit an updated Phase 1 Environmental Assessment that includes the "head parcel" of the closed Elsinore Landfill (i.e., APN 363- 020 -011). A copy of the Report shall also be submitted by the Applicant to the Riverside County Waste Management Department (RCWMD). 172. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall conduct a subsurface investigation on the "head parcel" to determine the presence of buried waste and subsurface soil conditions for the presence of landfill gas constituents. Copies of the report of the investigation shall be submitted to the City, RCWMD, the Local Enforcement Agency (Riverside County Environmental Health) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The Report shall be subject to approval by RCWMD. 173. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall provide the City with a letter from the RCWMD documenting the coordination between the RCWMD and Applicant as it relates to the abandonment of a groundwater monitoring well located within the tract's grading limits. 174. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall provide the City with a letter Planning Commission Approved Page 25 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE ll) from the RCWMD documenting that the tract's drainage flows will not jeopardize the landfill's integrity and /or operation of its drainage facilities. 175. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall make a deposit of $40,000 to RCWMD for the financing of the installation of at least nine (9) additional perimeter gas probes on the landfill boundary, in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 1150.1. 176. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall provide the City with a letter from the RCWMD documenting that either no housing units are within the 300 -foot limit from the refuse disposal footprint or landfill gas migration will not affect any of the proposed housing units. Otherwise, the applicant shall submit a vapor barrier design and construction plan to the RCWMD for review and approval. Such design and plan shall be prepared by a licensed professional engineer and meet the applicable building standards. The vapor barriers shall be installed in the foundations of the housing units on lots that are facing the landfill and within 300 feet from the refuse disposal footprint. 177. Prior to the final inspection and occupancy of the first dwelling unit, the Applicant shall provide the City with a letter from the RCWMD documenting that the additional perimeter gas probes required per SCAQMD Rule 1150.1, were installed and fully funded. 178. Where vapor barriers are required pursuant to Condition of Approval No. 176, prior to final inspection and occupancy, the Applicant shall provide the City with a letter from the RCWMD documenting that vapor barriers have been installed according to the approved design and construction plan for the designated housing units. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. No. 2015 -01 (SCH # 2013121035) MITIGATION MEASURES 179. The applicant shall comply with the following mitigation measures, which are set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program (MMRP) for Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2015 -01, which was adopted for this project. a. MM Air 1: To control fugitive dust, the proposed project shall adhere to best management practices (BMPs), which shall include, but are not limited to, the following: I. Water, or non -toxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications, shall be applied to exposed soils (including unpaved parking or staging areas, Planning Commission Approved Page 26 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) unpaved road surfaces, and active construction areas) at least three times per day as required per SCAQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust). II. Soil stabilizers or water shall be applied to inactive disturbed areas. III. A high wind dust control plan shall be prepared and implemented. IV. All stock piles shall be covered with tarps at the end of each day or as needed. V. Water spray shall be provided during loading and unloading of earthen materials. VI. In -out traffic shall be minimized from the construction zone. VII. Gravel pads will be installed at all construction access points. VIII. Trackout control devices will be installed at unpaved construction access points from public streets. IX. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks and other similar improvements will be completed as soon as is feasible and possible. X. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, or loose material shall be covered and /or required to maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard. XI. Streets shall be swept daily if visible soil material is carried out from the construction site. XII. A contractor's representative will be designated as the dust control manager and signage will be erected to identify the means of dust control manager contact. Developer shall use its best efforts to take remedial action within twenty -four (24) hours after notification of any dust control issues related to the project. b. MM Air 2: To control diesel exhaust, the proposed project shall include the following combustion emission control measures: I. Well -tuned off -road construction shall be utilized. ll. All diesel powered construction equipment in use shall require control equipment that meets, at a minimum, Tier III emission requirements. III. Developer shall use its best efforts to require and ensure that the contractor or builder shall restrict truck operation to "clean" trucks, such as a 2007 or newer model year or 2010 compliant vehicles. Planning Commission Approved Page 27 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) IV. Developer will require that all contractors turn off all construction equipment and delivery vehicles when not in use and prohibit idling in excess of three minutes. Easily visible signs will be posted at the project site informing contractors and operators of this requirement. C. MM Air 3: The project would implement the following measures to further reduce construction air quality impacts: I. Project construction will commence in conjunction with the completion of Streets "C" and "D" pursuant to the specific plan requirements for the Spyglass Ranch Specific Plan. II. Temporary traffic controls, including, but not limited to, flag persons will be utilized as necessary for safety and smooth traffic flow. III. All construction haul routes will be selected to minimize conflicts with off -site congestion and avoid, to the extent feasible and possible, pollution sensitive areas. IV. Developer will provide construction parking on the project site. V. Construction worker ride - sharing will be encouraged and monitored by Developer. VI. Developer will allow for on -site lunch opportunities, including, without limitation, food trucks, for construction workers during the period of project construction. VII. Developer will work with the City to, as and where necessary, ensure that traffic signals are synchronized to minimize, to the extent feasible and possible, additional congestion as a result of construction of the project. VIII. Developer will work with Caltrans to ensure, to the extent feasible and possible, adequate Levels of Service (LOS) at impacted freeway on- and off - ramps close to the project site. d. MM Biology 1: Clearing and grubbing shall occur outside of the bird breeding season (February 1 to August 31), unless a qualified biologist demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City that all nesting is complete through completion of a Nesting Bird Clearance Survey. A Nesting Bird Clearance Survey report shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to initiating clearing and grubbing during the breeding season. Planning Commission Approved Page 28 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) e. MM Biology 2: Impacts to Riversidean sage scrub shall be mitigated through payment of the MSHCP Local Mitigation Development Fee. The MSHCP Local Mitigation Development Fee in the amount of $1,938 per dwelling unit must be paid at the time a certificate of occupancy is issued for the residential unit or development project or upon final inspection (whichever occurs first). f. MM Biology 3: The following measures shall be undertaken to further minimize potential indirect impacts associated with project construction and operation: I. In the event that pre- construction surveys reveal the presence of sensitive species within the project footprint and including a 100 -foot buffer, grading for future development adjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area or proposed Open Space Areas during the nesting season shall include temporary noise barriers that provide at least 10 dBA in attenuation, or other measures shown to similarly minimize noise impacts to sensitive species. Any such barriers shall break the line of sight from noise generators to the Conservation or Open Space area. II. Enclosure fences (e.g., wood, tubular steel) shall be installed adjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area and any Open Space areas along with other barriers such as native landscaping. Signs shall be posted at potential access points of the MSHCP Conservation Area and the project Open Space area informing residents of the wildlife habitat value of open space and other language appropriate to minimize unauthorized public access, pet encroachment, domestic animal predation, illegal trespass or dumping (e.g. "no trespassing," "pets to be kept on leash," "no dumping "). III. Developer shall not install invasive species listed at Volume 1, Table 6 -2 of the MSHCP. Developer shall provide language in any covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC &Rs) created for the project which states that non - native plants and invasive species specified at Volume 1, Table 6 -2 of the MSCHP shall be prohibited within the limits of the project. Table 6 -2 shall be appended to the CC &Rs for reference. IV. Night lighting shall be directed away from the MSHCP Conservation Area and any proposed Open Space Areas to protect species from direct night lighting. All outdoor lighting shall be uni- directional, fully shielded, and situated to ensure ambient lighting in the MSHCP Conservation Area and Open Space Areas is not increased. g. MM Cultural 1: Prior to issuance of grading permit(s) for the project, the project applicant shall retain an archaeological monitor to monitor all ground- disturbing Planning Commission Approved Page 29 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation. h. MM Cultural 2: At least 30 days prior to seeking a grading permit, the project applicant shall contact the appropriate" Native American Tribal Representative (Representative) to notify the Representative of the intention to pull permits which signifies the initiation of grading, excavation and the monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Lake Elsinore and the Representative to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the 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. ( "It is anticipated that the Pechanga Tribe would be the "appropriate" Tribe due to their prior and extensive history with the City on this and other projects in determining potentially significant impacts and appropriate mitigation measures; due to their previous MILD calls within the City and the proximity of tribal reservations lands to the City.) MM Cultural 3: 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 with the agreement required in MM Cultural 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 groundbreaking activities, and shall also have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities in consultation with the project archaeologist. j. MM Cultural 4: The landowner or its authorized representative shall agree to return all cultural resources, including Native American ceremonial and cultural artifacts, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project site to the Appropriate Tribe for proper treatment and disposition. The landowner or its authorized representative shall agree to waive any and all claims to ownership of Native American ceremonial and cultural artifacts that may be found on the project site within a reasonable time period agreed to by the parties involved, not to exceed 30 days from the initial recovery of items. Planning Commission Approved Page 30 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) k. MM Cultural 5: All sacred sites, should they be encountered within the project area, shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation, if feasible. MM Cultural 6: In the event that human remains are encountered during the course of the project, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur at the location of the find until the Riverside County Coroner has been notified and made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5079.98, 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 County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which shall identify 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. m. MM GHG 1: The project shall provide pedestrian infrastructure, including sidewalks along new streets, that provides connections to existing and /or proposed adjacent uses. n. MM GHG 2: The project shall provide connectivity to area wide bikeway networks. o. MM GHG 3: The project shall provide 15- gallon non - deciduous, umbrella -form trees in strategic locations around buildings, as shade for parking lot and street pavement, and on landscaped slopes or at the future park site. Trees shall be planted one per 30 linear feet of boundary length near buildings, pursuant to Measure E 1.1 of the City's Climate Action Plan. p. MM GHG 4: Developer shall use its best efforts to require new homes constructed within the project to exceed the 2013 California Building Energy Efficiency Standards requirements by a minimum of 5 percent. q. MM GHG 5: The project shall comply with the City's Uniform Building Code requirements to reduce indoor water consumption by 30 percent from the existing default baseline. r. MM GHG 6: Electrical outlets will be installed on the exterior walls of all residential buildings to promote the use of electric landscape maintenance equipment. Planning Commission Approved Page 31 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) s. MM GHG 7: Electrical outlets will also be installed in all garages and at or adjacent to carports to facilitate and encourage the charging of electric vehicles. t. MM Hazards 1: All spills or leakage of petroleum products during construction activities shall immediately be contained, the hazardous material identified, and the material remediated in compliance with applicable state and local regulation regarding cleanup and disposal of the contaminant released. The contaminated waste shall be collected and disposed of at an appropriately licensed disposal or treatment facility. U. MM Hazards 2: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall comply with the following: I. The project applicant shall participate in the Development Impact Fee program, as adopted by the City of Lake Elsinore, to the extent applicable. II. All water mains and fire hydrants shall be constructed in accordance with Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 and /or No. 787.1. III. The project shall provide an alternate or secondary access. Before combustible materials are brought to the site, the applicant shall provide two points of access acceptable to the Riverside County Fire Department. V. MM Noise 1: The construction contractor shall complete the following to reduce construction noise to the levels specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code: I. During all project site excavation and grading, the construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment (fixed or mobile) with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers' standards. The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site. II. The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction - related noise sources and noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. III. Temporary noise barriers with a Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of at least 20 (e.g., vinyl acoustic curtain [STC rating 22] or quilted blanket [STC rating 22]) will be installed when project construction occurs within 100 feet of existing sensitive receptors. Any such barriers will break the line of sight from noise generators to sensitive receptors. They will also be constructed as Planning Commission Approved Page 32 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) close to the sensitive receptor as possible to achieve the greatest attenuation effect and have no gaps or openings. Such barriers will be maintained so long as construction occurs in the area adjacent to any existing sensitive receptors. IV. Provisions of the City's Noise Ordinance shall be satisfied during all site preparation and construction activity. Site preparation activity and construction shall not commence before 7:00 a.m. and shall cease no later than 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Only finish work and similar interior construction may be conducted on Saturdays and may commence no earlier than 8:00 a.m. and shall cease no later than 4:00 p.m. Construction activity shall not take place on Sunday, or any Legal Holidays. V. The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours specified for construction equipment. To the extent feasible, haul routes shall not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. VI. If construction would occur in close proximity to already occupied Spyglass Ranch homes, measures such as the use of smaller grading equipment or the erection of temporary barriers would be employed. VII. For the duration of construction activities, the construction manager will serve as the contact person should noise levels become disruptive to local residents. Developer will post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact regarding noise complaints. The construction manager, within seventy -two (72) hours of receipt of a noise complaint, will either take corrective actions or, if immediate action is not feasible, provide a plan or corrective action to address the source of the noise complaint. w. MM Public Services 1: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the Development Impact Fee program as adopted by the City of Lake Elsinore to the extent applicable. X. MM Traffic 1: The project shall participate in the phased construction of the off -site intersection improvements (e.g., traffic signals) through payment of established City of Lake Elsinore fees, participation in the Western Riverside Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees program, payment of the project's fair share traffic contribution, assessment district and /or community facilities district financing, and construction of off -site facilities under appropriate fee credit agreements. Planning Commission Approved Page 33 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36567 (SOUTH SHORE II) y. MM Traffic 2: Sight distance at project access shall be reviewed with respect to standard Caltrans and City sight distance standards. The final grading, landscaping, and street improvement plans shall demonstrate that sight distance standards are met. Such plans must be reviewed by the City and approved as consistent with this measure prior to bestowal of grading permits. 180. The applicant shall fund the implementation of the Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program (MMRP) through every stage of development. The City shall appoint an environmental monitor who shall periodically inspect the project site, documents submitted by the applicant, permits issued, and any other pertinent material, in order to monitor and report compliance to the City until the completion of the project. END OF CONDITIONS Planning Commission Approved Page 34 of 34 City Council March 17, 2015 April 14, 2015 ro _ k 1 R o ;W Y iC s iF h �x. ) Ilt1 ' -t 41-