Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Reso No 2015-087 LE Supercenter Impact Report (SCH 2014051093)RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -087 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE LAKE ELSINORE SUPERCENTER PROJECT (SCH NO. 2014051093), ADOPTING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM. WHEREAS, Barry Linder of Greenberg Farrow on behalf of Wal -Mart Real Estate Business Trust has requested approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2013 -06, in conjunction with Commercial Design Review No. 2013 -08, Conditional Use Permit No. 2013 -07, Conditional Use Permit No. 2013 -08 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2013 -09, which are collectively referred to herein as the "Project ", and WHEREAS, the Project consists of the development of a 17.66 -acre site located at the southwest corner of Central Avenue and Cambern Avenue with an approximately 154,487 square -foot Walmart Supercenter, including a 3,090 square -foot seasonal outdoor garden center (Commercial Design Review No. 2013 -08 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2013 -06), with additional conditional use permits (Conditional Use Permit No. 2013 -07, Conditional Use Permit No. 2013 -08 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2013 -09) for outlot development planned for the parcels fronting Central Avenue which consist of one of two site configurations. Option A would consist of a gas station with 16 fueling stations, an approximately 3,100 SF convenience store, and a drive - through car wash and two other buildings which would be developed as separate drive -thru restaurants (3,700 SF and 3,100 SF). Option B consists of one parcel being developed with approximately 9,200 SF of retail /restaurant mix -used space situated within two buildings while the other two parcels would be developed with drive thru restaurant uses similar to the proposed development under Option A; and WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore (the "City ") has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2014051093: the "EIR ") on the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.: "CEQA"), the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (California Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.: the "State CEQA Guidelines "), and the City's Procedures for Implementing the State CEQA Guidelines and its other procedures relating to environmental evaluation of public and private projects; and WHEREAS, the City transmitted for filing a Notice of Preparation of the Draft EIR on or about May 27, 2014 in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, for distribution to those agencies which have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project and to other interested persons and agencies, and sought the comments of such persons and agencies; and City Council Resolution No. 2015 -087 Page 2 of 4 WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15082(c)(1), on June 18, 2014, the City held a duly noticed scoping meeting in order to facilitate consultation regarding the scope and content of the environmental information in the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, the City transmitted for filing a Notice of Availability /Notice of Completion of a Draft Environmental Impact Report ( "DEIR ") and in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines forwarded the DEIR to the State Clearinghouse, for distribution to those agencies which have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project, and to other interested persons and agencies, and sought the comments of such persons and agencies; and WHEREAS, notice to all interested persons and agencies inviting comments on the Draft EIR was published in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and posted at the Office of the County Clerk of Riverside County on August 28, 2015; and WHEREAS, the State Clearinghouse posted the DEIR for a 45 -day public comment period which ran from August 28, 2015 to October 13, 2015; and WHEREAS, all actions required to be taken by applicable law related to the preparation, circulation, and review of the DEIR have been taken; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council for certifying Environmental Impact Reports, and WHEREAS, the City has prepared a Final EIR ( "FEIR ") that contains responses to the comments that were received regarding the DEIR; and WHEREAS, the DEIR was sent to the Planning Commission members on August 28, 2015, and the FEIR was provided to the Planning Commission on October 30, 2015. The DEIR and the FEIR (collectively referred to hereinafter in the singular as, "EIR ") were considered by the Planning Commission on November 3, 2015 at a duly noticed public hearing where the Planning Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties on the adequacy of the DEIR. The Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 2015 -72 recommending that the City Council certify the EIR for the Project; and WHEREAS, on December 1, 2015, at a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council has 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. City Council Resolution No. 2015 -087 Page 3 of 4 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 considered and evaluated all written and oral staff reports and comments received from persons who have reviewed the EIR, the comments submitted on the EIR; the responses to those comments, the public testimony and such other matters as are reflected in the record of the public hearing on the Project and the EIR. SECTION 3. The City Council finds that the EIR for the Project is adequate and has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and local procedures adopted by the City pursuant thereto. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the EIR and finds that the EIR represents the independent judgment of the City. SECTION 4, The City Council hereby makes, adopts, and incorporates herein as its "findings of fact' regarding the potential environmental impacts of the Project, the analysis and conclusions set forth in the EIR (including, without limitation, the mitigation measures therein set forth) and in the Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Regarding the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter Project (SCH #2014051093), attached hereto as Exhibit "A ".. SECTION 5. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ( "MMRP ") for the Project has been prepared in accordance with Section 21081.6 of CEQA, and the City Council hereby adopts the MMRP, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B." SECTION 6. The City Council finds that for each of the significant impacts which are subject to a finding under CEQA Section 21081(a)(3), that each of the social, economic, and environmental benefits of the Project, independent of the other benefits, outweigh the potential significant unavoidable adverse impacts and render acceptable each and every one of the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared and is attached hereto as Exhibit A (Findings of Fact) and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 7. Based upon all of the evidence presented and the above findings, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore certifies the EIR for the Project with Errata and Responses to Comments, the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. City Council Resolution No. 2015 -087 Page 4 of 4 SECTION 8. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a special meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, this 1 st day- ember, 2015. ands, Mayor ATTEST: Susan Domen, MMC City Clerk Barbara Lemold, Lity Attorney EXHIBIT A (City Council Resolution No. 2015 -087) ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE WALMART SUPERCENTER PROJECT SCH #2014051093 Prepared By: City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 December 2015 1. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION .......................................... ..............................1 1.1 Project Over view ................................................................................. ..............................1 1.2 Public Involvement and EIR Seeping ............................................... ..............................1 1.3 Final FIR Certification and Project Approval Process ................... ..............................2 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................................................... ..............................4 2.1 Project Location .................................................................................. ..............................4 2.2 Project Description ............................................................................. ..............................4 2.3 Project Objectives ............................................................................... ..............................9 3. GENERAL FINDINGS ON MITIGATION MEASURES ....................... .............................10 4. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS ............................................................... 4.1 .............................11 Areas Determined To Have No Significant Impact ........................ ..............................1 1 4.2 Findings Regarding Less Than Significant Impacts Identified in the FIR ................20 4.2.1. Aesthetics .................................................................................. .............................20 4.2.2. Air Quality ................................................................................ .............................24 4.2.3. Biological Resources ................................................................ .............................28 4.2.4. Geology, Soils and Seismicity .................................................. .............................30 4.2.5. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ..................................................... .............................33 4.2.6. Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................ .............................35 4.2.7. Land Use and Planning ........................................................... .............................41 4.2.8. Public Services ......................................................................... .............................47 4.2.9. Transportation and Traffic..... .............. .................................. ....................... 49 4.2.10.Utilities and Service Systems .................................................. .............................57 4.3. Findings Regarding Environmental Impacts Which Can Be Mitigated to Level of Less Than Significant .......................................................... .............................61 4.3.1. Air Quality ................................................................................ .............................61 4.32. Biological Resources ................................................................ .............................64 4.3.3. Cultural and Paleontological Resources ................................ .............................68 4.3.4. Greenhouse Gas E missions ..................................................... .............................73 4.3.5. Land Use .................................................................................. .............................76 4.3.6. Noise 77 4.4. Findings Regarding Environmental Impacts Not Fully Mitigated to a Level ofLess Than Significant .................................................................... .............................78 4.4.1. Air Quality ................................................................................ .............................79 4.4.2. Noise 4.4.3. Transportation and Circulation ........................ _................................................ 83 4.5. Findings Regarding Alternatives to the Project ............................. ............................107 5. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ...................... 5.1. ............................122 Unavoidable Significant Environmental Effects ............................ ............................122 5.2. Overriding Considerations ................................ ............................... ............................123 6. CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL FIR .................. ............................... 6.1. ............................124 Findings ............................................................... .............................4. ............................125 6.2. Conclusions ......................................................... ............................... ............................125 7. ADOPTION OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM................................................................... ............................... ............................126 Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter FIR Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 8. APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT .............................. ............................... ............................126 9. LOCATION AND CUSTODIAN OF RECORD ....... ............................... ............................126 Lake Elslnoro Walmart Super center EIR Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations LAKE ELSINORE WALMART SUPERCENTER ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS. 1. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION I.I. Project Overview The City of Lake Elsinore (City) has completed an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse Number 2014051093) for the Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter Project. The City is the Lead Agency for the purposes of preparing and certifying this EIR pursuant to Sections 15050 and 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section 15000 et seq.) . The purpose of this EIR is to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter Project. In compliance with Section 21002.1 of CEQA and Section 15002 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City, as Lead Agency, has prepared this EIR in order to (1) inform the general public, the local community, responsible and interested public agencies and the City's decision - making bodies and other organizations, entities, and interested persons of the potential environmental effects of the proposed project, feasible measures to reduce potentially significant environmental effects, and alternatives that could reduce or avoid the significant effects of the proposed project, (2) enable the City to consider environmental consequences when deciding whether to approve the proposed project and (3) to satisfy the substantive and procedural requirements of CEQA. 1.2. Public Involvement and EIR Scoping This document complies with the provisions of CEQA (California Public Resources Code, Sections 21000 et seq.), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section 15000 et seq.) and the City's Procedures for Implementing the State CEQA Guidelines. In compliance with CEQA, the City has solicited and considered comments from Responsible and Trustee Agencies, members of the public, and other interested parties during the proposed project's various environmental review processes: • In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15082, the City prepared and distributed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR. The NOP was distributed on or about May 27, 2014. • In compliance with Section 21083.9 of CEQA and Section 15082 (c)(1) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City held a public seeping meeting on June 18, 2014, to receive public and agency comments. • Comments received from the public and agencies during the public review period for the NOP and the public seeping meeting were considered in the preparation of the EIR prepared for the proposed project. In August 2015, a DEIR was prepared for the proposed project in accordance with CEQA regulations and guidelines. The DEIR was circulated for a 45 -day public review period on or about August 28, 2015. Notification was provided to the State Clearinghouse (SCH), responsible and trustee agencies, and all interested parties and jurisdictions pursuant to the requirements of Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter FIR Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Section 15087 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Approximately I I comments were received by the City during this original 45 -day review period. These comments were evaluated and responded to in accordance with Section 15088 of the State CEQA Guidelines. 1.3. Final EIR Certification and Project Approval Process a. Findings Required Under CEQA The City Council (the decision - making body) of the City (the CEQA Lead Agency) certifies the Final EIR. The Final EIR, as required by State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15089 and 15132, consists of the Draft Environmental Impact Report ( "DEIR ") (SCH No. 2014051093), comments and recommendations received on the DEIR, a list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the DEIR, the responses of the City as "Lead Agency" to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process and any other information added by the City. Since the DEIR identified potentially significant environmental impacts, the City Council must also prepare "findings" as part of its action to certify that the Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA and to approve the proposed project. Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been certified, which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out, unless the public agency makes one or more findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale of each finding. The possible findings, which must be supported by substantial evidence in the record, are: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. 2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. 3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR. b. Significant Effects and Mitigation Measures The DEIR identified several significant environmental effects (or "impacts ") resulting from implementation of the proposed project. Some of these significant effects can be fully avoided /mitigated through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures. For those significant impacts that cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance, the City Council is required to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the proposed project. The State CEQA Guidelines at Section 15093(a) provide that if specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." Lake Elsinore Walman Suldercenter EIR Z Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations As indicated in Section 5.1 (CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations) of the DEIR, certain environmental effects of the proposed project cannot be reduced to less than significant levels by the adoption of feasible mitigation measures or feasible environmentally superior alternatives. Project -level and cumulative Air Quality, project -level Noise and project - level and cumulative Transportation and Traffic impacts have been identified as significant and unavoidable and require the preparation of a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Section 3.0, below, describes those effects and outlines the City's findings with respect to the environmental effects of the proposed project. c. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared to monitor and report the implementation of the mitigation measures identified for the proposed project. The MMRP will be adopted by the City Council concurrently with these findings, and will be implemented by the City during the proposed project's planning horizon, and through the project review, construction and post - construction periods of individual development projects. To the extent that these findings conclude that all mitigation measures outlined in the DEIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded, or withdrawn, the City hereby binds itself to implement these measures. These findings, in other words, are not merely informational, but rather constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect if the City Council formally approves the proposed project. d. Certification of the Final FIR and Adoption of Findings The City Council will review and consider the information contained in the Final EIR, as well as submissions from public officials, public agencies and the general public. Prior to considering project approval, the City Council shall certify that the Final EIR reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis. Having considered the foregoing information, as well as any and all other information in the record, the City Council shall make findings pursuant to CEQA Section 21081. In accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City Council shall adopt the Findings as part of its certification of the Final EIR for the proposed project. e. No Recirculation Required The City Council finds that none of the circumstances that trigger the requirement for recirculation of the EIR under CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 have occurred. Specifically, there was no significant new information (as defined in CEQA Guideline Section 15088.5(a)) added to the EIR after the public review period. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 3 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1. Project Location The proposed project is located in the central portion of the City, in western Riverside County. The project site is generally located at the southwest corner of Central Avenue (SR 74) and Cambern Avenue. The project site is bound by Cambern Avenue to the northeast, Third Street to the southwest, and Central Avenue to the northwest. Adjacent to and southeast of the project site is a Mobil gas station with inline retail shops, vacant commercial land, the rear side of LA Fitness and single- family residences. The project site consists of seven coterminous vacant parcels that total 17.66 acres. The project site corresponds to the following Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APNs): 377 - 030 -015, 377 - 030 -076, 377 - 090 -009, 377 - 090 -0295 377 - 090 -030, 377 - 090-031, and 377 - 090 -032. 2.2. Project Description The proposed project includes a lot line adjustment and lot merger to consolidate the lots into four separate parcels. The 17.66 -acre site is proposed to include a 14.35 -acre parcel that would be developed with the Walmart Supercenter, three outlots totaling approximately 2.0 acres would be improved with the retail /restaurant uses and the remaining 0.89 acre would be used for street dedication. Table 2 -1, depicts the proposed project development by acreage. Figure 3 -5a in the DEIR depicts the proposed project's site plan with Option A and Figure 3 -5b in the DEIR depicts the proposed project's site plan with Option E. Table 2 -1 Proposed Project Development Proposed Development Acreage Walmart Supercenter Lot Outlet 1 Outlet 2 Outlet 3 State Highway Dedication 14.35 acres 1.07 acres 0.67 acres 1.68 acres 74 <0.29 acres> Cambern Avenue <0.54 acres> Dedication 3rd Street Dedication <0.60 acres> Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 4 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The Walmart Supercenter would encompass a maximum of 154,487 SF, including the seasonal outdoor garden center, and provide for the sale of general merchandise, groceries and alcoholic beverages for off -site consumption as well as pool chemicals, petroleum products, pesticides and paint products. It may operate up to 24 hours per day. The store may contain a drive -thru pharmacy, a medical clinic, a vision and hearing care center, a food service center, a photo studio, a photo finishing center, a banking center, and other similar accessory uses. The store would include an approximately 3,090 -SF outdoor seasonal garden center. It may have outdoor seasonal parking lot sales and sidewalk sales along the front of the store. Truck doors, loading facilities, and areas dedicated for trash compaction, organic waste recycling, and bale and pallet storage would be located at the back of the store, appropriately screened from public view. All proposed structures on the project site would be developed to a maximum building height of 32 feet. Project architectural renderings for the Walmart Supercenter depict the proposed maximum building height of 28 feet. However, the Supercenter building elevations would vary up to 32 feet in height, and the final building elevations would be subject to the approval of the City as part of the entitlement process. The buildings located on the outlots would also be limited to approximately 32 feet in height. The Supercenter building would be of contemporary commercial architectural style with articulated surfaces and roof lines. The exterior finish materials would vary and include smooth and split face concrete masonry block with varied neutral colors of tans and browns. The proposed project buildings would incorporate compatible architectural styles and elements as the Supercenter. 'The proposed project would require that all landscaping planters be planted with 24 inch box trees. The Walmart Supercenter parking lot would include low- impact development (LID) design features such as stormwater retention bio cells in the northern area of the parking lot. The store operations, delivery, and loading would occur 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Primary access to the project site would be provided via SR -74. Additionally, the building would have four delivery bays and a dedicated service door for independent vendors. Inbound and outbound truck access would be via SR -74 to Cambern Avenue and then to a rear driveway on 3rd Street. Truck doors, loading facilities, and areas dedicated to trash compaction, organic waste, recycling, and bale and pallet storage would also be provided at the rear of the building, along 3rd Street. The proposed project would also develop the northwestern portion of the site with one of two options for the outlots. For Option A, the site would be developed with a gas station and two separate drive -thru restaurants. For Option B, the site would be developed with two buildings developed as retail or sit -down restaurants and the two other buildings would be developed as the separate drive -thru restaurants. Site Preparation. Grading activities are proposed to be completed in one phase and require the import of approximately 35,000 cubic yards of material to construct finished pads. Site grading is Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR S Environmental Finings and Statement of Overriding Considerations anticipated to take 2 months. In addition, over - excavation and compaction of on -site material is expected to be required. Access /Circulation /Parking. Regional access to the project site would be provided by I -15 via SR -74. The proposed project would provide vehicle access from Central Avenue, Cambern Avenue and truck access from 3rd Street. All project access points are proposed to be full- access, with the exception of the driveway on Central Avenue, which is proposed for right -in /right -out access only. The proposed project would also have access available from Dexter Avenue via Allan Street or Crane Street. Due to the proximity of Central Avenue, the intersection of Allen and Dexter Avenue will be restricted to right -in /right out. Additionally, the proposed project would include relocation of the existing bus stop along Central Avenue, approximately 200 feet to the east from its current location. The proposed project would provide for use of this existing route by providing a bus turnout on SR -74. The proposed project would construct roadway improvements on Central Avenue, Cambern Avenue, 3rd Street, Crane Street and Allan Street, which are necessary to provide adequate site access and on -site circulation. The project would improve Central Avenue from the centerline to the project area, as an Augmented Urban Arterial Highway (134 -foot right -of -way), between the project's western boundary and Cambern Avenue. The proposed project would construct roadway improvements on Cambern Avenue, from the centerline to the project area, as a Secondary Highway (90 -foot right -of -way) from Central Avenue to 3rd Street. The proposed project would construct roadway improvements on 3rd Street, from the centerline to the project area, as a Collector (68 -foot right -of -way) between the project's western boundary and Cambern Avenue. The proposed project would include parking that either meets or exceeds the parking requirements contained within the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, including parking for clean air vehicles and bicycles. Parking and loading areas would have typical night lighting that would operate during the nighttime hours. Landscaping. The project site is proposed to be landscaped in compliance with City requirements and the conceptual landscape plan. Landscape materials are proposed to be drought tolerant. Storm Drainage. The proposed project is located within an area designated as Flood Zone X. The City is in the process of preparing an area hydrology plan (Area Drainage Plan) for the 3rd Street area in consultation with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFCWCD) and Caltrans. The City has identified a preferred storm drain alignment for the Area Drainage Plan (Figure 4.7.4). Under this plan, stormwater would be conveyed from the existing earthen charnel located at Cambern Avenue and directed into a series of storm drains south on Cambern Avenue, and then west on 3rd Street, under Interstate 15 (I -15), and into an earthen /rip -rap channel, which would connect to the existing 3rd Street channel and discharge into Temescal Wash. The proposed Area Drainage Plan would include installation of a permanent drainage system (including an inlet structure, storm drains, curbs and gutters, catch basins, and an open channel) to capture and direct run -off from the project area. Stone drains composed of reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) would range in size from 84 inches in Cambern Avenue and 72 inches and 48 inches in 3rd Street. A steel jacketed 36 -inch RCP will be jack and bored under I -15 and connect the proposed 378 - foot -long, 70 -foot -wide earthen trapezoidal Lake Elsinore Walmart St mementer EIR 6 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations channel. The proposed regional drainage plan will also capture off -site drainage that currently flows onto the project site and convey it into the proposed area -wide drainage system. The environmental impacts associated with the City's Area Drainage Plan will be evaluated in a separate CEQA document. If the Area Drainage Plan is not adopted and installed by the City prior to construction, , then the proposed project design would be implemented to accommodate flows on the southern boundary of the Walmart Supercenter site in accordance with Figure 3 -7. The alternative storm drainage project design would include conveyance of stormwater flows from Cambern Avenue through a storm drain structure with varying widths into an on -site approximately 72 foot -wide stormwater detention basin /open channel, which would be located along the southern boundary of the project site adjacent to 3rd Street. Utilities. Water and wastewater service would be provided by the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District ( EVMWD). Although some design details will not be finalized until the construction utility development phase of the proposed project, it is expected that the existing water main on Cambern Avenue would be modified or relocated in the same general area in coordination with EVMWD in order to install the drainage improvements. An adequate number of fire hydrants are proposed to serve the proposed project and adequate fire flow and pressure is available to serve the proposed project. Existing overhead electric lines and poles along Cambern Avenue would be relocated underground through coordination with Southern California Edison. The proposed project would connect to existing gas mains in 3rd Street, the telephone utility in 3rd Street, and the sanitary sewer system in Crane Street and 3rd Street. Project Sustainability Features The proposed Walmart Supercenter store proposes to include various sustainability features, which are described below. Construction and Demolition Recycling. Walmart would develop and employ a Construction and Demolition (C &D) program to capture and recycle construction waste materials; including: metals, woods, tiles, concretes, asphalts, and other materials generated. Walmart would work with a waste management company to fully research all available C &D recycling facilities in the area, and its C &D program would seek to include the widest possible range of materials recovery options. Grading and Construction. As described previously, the site is relatively flat and generally slopes from Cambern Avenue southerly at an approximate 2.0 percent gradient. The proposed project would be required to import approximately 35,000 cubic yards of material to create finished pads for building construction, on -site excavation of existing soils and over - excavation is also anticipated. Complete project construction is anticipated to take approximately 12 months including roadway improvements, with grading operations taking approximately 2 months. The timing of construction of outlet structures is dependent on market conditions. The design and construction of the proposed project has been developed to adhere to City Municipal Code. Lighting. The entire Walmart Supercenter store would include occupancy sensors in most non - sales areas, including resirooms, break rooms and offices. The sensors automatically turn the Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter E I R Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations lights off when the space is unoccupied. All lighting in the store would consist of T -8 fluorescent lamps and electronic ballasts and all exterior building signage and many refrigerated food cases would be illuminated with light- emitting diodes (LEDs). The Walmart Supercenter store would include a daylight harvesting system, which provides electronic continuous dimming ballasts, skylights and computer controlled daylight sensors that monitor the amount of natural light available. During periods of higher natural daylight, the system dims or turns off the store lights if they are not needed, thereby reducing energy use. Dimming and turning off building lights also helps eliminate unnecessary heat in the building. Given the prgject site's proximity to the Mount Palomar Observatory, site parking lot lighting would be low pressure sodium vapor lighting as encouraged by Section 17.112.040 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Systems. The Walmart Supercenter store would employ an HVAC system that would exceed the industry baseline standards and California Title 24 requirements. Dehumidification. The Walmart Supercenter store would include a dehumidifying system that allows the store to be operated at a higher temperature, use less energy, and allow the air conditioning and refrigeration systems to operate at maximum efficiency. White Roof. The Walmart Supercenter store would utilize a white membrane roof instead of the typical darker - colored roof materials employed in commercial construction. The white membrane roof would reduce building energy consumption by reducing the heat island effect, as compared to buildings using darker roofing colors. Refrigeration. The Walmart Supercenter store would use non- ozone - depleting refrigerants for the refrigerated cases. This limits the amount of copper refrigerant piping, insulation, potential for leaks, and refrigerant charge needed. Heat Reclamation. The Walmart Supercenter store would reclaim waste heat from on -site refrigeration equipment to supply approximately 70 percent of the hot water needs for the store. Central Energy Management System. Walmart employs a centralized energy management system (EMS) to monitor and control the heating, air conditioning, refrigeration and lighting systems for all stores from Walmart's corporate headquarters in Bentonville, Arkansas. The EMS enables Walmart to constantly monitor and control the store's energy use, analyze refrigeration temperatures, observe HVAC and lighting performance, and adjust system levels from a central location 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. Energy use for the entire store would be monitored and controlled in this manner. Water Conservation. The Walmart Supercenter store would install high - efficiency urinals that use only one - eighth (1/8) gallon of water per flush. This fixture reduces water use by 87 percent compared to the conventional one gallon per flush urinal. The 1/8 gallon urinal also requires less maintenance than waterless urinals. All restroom sinks would use sensor- activated one -half (1/2) gallon per minute high - efficiency faucets. During use, water flows through turbines built into the faucets to generate the electricity needed to operate the motion sensors. Water efficient restroom Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 8 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations toilets would be employed in the Walmart Supercenter restrooms. The fixture uses 20 percent less water compared to mandated U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Standards of 1.6 gallon per flush fixtures. The toilets use built -in water turbines to generate the power required to activate the flush mechanism, which is energy efficient because it saves energy and material by eliminating electrical conduits required to power automatic flush valve sensors. Additionally, the proposed project would incorporate BMPs that would be designed in accordance with LID procedures for minimizing effects on stormwater and stormwater quality. Material and Finishes. The Walmart Supercenter store would be built using cement mixes that include 15 -20 percent fly ash, a waste product of coal -fired electrical generation, or 25 -30 percent slag, a by- product of the steel manufacturing process. By incorporating these waste product materials into its cement mixes, Walmart offsets the greenhouse gases emitted in the cement manufacturing process. The Walmart Supercenter store would use Non - Reinforced Thermoplastic Panel (NRP) in lieu of Fiber Reinforced Plastic (FRP) sheets on the walls in areas where plastic sheeting is appropriate, including food preparation areas, utility and janitorial areas, and employee break rooms. NRP can be recycled, has better impact resistance, and, like FRP, is easy to keep clean. The Walmart Supercenter store's exterior and interior field paint coatings would be low volatile organic compound (VOC) paint that would be provided in 55 gallon drums and 275 gallon totes that are returned to the paint supplier for cleaning and reuse. The store would have exposed concrete floors that would not need chemical cleaners, wax strippers or propane- powered buffing. Recycled Building Materials. Construction of the Walmart Supercenter store would use steel containing approximately 90 -98 percent recycled structural steel, which utilizes less energy in the mining and manufacturing process than does new steel. All of the plastic baseboards and much of the plastic shelving included in the expansion area would be composed of recycled plastic. 2.3. Project Objectives CEQA Guidelines Section 15124 requires an FIR to include a statement of objectives sought by the proposed project. The objectives assist in developing the range of proposed project alternatives to be evaluated in the EIR. The objectives of the proposed project include the following: • Develop a new major retail and commercial center along major roadways and within close proximity to the Interstate 15 (I- 15)/SR -74 interchange in order to facilitate regional public access and take advantage of' the high visibility site to regional travelers. • Develop the vacant unused parcels comprising the project site for retail - commercial uses, consistent with the existing General Plan land use and zoning designations, in a manner that fully utilizes their development potential. • Develop a new major retail and commercial center which takes advantage of existing infrastructure. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 9 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations • Develop a project that will provide local employment opportunities and that will provide economic benefits to the community and the City. • Develop a new retail center with sustainable project features that reduces project impacts on the environment. • Develop full scale grocery use to serve the needs of the local residents. • Develop a cohesive shopping center that allows shoppers to complete multiple shopping opportunities in one stop thereby reducing the number of traffic trips. 3. GENERAL FINDINGS ON MITIGATION MEASURES In preparing the Conditions of Approval for this Project, City staff incorporated the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR as applicable to the Project. In the event that the Conditions of Approval do not use the exact wording of the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR, in each such instance, the adopted Conditions of Approval are intended to be identical or substantially similar to the recommended mitigation measures. Any minor revisions are to improve clarity or to better define the intended purpose of the mitigation and are not designed to substantively alter the purpose of such mitigation. Finding: Unless specifically stated to the contrary in these Findings, it is the City's intent to adopt all mitigation measures recommended by the EIR which are applicable to the Project. If a measure has, through error, been omitted from the Conditions of Approval or from these Findings, and that measure is not specifically reflected in these Findings, that measure shall be deemed to be adopted pursuant to this paragraph. In addition, unless specifically stated to the contrary in these Findings, all Conditions of Approval repeating or rewording mitigation measures recommended in the FIR are intended to be substantially similar to the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR and are found to be equally effective in avoiding or lessening the identified environmental impact. In each instance, the Conditions of Approval contain the final wording for the mitigation measures. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 10 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 4. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS 4.1. Areas Determined To Have No Significant Impact The City, through the Initial Study (IS) process, determined the proposed project has the potential to cause or result in significant environmental impacts, and warranted further analysis, public review, and disclosure through the preparation of an EIR. The IS and associated FIR Notice of Preparation (NOP), dated May 2014, were forwarded to the California Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse (SCII), and circulated for public review and comment. The State Clearinghouse established the public comment period for the IS /NOP as May 28, 2014 through ,Tune 26, 2014. The following discussion summarizes the environmental impacts that were determined in the IS/NOP and public review processes to pose no potentially significant impacts. Specific issues considered to pose no potentially significant impacts were not substantively discussed within the EIR. Aesthetics The project area is located in Viewshed I 1 described in the General Plan as consisting mainly of residential and commercial land uses, in which the proposed project would be consistent. The General Plan identifies vantage points, generally around the Lake Elsinore. Lake Elsinore is located 1.5 miles southwest of the project site and therefore, is not visible from the project site or roadways; thus, the project would not alter existing views of the Lake Elsinore. The Santa Ana Mountains and Cleveland National Forest are located roughly 4 miles northwest, west, and southwest of the project site; as a result, the proposed project would not affect off -site views of these areas. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project is not anticipated to result in a substantial adverse effect to viewsheds or landscaped viewshed units of scenic vistas and no impact would occur. Agriculture and Forest Resources The project site is not under a Williamson Contract (CDOC, 2012a) and is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance (CDOC, 2012b). The project site does not contain forested or timber land. A portion of the project site contains Farmland of Local Importance but is not used for agricultural cultivation. No active agricultural operations currently exist on -site. The project site has been designated for commercial and mixed -use commercial development under the City'sGeneral Plan, and has existing zoning designations of General Commercial (C -2) and Commercial Mixed Use (CMU). Additionally, land adjacent to the project site does not contain agricultural or forest resources and is zoned for such uses. As the project site does not contain agricultural or forest resources and would not result in the conversion of off -site agricultural or forest resources, there would be no impact for this issue area. Biological Resources The project site does not contain any federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and impacts related to wetlands would not occur from implementation of Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercenler E3R Environtri Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations the proposed project. As noted above, the project site may contain potentially jurisdictional waters of the state; however no federally protected waters exist or would be affected by the proposed project. According to the MSHCP there are no documented terrestrial migration corridors in the vicinity of the project site. Furthermore, the project site is within a moderately developed portion of the City and it is not anticipated that the project site is used for migration, movement or dispersal of wildlife. Project construction and operation would remove some foraging habitat for common reptile, avian, and mammal species, including the eucalyptus grove and non - native grassland on- site; however, these habitat types are wide - spread throughout the region and development of the project site is not anticipated to impede wildlife movement. The City of Lake Elsinore has a palm tree preservation program in place. The purpose of the program is for the protection of the project site is within a moderately developed portion of the City and it is not value of significant palm trees within the City as natural aesthetic resources, which help define the history and character of the City. All residents who wish to remove a palm tree that exceeds five feet in height measured from the ground at the base of the trunk to the base of the crown must obtain a palm tree removal permit prior to removal of the tree. No palm trees occur within the project limits and no other local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources apply to the project. Cultural Resources The project site is a vacant parcel that contains non - native grasses, a row of mature eucalyptus trees, and gravel covered ground. The project site does not contain any existing structures or historic resources, and the project site is not located adjacent to or in the vicinity of any historic sites, which are shown on Figure 3.2 -2 of the City's General Plan EIR. Additionally, the General Plan EIR states the 3rd Street Annexation area (that includes a portion of the project site), does not contain any previously identified historical resources. Therefore, development and operation of the retail center on the project site would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. Geology, Soils, and Seismicity There are no known active faults crossing the project site and the project site is not located in or immediately adjacent to an Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The nearest known active or potentially active fault is the Elsinore (Glen Ivy) Fault, located about 3.2 miles west of the project site. Therefore, the potential for fault rupture at the project site is considered low and impacts would be less than significant. Landslides are large movements of the underlying ground that include rock falls, shallow slumping and sliding of soil, and deep rotational or transitional movement of soil or rock. No state landslide data is currently available for the Lake Elsinore Quadrangle, in which the project is located (CDOC, 2007). The project site is relatively flat with gentle slopes descending from north to the south, with site elevations ranging from approximately 1,317 feet above mean sea level (amsl) in the northern portion of the site to about 1,298 feet amsl in the southern portion. The project site is not located in close proximity to hills or mountains and does not contain steep Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 12 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations slopes. Therefore, the risk for landslides onsite is very low, and impacts would be less than significant. Expansive soils are soils that exhibit moderate to high shrink /swell potential and may cause damage to components, including underground utilities, pipelines, foundations, and infrastructure. Expansion index testing indicated that the near surface sandy lean clay soils found onsite have a low expansion potential (Greenburg, 2011). Therefore, impacts related to expansive soils would be less than significant. The project would connect to a public sewer system. No septic systems are proposed, and thus there would be no impact in regard to having soils incapable of supporting proposed septic systems. Hazards and Hazardous Materials The proposed project would involve the transport of fuels, lubricants, and various other liquids needed for operation of construction equipment at the project site and would be transported to the construction site on an as- needed basis by equipment service trucks. Materials hazardous to humans, wildlife, and sensitive environments would be present during project construction. These materials include diesel fuel, gasoline, equipment fluids, concrete, cleaning solutions and solvents, lubricant oils, adhesives, human waste, and chemical toilets. The potential exists for direct impacts to human health and the environment from accidental spills of small amounts of hazardous materials from construction equipment during construction. Additionally, the project would sell products that may be considered hazardous materials. These include pool chemicals, ammunition, paints, thinners, cleaning solvents, fertilizers, pesticides, motor oil, and other gardening, home improvement and automotive substances. With existing regulations governing the proposed projects hazardous materials, impacts during construction would be less than significant. A regulatory agency database search for the project area was performed using the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Envirostor databases (SWRCB, 2013a; DTSC, 2013) in addition to review of other hazardous site lists maintained by the state (California Environmental Protection Agency, 2013). At this time neither the project site nor surrounding properties posed significant environmental concerns which would prevent development of the project site with commercial uses. The databases search regulatory agency lists for sites with a documented release of hazardous materials or petroleum products. Regulatory agency lists included in the database search were: Federal Superfund (EPA National Priorities List); State Response; Voluntary Clearrup; Landfill Disposal Sites; Military Sites, Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Sites; and other sites. The search of available environmental records revealed that the proposed subject property is not listed in any of the databases reviewed as having environmental concerns. Additionally, within the vicinity of the project site there are no sites which would currently present concerns to development of the project site. Geotracker, for example, identified two LUST sites located approximately 400 feet southwest of the project sites; however, these sites are closed cases of soil groundwater contamination which were resolved in June 2010 and January 2011. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to create a significant hazard to Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 13 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The nearest school is located 2.45 miles east of the project site. The proposed project is a commercial development that would sell products that may be considered hazardous materials. These include pool chemicals, ammunition, paints, thinners, cleaning solvents, fertilizers, pesticides, motor oil, and other gardening, home improvement and automotive substances. As the project site is not located within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, it does not involve hazards to nearby schools. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was conducted for the subject property by Cornerstone Earth Group (Cornerstone) in 2011. Observed hazardous materials related to vehicle maintenance included mainly new and used lubricants, antifreeze and other automotive - related products. Asbestos - containing materials (ACM) were identified during a hazardous building materials survey. The ACM were associated with the mobile homes and consisted of roof penetration mastics on the roofs of the four mobile homes surveyed, and roof shingles on one of the mobile homes (Cornerstone, 2011). It should be noted that this assessment was conducted when mobile homes were still present on -site. The mobile homes have since been demolished and the project site is now vacant. The search of available environmental records revealed that the proposed subject property is not listed in any of the databases reviewed as having environmental concerns and is not located on any hazardous materials site as designated by Government Code § 6592.5. Based upon the previous Phase I, as well as a review of federal, state, and local environmental databases, neither the project site nor the surrounding area presents hazardous conditions for development of the project site. The project site is located approximately 4.8 miles northwest of Skylark Field, a small private airport in the City. The project site is located outside of the Influence Area of this airport as shown in Figure 5 of the Elsinore Area Plan, "Skylark Airport Influence Policy Area" (RCTLMA, 2014). No other private or public airports are located in the immediate project vicinity. Given the distance to the closest airport, intervening land uses, and relatively small scale of aviation operations of Skylark Field, the project would have no potential to expose employees and visitors of the project site to excessive aircraft - related noise. The proposed project does not present a safety hazard with respect to airports. Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. The proposed project would not interfere with any adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. The project does not propose any changes to the City's Emergency Preparedness Plan or the Riverside County Operational Area Multi - Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. All applicable local and state regulatory standards for adequate emergency access will be met. The project would be provided with vehicle access from Central Avenue, Dexter Avenue, Cambern Avenue and truck access from Carnbern Avenue and 3rd Street. All project access points are proposed to be full- access, with the exception of the driveway on Central Avenue, which is proposed for right- ii-dright -out access only. The proposed project would also have access to Dexter Avenue via Allan Street and Crane Street. Development is required to comply with emergency vehicle access requirements (e.g., street width and turnaround requirements) in the 2010 CBC, including the Fire Code. Further, the City Engineer and the City Fire Department would review the improvements to the existing roadways to ensure that adequate emergency Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter FIR 14 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations access or emergency response would be maintained. Therefore, the project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. hnpacts related to emergency access and evacuation would be less than significant. The project would involve the construction of new structures onsite said could expose more people and additional development to potentially significant hazards from wildfires. The southeastern portion of project site is located within a CAL FIRE State Responsibility area within the Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone (CAL FIRE, 2007). However, the General Plan identifies the project site as being within a moderate fire hazard zone, which indicates that with prevention strategies and response programs, this risk can be reduced. The Lake Elsinore Local Hazard Mitigation Plan includes various policies including on -going brush clearance, low fuel landscaping, fire resistant building techniques, and creation of fuel modification zones around development to address the risk of wildfire (City, 2012). The proposed project would remove the eucalyptus grove onsite and the City Engineer and Fire Department would review the proposed development to ensure that adequate fire protection measures are implemented consistent with the 2010 CBC, thereby lowering the threat of hazards from wildfires. As a result, impacts involving wildland fires would be less than significant. Hydrology and Water Quality The project site is not located within a 100 -year flood zone (defined as a flood with a I percent annual chance of occurrence), as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) No. 03035C2029G. The proposed project does not include and would not place housing within a 100 -year flood zone. The proposed project would not place structures or other facilities associated with the commercial development within a 100 - year flood zone. Therefore, no impacts associated with a 100 -year flood zone would occur. The project is not protected from flooding by a dam or levee, or by any other flood control structure, the failure of which could cause harm. Thus, the project would not result in an impact related to these issues. The project is located inland and at an elevation of at least 1,300 feet amsl; therefore, the project area would not be affected by tsunami. The project is not located immediately adjacent to a lake or other large water body, and therefore would not be affected by seiche. Finally, the project is located within a small watershed of limited area. Although the watershed has moderate topographic relief and some areas of light vegetation cover, the watershed is not large enough to generate a mudflow of sufficient size to cause harm or damage to property. Thus, there would be no impact for these issues. Land Use and Planning The proposed project would develop commercial uses within an area that is designated for general commercial and mixed commercial use by the City's General Plan. The project is not within a Specific Plan. The project must undergo City review and ultimately must be consistent with existing City policy to be adopted or propose an amendment to existing City policies. Thus, Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter E I R 15 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations the project is not anticipated to conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation and this impact is considered less than significant. Mineral Resources The project site is within a Mineral Resource Zone 3a (MRZ -3a) as delineated by the California Geological Survey (1991). The MRZ -3a designation indicates that a known mineral deposit of an undetermined significance is present on the site. There are no active mines located onsite. An area of disturbed soil on the northern portion of the site, as depicted in historic aerial photographs, may have been an exploratory pit associated with larger off -site clay mining operations. The Elsinore Clay Company and International Pipe and Ceramics Corporation owned two of the site parcels between 1947 and 1977; however, manufacturing activities do not appear to have been conducted onsite (Cornerstone, 2011). Based on a search in the USGS Mineral Resources Database, Morton Clay Deposit is located a few hundred feet northeast of the project site's northern corner at Central Avenue and Cambern Avenue and was a past producer of clay. Evans Shafts is located about 350 feet northeast of the project site and was a past producer of clay. Sedco Pit is located just over 4 miles southeast of the project site, which currently produces non - metallic crushed stone (US- Mining, 2013). As stated above, previous records indicate the area has already been explored for mineral resource value, yet it was never converted into a functioning mine or excavation area, which indicates that resources are not of value. In addition, the project site has been designated for general commercial and mixed use. Therefore, the project would not result in the significant loss of a valuable or locally important mineral resource as designated on a City plan, and significant impacts to mineral resources would not result from the proposed project. Noise The project site is located approximately 4.8 miles northwest of Skylark Field, a small private airport in the City. The project site is located outside of the Influence Area of this airport, as shown in Figure 5 of the Elsinore Area Plan, "Skylark Airport Influence Policy Area" (RCTLMA, 2014). No other private or public airports are located in the immediate project vicinity. Given the distance to the airport, intervening land uses, and relatively small scale of aviation operations of Skylark Field, the project's potential to expose employees and visitors of the project site to excessive aircraft- related noise would not occur. Population and Housing The project does not propose new residential development and would not directly contribute to population growth within the City. The project is proposed at this location in order to service customers from existing demand in the project vicinity, and to provide access to the new retail center via the existing roadway system including I -15 and Central Avenue (SR -74). The project site has been planned and zoned for general commercial development. Further, the project site is located within an urbanized area that contains similar retail center uses and is already served by water and sewer utilities, and other infrastructure. The project would not include the extension of City infrastructure that could spur indirect growth that could induce substantial population growth. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 16 Environinental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Employment generated by the project may contribute to nominal population growth; however, project - related employment demands would likely be filled by the existing persons within the City and neighboring communities. The unemployment rate in December 2013 was 8.8 percent in Lake Elsinore and 8.0 percent in Wildomar, which is lower than the three previous years. The City provides a healthy labor force to meet the project's employment demands locally. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to draw a significant number of employees from outside of the City and adjacent areas, which would relocate to work at the new retail center. Therefore, the project's potential to induce substantial growth directly or indirectly is considered less than significant. The proposed project would not result in the direct displacement of existing housing or people, since the proposed project is a commercial development on vacant land. Therefore, the project would have no impact with respect to these issues. Public Services The proposed project would not develop residential uses and thus would not increase direct school enrollment within the Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD). Indirect impacts to schools could occur if the employees of the proposed retail center relocate to be closer to work and if they have children that would attend school. The City and the City of Wildomar provide an ample labor force that would be able to meet the project's employment demands locally. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to draw a significant number of employees from outside of the City that would relocate to the City, and generate new students at local schools. As a result, the potential for this secondary effect to result in the need for new or physically altered school facilities would be less than significant. Furthermore, the project, like all commercial projects, would be required to pay school impact fees as levied by the LEUSD, which would provide funding for school facilities. Impacts related to school facilities would be less than significant. The proposed project would not develop residential uses and thus would not directly increase park uses within Lake EIsinore. Indirect impacts to parks could occur if the employees of the proposed retail center relocate to be closer to work and utilize local parks. Also, secondary impacts to park facilities from commercial development would be the occasional use of a park during a lunch or dinner break. As is consistent with all commercial projects, the proposed retail center project would be required to pay park fees to the City for the purpose of establishing, improving and maintaining park Land within the City. Overall, development and operation of the retail center would not result in the increase in use of park facilities that would be substantial, such that new or physically altered park facilities would be needed. Therefore, project impacts related to parks are less than significant. The proposed project would not develop residential uses and thus would not directly increase City population. Potentially limited indirect increases to public facilities from the increase in employees from the project could result; however, similar to the previous discussion above, secondary impacts to library facilities from commercial development would be the occasional use of a proximate library during a lunch or dinner break. As a result, the potential for the project to result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with new or physically altered Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercener FIR 1 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities is considered less than significant. Recreation The project does not propose elements (e.g., residential development) that would result in substantial increased demands for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. Further, project related employment demands are expected to be largely filled by existing City residents or residents of neighboring communities. As such, the proposed project's potential to result in increased demands on neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities is considered less than significant. Indirect impacts to parks could occur if the employees of the proposed retail center relocate to be closer to work and utilize local parks. Also, secondary impacts to park facilities from commercial development would be the occasional use of a park during a lunch or dinner break. As is consistent with all commercial projects, the proposed retail center project would be required to pay park fees to the City for the purpose of establishing, improving and maintaining park land within the City. Overall, development and operation of the retail center would not result in the increase in use of park facilities that would be substantial, such that new or physically altered park facilities would be needed. Therefore, project impacts related to parks are less than significant. The construction of recreational facilities is not included in the proposed project, nor will the project require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Neither project construction nor operations are anticipated to negatively impact any surrounding recreational facilities. As previously stated, the project would pay $0.10 per square foot of enclosed space in order to establish, improve and maintain park land within the City. The project would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities and thus would have less than significant impacts. Traffic and Transportation The project does not include any components related to air traffic. As described previously, the project site is located approximately 4.8 miles northwest of Skylark Field and outside of the Influence Area of this airport. There are no other private or public airports located in the immediate project vicinity, and impacts related to air traffic patterns would not occur from implementation of the retail center project. The project would include an onsite circulation system, ingress and egress from adjacent streets and development, and would improve adjacent streets to the project site. The proposed circulation system, including all sight distance design requirements, number of access points, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities would comply with City codes, policies and standards, and would be reviewed and approved by the City's Public Works and Traffic Engineering staff. The circulation would be free of sharp curves, dangerous intersections, and uses that are inconsistent with the proposed retail center uses. Although the proposed project would increase traffic volumes in the project vicinity, the project would not include any hazardous traffic features. As a result, impacts related to hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use would be less than significant. - Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercenter CIR 18 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 'The project would develop a retail center on a site that is currently vacant and surrounded by existing streets. City standard development reviews by the City's planning, traffic engineering, and fire department staff (via contract with Riverside County Fire Department) would ensure that adequate emergency access would be provided with development of the project. As a result, project impacts related to inadequate emergency access would be less than significant. The retail center project does not present elements or aspects that would conflict with adopted alternative transportation policies. Development of the retail center includes connections to all of the adjacent street systems and installation of 34 bicycle racks on the project site. In addition, the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) currently provides bus service that travels by the project site. RTA Route 22 travels along Central Avenue past the project site. The proposed project would include relocation of the existing bus stop along Central Avenue, approximately 200 feet from its current location. The proposed project would provide for use of this existing route by providing a bus turnout on Central Avenue (SR -74). Therefore, the project would not conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation, and impacts would be less than significant. Utilities Wastewater service to the project site would be provided by EVMWD via existing lines along streets that are adjacent to the project site. EVMWD provides wastewater and reclaimed water service to the City and the Cities of Canyon Lake and Wildomar, portions of the City of Murrieta and unincorporated portions of Riverside County. Project - generated wastewater would be typical of commercial/retail sources, and would not require treatment beyond that provided by existing and programmed EVMWD facilities. Wastewater flows from the project site would be collected and conveyed to the existing sewer line along Crane Street and sewer line along 3rdStreet. Wastewater treatment demands of the proposed project can be accommodated within the scope of existing /programmed EVMWD facilities and would not cause or result in exceedance of wastewater treatment requirements. The project proponent would be required to pay for utility rates and connection fees to reduce the impacts from increased demands to wastewater services to a less than significant level. Construction of new lines or expansion of existing lines is not proposed as there is sufficient capacity to support the proposed project. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Chapter 14.12 of the City Municipal Code requires that project construction divert a minimum of 50 percent of construction and demolition debris. Following construction, the project would be served by CR &R, the City's trash hauler. Each business would be provided with a three cubic yard commercial container, with regular weekly service from Monday through Saturday. CR &R also provides a 3- or 4 -yard bin for collection as part of their Mixed Use Recycling Program upon request. They also provide glass recycling, electronic waste, bulky items, and special event waste pickup upon request (CR &R, 2014). Waste produced on -site would be hauled to a materials recovery facility, transfer facility or landfill in Riverside County. The Riverside County Waste Management Department manages the landfills used by the City. The landfills typically used by the City are the El Sobrante, Badlands and Lamb Canyon Landfills (City, 2011). The El Sobrante Landfill is the closest to the project site, located approximately 9.5 miles northwest at 10910 Dawson Canyon Road in the City of Corona. The El Sobrante, Badlands and Lamb Canyon Landfills based on current planning efforts and permitted daily capacity have anticipated closure dates of 2045, 2024, and 2021 respectively (CalRecycle, 2013). Both the Badlands Lake Elsinore Walmart Suldercenler E I R 19 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Landfill and the Lamb Canyon Landfill also have room for potential expansion (City, 2011). As the amount of solid waste generated by the project is anticipated to be accommodated by these existing landfills and overall solid waste would be reduced by the provision of recycling and green waste collection, impacts from the project would be less than significant. 4.2. Findings Regarding Less Than Significant Impacts Identified in the FIR The DEIR completed in August 2015 found that the proposed project would have a less than significant impact without the imposition of mitigation on a number of environmental topic areas. The less than significant environmental impact determination was made for each of the following topic areas listed below, based on the more expansive discussions contained in the DEIR. 4.2.1. Aesthetics a. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would result in less- than - significant impacts to scenic resources. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that impacts upon scenic resources would be less- than - significant. There are no officially designated state scenic highways in the vicinity of the project site (Caltrans, 2012). However, SR -74 (Central Avenue), directly adjacent to the project site, is eligible for designation as a state scenic highway, but is not officially designated. The project site is not is not located within a scenic overlay district and the project site does not include the General Plan identified scenic resources such as the lake, the Cleveland National Forest, other natural landscapes and buildings of historical /cultural significance. In addition, the project site is not located on a segment on SR- 74 considered a vantage point by the City. Development of the proposed project would remove an existing eucalyptus grove within the view of SR -74. However, the eucalyptus grove is not considered sensitive or designated for protection under federal, state, local or regional plans. Moreover, under the General Plan and zoning ordinance, the site is designated for commercial uses, and consistent with the land use designation, the proposed project would include buildings, site screening and ornamental landscaping consistent with the City's design criteria. Based on the discussion above, the project's compliance with the existing City land use and zoning regulations would ensure on -site development would not impact nearby views of scenic resources or vistas. Therefore, the project's potential to result in impacts on scenic resources, including trees, is considered less - than- significant. Reference: EIR page 4.1 -10. b. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would result in less - than - significant impacts to the existing visual character of the project site. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter FIR 20 Environmental findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR, and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that impacts on the visual character would be less -than- significant. Construction— related activities include the following: site preparation, grading, paving, construction of structures and infrastructure, and architectural coating. Motorists traveling along Central Avenue /SR -74 and residents along Cambern Avenue and 3rd Street would have views of construction activities. During project construction, the construction activities would alter the character of the project site and its surroundings. Graded surfaces, construction materials, construction equipment and truck traffic would be visible. Soil would be stockpiled and equipment for grading activities would be staged on the project site. Construction- related visual impacts would not be constant over the 12anonth construction period because construction phases would not occur at the same time. Short -term visual impacts would cease once construction is complete. Therefore, because of the temporary nature of construction - related activities, potential impacts to visual character would be less- than- significant. Additionally, project implementation would convert undeveloped land to commercial /retail restaurant and possibly gas station uses, altering the aesthetic nature of the project site. The proposed project would result in a visual change from undeveloped land to a higher intensity development consisting of a Walmart Supercenter, outlet buildings, parking lots, and landscaping. Transition of the site from undeveloped to commercial /retail uses proposed under the project would change the visual character and quality of the site to be consistent with the nearby commercial /retail development as shown in Figures 4.1 -1a through 4.1 -2. Building design and landscaping would be incorporated into the overall project design that would conform to the City's zoning and design standards, and are subject to City review and approval. The architectural features and landscaping design are intended to provide a visually appealing commercial retail development. As described above, the development of the proposed project would be of similar land uses, height and scale as the local commercial retail centers located along Central Avenue /SR -74 to the west and commercial uses to the south (i.e. Lowes, Bed Bath and Beyond, Costco, and LA Fitness). The proposed project would be consistent with the existing General Plan land use and zoning designations for the project site. Given the existing nearby commercial and retail centers and buildings, and the project's consistency with General Plan and zoning design standards, the potential for the proposed project to substantially degrade the existing visual character and quality of the site and its surroundings is considered less- Than - significant. As discussed above, the surrounding land uses in the project vicinity that would have the greatest potential for impacts are the residential uses to the east and southeast. The existing single- family residential uses are located directly east and southeast of the project site along Cambern Avenue and 3rd Street. A wind row of eucalyptus trees on the project site and other scattered trees partially block views of the project site from the residences located east of 3rd Street, as shown in Figure 4.1 -lb, Photo 4. The residences to the north currently have an unobstructed view of the project site, as shown in Figure 4.1 -1a, Photo 2, and Figure 4.1 -1b, Photo 3. Lake Elsinore Waltman[ Supercenter EIR 21 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The segment of the Interstate 15 (I -15) Freeway overlooking the project site is approximately 890 feet southwest of the project site. The I -15 freeway and off-ramp are located on a raised embankment. Views looking down on the project site are relatively unobstructed and consist of undeveloped land, commercial land uses and ornamental landscaping. Given the presence of the existing commercial and retail center, the proposed project would not be considered a substantial change in the visual character of the project area. Overall, implementation of the proposed project would result in a visual contrast from existing conditions, but would not degrade the character or quality of the site, which is currently undeveloped and surrounded by a chain link fence. In addition, the proposed project would be visually compatible with the existing built environment to the south and west of the project site that includes various large commercial /retail buildings and ornamental landscaping. Although implementation of the proposed project would alter the visual character of the site and surroundings, it is not anticipated that a substantial degradation of the visual character or quality would occur. The project would complement the existing character of the area by reinforcing the established urban, commercial /retail quality of Central Avenue (SR -74) corridor. As a result, the proposed project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site or surrounding area, and impacts would be less - than - significant. Reference: EIR pages 4.1 -10 and 4.1 -I1. c. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would result in less- than - significant impacts from light and glare. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would have less- than - significant impacts related to light and glare because the project buildings would largely screen the visibility of exterior lighting fixtures, illuminated signs, and vehicular lights from the residential uses north, east and south of the project site. Furthermore, lighting along the project property lines adjacent to the existing residences would not exceed one foot - candle. The proposed project would include low pressure sodium vapor lighting as encouraged by Section 17.112.040 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. In addition, the proposed project would not use highly reflective surfaces, and would not include large areas of glass on the buildings. The proposed project will comply with the City requirements to illuminate the site without causing undue light or glare, compromising views, or affecting astronomical observation and research. Compliance with these standards would minimize any potential light and glare impacts from the project, and potential impacts would be less- than - significant. Reference: EIR pages 4.1 -12 through 4.1 -15. d. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would result in less -than- significant cumulative aesthetic impacts. Lake Elsinore Waimea Supercenter EIR 22 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR, and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the cumulative aesthetic impacts of the project would be less - than - significant. Scenic Resources The project site is not located along a State Designated Scenic Highway or within a scenic overlay district in the City. The proposed project site does not include any General Plan identified scenic resources such as Lake Elsinore, the Santa Ana Mountains, or Cleveland National Forest. Additionally, the project site is located within Viewshed 11, which consists mainly of residential and commercial land uses. Although implementation of the proposed project would remove a eucalyptus grove, that grove is not considered sensitive or designated for protection under federal, state, local, or regional plans. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project, when combined with the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable cumulative projects, would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact to scenic resources. Visual Character and Site Quality The cumulative aesthetics study area for the proposed project is the viewshed, which includes areas that can view the project site. Of the related cumulative projects, one is within the viewshed of the project and involves a single- family residential development. The Lennar Project is located approximately one -third mile east of the project site and would develop 191 dwelling units. Additionally, the Ramsgate single - family and multi- family residential Project is located along SR -74, which is in the vicinity of the proposed project. There are a number of cumulative projects within the vicinity of the proposed project of a similar nature (commercial retail centers) to the proposed project. Thus, cumulative projects are similar in character to the proposed project. These projects would be subject to design and landscaping requirements to ensure that they do not degrade visual character and that they comply with applicable General Plan and Zoning Ordinance regulations. Therefore, the governing land use regulations would ensure that the proposed project, combined with the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable cumulative projects, would not result in a cumulatively considerable degradation to the existing visual character or quality of the environment. As a result, cumulative impacts related to visual character and site quality would be less - than - significant. Light and Glare The proposed project has the potential to introduce new sources of light and glare to the project area; however, the City Municipal Code Section 17.112.040 restricts the use of certain fixtures which affect the night sky and spillover onto adjacent residential properties. Similar to the proposed project, cumulative projects would be required to adhere to the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code that would reduce excessive light skyward and within the vicinity. Because the proposed project would include low pressure sodium vapor lighting, would not use highly reflective surfaces, and would comply with the City requirements to illuminate the site without causing undue light or glare, the proposed project would limit its potential to introduce new Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter FIR 23 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations sources of light to the cumulative project vicinity, and cumulative impacts from light and glare would be less- than - significant. Reference: EIR pages 4.1 -15 through 4.1 -17. 4.2.2. Air Quality a. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would result in less - than- significant impacts to sensitive receptors related to CO hotspots. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained on the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that impacts related to the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollution concentrations are less than significant. Under Option A, daily project activities would result in 9,543 trips on weekdays and 1,092 trips on Saturdays. Under Option B, daily project activities would result in 11,723 trips on weekdays and 1,204 trips on Saturdays. Because the potential for CO hotspots in the Basin is relatively low based as discussed under the methodology section in the DEIR, the analysis of CO hotspots bases the analysis for both Options A and B on the traffic generated by Option B (the worst case scenario /highest trips). This analysis is designed to determine impacts on sensitive receptors (residences, schools, other receptors deemed sensitive as described in the Sensitive receptors section of the DEIR, located within 50 feet of an intersection). As the intersection analysis used in this analysis is based on the traffic study, there may or may not be receptors within 50 feet of the studied intersections. However, because the intersection analysis is designed to capture the highest volume and worst congested or potentially congested, it is assumed that all other intersections would have less emissions associated with them. Therefore, although sensitive receptors may not be located near these specific emissions, the analysis is sufficient to determine if there is a potential for impacts on sensitive receptors near less traveled or less congested intersections. The four local intersections with the greatest daily traffic volumes were analyzed for the determination of CO hotspots. As the emissions from these intersections would be greater than any of the other intersections, if these intersections would not result in a CO hotspot, intersections with fewer daily trips and therefore less emissions, also would not result in CO hotspots. The opening year plus project peak hour conditions were evaluated against the screening level threshold of 24,000 vehicles per hour, and 400,000 vehicles per day. The study area intersections with the maximum peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Table 4.2 -12 in the DEIR. As none of the peak hour traffic at any of the intersections would come close to 24,000 vehicles per hour or 400,000 vehicles per day, CO emissions from these vehicles volumes would be less -than- significant. References: EIR page 4.2 -28. b. Impact: The proposed project construction would result in less - than - significant impacts related to the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial emissions of TACs during construction. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercerrei EIR 24 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained on the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that impacts related to the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial emissions of TACs during construction are less than significant. The construction of Options A and B would result in relatively similar criteria pollutant emissions, and were analyzed under the worst case scenario. Because emissions of TACs during construction are associated with diesel emissions from on -site construction vehicles, as the number and duration of vehicles anticipated under Options A and B are the same, the emissions associated with diesel exhaust would also be the same. Therefore, the analysis as presented represents impacts related to both Options A and B. The closest sensitive receptors to the project site that would be impacted by the construction of the proposed project would be the residential land uses adjacent to the southwest of the project site and the residential uses directly across Cambern Avenue to the northeast and 3rd Street to the east. Project construction would result in short -term emissions of diesel PM, a TAC. Diesel PM poses a carcinogenic health risk that is measured using an exposure period of 70 years. The exhaust of off -road heavy -duty diesel equipment would emit diesel PM during site grading and excavation; paving; installation of utilities, materials transport and handling; building construction; and other miscellaneous activities. SCAQMD has not adopted a methodology for analyzing such impacts and has not recommended that health risk assessments be completed for construction- related emissions of TACs. According to OEHHA, carcinogenic health risk assessments, which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to TAC emissions, should be based on a 70 -year exposure period; however, such assessments should be limited to the period or duration of activities associated with the proposed project. The construction period for the proposed project would be much less than the 70 -year period used for risk determination. Because off -road heavy -duty diesel equipment is specific to the construction phase (i.e. grading, building construction, paving) the equipment would be used only for short periods of time throughout the approximately 12 month construction period, reducing exposure times to pollutants to within acceptable limits. Therefore, project construction would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial emissions of TACs. References: EIR pages 4.2-30 and 4.2 -31. c. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would result in less -than- significant impacts related to localized air quality impacts during operation. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained on the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that localized air quality impacts during operation are less than significant. The analysis of operational LSTs for Options A and Options B are considered as the worst case scenario of both options. Therefore, the analysis presented represents both Options A and B. Lake Elsinore Walmart Superseder EIR 25 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations During project operations, the daily amount of localized pollutant emissions generated on -site by the project would not be substantial. The project's total operational - related emissions generated on -site would not exceed SCAQMD's screening operational LSTs. Thus no dispersion modeling is required and localized air quality impacts during project operations would be less -than- significant. References: EIR pages 4.2 -31 and 4.2 -32. d. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would result in less - than - significant impacts related to exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would have less -than- significant impacts related to exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. A health risk analysis was conducted to determine the proposed project's impacts on off -site residential, worker, and school children's exposure to on -site operations. Specifically, risks from the project site include the operation of diesel vehicles on -site and in the project vicinity, charbroilers from fast food restaurants, and emissions from the potential gasoline fueling facility. The following summarizes the results of the health risk analysis for each project option. Detailed modeling, calculations, and results are included in the health risk analysis included in Appendix B2 of the DEIR. Options A and B of the proposed project would be anticipated to result in the emission of different types and amounts of TACs based on the type of use (specifically the inclusion or exclusion of the gas station). Therefore, the analysis of operational TAC emissions are discussed separately for each Option. Option A Option A consists of the development of the proposed Wahnart Supercenter, two fast -food restaurants with drive -thru windows and a gas station/convenience store /car wash with sixteen fuel stations. The residential land use with the greatest potential exposure is the site immediately northeast across Cambern Avenue in line with where Crane Street would connect with Cambern Avenue if it continued through from Dexter Avenue. Maximum cancer risk at this location is estimated to be 3.43 in one million and the non- cancer risk was estimated at 0.098 in one million — neither of which exceed the regulatory thresholds of 10 in a million and lin a million, for chronic non- carcinogenic health hazard thresholds respectively. The land use with the greatest potential worker exposure is located directly northeast of the project site across Cambern Avenue, just southeast of Central Avenue. Maximum cancer risk at this location is estimated to be 0.417 in one million and the non - cancer risk was estimated at 0.049— neither of which exceed the regulatory thresholds. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supenonler EIR 26 Environmental Finings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The Earl Warren Elementary School, located at 41221 Rosetta Canyon Drive, is the school site that would result in the maximum potential exposure from on -site operations. The school site is located approximately 0.75 miles east northeast of the project site. Maximum cancer risk at this location is estimated to be 0.001 in one million and the non - cancer risk was estimated at 0.0003 -- neither of which exceed the regulatory thresholds. Option B Option B includes the Walmart Supercenter and Garden Center along with approximately 4,600 SF of specialty retail shops and fast -food restaurants with and without drive -thru ability. The residential land use with the greatest potential exposure is the site immediately adjacent to the south of the project site just north of 3rd Street. Maximum cancer risk at this location is estimated to be 3.00 in one million and the non - cancer risk was estimated at 0.002 -- neither of which exceed the regulatory thresholds of 10 in a million and 1, respectively. The land use with the greatest potential worker exposure is located directly northeast of the project site across Cambern Avenue, just southeast of Central Avenue. This is the same location identified for maximum worker exposure under Option A. Maximum cancer risk at this location is estimated to be 0.261 in one million and the non- cancer risk was estimated at 0.003 neither of which exceed the regulatory thresholds. The Earl Warren Elementary School, located at 41221 Rosetta Canyon Drive is the school site that would result in the maximum potential exposure from on -site operations. Maximum cancer risk at this location is estimated to be 0.0008 in one million and the non- cancer risk was estimated at 0.000004 — neither of which exceed the regulatory thresholds. As identified above, the cancer and non - cancer risk for all analyzed receptor locations would not exceed the regulatory thresholds under either Option A or Option B. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. References: EIR Pages 4.2 -32 through 4.2 -34. e. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would have less - than - significant impacts related to objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. During construction of the proposed project, exhaust from equipment and activities associated with the application of architectural coatings and other interior and exterior finishes may produce discernible odors typical of most construction sites. Such odors would be a temporary source of nuisance to adjacent uses, but would not affect a substantial number of people. As odors associated with project construction would be temporary and intermittent in nature, the odors would not be considered to be a significant environmental impact. Lake Elsinore Waimea Supercenter EIR 27 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations References: EIR page 4.2 -34 and 4.2 -35 f. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would result in less than cumulatively considerable impacts from construction emissions, to sensitive receptors with respect to CO concentrations at nearby intersections, and for cancer risks and chronic hazards. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would result in less than cumulatively considerable impacts within respect to CO hotspots. The project's construction emissions, with the implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ -1, would not exceed SCAQMD's daily thresholds during construction. Thus, because the proposed project's construction - period impact would be less - than - significant, the proposed project would not result in a significant cumulative impact, when considered with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable projects. The four local intersections with the greatest daily traffic volumes were analyzed for the determination of CO hotspots for the General Plan Buildout scenario. As the emissions from these intersections would be greater than any of the other intersections, if these intersections would not result in a CO hotspot, intersections with fewer daily trips and therefore less emissions, also would not result in CO hotspots. The General Plan Buildout scenario project peak hour conditions were evaluated against the screening level threshold of 24,000 vehicles per hour, and 400,000 vehicles per day. As none of the peak hour traffic at any of the intersections would come close to these levels, CO emissions from these vehicles volumes would be less -than- significant. Therefore, emissions at the remaining project intersections would also be anticipated to result in less than cumulatively considerable impacts with respect to CO hotspots. Because the existing conditions plus cumulative projects would generate a cancer risk greater than 10 in a million, the cumulative health risk is significant. However, because the project's contribution is less than 10 in one million, and the project plus cumulative projects is less than 10 in a million, the project is not considered to have a cumulatively considerable impact based on SCAQMD methodology. Additionally, while there will be ambient growth in the project vicinity, it is anticipated that any increase in emissions (and thereby cancer risk) resulting from the ambient growth could be offset by decreases in future risk estimates due to the natural turnover of older fleets and equipment being replaced by more efficient, less polluting engines and additional regulatory actions being phased in. References: EIR pages 4.2 -36 to 4.2 -38. 4.2.3. Biological Resources a. Impact: The proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 28 Environmental Finings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the FIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts within respect to sensitive natural communities. Sensitive natural communities include riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or designated by the CDFW or USFWS. A total of 0.04 acres of potentially CDFW jurisdictional unvegetated streambed (as defined by Fish and Game Code Section 1602) exists within the project site, and would be impacted by project activities. Due to the small size of impact and the fact that the channel does not exhibit any important functions or services to wildlife or habitat other than ephemeral water conveyance, the impact to this channel is less- than - significant. However, changes to this channel are subject to review and approvals by the CDFW after submittal of a Streambed Alteration Notification. Upon receipt and review of this notification, the agency may decide that no permits are required. Should CDFW confirm jurisdiction over the on -site feature, an application for a CDFW Streambed Alteration Agreement under Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code may be necessary. Permit applications would include a narrative description of the on -site feature and submittal of engineering drawings to illustrate and detail the replacement of lost and regained functions and services. Compliance with CDFW's Streambed Alteration Program would reduce impacts to less - than - significant levels. Reference: FIR, pages 4.3 -32 and 4.3 -33. b. Impact: The proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the CWA (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project will not result in substantial adverse effects on federally protected wetlands because the project site does not contain any federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and impacts related to wetlands would not occur from implementation of the proposed project. However, the RWQCB regulates wetlands and waters of the state under the Porter - Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and may require a report of waste discharge pursuant to California Water Code Section 13260 for any discharge that could affect the quality of waters of the state, such as the drainage feature (Drainage 1) mapped on -site. Compliance with the waste discharge requirements would reduce impacts to less- than - significant levels. Reference: FIR page 4.3 -33. c. Impact: The proposed project would contribute to the incremental loss of undeveloped habitat areas but the loss would not be a cumulative impact. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenler EIR 29 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project will not result in a cumulative impact related to the loss of habitat areas. The geographic context for the evaluation of cumulative biological resource impacts is the Elsinore Area Plan of the MSHCP. Future development activities could result in incremental loss of undeveloped habitat areas that may support special status plants or other species. As described in the project impact evaluation in the DEIR, the project site has been disturbed by previous human activity and the vegetation within the proposed project is highly disturbed and not considered sensitive or designated for protection, so its loss would not contribute to a cumulative impact. Reference: EIR page 4.3 -34. 4.2.4. Geology, Soils and Seismicity a. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in the exposure people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving strong seismic ground shaking. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project will not result in the exposure people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving strong seismic ground shaking. The proposed project would construct commercial structures in a currently vacant area that is within a seismically active region. According to forecasts made by the USGS, there is a 60 percent chance that a magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquake will occur in the Southern California region over the next 30 years (USGS, 2015). Locally, the Elsinore fault zone has a 3.8 percent chance and the Southern San Andreas a 19 percent chance of a magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquake over the next 30 years (USGS, 2015). As a result, people on the project site could be exposed to seismic activity that is capable of producing very strong ground shaking at the site. The intensity of ground shaking would depend upon the magnitude of the earthquake, distance to the epicenter, and the geology of the area between the epicenter and the project site. However, if not constructed appropriately, the proposed improvements could be susceptible to substantive damage. Earthquakes are unavoidable hazards although the resultant damage can be minimized through appropriate seismic design and engineering. The City requires that all construction meet the latest standards of the CBC for construction which considers proximity to potential seismic sources and the maximum anticipated groundshaking possible. The proposed construction associated with the project would be in accordance with applicable City ordinances and policies and consistent with the most recent version of the CBC, which requires structural design that can accommodate ground accelerations expected from known active faults. In addition, the investigations would be prepared by a California registered Geotechnical Engineer or Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenler EIR 30 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Engineering Geologist and recommendations would include final design parameters for the walls, foundations, foundation slabs, and surrounding related improvements (e.g., utilities, parking lots, and sidewalks). Compliance with these building safety design standards would reduce potential impacts associated with groundshaking to less than significant levels. Therefore, with implementation of the seismic design requirements into construction specification, the impacts associated with the effects associated with groundshaking would be reduced to less -than- significant levels. References: EIR pages 4.5 -7 and 4.5 -8. b. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in the exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project will not result in the exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction. The project site is located in an area identified as being susceptible to liquefaction hazards. Analysis of site specific soils during the initial geoteclmical investigation at the site determined that settlement and differential settlement from liquefaction could range from 1.25 inches up to 2.5 inches. If not designed appropriately settlement of this magnitude could cause substantial damage. However, there are numerous geotechnical approaches that could be employed in foundation design to address this hazard such as the use of deep foundation systems or the treatment of liquefiable materials. As required by the CBC and the City's Municipal Code Title 17 Chapter 32, the applicant would be required to prepare a liquefaction hazard analysis, and submit it to the Director of Comiiiuiiity Development. Adherence to the Municipal Code and building code requirements that would implement proven geotechnical design measures would minimize the potential for liquefaction, differential settlement from liquefaction, and lateral spreading through foundation design, treatment of site soils and /or replacement of liquefiable soils with engineered fills. Therefore, with implementation of the seismic design requirements into construction specification in accordance with City and building code requirements, the impacts associated with the effects associated with seismic - related ground failure such as liquefaction, would be reduced to less- than - significant levels. References: EIR pages 4.5 -8 and 4.5 -9. c. Impact: The proposed project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required Lake Elsinore Walmad Superoontei EIR 31 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project will not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Topography on the project site and in the vicinity of the project is relatively flat, and runoff on- site passes over the project site through natural rills and gullies that partially pool in the western portion of the project site and continues to flow off of the site to the southwest to flow onto an adjacent parcel. Elevations range from approximately 1,325 feet above mean sea level (msl) in the north portion of the property to approximately 1,302 feet above msl in the southern portion. Construction activities would include earthwork activities (e.g., excavation, backflling and grading) that could expose bare soil to erosive elements (wind and rain). However, project construction would be required to comply with existing regulatory requirements that address soil erosion such as the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Program ( NPDES). Any development site, such as the project site, that disturb one or more acres are required to comply with a General Construction NPDES permit. The General Construction permit requires the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) which includes the use of erosion control Best Management Practices to protect surface water and groundwater from the adverse effects of construction activities. The erosion control best management practices (BMPs) (such as scheduling, preservation of existing vegetation, hydroseeding, sandbags, fiber rolls, and silt fences) would prevent the exposure of soil to wind and water and reduce the threat of erosion during construction. The SWPPP and BMPs would be reviewed by the City's Engineering Division prior to issuance of a building or grading permit. Once constructed, landscaped, and drainage improvements constructed the potential for erosion or loss of topsoil is effectively eliminated. Therefore, with implementation of these requirements and associated BMPs, erosion related to construction activities and operation of the project would be less - than - significant. References: EIR page 4.5 -9. d. Impact: The proposed project would be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse; however, adherence to building code requirements would reduce the potential for unstable soils to adversely affect proposed improvements. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project will not result in development on unstable soils. Development under the proposed project would be required to adhere to City and CBC requirements, which include the preparation of a geotechnical investigation by a state licensed geotechnical engineer. The required geotechnical report for the proposed improvements would determine the susceptibility of the subject site to settlement and prescribe appropriate engineering techniques for reducing its effects. Where settlement and /or differential settlement is predicted, site preparation measures —such as use of engineered fill, surcharging, wick drains, deep Lake Elsinore Walmart Sugercenter EIR 32 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations foundations, structural slabs, hinged slabs, flexible utility connections, and utility hangers — could be used. These measures would be evaluated and the most effective, feasible, and economical measures recommended in a geotechnical report and incorporated into site design in accordance with building code requirements. Engineering recommendations included in the project engineering and design plans would be reviewed and approved by the City. Therefore, with adherence to building code requirements the potential for unstable soils to adversely affect proposed improvements would be reduced to less- than - significant levels. References: EIR pages 4.5 -9 and 4.5 -10. e. Impact: hnplementation of the proposed project would not result in impacts onsite that could affect offsite properties and generate a cumulative geology, soils, and seismicity impact. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project will not result in impacts onsite that could affect offsite properties and generate a cumulative geology, soils, and seismicity impact. The geographic scope for considering cumulative impacts related to geology and soils can generally be considered as the entire Riverside County; however, because of widely varying conditions on a site -by -site basis, the impacts related to geology and soils are generally site - specific. The project site is in a seismically active area, which is bordered by major fault systems including the Elsinore Fault and San Andreas Fault. No areas of Riverside County are considered seismically inactive, therefore other past, present, and future projects in the County share relatively similar overall seismic hazards; however, they typically vary from site to site based on underlying conditions and distances to seismic events. Because potential geologic and seismic hazards are site specific, development projects that are developed to existing code requirements that address site specific conditions, improvements that incorporate seismic design requirements are not of a nature to combine with existing or future projects to result in cumulatively significant effects from geologic and seismic impacts. The geologic conditions present are geotechnically feasible for construction with the appropriate seismic design that is similar to what other projects in the region would be required to include in project design. Furthermore, the less than significant impacts related to the proposed project would be on -site and the project would not result in impacts on -site that could affect off -site properties and generate a cumulative impact. References: FIR page 4.5 -10 4.2.5. Greenhouse Gas Emissions a. Impact: The proposed project would not conflict with applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 33 Environmental Finings and Statement of Overriding Considerations finds that the proposed project will not conflict with applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. Consistency with GARB Scoping Plan Out of the Recommended Actions contained in CARB's Seeping Plan, the actions that are most applicable to the project would be Actions E -I (increased Utility Energy efficiency programs including more stringent building and appliance standards), GB -I (Green building), and W -1 (Increased water use efficiency). CARB Seeping Plan Action E -1, together with Action GB -1 (Green Building), aims to reduce electricity demand by increased efficiency of Utility Energy Programs and adoption of more stringent building and appliance standards, while Action W -1 aims to promote water use efficiency. The proposed project would be designed to comply with the CALGreen Code to ensure that the new commercial development would use resources (energy, water, etc.) efficiently and significantly reduce pollution and waste. Therefore, the project would be consistent with the Seeping Plan measures through incorporation of stricter building and appliance standards. Consistency with Lake Elsinore Climate Action Plan The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of the City's Climate Action Plan (CAP). The CAP identifies an emissions reduction target of 944,737 MTCO2e by the year 2020, meaning an 11.26 percent reduction from a 2008 baseline condition. As a reduction of 28.5 percent below the BAU scenario is required to meet the goals of AB 32 and the project's GHG emissions would result in an emission reduction of between 34.10 percent and 40.80 percent, the targeted GHG emissions reduction identified within the City CAP would be exceeded. The proposed project would implement sustainability features (presented below), that are consistent with specific CAP measures identified in Appendix D: Project -Level CAP Consistency Worksheet within the City's CAP. Although not required by the City, Walmart plans to incorporate a number of additional sustainability features into the proposed project as described on pages 3 -15 through 3 -17 of the DEIR. References: EIR pages 3 -15 through 3 -17 and pages 4.6 -14 through 4.6 -18. b. Impact: The proposed project would result in less than cumulatively considerable impacts due to the emissions of GI-IGs. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project will not have cumulatively considerable impacts from the emissions of GHGs. Annual emissions of GHGs from project implementation would result in a 34.10 percent reduction from BAU. With implementation of the project's design features and regulatory developments, the project's GHG reduction would exceed the AB 32 reduction target of 28.5 percent. Therefore, the increase in GHG emissions resulting from project implementation would not be cumulatively considerable. References: EIR page 4.6 -18. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 34 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 4.2.6. Hydrology and Water Quality c. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. As project construction would disturb more than one acre of soil, the project proponent would be required to comply with the NPDES Construction General Permit. In compliance with this permit, a SWPPP would be prepared and implemented, which would require non - stormwater and waste and material management BMPs that would prevent construction chemicals used on -site from washing into local water bodies. The SWPPP would also include erosion and sediment control BMPs that would prevent the mixing of exposed soil with stormwater. The SWPPP would be submitted to and reviewed by the City's Engineering Division prior to issuance of a building or grading permit. With implementation of the SWPPP and its associated BMPs, impacts related to water quality during construction of the project would be less than significant. In accordance with MS4 NPDES Permit requirements for new development, the proposed project would be required to develop a site- specific WQMP that would identify HCOC, highlight LID principles utilized on -site and list all site design, source control and treatment control BMPs that will be implemented during site occupation in order to protect stormwater quality throughout the life of the project. The WQMP would be required to designate maintenance and funding sources for the upkeep of these BMPs. A Preliminary WQMP would be prepared and submitted for Engineering Division review during the design stage of a project. A Final Project WQMP must be approved prior to issuance of building and grading permits, which would include a final hydrology analysis ensuring appropriate sizing and control of BMPs. References: EIR pages 4.7 -12 and 4.7 -13. d. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would not deplete groundwater supplies and /or interfere with groundwater recharge because The project would employ water conservation practices during operation including regular maintenance of irrigation systems to detect overspray, installation of rain detection devices to prevent irrigation during or following a rain event, and the use of drought- tolerant low -water usage vegetation for landscaping, thereby reducing excessive water demand. Additionally, groundwater makes up a small percentage (less than 10 percent) of the Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR $5 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations total water supply, and based on EVWMD water supply projections, groundwater pumping for water supply would not exceed the Elsinore groundwater basin's annual recharge nor even increase beyond current levels out to the year 2035. Further, the project has obtained a will -serve letter from EVMWD for the estimated operational water demand, indicating the project would not contribute to an over pumping or substantial decrease in groundwater levels. In addition, the site is currently vacant and would introduce new impervious surfaces to the site. The increase in impervious surfaces could result in a decreased amount of stormwater runoff that would infiltrate on -site and recharge underlying groundwater resources. However, as required by the MS4 NPDES permit, the inclusion of LID BMP drainage features into project design would encourage the on -site infiltration of stormwater runoff through vegetated swales, bio- retention facilities, permeable paving and other approved LID improvements. Incorporation of these required drainage features would allow for on -site infiltration of stormwater runoff in addition to the requirements that limit the volumes of stormwater allowed to discharge off -site, and the resulting impact to underlying groundwater resources would likely be relatively small and considered less - than - significant. Therefore, operation of the project constructed in accordance with existing regulatory requirements is not anticipated to substantially deplete groundwater supplies, and impacts would be less - than- significant. References: EIR pages 4.7 -13 and 4.7 -14. e. Impact: The proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of a site or area through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or by other means, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion, siltation or flooding on- or off =site. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of a site or area through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or by other means, in a mariner that would result in substantial erosion, siltation or flooding on- or off-site. Construction Construction of the proposed project would alter the existing drainage pattern of the project site, as ground disturbance would occur in the path of existing drainage paths. Possible impacts of this include erosion, sedimentation and flooding, all of which are interconnected. Erosion is defined as the washing away of soil by rain or wind. Siltation is an undesired increased transport and sedimentation of suspended material (or water). Flooding is the partial or complete inundation of normally dry land area from unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters. Flooding can often cause erosion, which in turn can cause siltation. Construction of the proposed project facilities would involve alteration of the ground surface and expose a large amount of bare soil, making soil prone to erosion by on -site drainages and stormwater. Project construction would comply with the NPDES Construction General Permit Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenler EIR 36 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations through development and implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP would include erosion control BMPs, such as scheduling and preservation of existing vegetation, which would prevent the exposure of soil to water and reduce the threat of erosion during construction. 'The SWPPP would also implement sediment control BMPs, such as sandbags and fiber rolls, to trap any sediment that mobilizes on -site, thereby preventing siltation from occurring. The SWPPP would be reviewed by the City's Engineering Division prior to issuance of a building or grading permit. Impacts related to erosion on -site would be less than significant. Alteration of existing site grade or drainage patterns could cause water to pool and /or flood in areas on -site. Flooding conditions already exist on an adjacent parcel to the southwest of the site. However, construction could increase flooding off -site by reducing the drainage's ability to meander or percolate into the soil prior to exiting the site. Increased erosion and siltation could occur in off -site areas as a result of scouring from increased flooding. Furthermore, although construction of the proposed project would not increase the amount of run -on received by the site, run -on would still have to be directed around work areas to avoid flooding. As stated in Chapter 3, Project Description, the flood control facilities and associated utility connections would be constructed sometime after the start of construction in early 2016. Furthermore, the project proponent would be required to obtain a Drainage Permit from the City, which requires the submittal of a Drainage Inspection Application. The application would include engineering drawings of existing and proposed drainage flow during construction. The proponent would receive a letter from the City identifying requirements and providing documents necessary for permit issuance, and using this information, would submit a Drainage Inspection Permit to the City Engineering Division. This application is then reviewed by staff, and a Drainage Permit would be issued if all requirements have been met. Therefore, with flood control structures in place during the rainy season and the City drainage permit review process, impacts relating to flooding both on- and off -site during construction would be less than significant. Operation Operation of the proposed project would alter existing drainage patterns. The majority of the project site would be graded and paved during operation; therefore, it is not likely that erosion or sedimentation would occur on -site. Flooding on -site could occur, as the amount of impervious surfaces would be increased and facilities would be located in existing drainage paths. This could also lead to off -site flooding, which can be a cause of off-site erosion and sedimentation as well. However, the proposed project would involve the construction of new drainage facilities with the purpose of collecting stormwater runoff and efficiently discharging it off -site in accordance with local drainage control requirements. Compared to existing conditions, the developed project condition would generate 64.07 cubic feet per second (efs) of runoff during the 100 -year event compared to 36 efs under existing conditions. This increased amount of onsite stormwater would be captured by the proposed on -site detention basin and slowly released into the existing 30 -inch storm drain at the intersection of Crane Street and Dexter Avenue, thereby not causing any flooding, erosion or siltation. Should the City's area drainage plan not be completed by project construction, runoff originating from a source to the northeast of the project site would be channeled into a culvert, running under Cambern Avenue and into an open channel on -site. The Lake Mohave Walmart Supercenter FIR 37 Environmental Finings and Statement of Overriding Considerations open channel would collect runoff with a capacity to handle the 100 -year, 3hr storm event producing 697cfs off -site from across Cambern Ave. and the 2.73efs (Q38) from the rainfall over the 0.844 acres taken up by the open channel. At capacity, the channel would then overtop and water would be directed via spillways and flow east onto 3rd Street. Water would then release onto a vacant property's existing drainage ditch that flows southwest, eventually crossing Dexter Avenue, passing under I -15, and entering into the 3rd Street channel. The existing off -site ditch currently accommodates the flows. With the installation of the City's area drainage plan, the proposed facilities would convey runoff sources from across Cambern Avenue, thereby reducing existing flooding conditions on the adjacent parcel to the southwest of the project site. Through implementation of a WQMP in accordance with MS4 requirements, the project would implement site design, source control and treatment control BMPs. Although these BMPs are primarily designed to prevent water pollution, some involve the containment of stormwater runoff, which would reduce the potential for flooding on -site or off -site. The Final WQMP would include a final hydrology analysis containing calculations to confirm that flooding would not occur on, or off -site and flood control structures would channel water as planned during project operation. With implementation of a WQMP, impacts related to flooding, erosion, and sediment on or off-site would be less -than- significant. References: EIR pages 4.7 -15 through 4.7 -18. f Impact: The proposed project would not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Mitigation: No mitigation treasures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would not exceed stormwater drainage system capacities or add sources of polluted runoff. The project involves the construction of additional stormwater drainage facilities to accommodate the proposed development. Prior to the complete installation of these new drainage systems, project construction could create runoff that could overwhelm the existing drainage system through flooding from the temporary alteration of on -site drainage patterns. However, interim flood control facilities (including stormwater drainage facilities) would be established prior to the start of the rainy season, thereby ensuring excess runoff caused by construction does not overwhelm available drainage control. Furthermore, the project proponent would be required to obtain a Drainage Permit from the City, which requires a multi- level review of site plains prior to issuance of the permit to ensure drainage during construction is appropriately controlled. During operation, the proposed project would generate greater amounts of runoff compared to existing conditions due to the net increase of impervious surfaces. However, if the city drainage project is not completed by project construction, the proposed on -site detention basin will be sized to create no net increase in peak runoff discharged from the site. 'The detention basin would slowly release the stored runoff into an existing 30 -inch storm drain at the intersection of Crane Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 38 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Sheet and Dexter Avenue. According to the preliminary hydrology analysis, the total post - development peak flow detention provided by the proposed flood control facilities on -site is designed in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Hydrology Manual requirements for drainage system design. Therefore, runoff generated on -site that is released by the detention basin would be designed in a manner such that the runoff channeled into the Crane Street storm drain would not exceed its existing capacity. The proposed storm drain system is designed to control existing run -off sourced stormwater from across Cambern Avenue and the project site, and route it through the site to the aforementioned detention basin and released off-site in a controlled manner to an existing drainage. This downstream drainage flows across vacant property, and flows southwest onto another vacant property before flowing under I -15 through existing drainage structures and eventually into the 3rd Street charnel and Temescal Wash. However, the project facilities would not increase the amount of runoff entering the site, and would therefore not result in the exceedance of the 3rd Street channel drainage capacity. The drainage control requirements not only address stormwater volumes but also water quality such that there would be no substantial increased in sources of polluted runoff. Impacts would be less- than - significant. References: FIR pages 4.7 -19. g. Impact: The proposed project would not substantially degrade water quality. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the FIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would not substantially degrade water quality. Construction The project has the potential to degrade water quality during construction, either restating from the use of construction- related chemicals on -site or from the siltation of water resulting from soil disturbance during construction. However, construction activities would disturb more than an acre, and would therefore be required to implement a SWPPP that would include various erosion control, sediment control and non - stormwater BMPs, which would help protect water quality. Construction of the project could also degrade water quality through the creation of flooding on- or off -site, which could lead to siltation of water. However, the proposed flood control facilities would be installed and functional at the start of the rainy season, thereby preventing flooding from occurring in the remaining construction work areas during the rainy season. Furthermore, the project proponent would be required to obtain a Drainage Permit from the City, which requires the submittal and review of construction drainage plans by the City prior to the issuance of the permit. Construction of the project is not expected to pose any additional threats to water quality. Operation Operation of the project would introduce commercial uses to the project site, which is currently vacant. Pollutants associated with commercial uses include trash and debris; nutrients, pesticides, Lake Elsinore Wellman Supercenter EIR 39 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations sediment from landscaping; and oils and greases; should these pollutants be generated on -site and mix with stormwater, a degradation of water quality could result. However, the project would be required to comply with the MS4 Permit requirements, which involve the implementation of post - construction site design, source control and treatment control BMPs implemented throughout the lifetime of the project in order to protect water quality. The City requires that a Preliminary WQMP be submitted during project design and a Final WQMP be submitted prior to issuance of a building or grading permit. The WQMP will include specific on- site stormwater treatment provisions for stormwater originating on -site including bio- filtration landscape strips, pervious pavement and on -site detention. Pass- through stormwater from upstream off-site areas is not proposed to be treated. The project could also degrade water quality during its operation if it were to create flooding on- or off -site, which can lead to siltation of stormwater. However, the project would include a drainage control system, both for anticipated expected run -off generated on -site and the existing run -on. The hydrology analysis included in the Final WQMP would confirm the proposed run -on and run -off leaving the site would be properly controlled, thereby avoiding flooding impacts and associated water quality degradation from siltation. References: EIR page 4.7 -20. h. Impact: The proposed project would not result in cumulative impacts to hydrology and water quality. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would not result in cumulative impacts to hydrology and water quality. The proposed project, in conjunction with other projects, could result in impacts to flooding and water quality. However, similar to the proposed project, other projects in the area disturbing more than one acre during construction would be subject to Construction General Permit requirements, involving implementation of a SWPPP that includes various erosion control, sediment control, non - stormwater management and waste management BMPs that would protect water quality. Operation of cumulative projects would be subject to the MS4 Permit, which requires a WQMP including identification of I-ICOC and post - construction BMPs designed to protect water quality throughout the life of the project. In regard to cumulative flooding impacts, should the city drainage plan not be complete by project opening, all runoff generated on -site would be collected by an on -site earthen detention basin and slowly released into an existing storm drain. Further, the project would reduce existing flooding conditions on the adjacent parcel to the southwest through the containment of run -on sourced from across Cambern Avenue in the proposed open channel on -site. In 100 -year, three hour storm conditions, the downstream open channel would overflow and be discharged to a vacant property to the south to meet an existing drainage. The proposed drainage improvements would substantially improve the drainage condition of the properties to the south -west of the project site, between LA Pitness and 3rd Street. Currently, these parcels experience flooding under existing conditions and have runoff across their properties during all rain events. With development of the proposed improvements, the referenced properties would not have any off -site drainage flowing across their properties during a 2 -year rain event. Even in a 100 -year flood event, they would be subject Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercenter EIR 40 Environmental findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations to substantially less runoff across their parcels. Although the project would essentially utilize the remaining capacity of the existing 30 -inch Crane Street storm drain, potentially preventing other projects in the area from the provision of efficient flood control, other projects would be required to designate appropriate drainage control during construction per submittal of a Drainage Permit Application, requiring City review prior to the issuance of a Drainage Permit. Furthermore, as part of the Final WQMP, a hydrology analysis would be required of other projects similar to those described for the proposed project to prove flood control would be sufficient during operation of the projects. With adherence to existing drainage control requirements, cumulative impacts to hydrology and water quality would be less - than - significant. References: EIR page 4.7 -21. 4.2.7. Land Use and Planning Impact: The proposed project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the General Plan, Specific Plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect because the proposed project would be consistent with the applicable policies of the City's General Plan and the applicable zoning codes. As outlined in the DEIR, the Project uses, site plan concept, and building designs reflect and /or can be feasibly implemented consistent with applicable provisions of the City General Plan. See DEIR, Table 4.8 -1. In addition, the proposed Walmart Supercenter and anticipated outparcel uses (restaurant and retail shops /services) are included in the List of permitted or conditionally permitted uses. Proposed development projects within the General Commercial and Commercial Mixed Use zones are required (per Zoning Code Sections 17.124.120 and 17.134.080) to submit an application for design review or a conditional use permit that includes design review to ensure that new development occurs in a manner which enhances the character and quality of the surrounding properties and that the scale, special relationships and architectural treatment of structures including materials, colors, and design, visually contribute to the area and environment in which they are located. The design review process is also intended to apply to the ancillary elements of projects such as signs and landscaping in order to ensure that the overall development maintains the same integrity of design as approved for the primary structure(s). As described in Chapter 3, Project Description, the proposed project would include quality design consistent with the development standards. As required by the zoning code applications for commercial design review and conditional use permits have been submitted for the proposed project's development plans for review by the City. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the existing zoning designation and implementation of the proposed project would result in less- than - significant impacts related to conflicts with the zoning code. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 41 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations References: EIR pages 4.8 -11 through 4.8 -20 a. Impact: The proposed project would not contribute to land use impacts that would be cumulatively considerable. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would not contribute to land use impacts that would be cumulatively considerable. The cumulative impact area when considering potential cumulative land use and planning issues includes areas that are currently, or anticipated to be, subject to the provisions of the City General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and /or Specific Plans. The cumulative study area includes the City and surrounding areas lying within the City's Sphere of Influence. Commercial /retail uses and their configurations proposed by the project are consistent with, and are allowed under, the site's current General Commercial and Commercial Mixed Use General Plan Land Use designations. The proposed project would be implemented and operated consistent with all applicable General Commercial and Commercial Mixed Use regulations and development standards. The proposed project's contributions to potential cumulative land use impacts are not cumulatively considerable, and the cumulative effects of the proposed project are determined to References: EIR page 4.8 -21. Noise b. Impact: The proposed project would not result in exposure of persons to, or generation of, excessive ground -borne vibration or ground -borne noise levels. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would not result in exposure of persons to, or generation of, excessive ground -borne vibration or ground -borne noise levels. Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures and soil type. It is expected that ground -borne vibration from the project's construction activities would cause only an intermittent, localized intrusion. The proposed project's construction activities most likely to cause vibration impacts are: • Heavy Construction Equipment: Although all heavy mobile construction equipment has the potential of causing at least some perceptible vibration while operating close to a building, the vibration is usually short -tern and is not of sufficient magnitude to cause building damage. It is not expected that heavy equipment such as large bulldozers would operate close enough to any residences to cause a vibration impact. Lake Elsinore Wonnart Supercenter EIR 42 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations • Trucks: Trucks hauling building materials to construction sites can be sources of vibration intrusion if the haul routes pass through residential neighborhoods on streets with bumps or potholes. Repairing the bumps and potholes generally eliminates the problem. Ground -borne vibration levels resulting from construction activities occurring within the project site were estimated by data published by the FTA. Construction activities that would have the potential to generate low levels of ground -borne vibration within the project site would occur primarily during the grading phase. Using the vibration source level of construction equipment and the construction vibration assessment methodology published by the FTA, the project's potential vibration impacts at off -site sensitive receiver locations were estimated. Based on the reference vibration levels provided by the FTA, a large bulldozer represents the peak source of vibration with a reference velocity of 0.089 in /sec (PPV) at a distance of 25 feet. At distances ranging from 141 to 337 feet from the project site, construction vibration velocity levels are expected to range from 0.002 to 0.007 in /sec (PPV). In order to assess the human perception of vibration levels in PPV, the velocities are converted to RMS vibration levels based on the Caltrans' Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual conversion factor of 0.71. The construction vibration levels in RMS are expected to range from 0.001 to 0.005 in/see (RMS) at the six receiver locations. Based on the City's vibration standards, the proposed project site will not include or require equipment, facilities, or activities that would result in a "barely perceptible" human response (annoyance). Further, vibration levels at the site of the closest sensitive receiver are unlikely to be sustained during the entire construction period, but will occur rather only during the times that heavy construction equipment is operating within 100 feet of the project site perimeter. Moreover, construction at the project site will be restricted to daytime hours consistent with City requirements thereby eliminating potential vibration impacts during the sensitive nighttime hours. References: EIR pages 4.9 -47 through 4.9 -49 c. Lnpact: The proposed project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would not result a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. A potential noise impact associated with project operations could occur if the project's operational noise sources would result in substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Noise levels associated with operation of the proposed project would result from the on -site noise sources (i.e., dock activities, a trash compactor, rooftop air conditioning units, shopping cart carousels, drive -thru speakerphones, parking lot vehicle movements, and car wash activities) and project - generated traffic on the locall roadway system. The potential for these operational noise sources to result in Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 43 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity are evaluated below. On -Site Operational Noise Levels To describe the project's operational noise level contributions, the project operational noise levels were combined with the existing ambient noise levels measurements at the sensitive receiver locations. The difference between the combined project and ambient noise levels against the existing ambient noise levels describe the project noise level contributions. Noise levels that would be experienced at receiver locations when project - source noise is added to ambient daytime and nighttime conditions under Option A are presented in Table 4.9 -27 and Table 4.9 -28 in the DEIR, respectively. For Option B, the noise levels that would be experienced at receiver locations when project - source noise is added to ambient daytime and nighttime conditions are presented in "Table 4.9 -29 and Table 4.9 -30 in the DEIR, respectively. The noise levels presented in Tables 4.9 -27 to 4.9 30 in the DEIR include the attenuation provided by the planned 8 -foot- high barrier along the project's southwestern boundary, 10- foot -high loading dock barrier, and the 5- foot -high parapet walls. For the purposes of this analysis, the project's contribution to the ambient noise environment is shown in energy average (dBA Leq) and median (dBA L50) noise levels due to the City's median noise level (L50) standards for stationary- source (operational) noise. The proposed project under Option A is expected to generate a daytime operational noise level contribution of up to 1.4 dBA Leq, 1.2 dBA L50, 1.5 dBA L25, 2.2 dBA L8, 1.4 dBA L2, and 0.5 dBA Lmax at nearby receiver locations. Additionally, as indicated in Table 4.9 -28, the proposed project is expected to generate a nighttime operational noise level contribution of up to 3.2 dBA Leq, 2.4 dBA L50, 3.1 dBA L25, 4.8 dBA L8, 4.0 dBA L2, and 4.9 dBA Lmax at nearby receiver locations under Option A. Based on the significance criteria described in Table 4.9 -14 in the DEIR, the project- related operational noise level contributions to both the daytime and nighttime ambient noise levels at nearby sensitive receiver locations would be less than significant. On this basis, project operational stationary - source noise under Option A would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project, and impacts in will be less than significant. The proposed project under Option B is expected to generate a daytime operational noise level contribution of up to 1.1 dBA Leq, 1.2 dBA L50, 1.4 dBA L25, 1.5 dBA L8, 1.1 dBA L2, and 0.5 dBA Lmax at nearby receiver locations. Additionally, as indicated in Table 4.9 -30, the proposed project is expected to generate a nighttime operational noise level contribution of up to 2.7 dBA Leq, 2.3 dBA L50, 2.8 dBA 1,25, 3.6 dBA L8, 3.3 dBA L2, and 4.7 dBA Lmax at nearby receiver locations under Option B. Based on the significance criteria described in Table 4.9 -14, the project- related operational noise level contributions to both the daytime and nighttime ambient noise levels at nearby sensitive receiver locations would be less than significant. On this basis, project operational stationary- source noise under Option B would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project, and impacts in will be less than significant. Roadway Noise Levels Lake Elsinore Wairrart Supercenter FIR 44 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The increase in traffic resulting from implementation of the project could increase the ambient noise levels at land uses fronting the roadways located in proximity to the project site. The estimated roadway noise impacts from the project's vehicular traffic were calculated using a computer program that replicates the FHWA -RD -77 -108 Model. Based on Lake Elsinore Walmart Traffic Impact Analysis study that is included as Appendix I of this EIR, in combination with an analysis of the surrounding land uses, roadway noise levels were forecasted to determine if the project's vehicular traffic would result in a significant noise impact at receptor locations located in proximity to the project site. The project is expected to generate an exterior noise level increase of up to 3.0 dBA CNEL; however, the ambient conditions where roadway segments 7 and 28 experience a barely perceptible 3.0 dBA CNEL increase are below the applicable significance thresholds described under Section 4.9.3, Thresholds of Significance in the DEIR. Therefore, the off -site traffic noise level increases are considered less than significant for existing conditions. The project is expected to generate an exterior noise level increase of up to 2.4 dBA CNEL; however, the ambient conditions are below the significance thresholds identified under Section 4.9.3, Thresholds of Significance in the DEIR. Therefore, the off -site traffic noise level increases are considered less than significant for Year 2016 conditions. The project is expected to generate an exterior noise level increase of up to 0.5 dBA CNEL; however, the ambient conditions are below the significance thresholds identified under Section 4.9.3 (Thresholds of Significance) in the DEIR Therefore, the off-site traffic noise level increases are considered less than significant for Year 2035 conditions. The off -site traffic noise analysis shows that the existing noise level contribution of 3.0 dBA CNEL will decrease to 2.4 dBA CNEL by Year 2016 conditions, and to 0.5 dBA CNEL by Year 2035 conditions. This shows that the project's incremental traffic - related noise level increases at land uses adjacent to roadways conveying project traffic will diminish over time. This occurs as the background traffic on the study area roadway segments increases and the project represents a smaller percentage of the overall traffic volume. The off -site traffic noise analysis indicates that the project's contributions to roadway noise levels will be less -than significant. References: EIR pages 4.9 -49 through 4.9 -59. d. Impact: The proposed project would not contribute to noise impacts that would be cumulatively considerable. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would not contribute to noise impacts that would be cumulatively considerable. Cumulative noise assessment considers development of the proposed project in combination with ambient growth and other development projects within the vicinity of the proposed project. As noise is a localized phenomenon, and drastically reduces in magnitude as distance from the source increases, only projects and ambient growth in the nearby area could combine with the proposed project to result in cumulative noise impacts. Lake Elsinore Walmart St mercenter EIR 45 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Development of the proposed project in combination with the related projects could result in an increase in construction- related and traffic- related noise. However, each of the related projects would be subject to the exterior noise level limits that should be applied to different receiving land uses in the City as established in Section 17.176.060 of the City's Municipal Code. Related projects would also be subject to Section 17.176.080(F) of the City's Municipal Code with respect to construction - related noise levels, which prohibits the operation of any tools or equipment used between weekday hours of 7:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M., or at any time on weekends or holidays, that will create a noise disturbance across a residential or commercial real - property line. Additionally, the maximum noise levels that are allowable for both mobile and stationary equipment in the City are also defined for different land uses under Section 17.176.080(F). Construction noise is localized in nature and decreases substantially with distance. Consequently, in order to achieve a substantial cumulative increase in construction noise levels, more than one source emitting high levels of construction noise would need to be in close proximity to the proposed project. The nearest future related project to the project site is the proposed 7,798 square foot (SF) Golden Corral Restaurant development, which is located over 700 feet west of the project site. Due to this distance, and along with the numerous intervening structures located between this related project site and the project site that would serve to reduce construction - related noise levels, a substantial increase in combined construction noise levels would not occur should construction of this related project occur at the same time as the proposed project. Therefore, cumulative noise impacts associated with construction activities would be less than significant. Cumulative construction in the City may result in the exposure of people to or the generation of excessive ground -borne vibration. The nearest future related project to the proposed project is the proposed Golden Corral Restaurant development located over 700 feet west of the project site. Due to this distance, and the rapid attenuation of ground -borne vibration, the proposed project and this related project are not in close enough proximity to each other such that vibration levels generated during construction could potentially affect the same sensitive receptor should construction of this related project occur at the same time as the proposed project. Only receptors located in the immediate vicinity of each construction site would be potentially impacted by each development. Thus, the project would not contribute to cumulative vibration impacts even if concurrent construction occurs for the project and the related project. As such, cumulative impacts associated with ground -borne vibration from construction activities would not be cumulatively considerable, and would be less than significant. Cumulative mobile source noise impacts would occur primarily as a result of increased traffic on local roadways due to the proposed project and related projects within the study area. Therefore, cumulative traffic- generated noise impacts have been assessed based on the contribution of the proposed project to both the near -term (2016) and long -term (2035) cumulative base traffic volumes on the roadway segments in the project vicinity. A total of three roadway segments in the project vicinity would experience an increase in noise levels that exceeds the applicable thresholds identified under Section 4.9.3, Thresholds of Significance in the DEIR, as a result of near -term cumulative development along with the proposed project in 2016, while a total of 35 roadway segments in the project site vicinity would Lake Elsinore Warman Supercenter FIR 46 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations experience an increase in noise levels that exceeds applicable thresholds as a result of cumulative development along with the proposed project in 2035, respectively. As such, cumulative impacts related to a substantial permanent increase in traffic noise levels would be cumulatively considerable for these identified roadway segments. I3owever, the project's contribution to cumulative traffic noise impacts would only reach as high as 1.8 dBA CNEL during near -term (2016) conditions and 0.5 dBA CNEL during long -term (2035) conditions, which would not exceed the significance thresholds identified under Section 4.9.3. Thus, the project's contribution to a substantial permanent increase in traffic noise levels would be less - than- significant. References: EIR pages 4.9 -60 and 4.9 -67. 4.2.8. Public Services a. Impact: The proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of, or the need for, new or physically altered fire protection facilities. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project will have less than significant impacts associated with the provision of, or the need for, new or physically altered fire protection facilities. The closest fire station to the project site is Station 97, located approximately 0.75 mile northeast of the site. Also, Station 10 is located 2.8 miles from the site. Both stations are within five minutes driving time to the site. The proposed project would introduce new commercial structures and employees and visitors to a site that is currently undeveloped. This would increase the potential for fire or emergency medical needs to occur on -site, which would in turn require services by the existing fire stations. The service demands resulting from the proposed project could increase the need for additional equipment or personnel. Fire Station No. 97 currently has the structural potential to expand its personnel from nine to twelve firefighters if necessary. However, the General Plan EIR has evaluated the city's fire service capacity and has determined that no additional facilities or staffing would be required to serve build out of the 3rd Street Annexation area, within which a portion of the project site is located. The 3rd Street Annexation area considered commercial retail development for the project area. Station 97, which would serve the project site, is new (June 2013) and has the potential to expand; and Fire Station No. 10 is approximately 2.8 miles from the project site, existing fire facilities and equipment are in place to service the project and new fire facilities would not be required to be developed or expanded to serve the proposed project. As a result, the project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of, or the need for, new or physically altered fire protection facilities. Additionally, to reduce the risk of fires and need for fire services, the proposed project is required to comply with the California Fire Code as adopted by the City, which regulates hydrants, water flow, fuel modification zones, access designs, and use of fire resistant materials. Lake Elsinore Walmart Stmercenter EIR 47 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The proposed project would also be subject to Municipal Code Chapter 8.20, Burning and Fire Ilazards, which prevents the accumulation of inflammables. Moreover, upon project approval, the project proponent would be required to comply with Chapter 16.74 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code which requires the payment of development impact fees for the purpose of defraying the costs of public expenditures for capital improvements (and operational services to the extent allowed by law). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a substantial adverse physical impact associated with the provision of, or the need for, new or physically fire protection facilities and less -than- significant impacts would occur. References: EIR pages 4.10 -4 and 4.10 -5. b. Impact: The proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of, or the need for, new or physically altered police protection facilities. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project will have less than significant impacts associated with the provision of, or the need for, new or physically altered police facilities. The Lake Elsinore police station is 1.72 miles south of the project site. The City's General Plan EIR has evaluated police facilities and staffing and has determined that no additional facilities or staffing would be required to serve build out of the 3rd Street Annexation area, within which the project site is located. In addition, the City's General Plan includes measures to meet the service needs of the City as it grows, including a City annual review of police services and staff ratios (Goal 8 General Plan Implementation Program) and coordination with the County of Riverside to provide adequate police service and staffing levels (Policy 8.2). Furthermore, City development fees require that commercial projects pay fees per 1,000 SF to defray public expenditures for the expansion of services. Although the project would increase the amount of employees and visitors to the site, thereby potentially requiring increased police protection services, the project would provide security systems and staff to provide theft management and promote patron safety. Calls for police services from the proposed project would be minimized through the provision of on -site security personnel 24 hours a day at the Walmart Supercenter that would monitor and patrol the store and parking areas. Security personnel would serve as a first line of defense against criminal activities and nuisances, and would be able to resolve minor incidents that ordinarily would not warrant a police response (e.g., a lost child or a verbal dispute between customers). In addition, exterior lighting would be provided along buildings and in the parking area, which would serve to deter criminal activity during the nighttime hours. Due to the existing police services ability to service the proposed project and the additional security that would be provided by the project proponent, no significant impacts are anticipated. The project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of, or the need for, new or physically altered law enforcement facilities. - - - -- - Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 48 Environmental findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations References: EIR pages 4.10 -5 and 4.10 -6 c. Impact: The proposed project would not result in impacts to public services that would be cumulatively considerable. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project will not result in impacts to public services that would be cumulatively considerable. The geographic context for cumulative fire protection and police services is the City, which is the service area relative to the City's contracts for services with the Riverside County Fire and Sheriff's Departments and the area currently served by existing fire and police facilities within the City. The project would comply with the applicable fire and public safety related regulations and provide on -site measures, such as security and fire resistant building materials to reduce demands related to fire and police services; and the project would be served by existing law enforcement and fire facilities that have adequate capacity to service the project. However, increased development within the City, such as the projects listed in Table 3 -8, could eventually require additional service facilities, such as a sheriff's substation. As a result, both the project and cumulative projects would be required to pay development impact fees to offset potential future demands for fire and police services. The General Plan EIR describes that implementation of future development in accordance with its Land Use Plan (that the proposed project is consistent with as described in Section 4.8, Land Use and Planning) would not have significant cumulative impacts upon physical impacts associated with or the need for, new or physically altered fire protection facilities or law enforcement police protection facilities. Furthermore, because the proposed project would not require new facilities and would contribute toward funding future facilities, cumulative impacts associated with fire and police service facilities would be less - than- significant. References: EIR pages 4.10 -6 and 4.10 -7 4.2.9. Transportation and Traffic a. Impact: The proposed project's construction - related traffic impacts would not conflict with a plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project will result in less than significant impacts related to construction - related traffic. Traffic operations during the proposed construction phase of the project potentially could result in traffic impacts related to vehicle trips generated by construction employees, and trucks exporting and importing materials and transporting equipment. It has been assumed that construction activity would occur between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM. Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercenter GIN 49 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Employee Trips Employee trips are estimated based on the number of employees estimated to be on -site throughout the various stages of construction. Each employee is assumed to drive and from the construction site each day. It has been assumed that employees will arrive up to 30 minutes prior to the workday and will leave up to 30 minutes after the workday ends, hence the majority of employees would arrive and depart from the site outside of the peak commute traffic periods (i.e., 7:00 AM — 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM — 6:00 PM). Each employee is assumed to drive to and from the site alone each day. Parking for employees and non - employee vehicles could be accommodated through the construction of a portion of the proposed parking lot for the project. Export and Import of Materials and Heavy Equipment Construction of the proposed project would require the export and import of construction materials from and to the site. The export/import materials will be transported via 15 -cubic yard capacity dump trucks. Export of construction materials is anticipated to consist of the exportation of excavated soil from the site. Import of construction materials is anticipated to consist of raw building materials, concrete, asphalt, etc. Heavy equipment to be utilized on -site during construction include, but is not limited to: flat beds, dozers, scrapers, graders, track hoes, dump trucks, forklifts, cranes, cement trucks, pavers, rollers, water trucks, rolling container trucks and bobcats. Heavy equipment will be delivered and removed from the site throughout the construction phase. It is anticipated that delivery of heavy equipment would not occur on a daily basis, but rather periodically throughout the construction phase based on need. In order to minimize the impact of construction truck traffic to the surrounding roadway network, the City - required traffic control plan would stipulate that trucks utilize the most direct route between the site and I -15 via Central Avenue (SR 74). It is anticipated that the construction staging would be located off Central Avenue. Import and export of soil and related materials may utilize Central Avenue (SR 74) or Main Street depending on the location origin and destination of the soil and related materials. Further, although subject to review of a traffic control plan for the proposed project, it is expected that trucks would travel on area roadways during off -peak traffic hours in order to minimize traffic impacts. Given the temporary nature of construction, the construction work hours being such that workers would not travel during the peak traffic hours, truck trips being spread over the course of the work day, and the requirement for a City- approved traffic control plan, the project's construction - related traffic impacts would not conflict with a plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, and the impacts associated with construction of the project would be considered less - than - significant. References: FIR pages 4.11 -15 and 4.11 -16. Urban Decay b. Impact: The proposed project would not create a diversion of sales from existing retail facilities severe enough to result in business closings. Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercenter EIR 50 Environmental Findings and Slatement of Overriding Considerations Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project will result in less than significant impacts related to a diversion of sales from existing retail facilities. General Merchandise, Apparel, Furniture /Appliances and Other /Specialty Sales The proposed project would result in a net increase of 130,145 SF of retail space devoted to General Merchandise, Apparel, Furniture /Appliances and Other /Specialty (GAFO1) sales. This total includes the non - grocery portion (120,945 SF) of the proposed Walruart Supercenter and the potential specialty retail space proposed for development at out lot 1. 'the demand analysis indicates year 2013 market support for $174.1 million in GAFO retail sales in the trade area. The $174.1 million in market demand translates into approximately 696,272 SF of GAFO retail space that could be currently supported in the trade area. Based on estimates from the field survey completed by TNDG, there is approximately 456,328 "effective" SF of existing GAFO space in the trade area. Thus, TNDG estimates that the trade area could currently support approximately 239,944 SF of additional GAFO space over and above the existing inventory. Within the trade area, potential demand for new retail space in the GAFO retail categories is projected to grow to approximately 291,447 SF by opening year 2017 (the proposed project's assumed opening date); 352,284 SF by 2021; 393,216 SF by 2023; and 481,415 by 2027. Given that the proposed retail space is well within the level of residual market support for GAFO space in the trade area, the GAFO components of the proposed project would not have significant competitive impacts on existing stores in the trade area. Therefore, the impact of GAFO retail components of the proposed project would be less- than - significant. Impacts of Proposed Grocery Component The proposed project's grocery component would total 39,155 SF (30,596 SF of grocery sales area plus 8,559 SF of grocery support space). The proposed project's grocery space would generate levels equivalent to the national average for grocery sales in Walmart stores of approximately $475 per SF (gross area) (from 2013 to 2027), or total grocery sales of approximate $18.6 million. The trade area currently has seven supermarkets totaling approximately 173,208 "effective" SF. Appendix K of the LIR provides a list of the supermarket centers that includes the stores' square footages and distances to the proposed project. The demand analysis indicates that there is base year (year 2013) demand to support average supermarket sales volumes in the trade area of $497 per SF at the seven existing supermarkets. In comparison, the industry median for supermarkets is approximately $473 per SF nationally and $418 in the Western United States. Thus, "GAFO" is a retail industry acronym for the General Merchandise, Apparel, Furniture and Other /Specialty retail categories. The GAFO categories generally correspond to the merchandise mix of a discount department store such as Wahnart. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter Eln jt Environmental Findings and Statement of overriding Considerations supermarkets in the trade area currently, on average, have the potential to generate sales volumes which are above the Western regional median and the national median. Total demand for supermarket sales in the trade area is projected to increase from approximately $86.1 million in 2013 to approximately $92.5 million in 2017, the assumed opening date of the proposed project. By 2027, total demand for supermarket sales in the trade area is projected to reach approximately $115.9 million (all projections are given in 2013 constant dollars). The development of the proposed project would initially cause potential average sales volumes at the seven existing supermarkets to decrease from the current level of $497 per SF to approximately $426 per SF. Although this represents a reduction in the potential sales volume per SF for existing stores, the potential average sales level of $426 per SF in year 2017 is unlikely to be low enough to cause the closure of any of the trade area's existing supermarkets. At $426 per SF, potential sales volumes would still be above the Western regional median ($418) and about 90 percent of the national median ($473). In addition, due to continued population growth in the trade area, the projected sales impacts to existing supermarkets would only be temporary and would be partially offset by growth in retail demand. Potential sales volumes would reach $446 per SF in 2019, just two years after the proposed project's projected opening date. This projected sales volume is above the Western Regional median figure ($418) and 90 percent of the estimated base year amount ($436). Further, in 2023, just six years after the projected start date, projected potential sales volumes would reach $499 per SF, which is above the current estimate of $497. Therefore, potential adverse impacts for the grocery component of the proposed project with respect to urban decay would be less- than - significant. Impact of Proposed Restaurant Space The proposed project would include 6,800 SF of restaurant space. The demand analysis indicates in 2013 potential market support for $64.3 million in restaurant sales in the trade area. The $64.3 million in market demand translates into approximately 214,432 SF of restaurant space that could be currently supported in the trade area. Based on estimates from the field survey completed, there is approximately 194,436 SF of existing restaurant space in the trade area. Thus, the trade area could currently support approximately 19,996 SF of additional restaurant space over and above the existing inventory. Potential demand for new restaurant space in the trade area is projected to grow to 35,857 SF by 2017 (the assumed opening date for the proposed project), 54,593 SF by 2021 and 94,362 SF by 2027. The proposed project's restaurant retail space, totaling 6,800 SF, would be within the envelope of available demand for new space, and is not likely to result in the closure of existing restaurants. Therefore, the potential for the proposed project to result in urban decay related to restaurants would be less -than- significant. Impacts of Proposed Gasoline Station /Convenience Store As described in the Project Description, if out lot 1 is not developed with the proposed 9,310 SF of specialty retail space, it would be developed with a gasoline station/car wash and a 3,100 -SF convenience store. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenler EIR 52 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations According to the most recent data from the SBOE, gasoline stations in California generate approximately $5.5 million in annual sales on average. This figure is calculated by dividing total annual taxable sales ($55,210,075,637) by the number of permits in the state (9,958). Demand for service station sales is projected to increase by $6.5 million between 2013 and 2017. Thus, the growth in the market over the next five years would be more than sufficient to support the sales of a typical gasoline station in California. The growth in demand for gasoline sales from 2013 to 2017 would be more than sufficient to support the likely sales at a potential gas station/convenience store. As shown, the proposed gasoline station /convenience store would not have significant competitive impacts on existing gasoline stations /convenience stores in the trade area. Thus, potential sales impacts to existing service stations are expected to be less- than- significant with respect to urban decay. Potential Reuse of Existing Lake Elsinore Walmart Site Given that Walmart is proposing to develop two new Supercenters that are both approximately three miles from the existing Lake Elsinore store, there is a potential for the existing Walmart store to close at the time the project opens or thereafter. In addition to the proposed project evaluated in this analysis, there is a Supercenter planned for development in Wildomar near the 1 -15 and Bundy Canyon Road. Given that the existing Walmart store is at the midpoint between the two proposed Supercenters, it is reasonable to assume that a potential closure would be equally attributable to the two new proposed Supercenters. In fact, Walmart is currently anticipating closing the existing Lake Elsinore store upon opening of the proposed project. The potential demand would be more than sufficient by 2017 (i.e., the assumed opening date of the proposed project) to support some type of retail reuse of the existing store, even after accounting for the demand that would be absorbed by the proposed store. Although the market demand analysis indicates there would be sufficient retail demand to support some type of retail reuse of the existing Walmart store immediately after it closes, no specific tenants have been identified that could potentially re- tenant tine site. In addition, Appendix K of this EIR highlights some caveats that could potentially delay retail reuse of the existing Walmart store. Notably, Walmart has an internal department which focuses on the sale of "excess" property. This department expends efforts to advertise and sell all "excess" existing buildings so that buildings are reoccupied. According to the testimony of Walmart before the planning Commission, Walmart has been highly successful in insuring the reuse of its closed stores. Currently in all of California, there is only one closed Walmart store that has not been sold or re- tenanted but that location is in escrow to be sold. Escrow is currently scheduled to close at the end of 2015. In order to ensure the site does not fall into a state of disrepair while a new tenant is sought, the City has require the applicant to adhere to site maintenance conditions of approval. (Condition of Approval No. 25.) References: EIR pages 4.12 -8 through 4.12 -13. c. Impact: The proposed project would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to urban decay. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 553 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the FIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project will not result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to urban decay. Non - Grocery /Non - Gasoline Categories Demand for new retail space (non - grocery) in the trade area is projected to reach approximately 360,911 SF in 2017 and 795,022 SF by 2027. Based on the potential demand for new non - grocery retail space and based on detailed analysis and data provided), the total SF of planned and pending projects in the trade area would be well over the level of retail demand through 2027. Thus, if all of the pending projects were developed by 2027, the market would be substantially overbuilt. A more likely cumulative scenario is that retail market conditions would result in a more gradual buildout of planned retail development, such that the pace of retail development would more closely follow the growth in retail demand. Under a more gradual (market- driven) buildout scenario, there is less potential for overbuilt conditions to occur, and consequently a reduced potential for building vacancies and urban decay to follow. Specifically, the following factors are highly likely to mitigate against the development of a significantly overbuilt retail market. Probability of development. The majority of the projects evaluated in this analysis are part of Specific Plan studies that have included retail space as part of conceptual development plans. These potential retail sites would be developed only if and when future demand dictates, which assumption is consistent with existing industry customs and practice. In addition, although some of these projects have specific zoning approved for retail uses, they still may require project site plans or other entitlements required for retail development. Finally, some of the projects are only proposed and have not yet submitted applications to the City for development of these sites. Market area distinction. Evaluating the aggregate SF proposed in the trade area implicitly assumes that the planned and pending projects' market areas are identical to the market area for the Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter project. However, the planned and pending projects will have their own distinct market areas, which only partially overlap with the trade area evaluated in this analysis. As such, these projects would not be limited to the same "pool" of demand projected in this analysis. Projected supply increases are typically linked to population growth. The supply of planned retail SF in the trade area greatly exceeds the amount of population growth projected for the area. Given that population growth largely fuels the demand for new retail space, it is unlikely that all of the proposed projects will be developed as initially proposed. For instance, as individual project proponents advance further along in the planning process, some projects will be scaled back, some will decide to change the overall development mix (e.g., substituting office space for retail space), while others will be completely dropped. Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercen er EIR 54 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations First -in- line - phenomenon. In markets expected to experience above- average population growth, such as Lake Elsinore and surrounding area, project proponents often attempt to get projects moving along in the entitlement process much earlier than warranted by market demand. By getting their projects "first -in- line ", developers hope to obtain commitments from major national chain retailers before other projects are proposed and entitled. As these key retailers commit to specific projects, other proposed projects, which were likely attempting to attract many of the same tenants, will reevaluate their development plans. In some cases, they will drop development plans altogether; in others, they will shift development proposals to non- retail uses. Automatic market corrections. Ultimately, the planned projects will go forward only when retailers commit to locating at the project. In the event that the market becomes saturated with key retailers, major national retailers will choose not locate at some of the proposed projects in the trade area. Without commitments from key anchor tenants, developers will be unable to fill inline and other non - anchor space in their projects. Moreover, without pre- leasing commitments from retailers, many developers will be unable to obtain development financing for their projects. In this case, major retailers' site selection criteria will act as an automatic correction to an oversupply of retail space. Thus, without commitments from key retailers, developers will have to revisit their development proposals and consider alternative uses, other than retail space, for their project sites. Potentially significant economic impacts are projected under cumulative conditions if all of the planned and pending projects were to be developed by 2027. It is extremely unlikely that the planned and /or pending projects will be developed during this time frame. However, even in the unlikely event that these projects are developed by 2027, it is currently not possible to identify which (non - grocery) retail categories could possibly become overbuilt, or to identify existing businesses in those categories which might be forced to close if the potential retail components of these projects are ultimately developed. As previously noted, most of the planned and /or pending projects identified on Table 4.12 -7 are at the preliminary conceptual stage without commitments from specific retail tenants. Therefore, any attempt to identify specific vacancies which might possibly result, or to determine the potential for physical deterioration or urban decay, would be speculative in this context. For purposes of evaluating CEQA impacts, it is not required or valid to engage in speculative analysis. A more likely cumulative scenario is that retail market conditions would result in a more gradual buildout of planned retail development, such that the pace of retail development would more closely follow the growth in retail demand. Under this scenario, there is less potential for overbuilt conditions to occur, and consequently a reduced potential for building vacancies and urban decay to follow. But again, any attempt to identify businesses which might be affected under this scenario, if any, whose closure might ultimately result in urban decay would be speculative, and therefore would not be required under CEQA. Supermarket Category Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 55 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Besides the proposed grocery component of the Walmart Supercenter, there are no other known planned and /or pending supermarket projects in the trade area. Thus, there would be no cumulative impacts in the supermarket category above and beyond the project - specific impacts. Gasoline Station Category A Circle K gasoline station is proposed for development at the intersection of Riverside Drive and Joy Street in the City. Combined, the gas station /convenience store outlet option (proposed project) and the cumulative project would total approximately $11.0 million in annual sales. Growth in demand for service station sales is projected to increase by $6.5 million between 2013 and 2017, indicating that the market would be slightly overbuilt in the gasoline stations category if both projects were built by 2017. However, these potential sales impacts would not be severe enough to cause the closure of any gasoline station in the trade area. Assuming both gasoline stations are built in this timeframe, excess sales over demand would be approximately $4.5 million in 2017 ($11.0 million - $6.5 million = $4.5 million). However, as a share of total service station demand in 2017, this would equal less than 5 percent of total trade area demand in 2017 which would be $94.8 million). Moreover, these potential sales impacts would be temporary, as continued growth in the market would be more than sufficient to support sales of both gasoline stations by 2020. The demand for gasoline and the ability of the area to support existing and future gas stations is further outlined in Appendix A to the FPIR. Retail Reuse of Existing Walmart Store The retail demand analysis indicates there would be sufficient demand, under project - specific conditions, to support some type of retail reuse of the existing Walmart store. In addition, the store is in a favorable location, with good freeway access and visibility (two key site criteria for many retailers), along with being next to a strong concentration of retail development on the west side of I -15. However, based on previous studies, the relative success in reusing closed Walmart stores for other retail uses represents a "mixed bag" of sorts, with some successfully reconfigured for other retail stores while others have remained vacant for several years. Specifically, TNDG has either prepared urban decay studies, or is aware of other examples, where simultaneous store openings and closings in the following California cities involved the simultaneous closing of an existing Walmart store and the development of a Walmart Supercenter combining general merchandise and grocery sales: La Quinta, Palmdale, Palm Springs, Hanford, San Jacinto, Gilroy, and Bakersfield (White Lane).Walmart currently has only one closed retail store in California that has not been sold or put to reuse, but as stated, that location is currently in escrow and scheduled to close by the end of 2015.. It should also be noted that along with potential retail reuse options, the existing Walmart building would also be a candidate for some type of adaptive reuse, including uses ranging from a recreational facility (e.g., bowling alley, ice rink, fitness center) to institutional uses (e.g., government office facility, library, church) to office /service type uses (e.g., call centers). There are numerous examples of vacant "big box" stores being converted for these types of uses. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 56 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations However, even if the new property owners of the existing store are unable to attract replacement tenant(s) for the Walmart store, the closure of the Walmart store would not necessarily result in long -term physical impacts to the Lake Elsinore City Center shopping center. Walmart is conditioned to maintain the existing store. Moreover, without the existing Walmart store, the center would still function as a well - tenanted neighborhood -scale shopping center anchored by the existing Vons store, with it accounting for approximately 44 percent of the remaining center space. According to the ICSC, supermarket anchors typically account for 30 percent to 50 percent of total space in neighborhood centers. References: EIR pages 4.12 -13 through 4.12 -19. 4.2.10. Utilities and Service Systems a. Impact: Implementation would not require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities, or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the project would not require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities, or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Impacts would be less than significant. There are two alternative drainage improvement scenarios for the project site. Alternative A is the City's area drainage improvement plan that is currently being designed and is anticipated to be in place prior to project construction. Alternative B is the project applicant's on -site drainage facilities that would be constructed should the City's drainage improvement not be completed prior to project construction. The proposed project is located within an area designated as Flood Zone X. The City is in the process of preparing an area hydrology plan (Area Hydrology Plan) for the 3rd Street area in consultation with the Riverside County Flood Control District and Water Conservation District (RCFCWCD) and Caltrans. The City has identified a preferred alignment for the Area Hydrology Plan as shown in Figure 4.7.4. Under this plan, stormwater would be conveyed from the existing earthen channel located at Cambern Avenue and directed south on Cambern Avenue, and then west on 3rd Street, under Interstate 15 (1 -15), and into an earthen/rip -rap channel, which would connect to the existing 3rd Street channel and into Temescal Wash. The proposed Area Hydrology Plan would include installation of a permanent drainage system (including an inlet structure, storm drains, curbs and gutters, catch basins, and an open channel) to capture and direct run -off from the project area. Storm drains composed of reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) would range in size from 84 inches in Cambern Avenue and 72 inches and 48 inches in 3rd Street. A steel jacketed 36 -inch RCP will be jack and bored under I- 15 and connect the proposed 378 -foot long, 70- foot -wide earthen trapezoidal channel. The proposed regional drainage plan will also capture off -site drainage that currently flows onto the project site and convey it into the proposed area -wide drainage system. The environmental impacts associated with the City's Area Hydrology Plan will be evaluated in a separate CEQA document. Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercenter EIR 57 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations If the Area Hydrology Plan is not adopted by the City by the time the proposed project is constructed, then the proposed project design would be designed to accommodate increased flows on the southern boundary of the Walmart Supercenter the site in accordance with Figure 3- 7 in the DEIR. The alternative storm drainage project design would include conveyance of stormwater flows from Cambern Avenue through a storm drain structure with varying widths into an on -site approximately 72 -foot -wide stormwater detention basin /open channel, which would be located along the southern boundary of the project site adjacent to 3rd Street. The proposed project would include the development on -site of drainage facilities to accommodate on -site flows. The facilities would be constructed to handle 64.07 cubic feet per second (cfs) of runoff during the 100 -year event compared to 36 cfs under existing conditions. The facilities would be developed within the project footprint, and no additional areas of disturbance would be required. The proposed project would not require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities, or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. The on -site alternative drainage plan would not create a need to expand drainage facilities and would have less -than- significant impacts to existing facilities. References: EIR pages 4.13 -8 and 4.13 -9. b. Impact: The project site would not require new or expanded entitlements for water supplies; impacts would be less- than - significant. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the project has received a will -serve letter from EVMWD dated August 13, 2015 verifying the project will be provided water supply and wastewater treatment services. Therefore, the project site would not require new or expanded entitlements; impacts would be less -than- significant. The proposed project would be served by the EVMWD. Currently, service is provided to the project vicinity via a 12 -inch main in Cambern or 8 -inch main in 3rd Street. The estimated construction water demand is 12,000 gpd for 40 days, totaling 480,000 gallons or 1.5 acre feet. The operational water demand is approximately 3,300 gpd domestic and 5,380 gpd irrigation for a total of approximately 9.7 acre -feet per year. This would represent an increase in existing water demand compared to existing site conditions. Currently, there is no regular water usage at the site. The Walmart Supercenter store would install high - efficiency urinals that use only one - eighth (1/8) gallon of water per flush. This fixture reduces water use by 87 percent compared to the conventional one gallon per flush urinal. All restroom sinks would use sensor- activated one -half (1/2) gallon per minute high - efficiency faucets. During use, water flows through turbines built into the faucets to generate the electricity needed to operate the motion sensors. Water efficient restroom toilets would be employed in the Walmart Supercenter restrooms. The fixture uses 20 percent less water compared to mandated EPA Standards of 1.6 gallon per flush fixtures. The Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 58 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations toilets use built -in water turbines to generate the power required to activate the flush mechanism, which is energy efficient because it saves energy and material by eliminating electrical conduits required to power automatic flush valve sensors. Additionally, the proposed project's parking lot would include low - impact development (LID) design features such as stormwater retention bio cells in the northern area of the parking lot. The proposed project is consistent with the site's designated zoning (General Commercial and Commercial Mixed Use). The demand associated with those land uses has been accounted for in the EVMWD water demand projections, which are based on General Plan buildout. Based on a comparison of projected supply and demand, there would be sufficient water supplies to meet demand through the year 2030. As shown above, the proposed project would consume approximately 9.7 acre -feet of water annually. The proposed project is located within the EVMWD's Elsinore Division. EVMWD supplies approximately 23,820 acre -feet of water annually to the Elsinore Division. The proposed project's annual water demand represents 0.03 percent of EVMWD's total annual water supply to the Elsinore Division, and EVMWD has verified that it has adequate capacity to serve the site. Appendix L contains the project's Water Supply Evaluation and Will -Serve letter. Forecasts for EVMWD's long -range water supply project a demand of 2.3 million acre -feet of imported water its member agencies in 2020. Based on existing water supplies, EVMWD has indicated that it will be able to meet 100 percent of its member agencies demands over the next 20 years in average and wet years, over the next 15 years in multiple dry years, and over the next 10 years in single dry years ( EVMWD, 2011). With the addition of future- planned water supplies, EVMWD will be able to meet 100 percent of demand over the next 20 years, even under a repeat of the worst drought, while providing a 15 to 20 percent reserve supply and making sufficient water deliveries for the replenishment of local and regional storage. References: EIR pages 4.13 -10 through 4.13 -11. e. Impact: The proposed project would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to utilities and service systems. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to utilities and service systems. The EVMWD service area is considered the cumulative area to be affected. The proposed project could result in a cumulative impact on water supplies since the project represents a new water demand in the project area. However, the proposed project would be consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan, which designates the project site as General Commercial and Commercial Mixed Use. In order to support water saving high - efficiency technology, the proposed project would implement the project design features described above. Furthermore, the proposed project would not represent maximum allowable buildout of the site, as it would be well below the maximum Floor Area Ratio of 0.40 for General Commercial land uses and 0.80 for Commercial Mixed Use. Furthermore, EVMWD plans to optimize recycled water use within the service area, which would help meet an increase in water demand without Lake Elsinore Walmart Supementer FIR 59 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations requiring more imported supplies. Therefore, the project would result in less - than - significant impacts. References: EIR page 4.13 -11. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter FIR 60 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 4.3. Findings Regarding Environmental Impacts Which Can Be Mitigated to Level of Less Than Significant Environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant but which the City finds can be mitigated to a level of less than significant through the imposition of feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and set forth herein, are described in this section. 4.3.1. Air Quality a. Impact: The proposed project would exceed SCAQMD thresholds during construction and the impact is potentially significant. Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s): MM AQ -3: During grading activity, the contractor shall ensure that all Rubber Tired Dozers and Scrapers shall be California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 3 Certified or better. Additionally, during grading activity, the contractor shall ensure the total horsepower -hours per day for all equipment shall not exceed 18,560 horsepower -hours per day and the maximum disturbance ( activity graded) area shall not exceed 5 acres per day. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the implementation of the project would exceed SCAQMD thresholds and the impact is potentially significant. Construction - related emissions will be approximately the same for both outlot development options A and B, as detailed in the methodology section. Construction emissions are based on construction schedule (length of construction), acreage of the project site, and building size. Regardless of the option chosen, the construction schedule is anticipated to be of equal length. The grading phase emissions which typically has the most intensive construction equipment use, is based on property size. Regardless of the option chosen, the total site size of the project site would not change therefore daily emissions from grading would be identical regardless of option. Additionally, building size will dictate the equipment usage in the building construction phases and the amount of architectural coating used. Because the two options only differ in building size by approximately 6,000 SF, the building construction phase emissions would be identical between the two as the daily amount of equipment usage would be identical for both options, as there is not enough discrepancy in the amount of building development to change the construction equipment used between the two options. For architectural coating, the analysis focused on Option B, the option with the greater square footage of development as it provides for a greater daily usage of architectural coating. While emissions from Option A could be slightly less than identified, the analysis as presented represents a worst case scenario for both options. Construction activities associated with the proposed project would generate pollutant emissions from the following construction activities: (1) grading; (2) construction workers traveling to and from project site; (3) delivery of construction supplies to, and hauling fill material import to as Lake Elsinore Walmarl Supercenler EIR 61 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations well as material export and debris from, the project site; (4) fuel combustion by on -site construction equipment; and (5) building construction, application of architectural coatings, and paving. These construction activities would temporarily create emissions of dust, fumes, equipment exhaust, and other air contaminants. The amount of emissions generated on a daily basis would vary, depending on the intensity and types of construction activities occurring simultaneously at the time. Construction emissions are considered short term and temporary, but have the potential to represent a significant impact with respect to air quality. Particulate matter (i.e., PM10 and PM2.5) are among the pollutants of greatest localized concern with respect to construction activities. Particulate emissions from construction activities can lead to adverse health effects and nuisance concerns, such as reduced visibility and soiling of exposed surfaces. Particulate emissions can result from a variety of construction activities, including excavation, grading, demolition, vehicle travel on paved and unpaved surfaces, and vehicle and equipment exhaust. Construction emissions of PM can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific operations taking place, the number and types of equipment operated, local soil conditions, weather conditions, and the amount of earth disturbance. Emissions of ozone precursors VOC and NOx are primarily generated from mobile sources and vary as a function of vehicle trips per day associated with debris hauling, delivery of construction materials, vendor trips, and worker commute trips, and the types and number of heavy -duty, off - road equipment used and the intensity and frequency of their operation. A large portion of construction - related VOC emissions also result from the application of architectural coatings and vary depending on the amount of coatings applied each day. Several SCAQMD Rules are applicable during construction activity for this project include but are not limited to: Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings); Rule 431.2 (Low Sulfur Fuel); Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust); and Rule 1186 / 1186.1 (Street Sweepers). As required by Rule 403 the following measures were incorporated into the modeling for the reduced project emissions in order to reduce impacts from fugitive dust. All clearing, grading, earth - moving, or excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 25 mph per SCAQMD guidelines in order to limit fugitive dust emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all disturbed unpaved roads and disturbed areas within the Project are watered at least three (3) times daily during dry weather. Watering, with complete coverage of disturbed areas, shall occur at least three times a day. The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds on unpaved roads and Project site areas are reduced to 15 miles per hour or less Additionally CARB, in Title 13, Chapter 10, Section 2485, Division 3 of the of the California Code of Regulations, imposes a requirement that heavy duty trucks accessing the site shall not idle for greater than five minutes at any location. This measure shall apply to construction traffic. Grading plans shall reference that a sign shall be posted on -site stating that construction workers need to shut off engines at or before five minutes of idling. This regulatory measure reduces the emissions of NOx from construction delivery vehicles. Lake Elsinore Walmart S irementer EIR 62 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Under the assumed scenarios, emissions resulting from the project construction will exceed criteria pollutant thresholds established by the SCAQMD for emissions of NOx (before mitigation). It should be noted that the impacts BACMs do not take credit for reductions achieved through standard regulatory requirements (SCAQMD's Rule 403). The maximum daily construction emissions generated by the proposed project's worst -case construction scenario (as described in the methodology section) would exceed the SCAQMD's daily significance threshold for NOx. Emissions from the remaining criteria pollutants would not exceed the SCAQMD's daily significance thresholds. Because NOx would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds, this impact is potentially significant. Detailed construction model outputs are presented in Appendix 131. Regulatory measures as discussed above and Mitigation Measure AQ -3 for the reduction of NOx emissions shall be incorporated to reduce the severity of the impact. After implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, construction activity emissions for NOX will be reduced to below the SCAQMD regulatory thresholds, and the remaining criteria pollutants will also be reduced. References: BIR page 4.2 -22 through 4.2 -25, 4.2 -27. b. Impact: Construction of the proposed project would result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s): MMAQ -3 Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that localized air quality impacts would be less - than - significant with mitigation. Daily disturbance acreage is estimated by the types and amount of equipment used during the construction phases. As the grading phase is the most intensive phase for the daily level of disturbance, the isr emissions for construction are based on emissions from the grading phase. Because the emissions from grading are based on the acreage of development and the development under both Options A and B are identical, the emissions from the grading phase for both options would be the same. Therefore, this analysis is relevant for both Options A and Options B. The daily ou -site construction emissions generated by the project were evaluated against SCAQMD's LSTs for a 5 -acre site to determine whether the emissions would cause or contribute to adverse localized air quality impacts. The nearest sensitive receptor land uses are immediately adjacent to the Project site to the southwest of the Project site. Because the mass rate look -up tables provided by SCAQMD only provides LSTs at receptor distances of 82, 164, 328, 656, and 1,640 feet, the LSTs for a receptor distance of 82 feet are used to evaluate the potential localized air quality impacts associated with the project's peak day construction emissions. The daily Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter FIR 63 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations unmitigated emissions generated on -site by the project's worst -case construction scenario would exceed the applicable SCAQMD LSTs for a 5 -acre site in SRA 25. However with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ -3, the daily mitigated emissions generated on -site by the project's worst -case construction scenario would be reduced to below the applicable SCAQMD LSTs for a 5 -acre site in SRA 25. References: hIR pages 4.2 -29 and 4.2 -30 4.3.2. Biological Resources a. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDPW or USPWS. Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measures BIO -I: The ,following Best Management Practices (Bi are applicable measures from Appendix C of the MSHCP and shall be implemented by the project proponent for construction activities: • Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, a qualified biologist (approved by the City of Lake Elsinore) shall be retained to oversee compliance with protection rneasures,for• nesting birds and raptors and potentially jurisdictional resources. • The project biologist or designated representative shall be on -site during initial ground - disturbing activities, including vegetation removal, tree removal and grading to ensure that nesting birds and raptors and potentially jurisdictional resources identified during the biological survey are not impacted. • Trash and food items shall be contained in closed containers and removed daily to reduce the attractiveness to opportunistic predators such as common ravens, coyotes, and feral dogs. • Workers shall be prohibited from bringing pets and firearms to the project site and from feeding wildlife. • Intentional killing or collection of any plant or wildlife species shall be prohibited. BIO -2: Prior to the commencement of construction activities, the project proponent shall adhere to the following. • A qualified biologist (i.e., a biologist approved by the City of Lake Elsinore with previous burrowing owl survey experience) shall conduct a pre - construction clearance survey (regardless of the time of year) of the permanent and temporary impact areas to locate active breeding or wintering burrowing owl burrows no more than 14 days prior to ground - disturbing activities (i.e., vegetation clearance, tree removal, grading, tilling). The survey methodology shall be consistent with the methods outlined in the MSHCP and shall consist of walking parallel transacts 7 to 20 meters apart, adjusting for vegetation height and density as needed, and noting any potential burrows with fresh burrowing owl Lake Elsinore Walinart Sopercenter EIR 64 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations sign or presence of burrowing owls. In the event that a burrowing owl is detected or observed during the preconstruction clearance survey, all measures shall be implemented as described in Appendix E of the MSIICP to ensure impacts are avoided or reduced to less -than- significant levels. BI0-3: If rernoval of the on -site frees and grading occurs during the non - nesting season(September I -- .lanum�y 31), and if free removal and grading occurs during the nesting season and construction is scheduled to commence during the avian non - nesting season (September 1 to .lanuary 31), no preconstruction surveys or additional measures are required for nesting birds (other than burrowing owl - -- see BIO -2). Should construction activities occur within the avian nesting season (February 1 -- August 31) the following measures shall be implemented: • To avoid impacts to nesting birds in the project area for construction activities that are initiated during the breeding season (February I to August 31), a qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct preconstruction surveys of all potential nesting habitat within the project site plus a 500- oot bzffer. Potential nesting habitat includes shrubs, trees, and structures as well as open areas suitable for ground nesting species. Surveys shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior to construction activities. Surveys need not be conducted for the entire project site at one lime; they may be phased so that surveys occur shortly before a portion of the site is disturbed The surveying biologist must be qualified to determine the status and stage of nesting by migratory birds and all locally breeding raptor species without causing intrusive disturbance. If active nests are, found, a suitable buffer (e.g. 200- 300,feet for common raptors and 30- 50.feetfor passerines) shall be established around active nests and no construction within the buffer shall be be until a qualified biologist has determined that the nest is no longer active (e.g. the nestlings have fledged and are no longer reliant on the nest). Encroachment into the buffer may occur at the discretion of a qualified biologist. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that project construction activities could result in the direct loss of active nests of both common and special- status bird species (including raptors) or the abandonment of active nests as a result of noises and /or vibrations generated by temporary construction activities, which would be considered a significant impact by the MTBA and the California Fish and Game Code (3503 and 3503.5). However, with the implementation of the above mitigation measures, the impacts will be less than significant. Vegetation Communities and Habitat Direct impacts as a result of construction activities associated with the proposed project would include the permanent removal of vegetation communities that may be utilized as habitat for both Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 65 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations common and rare wildlife. Indirect impacts associated with construction include fugitive dust and increased noise levels due to heavy equipment operations occurring in these areas. Indirect impacts to habitat could include alterations to existing topographical and hydrological conditions, increased erosion and sediment transport, and the establishment of non - native and invasive weeds. Operational impacts include disturbances associated with increased human presence. Development of the proposed project would grade and /or otherwise disturb the entire project site. Common plant species would be impacted by the project through the direct, permanent removal of 9.7 acres of non- native grassland, 2.8 acres of eucalyptus grove, and 5.1 acres of disturbed habitat. The plant communities found within the proposed project are highly disturbed, widespread throughout the region, and are not considered sensitive or designated for protection under federal, state, local or regional plans. As a result, the permanent removal of 17.6 acres of disturbed vegetation would be less - than - significant. Special - Status Plants No special - status plants were observed during the biological surveys. The potential for species to occur is low, and per Sections 6.1.3 and 6.3.2 of the MSHCP (RCIP, 2004), the project site does not fall within a predetermined survey area for special- status plants and are conserved by the MSHCP Reserve design. Based on the low potential for occurrence and the coverage under the MSHCP, impacts to special - status plants from implementation of the proposed project would be less -than- significant. Special- Status Wildlife Cooper's hawk and Burrowing owl have moderate and high potentials for occurrence on the project site. Activities associated with construction of the project may potentially impact these special - status species. Construction activities could result in the direct loss of active nests of both common and special- status bird species (including raptors) or the abandonment of active nests as a result of noises and /or vibrations generated by temporary construction activities, which would be considered a significant impact by the MTBA and the California Fish and Game Code (3503 and 3503.5). However, potential impacts can be prevented through implementation of pre - construction surveys and associated avoidance measures should construction occur during nesting season. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO -1 through BIO -3 would reduce potential impacts to a less - than - significant level. Critical Habitat The project site does not occur within any USFWS - designated critical habitats. The nearest critical habitat occurs approximately 0.5 mile east of the project site for the coastal California gnatcatcher. As a result, because the project would not disrupt any USFWS- designated critical habitats, no impacts to designated critical habitat would occur from the proposed project. References: EIR pages 4.3 -30 through 4.3 -32. b. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan. Lake Elsinore Walnart Supercenter HE 66 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s): MM B10 -1 Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the project could result in significant impacts related to provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan. The project site is located within the boundaries of the MSHCP and subject to the Reserve Assembly Requirements (Section 6.1.1); Protection of Species Associated with Riparian /Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools (Section 6.1.2); Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species (Section 6.1.3); Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface (Section 6.1.4), and Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (Section 6.3.2), which are described below. Section 6.1.1 - Project Relationship to Reserve Assembly: The entire project is located within the Elsinore Area Plan of the MSHCP. The project site is not within a Criteria Cell proposed for conservation under the MSHCP; therefore, the project is not subject: to the Habitat Evaluation and Acquisition Negotiation Strategy (HANS) or Joint Project Review processes, and thus the project is consistent with the Reserve Assembly requirements of the MSHCP. Section 6.1.2 - Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools: The project site does not contain areas defined by the MSHCP as riparian/riverine, nor does the project site support vernal pools or vernal pool- associated species; therefore, the project is consistent with the riparian/riverine and vernal pool requirements of the MSHCP. Section 6.1.3 - Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species: The project site is net located within the MSHCP Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area (NEPSSA); therefore, focused plant surveys are not required for species identified under Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP. Thus, the project is consistent with the Narrow Endemic Plant Species requirements of the MSHCP. Section 6.1.4 - Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban /Wildland Interface: The MSHCP Urban/Wildland Interface Guidelines are intended to address indirect effects associated with locating development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area. The project site is not located within a MSHCP Criteria Area and is not located adjacent to any Criteria Cell describing areas of conservation. The proposed project is not expected to result in significant indirect impacts to special - status biological resources. Implementation of the BMPs in Appendix C of the MSHCP (included as Mitigation Measure BIO -1) would ensure compliance with the MSHCP. Thus, the proposed project is consistent with the Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban /Wildland hnterface. Section 6.3.2 - Additional Survey Needs and Procedures: The project site is not located within the MSHCP Additional Survey Areas for Amphibians, Burrowing Owl, Criteria Area Species, Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 67 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Mammals, or Special Linkage Areas. No surveys are required and the proposed project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures of the MSHCP. As described above, the proposed project would not conflict with the MSHCP, and with adherence to the BMPs in Appendix C of the MSHCP, as included in Mitigation Measure 13I0-1 impacts related to provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan would be less -than- significant. References: EIR pages 4.3 -33 to 4.3 -34. c. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to biological resource impacts. Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s): Implementation of 13I0-1 through 13I0-3. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project could result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to biological resource impacts. The potentially impacted species are all avian species that would be protected through implementation of 13I0-1 through 13I0-3 and are provided regional coverage under the MSHCP. Likewise, all projects within the boundaries of the MSHCP are subject to the Reserve Assembly Requirements; Protection of Species Associated with RipariandRiverine Areas and Vernal Pools; Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species; Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface, and Additional Survey Needs and Procedures, in addition to state and federal agency requirements, such as the MBTA, that would reduce the potential of cumulative impacts to biological resources. With implementation of 13I0-1 through 13I0-3 the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to biological resource impacts. References: EIR pages 4.3 -34 to 4.3 -35. 4.3.3. Cultural and Paleontological Resources a. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could result in impacts on significant historic resources as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s): CULT -1: Prior to earth moving activities, a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology (U.S. Department of the Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 68 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Interior 2008) or a County of Riverside qualified archaeologist shall conduct cultural resources sensitivity training, for all construction personnel. Construction personnel shall be informed of the types of archaeological resources that may be encountered, and of the proper procedures to be enacted in the event of an inadvertent discovery of archaeological resources or human remains. The City shall ensure that construction personnel are made available for and attend the training and retain documentation demonstrating attendance. Prior to issuance of grading perinit(s) for the project, the project proponent 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. At least 30 days prior to seeking a grading permit, the project proponent shall contact the appropriate Tribe to notify that Tribe of grading, excavation and the monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Lake Elsinore and the Tribe to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the treatment of known cultural resources, the designation, responsibilities, and participation of Native American Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation; and treatment and,frnal disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. 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 this measure, the archaeological monitor's authority to stop and redirect grading will be exercised in consultation with the appropriate tribe in order to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. Tribal monitors shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and ground breaking activities, and shall also have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities in consultation with the project archeologist. The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area to the appropriate tribe for proper treatment and disposition CULT -2: If unknown prehistoric /historic archaeological resources are encountered during grading and excavation activities, no.further excavation or disturbance of the area where the resources were found shall occur within 100 feet of the find until a qualified archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology (U.S. Department of the Interior 2008) or a County of Riverside qualified archaeologist, is retained by the developer and examines the find. The archaeologist shall determine the significance of the find If the.fnd is determined not significant then grading and excavation activities can continue, and the archaeologist would determine the need for archaeological monitoring. If the.frnd is determined to be significant or potentially significant; the archaeologist shall prepare a Treatment Plan and shall contact the appropriate Native American tribal representatives, as identified Uy the Native American Heritage Commission. ff requested by the Tribe(s), the City, the developer, or the Project archaeologist, the City shall, in good faith, consult on the discovery and its disposition (e.g., avoidance, preservation, return of artifacts to tribe, etc.). ff the Developer and the Tribe cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter GAR 69 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations such resources, these issues will be presented to the Community Development Director (CDD) for decision. The CDD shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources and shall take into account the religious beliefs, customs, and practices of the appropriate tribe. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the CDD shall be appealable to the City of Lake Elsinore City Council. A report of findings shall also be prepared by a qualified archaeologist, and shall include an itemized inventory of any specimens recovered. The report and confirmation of curation of any recovered resources ,frorn an accredited museum repository shall signify completion of the program to mitigate impacts to archaeological /historic resources. ff disturbed resources are required to be collected and preserved, the Applicant shall be required to participate financially up to the limits imposed by Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. After the find is determined to be significant, the project archaeologist shall determine the need for archaeological monitoring for the remainder of the excavation activities. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Based upon the analysis presented in the FIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the implementation of the proposed project may result in significant impacts on unknown archaeological resources. No historical resources or unique archaeological resources were identified in the project site, and the closest previously recorded archaeological resource is approximately 2,100 feet from the project site and consists of historic -era refuse scatter. In addition, results from both ASM's 2007 study and ESA's 2014 study indicate that the project site is in an area of low cultural sensitivity. Furthermore, portions of the project site have been disturbed by non - historic residential development and grading activities. Based on the archaeological studies and the literature review, it is highly unlikely that archaeological resources exist on the project site. However, it is possible for unknown archaeological resources to be located on the project site. Project applicants would be required to implement the mitigation for these potential impacts, as dictated by City guidelines. With the implementation of the mitigation measures, the impact would be less - than - significant. References: EIR pages 4.4 -12 and 4.4 -13. b. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could result in impacts on significant paleontological resources. Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s): CULT -3: Prior to earth moving activities, a qualified paleontologist shall be retained to conduct pre - construction worker paleontological resources sensitively training. This training shall include information on what to do in case an unanticipated discovery is made by a worker. All construction personnel shall be informed of the possibility of encountering fossils, and instructed Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercnnter EIR 70 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations to irmnediately itgform the construction foreman if any bones or other potential fossils are unexpectedly unearthed in an area where paleontological monitoring is not required The pr gjeci proponent shall ensure that construction personnel are made available for and attend the training and retain documentation demonstrating attendance. CULT -4: Excavations exceeding.fnve feet below the current grade within the surfaces areas containing the younger Quaternary Alluvium as well as any excavation into areas of the site that contains the Silverado Formation shall be monitored by a qualified paleontologist. A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual on the County of Riverside list of qualified paleontologists or an individual with an MS. or a Ph.D. in paleontology or geology who is familiar with paleontological procedures and techniques. A qualified paleontologist shall perform periodic spot check monitoring during excavation activities within the areas containing Quaternary Alluvium on the surface until excavations reach five feet below current grade. however, if paleontological resources are found prior to five feet below current grade within the areas containing Quaternary Alluvium oil the surface, the qualified paleontologist shall determine the need for more ,frequent paleontological monitoring for the remainder of the excavation activities. ff paleontological resources are discovered, the qualified paleontologist shall inform the contractor to cease ground disturbing activities within 50 feet of the find until it can be assessed by the qualified paleontologist. ff the find is determine to be not significant, excavation activities can continue. If the find is determined to be significant or potentially significant, the ground disturbing activities within 50, feet of the find shall continue to cease until the sampling and data recovery of resource is completed. After recovering the resource, the paleontologist shall follow the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standard guidelines for analyzing the fossil specimens, store the specimens at a museum depository that is capable to provide access for future research, prepare a,final report documenting the find(s), and submit the document to the City of Lake Elsinore and other interestedparties. Finding/Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that proposed project has the potential to destroy an unknown unique paleontological resource by disturbing earth in which the resources lie. Disturbance of an archaeological resource that is considered significant pursuant to California Code of Regulations Section 15064.5 would be a significant impact. Although the project site has been previously disturbed through grading, agricultural activities and /or development, the paleontological records search and cultural resources survey indicate that at least some portions of the project site are sensitive for the presence of paleontological resources. Excavations may impact exposures of the Silverado Formation, which has the potential for vertebrate fossils. The City's General Plan EIR states that projects must demonstrate that it will not result in significant impacts to paleontological resources through implementation of General Plan EIR Lake Elsinore Walmart Susementer EIR 71 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations mitigation measure MM Cultural /Paleontological Resources 9, which states that projects shall demonstrate compliance with Cultural and Paleontological Resources Policy 8.1, any potential impacts will be reduced to a less - than - significant level. Policy 8.1 states that for development in areas delineated as "High" or "Undetermined" potential sensitivity for paleontological resources, require the project applicant to hire a certified paleontologist, who must perform a literature search and /or survey and apply the relevant treatment for the site as recommended by the Society for Vertebrate Paleontology. This was completed as part of the Phase I Cultural Resources Study that is attached as Appendix D to this EIR. The Phase I Cultural Resources Study identified sediments that have potential for vertebrate fossils throughout the northern two - thirds of the project site. In addition, in response to research on the project site, the NHMLAC concluded that shallow excavations in the younger Quaternary Alluvium exposed throughout project site would not uncover significant vertebrate fossils. However, deeper excavations into older sedimentary deposits may encounter significant fossil vertebrate remains. Therefore, any substantial excavations (i.e., greater than five feet) into the areas with younger Quaternary Alluvium exposed on the surface as well as any excavations into the areas of the site that contains the Silverado Formation could result in potential significant impacts to paleontological resources. With the implementation of the mitigation measures, the impact would be less- than- significant. References: EIR pages 4.4 -13 and 4.4 -15. i Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could result in impacts due to the accidental discovery of human remains. Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s): CULT -5: If human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and f ee 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 contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. Subsequently, the Native American Heritage Commission 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. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Based upon the analysis presented in the RP -EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that several Indian tribes identified the City and its SOI as being within either their traditional use area or one in which they have cultural ties. No known cemeteries or other burial places are known to exist within the project site and the project is unlikely to disturb human remains. However, ground- disturbing activities associated with development have the potential to disturb undiscovered human remains. Hence, - — - - -- Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter FIR 72 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations because the project would involve ground - disturbing activities, it is possible that such actions could unearth, expose, or disturb previously unknown human remains, and these actions are considered potentially significant. Mitigation Measure CULT -5 is provided to reduce potential impacts to human remains to a less - than - significant level. References: EIR page 4.4 -15. d. Impact: The proposed project could result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to cultural resource impacts. Mitigation: The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s): MM CULT -1 through CULT -5 are required. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project could result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to cultural resource impacts. The geographic scope for cumulative impacts to cultural and paleontological resources includes the western Riverside County region. This geographic scope of analysis is appropriate because the archaeological, historical, and paleontological resources within this radius are expected to be similar to those that occur on the project site because of the proximity; similar environment, landform, and hydrology would result in similar land -use and thus, similar potential cultural resources. Western Riverside County contains archaeological and paleontological resources. Thus, there is potential for development projects in the region to disturb areas that may contain known or unknown cultural resources. Potential cultural resource impacts of the proposed project, in combination with other projects in the region, could contribute to a cumulatively significant impact due to the overall loss of artifacts unique to the region. However, the results from both ASM's 2007 study and ESA's 2014 study indicate that the project site is in an area of low cultural sensitivity. In addition, the Mitigation Measures listed above would further reduce the potential of the project to impacts to cultural resources, including paleontological resources and human remains. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less- than - significant contribution to an adverse impact to cultural resources. References: EIR pages 4.4 -15 and 4.4 -16. 4.3.4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions a. Impact: The proposed project would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter FIR 73 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Mitigation: The impacts are less than significant. However, implementation of the following mitigation measure(s) would further reduce project impacts: MMAQ -1 andAQ -2 Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would not result in GHG emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment. The project would generate GHG emissions from a variety of sources. First, GHG emissions would be generated during construction of the project. Once fully operational, the project's operations would generate GHG emissions from both area sources and mobile sources. Indirect source emissions generated by the project include electrical consumption, water and wastewater usage (transportation), and solid waste disposal. Mobile (direct) sources of air pollutants associated with the project would consist of motor vehicles trips generated by employees and consumers of the proposed development. Construction Emissions Options A and B produce similar construction emissions and therefore the analysis in this section is applicable to both Options. Construction emissions are based on construction schedule (length of construction), acreage of the project site, and building size. Regardless of the option chosen, the construction schedule is anticipated to be of equal length. Regardless of the option chosen, the total site size of the project site would not change therefore daily emissions from grading would be identical regardless of option. Building size will dictate the equipment usage in the building construction, paving and architectural coating phases. Because the two options only differ in building size by approximately 6,000 SF, the equipment used in these phases are anticipated to be identical and therefore emissions would be identical. Therefore, the analysis as presented represents a worst -case scenario for both options. Construction - related GHG emissions for the proposed project were estimated using the same assumptions as the air quality analysis. The project's total estimated GHG emissions during construction would be approximately 786.63 MTCO2e. This would equal to approximately 26.22 MTCO2e per year after amortization over 30 years per SCAQMD methodology. Operational Emissions Area and indirect sources associated with the project would primarily result from electricity and natural gas consumption, water transport (the energy used to pump water to and from the project site), and solid waste generation. GHG emissions from electricity consumed on the project site would be generated off-site by fuel combustion at the electricity provider. GHG emissions from water transport are also indirect emissions resulting from the energy required to transport water from its source. In addition, the proposed development would result in direct emissions from mobile source emissions from motor vehicle trips generated by employees and consumers. Lake Elsinore Welded Supercenter EIR 74 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Business -as -Usual The BAU scenario was based on the worst -case emissions scenario. For the proposed project that scenario is Option B, or the development of the Walmart Supercenter and Garden Center along with approximately 9,310 SF of retail /restaurants. The BAU scenario is anticipated to generate a total of approximately 14,938.25 MTCO2e per year. For consistency with the 2020 project analysis, amortized construction emissions are incorporated into the BAU scenario. The distinct uses under Options A and B with respect to the gas station vs additional retail /restaurant use would result in distinctly different annual emissions levels. Therefore, Options A and B are discussed separately in this section. In accordance with SCAQMD's recommendation, the project's amortized construction - related GHG emissions are added to the operational emissions estimate in order to determine the project's total annual GHG emissions. Option A Option A is anticipated to generate a total of approximately 8,842.77 MTCO2e per year. This results in a reduction of 40.80 percent from the BAU scenario and exceeds the AB 32 reduction target of a 28.5 percent reduction from BAU. Option B With Option B, GHG emissions with the incorporation of the appropriate regulations and mitigation measures results in approximately 9,844.26 MTCO2e per year. This results in a reduction of 34.1 percent from the BAU scenario and exceeds the AB 32 reduction target of a 28.5 percent reduction from BAU. Thus, the impact of the project is less- than - significant. Additional Finding Applying the SCAQMD or MDAQMD thresholds, the project would still have a less than significant impact as it relates to GHG emissions as neither Option results in GHG emissions that exceed 10,000 MTCO2e ( SCAQMD threshold) or 100,000 MTCO2e ( MDAQMD threshold). The City has concluded based upon a review of the potential numeric thresholds of significance available for use, as well as the project's compliance with the General Plan Climate Action Plan that the proposed project's contribution of GHG emissions would be less than significant under each of those three additional thresholds of significance. References: FIR pages 4.6 -10 through 4.6 -14. It. Impact: The proposed project's increase in GIIG emissions would not be cumulatively considerable. Mitigation: Because the impact is less -than- significant, mitigation is not required. However, implementation of the following mitigation measure(s) would further reduce project impacts: MM AQ -1 and AQ -2 Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercenter EIR 75 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that implementation of the proposed project would not result in GHG emissions that would be cumulatively considerable. Global climate change is a change in the average weather on Earth that can be measured by wind patterns, storms, precipitation, and temperature. Therefore the geographic scope for the analysis of cumulative construction- and operational - related impacts resulting from the emissions of GHG is worldwide. Construction and operation of the project would incrementally contribute to GHG emissions along with past, present, and future activities, and the State CEQA Guidelines acknowledge this as a cumulative impact. As such, impacts of GHG emissions as analyzed in Section 4.6.5 of this EIR represent the cumulative analysis. As discussed in detail in the Section 4.6.5, annual emissions of GHGs from project implementation would result in a 34.10 percent reduction from BAU, thus with implementation of the project's design features and regulatory developments, the project's GIIG reduction would exceed the AB 32 reduction target of 28.5 percent. Therefore, the increase in GHG emissions resulting from project implementation would not be cumulatively considerable. References: EIR page 4.6 -18 4.3.5. Land Use a. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could conflict with an applicable conservation plan. Mitigation: Implementation of the following mitigation measure(s) would reduce project impacts: MM BIO -1 Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would not result in significant impacts on the environment related to conflicts with a conservation plan. The project site is located within the Elsinore Area Plan of the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The project site is not located within a Criteria Cell proposed for conservation under the MSHCP. Implementation of the BMPs in Appendix C of the MSHCP (included as Mitigation Measure 13I0-1) would ensure that the project is in compliance with the MSHCP. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the MSHCP and impacts related to provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan would be less -than- significant. Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercenter EIR 76 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations References: EIR page 4.8 -20. 4.3.6. Noise a. Impact: The use of stationary construction equipment in connection with the construction of the proposed project could result in impacts due to exposure of persons to, or generation of. noise levels due to operations in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or noise ordinance. Implementation of the proposed project could result in impacts from project operation due to exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels due to operations in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or noise ordinance. Mitigation: Implementation of the following mitigation measure(s) would reduce project impacts: MMN01 -1, N01 -2 Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that with mitigation, the proposed project would not result in significant impacts on the environment related to exposure of sensitive receptors to noise from stationary construction equipment or from project operations. As demonstrated in Table 4.9 -19 in the DEIR, the mitigated stationary noise levels are reduced to less -than- significant levels. The operational noise impacts associated with the proposed project are expected to include loading dock activities, a trash compactor, rooftop air conditioning units, shopping cart carousels, drive -thru speakerphones, narking lot vehicle movements, and car wash activities. The project's operational stationary - source noise levels at each of the sensitive receiver locations located off -site were estimated. The hourly noise levels associated with the project under Option A are expected to range from 40.5 to 43.5 dBA L50 at the sensitive receiver locations. The hourly noise levels associated with the project under Option B are also expected to range from 40.5 to 43.5 dBA 1,50 at the sensitive receiver locations The operational noise levels under Option A would not exceed the daytime (7:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M.) noise level standard of 61 dBA L50 or the nighttime (10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M.) noise level standard of 51 dBA L50 at the sensitive residential locations based on the City's noise standards. The proposed project's operational noise levels under Option B would also not result in noise levels exceeding the City's noise level standards at any of the sensitive receiver locations. It should be noted that the projected noise levels for the project under Options A and B assume the worst -case noise environment with all of the on -site noise sources (i.e., loading dock activities, a trash compactor, rooftop air conditioning units, etc.) operating simultaneously. In reality, these noise Level impacts will vary throughout the day. Nonetheless, operational noise Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter FIR ]] Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations levels associated with the proposed project under both Option A and Option B would not exceed the City's noise level standards at any of the off -site sensitive receiver locations. As such, impacts associated with operational noise levels would be less than significant. References: EIR pages 4.9 -31 and 4.9 -37 to 4.9 -47. b. Impact: The use of stationary construction equipment in connection with the construction of the proposed project could result in impacts due to substantial temporary or periodic increase. in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Mitigation: Implementation of the following mitigation measure(s) would reduce project impacts: MM NOI -1 Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would not result in significant substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. The project's construction - related noise levels would represent a short-term increase on the existing ambient noise levels in the immediate project vicinity. Based on the five phases of project construction, the unmitigated construction- related noise impacts are expected to create temporary and intermittent high -level noise conditions at receivers surrounding the project site when certain activities occur within 100 feet of the project site boundaries. With implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI -I, the recommended temporary noise control barriers providing a minimum attenuation of 10 dBA would reduce the project's construction noise from stationary construction equipment to below 60 dBA Lmax long -term stationary construction noise level standards at the nearby sensitive receivers. Therefore, the construction of the proposed project will result in noise impacts that are less -than- significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure NOT -1. References: EIR pages 4.9 -33 to 4.9 -37 and 4.9 -59 to 4.9 -60. 4.4. Findings Regarding Environmental Impacts Not Fully Mitigated to a Level of Less Than Significant Environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR as potentially significant but which the City finds cannot be fully mitigated to a level of less than significant, despite the imposition of all feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and sett forth herein, are described in this section. The applicable environmental issue areas include Air Quality, Noise, and Transportation and Traffic. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 78 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 4.4.1. Air Quality a. Lnpact: The project's operation would have significant and unavoidable impacts due to conflicting with, or obstructing, implementation of the AQMP. Mitigation: There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce the project's operational impacts beyond those already incorporated into the project. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into the proposed project which will reduce potentially significant effects on the environment; however, there are no feasible mitigation measures available that will lessen these significant impacts to a less- than - significant level. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project could conflict with, or obstruct, implementation of the AQMP and this impact would be significant and unavoidable. The project is located within the SCAB, which is under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. As such, SCAQMD's 2012 AQMP is the applicable air quality plan for the project. Projects that are consistent with the regional population, housing, and employment forecasts identified by SCAG are considered to be consistent with the AQMP growth projections, since the forecast assumptions by SCAG forms the basis of the land use and transportation control portions of the AQMP. Additionally, because SCAG's regional growth forecasts are based upon, among other things, land uses designated in General Plans, a project that is consistent with the land use designated in a General Plan would also be consistent with the SCAG's regional forecast projections, and thus also with the AQMP growth projections. The General Plan Land Use designations for the project are C -2 (General Commercial) and CMU (Commercial Mixed Use), the zoning designations for the project are General Commercial and Commercial Mixed Use. Although the project is consistent with the land use and zoning designation, it is anticipated that the project will result in a more intense land use (e.g., would generate more trips than what would otherwise occur under the existing land use and zoning designations) and would consequently result in greater emissions than what would have been "accounted for" in the AQMP based on the existing land use and zoning designations. The project promotes a suburban center setting that increases the diversity of land use. The project design includes: the relocation of the existing bus stop that along Central Avenue, providing a bus turnout accessible to the project; 57 parking spaces reserved for clean air vehicles, and 36 bicycle racks. These project design features would reduce vehicle miles traveled associated with the project, however, this would not offset the emissions increase anticipated by the more intensive land use proposed by the project. As such, the project would not be consistent with the AQMP since it would result in the development of a more intense land use. Therefore, the project could conflict with, or obstruct, implementation of the AQMP and this impact would be significant. References: EIR pages 4.2 -20 and 4.2 -22 Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 79 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations b. Impact: The proposed project would have significant and unavoidable impacts due to violations of air quality standards from project operations. Mitigation: There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce to reduce the project's operational impacts beyond those already incorporated into the project. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into the proposed project which will reduce potentially significant effects on the environment; however, there are no feasible mitigation measures available that will lessen these significant impacts to a less- than - significant level. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would have significant and unavoidable impacts due to violations of air quality standards. Operations Implementation of the project would result in long -term regional emissions of criteria air pollutants and ozone precursors associated with area sources, such as natural gas consumption, landscaping, applications of architectural coatings, and consumer products, in addition to operational mobile emissions. Option A Table 4.2 -8 shows the maximum anticipated daily operational emissions prior to the implementation of mitigation. As shown, Option A is anticipated to exceed the thresholds of significance established by the SCAQMD for emissions of VOCs and NOx. Therefore, Option A would result in a significant impact for VOCs and NOx for project - related regional operational emissions. Option B Option B is anticipated to exceed the thresholds of significance established by the SCAQMD for emissions of VOCs and NOx. Therefore, Option B would also result in a significant impact for VOCs and NOx for project - related regional operational emissions. There are no feasible mitigation measures to address these operational impacts. References: EIR pages 4.2 -25 through 4.2 -27. c. Impact: The proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts for cumulatively considerable criteria pollutants. Mitigation: The impact will be partially mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s): Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter FIR 80 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations MMAQ -1 through AQ -3 Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into the proposed project which will reduce potentially significant effects on the environment, however, there are no feasible mitigation measures available that will lessen these significant impacts to a Less- than - significant level. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts for cumulatively considerable criteria pollutants. Operational emissions associated with the proposed project would exceed the SCAQMD's thresholds of significance for VOC and NOx even with the implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ -2 and AQ -3. The proposed project could conflict with SCAQMD's air quality planning efforts for nonattainment pollutants and would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in nonattainment pollutants during operations, specifically for ozone precursors VOC and NOx. Therefore, cumulative impacts associated with operational emissions would be significant and unavoidable. References: EIR pages 4.2 -35 through 4.2 -38 4.4.2. Noise a. Impact: Construction noise from mobile construction equipment used in the construction of the proposed project would result in exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies during construction. Mitigation: The impact will be partially mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s): Npt -t: The following practices shall be implemented by the project applicant during construction activities: • Prior to approval of grading plans andlor issuance of building permits, plans shall include a note indicating that noise - generating project construction activities shall only occur between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 7.00 P.M on weekdays. Construction is prohibited on weekends and holidays. The project construction supervisor shall ensure compliance with the note and the City shall conduct periodic inspection at its discretion. • Prior to the start of construction, install temporary noise control barriers that provide a minimum noise level attenuation of 10.0 dBA when project construction occurs near existing noise- sensitive structures. The noise control barrier must present a solid face from top to bottom. The noise control barrier must designed to block the view of the noise source. • Any damage to the noise barriers must be repaired within 48 hours. Gaps or holes in the barrier or openings between the barrier and the ground shall be repaired within 38 hours. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 81 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations • The noise control barriers and associated elements shall be completely removed and the site restored upon the conclusion of the construction activity. • During all project site construction, the construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with mufflers operated and maintained consistent with manufacturers' standards. The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receivers nearest the prroject site. • The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create a mininsurn distance of 100 feet between construction- related noise sources and noise - sensitive receivers nearest the project site (i.e., the center of the site) during all project construction. • The construction contractor shall limit haul truck deliveries to the same hours specified for construction equipment (between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M. on weekdays. Construction is prohibited on weekends and holidays). The haul route exhibit shall design delivery routes to minimize the exposure of sensitive land uses or residential dwellings to delivery truck- related noise. NOI -2: The following practices shall be adopted as Conditions of Approval prior to the issuance Elf a buildingpermit for the proposed project: • All trucks, tractors, and forklifts shall be operated with proper operating and well maintained mufflers. • Maintain pavement conditions that are free of bumps to minimize truck noise. • The truck access gates and loading docks within the truck court on the project site shall be posted with signs which state: • Truck drivers shall turn off engines when not in use; • Diesel trucks servicing the Project shall not idle for more than five (5) minutes; and • Post telephone numbers of the building facilities manager to report violations. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into the proposed project which will reduce potentially significant effects on the environment; however, there are no feasible mitigation measures available that will lessen these significant impacts to a less- than - significant level. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. The highest construction noise levels generated from mobile equipment would occur during grading construction activities when all equipment is operating simultaneously at a distance of 100 feet from the project site boundary. The unmitigated peak mobile construction noise levels are expected to range from 72.3 to 79.9 dBA Lmax. The construction noise analysis shows that the unmitigated construction noise levels at nearby sensitive residential receivers represent a potentially significant impact and would exceed the City's applicable noise level standard of 60 dBA for single - family residential land uses. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter FIR 82 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Gonsiderations To control noise impacts associated with the construction of the proposed project, the City has established limits to the hours of operation and maximum noise levels for mobile and stationary equipment. The unmitigated mobile equipment construction noise level impacts are expected to exceed the 60 dBA Lmax daytime noise level threshold at all of the identified noise receiver locations. Consequently, the noise levels from mobile equipment would represent a potentially significant noise level impact. Therefore, temporary noise mitigation would be needed to reduce the potential construction noise impacts. Implementation of Mitigation Measure N0I -1 would require the use of practices and techniques at the project site during construction to reduce noise levels, including the installation of temporary exterior noise control barriers that. would provide a minimum attenuation of 10 dBA. The peak construction noise levels from mobile equipment are expected to range from 62.3 to 69.9 dBA Lmax with the attenuation from the temporary construction noise barriers at all the receiver locations (i.e., RI through R6). Despite the implementation of Mitigation Measure N01- 1, the noise levels generated from mobile construction equipment would continue to exceed the City's 60 dBA Lmax noise standard at all of the receiver locations. Therefore, noise impacts from the use of mobile equipment would be significant and unavoidable. References: EIR pages 4.9 -31 through 4.9 -47 4.4.3. Transportation and Circulation a. Impact: The proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to certain intersections and roadways because it would conflict with applicable level of service standards under baseline plus project and near -term plus project conditions. Mitigation: The impact will be partially mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation tneasure(s): Mitigation Measure TRA -1: The applicant for the proposed project shall contribute its./air share towards the modification of the traffic signal including permissive left -turn phasing at the intersection of East Lakeshore Drive /Diamond Drive. Mitigation tbleasure TRA -2: The applicant for the proposed project shall contribute its fair share towards the installation ii traffic signal at the intersection of Gunnerson Street / Riverside Drive, and to implement permissive left -turn phasing on all approaches. Mitigation Measure TRA -3: The applicant for the proposed project shall pay for the restriping the existing eastbound right turn lane as a third shared through -right turn lane at the intersection ofI -15 Southbound Ranps/Railrocrd Canyon Road. Mitigation Measure TRA -4: The applicant for the proposed project shall contribute its fair share towards the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection ofI -IS Northbound Ranps / Nichols Road Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 83 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Mitigation Measure TRA -5: The applicant for the proposed project shall contribute its .fair share towards the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of I -15 Northbound Ramps / North Main Street. Mitigation Measure TRA -6: The applicant for the proposed project shall pay its required Ti °affc Impact Fee (`rT1F'), which fee program includes funding for improvements to the Sumrnerhill Drive / Railroad Canyon Road intersection. One alternative for improving the operation of this intersection is to restripe the northbound approach at the intersection of Summerhill Drive /Railroad Canyon Road to provide a separate right turn lane, and modify the traffic signal and implement overlap phasing for the northbound and eastbound right turn lanes. The City is currently studying additional alternatives for improving the function of this intersection as part of the interchange improvements due to the close proximity. Mitigation Measure TRA -7: The applicant for the proposed project shall pay its required T1F, as well as the required Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (`rTUMF'), which fee programs include funding for the construction of a 2nd westbound through lane at the intersection of Lakeshore Drive /Riverside Drive (SR 74). Mitigation Measure TRA -8: The applicant for the proposed project shall contribute its fair share towards the construction of a second southbound left turn lane at intersection of East Lakeshore Drive /Diamond Drive and associated signal modifications. Mitigation Measure TRA -9: The applicant for the proposed project shall contribute its fair share to the construction of a left turn lane and a second through lane on the eastbound approach, at the intersection of Gunnerson Street / Riverside Drive, construction of a left turn lane and a second through lane on the westbound approach, and modification of the trgf c signal to provide protected left -turn phasing for the eastbound and westbound approaches. Mitigation Measure TRA -10: The applicant.for the proposed project shall contribute its fair share towards the construction. of left turn lane on the northbound approach at the intersection of 1 -15 Northbound Ramps and Railroad Canyon Road Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into the proposed project which will reduce potentially significant effects on the environment; however, there are no feasible mitigation measures available that will lessen these significant impacts to a less - than - significant level. In addition, some of the changes and alterations identified in the mitigation measures are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency (Caltrans) and not the City. Such changes and alterations can and should be adopted by such other agency. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that with implementation of the project would result in significant impacts to roadways and intersections. Baseline Plus Project The addition of project - generated traffic would cause the average delay at East Lakeshore Drive / Diamond Drive (Intersection 43) to increase during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak Lose e Elsinore Walmart Supercenler FIR 84 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations howl by more than the City's 1.0- second threshold of significance for intersections operating at LOS F without the project. The improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -1 would reduce impacts to less- than - significant. The mitigation measures requires the project applicant to fund its fair share of the improvements. The intersection is currently identified in the TIF for improvement. In addition to paying its fair share, the applicant will also pay the required TIF. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. The addition of project - generated traffic would cause the average delay at Gunnerson Street / Riverside Drive (SR 74) (Intersection 44) to increase during the AM peak hour by more than the City's 2.0- second threshold of significance for intersections operating at LOS E without the project, and to increase during the PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours by more than the City's 1.0- second threshold of significance for intersections operating at LOS F without the project. The improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -2 would reduce impacts to less -than- significant. The mitigation measure requires the project applicant to fund its fair share of the improvements. The proposed traffic signal is currently not identified in the TIP. The City plans to add the traffic signal to the TIF in the next TIF update. The applicant will pay both the fair share payment and the TIF payment. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to install the traffic signal. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. The addition of project - generated traffic would cause the average delay at I -15 Northbound Ramps / Nichols Road (Intersection #12) to increase during the AM peak hour by more than the City's 2.0- second threshold of significance for intersections operating at LOS E without the project. The improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -4 would reduce impacts to less - than - significant. The mitigation measure requires the project applicant to fund its fair share of the improvements. It will take time to assemble the necessary funds to install the traffic signal. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. The addition of project - generated traffic would cause the average delay at 1 -15 Northbound Ramps / North Main Sheet (Intersection 414) to increase during the AM and PM peak hour by more than the City's 1.0- second threshold of significance for intersections operating at LOS F without the project. The improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -5 would reduce impacts to less -than- significant. The mitigation measures requires the project applicant to fund its fair share of the improvements. The proposed traffic signal is currently not identified in the TIF. However, the City plans to add the traffic signal to the TIF in the next TIP update. The fair share payrnent will be in addition to the payment of the TIF. It will take time to assemble the necessary funds to install the traffic signal. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercenter EIR 85 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The addition of project - generated traffic would cause the average delay at Summerhill Drive / Railroad Canyon Road (Intersection #23) to increase during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours by more than the City's 1.0- second threshold of significance for intersections operating at LOS F without the project. The improvement described in Mitigation Measure TRA- 6 would reduce impacts to less- than- significaut. The mitigation measures requires the project applicant to fund its fair share of the improvements. The intersection is currently identified in the TIF for improvement. The applicant will pay the required TIF. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. Near -Term Plus Project The addition of project traffic is not anticipated to result in any additional deficient intersections in addition to the eight identified for Near -Term Cumulative (Opening Year 2016) Without Project traffic conditions. However, the proposed project would increase traffic volumes at those intersections, which would contribute to significant impacts. The implementation of the traffic improvements identified in the mitigation measures would reduce the project's impacts to less - than- significant levels. However, as discussed below, the timing of construction of the improvements in many cases is uncertain as it will take time to accumulative the funding necessary for the improvements. In addition, some of the improvements would be within the jurisdiction of other public agencies which the City does not control. Thus, in some cases, significant impacts could exist even though the applicant for this particular project has made a contribution towards the improvement and satisfied its obligation with regard to the measures. For those reasons, without successful implementation of the improvements identified in the mitigation measures, the proposed project would result in exeeedances of the Thresholds of Significance. The addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to unacceptable LOS E conditions at Lakeshore Drive / Riverside Drive (SR 74) (Intersection 41) during the PM and Saturday mid- day peak hours. The improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -7 would reduce impacts to less- than- significant. The mitigation measure requires the project applicant to fund its fair share of the improvements. The proposed additional westbound through lane is currently not identified in the TIF. The City plans to add the lane to the TIF in the next TIF update. It will take time to assemble the necessary funds to construct the lane. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. The addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to unacceptable LOS F conditions at East Lakeshore Drive / Diamond Drive (Intersection #3) during the AM, PM and Saturday mid- day peak hours. The improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -8 (in addition to Mitigation Measure TRA -1) would reduce impacts to less - than - significant. The mitigation measure requires the project applicant to fund its fair share of the improvements. The subject intersection is currently identified for improvement in the TIP. The applicant will also pay the TIF. It will take time to assemble the necessary funds to install the lane improvements and signal Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 86 Environmental Findings and Stalemenl of Overriding Considerations modification. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. The addition of project- generated traffic would contribute to unacceptable LOS E conditions at Gunnerson Street / Riverside Drive (SR 74) (Intersection #4) to increase during the AM peak hour, and to unacceptable LOS F' conditions during the PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. The improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -9 (in addition to Mitigation Measure TRA -2) would reduce impacts to less- than - significant. The mitigation measures require the project applicant to fund its fair share of the improvements. Certain of the improvements are currently identified in the TUMF. The applicant will also pay the TUMF. It will take time to assemble the necessary funds to install the traffic signal (Mitigation Measure TRA -2). In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. The addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to unacceptable LOS E conditions at I- 15 Northbound Ramps / Nichols Road (Intersection 412) during the AM peak hour. The improvements described in Mitigation Measure TI2A -4 would reduce impacts to less -than- significant. The mitigation measure requires the project applicant to fund its fair share of the improvements. The intersection is currently identified in the TIF. The applicant will pay the TIP. It will take time to assemble the necessary funds to install the traffic signal. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. The addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to unacceptable LOS F conditions at I- 15 Northbound Ramps / North Main Street (Intersection #14) during the AM and PM peak hours. The improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -5 would reduce impacts to less -than- significant. The mitigation measure requires the project applicant to fund its fair share of the improvements. The proposed traffic signal is currently not identified in the TIF. The City plans to add the traffic signal to the TIP in the next TIP update. It will take time to assemble the necessary funds to install the traffic signal. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. The addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to unacceptable LOS E conditions at I- 15 Northbound Ramps / Railroad Canyon Road (Intersection #15). The improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -10 would reduce impacts to less - than - significant. The some intersection improvements are currently identified in the TIF for improvement. The applicant will pay the required TIP. In addition, the mitigation measure requires the project applicant to fund its fair share of the improvements. It may take time to assemble the necessary funds to install the traffic signal. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR $7 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to unacceptable LOS F conditions at Summerhill Drive / Railroad Canyon Road (Intersection 423) during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. The improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -6 would reduce impacts to less - than - significant. The intersection is currently identified in the TIF for improvement. The applicant will pay the required TIF. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. As stated above, while mitigation will be imposed and the identified improvement can reduce the impacts to less than significant, it is unknown when all of the required funding for the improvements outlined above will be acquired. In addition, with many of the subject improvements, Caltrans would be required to issue permits and approvals. Therefore, the City cannot control the completion and timing of the measures. For this reason, the DEIR assumed that the impacts will remain significant unless and until the improvements outlined above are completed. References: FIR pages 4.11 -17 through 4.11 -37. b. Impact: The proposed project would result in a substantial contribution to long -term cumulative impacts because it would conflict with applicable level of service standards. Mitigation: The impact will be partially mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s): Mitigation Measure TRA -II: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of Lakeshore Drive /Riverside Drive (SR 74) are as, follows: • A 3rd and 4th westbound through lanes, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. • A 2nd northbound left turn lane and a right turn lane. • A 2nd southbound left turn lane and a 3rd through lane. Modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. • A 2nd eastbound left turn lane and a 3rd through lane. Modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. Prior to the issuance of a building pernnit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF andlor TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -12: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of W. Graham Avenue /North Main Street (SR 74) are as follows: • Install Traffic Signal • Construct an eastbound left turn lane. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 88 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations • Construct a westbound left turn lane. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these hmprovernenis prior to the issuance of building permits. of building permils. Mitigation Measure TRA,13: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of Easl Lakeshore Drive /Diamond Drive are as follows: • A 3rd westbound through lanes, two right -turn lanes, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lanes. • A 2nd northbound left turn lane, 3rd through lane and 2nd right turn lane, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lanes. • A 3rd southbound through lane and a right turn laze, and modify the tragic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. • A 2nd eastbound lef turn lave and a right turn laze. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the abo and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay through its payment of those fees. To the extent that covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant installation of these improvements prior to the issuance �e improvements are covered by the TIF its contribution for these improvements any of the above improvements are not shall contribute its fair share toward of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -14: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of Collier Avenue /Riverside Drive (SR 74) are as follows: Y Two westbound left turn lanes, a 2nd and 3rd through lazes and a right turn lane. C A 2nd northbound left turn lane, 2nd through laze and a right turn lane, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. • A 2nd southbound lef turn lane and a 2nd through lane, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. • Two eastbound left turn lanes, a 2nd and 3rd through lanes and a free -right turn lane. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and/or the TUMF in effect; the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and/or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permils. Mitigation Measure TRA -15: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection. of Collier Avenue / Central Avenue (SR 74) are as. follows: Lake Elsinore Walman Superseder FIR 89 Environmental findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations • A 2nd westbound through lane and a free -right turn lane. • A 2nd northbound through lane and a 2nd right turn lane with overlap signal phasing. • A 3rd southbound left turn lane. • A 3rd eastbound through lane and a right turn lane, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the 'lUM£ in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -.16: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of Auto Center Drive / Diamond Drive are as _follows: • A 3rd westbound through lane and a right turn lane, and modify the traffrc signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. • A 2nd northbound left turn lane and two northbound right turn lanes, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lanes. • A 2nd southbound left turn lane and two right turn lanes, and modify the traffc signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lanes. • A 2nd eastbound left turn lane and a right turn lane, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF andlor TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -17: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of I -15 Southbound RampslNichols Road are as follows: • A 2nd westbound left turn lane and the 2nd and 3rd through lanes. • Two southbound left turn lanes and a right turn lane and restripe the southbound left - through -right turn lane as a 2nd right turn lane. • A 2nd and 3rd eastbound through lanes. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Lake Llsinore Walmart Supercenter LIR 90 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Mitigation Measure TRA -18: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of 115 Southbound Ramps / Central Avenue (SR 74) are as, follows: • New Interchange Design (loop on -ramp at 1 -15 Southbound Ramps). • A 2nd southbound left turn lane, and restripe the shared left- through -right turn lane as a left turn lane, and 1st and 2nd right turn lane. • A 3rd eastbound through lane and 2nd right turn lane. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, {f the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -19: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of I -15 Southbound Ramps /North Main Street are as follows: • Construct a 2nd westbound left turn lane and a 2nd through lane. • Construct a southbound left turn lane. • Construct a 2nd eastbound through lane and a right turn 'lane. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /m° TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. .fair Mitigation Measure TRA -20: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of 1 -15 Southbound Ramps / Railroad Canyon Road are as follows: • New Interchange Design (ramps on frontage road). • Install a lraf/ic signal. • Construct a northbound right turn lane. • Construct 2 southbound left turn lanes and a 2nd through lane. • Construct a westbound left turn lane and 2 right turn lanes. The City and /or Cahrans may ultimately design alternative improvements at this intersection that would mitigate the impacts to the same or to a greater degree than the improvements outlined above ( "allernative improvements'). Prior to the issuance of or building permit, if the above improvements or the alternative improvements or alternative improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect; the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF andlor° TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Lake Elsinore Walmart Superseder FIR 91 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Mitigation Measure TPA -21: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of I -15 Northbound Rantps /Nichols Road are as follows: • A 2nd and 3rd westbound through lanes and a right turn lane. • A northbound left turn lane and a right turn lane and restripe the shared left- through -right turn lane as a 2nd right turn lane. • A 2nd eastbound left: turn lane and the 2nd and 3rd through lanes. The City and /or Caltrans may ultimately design alternative improvements at this intersection that would mitigate the impacts to the same or to a greater degree than the improvements outlined above (`alternative improvements'). Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements or the alternative improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in efect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements or the alternative improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -22: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection ofI15 Northbound Ramps /Central Avenue (SR 74): • New Interchange Design (loop on -ramp at 1 -15 Northbound Ramps). • A northbound left turn lane and restripe the left - through -right turn lane as a 2nd right turn lane. • An eastbound right turn lane. The City and/or Caltrans may ultimately design alternative improvements at this intersection that would mitigate the impacts to the same or to a greater degree than the improvements outlined above (`alternative improvements'). Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements or the alternative improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements or alternative improvements are not covered by the TIF and/or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -23: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of 115 Northbound Ramps /North Main Street are as follows: • A 2nd westbound through lane and a right turn lane. • A northbound left turn lane and a right turn lane. • A 2nd eastbound left turn lane and a 2nd through lane. The City and /or Caltrans may ultimately design alternative improvements at this intersection that would mitigate the impacts to the same or to a greater degree than the improvements outlined alcove ( "alternative improvements'). Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 92 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations above improvements or alternative improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution, for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements or alternative improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -24: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of I -15 Northbound Ramps / Railroad Canyon Road (Grape Street) tf the existing diamond interchange remains are as follows: • New Interchange Design (ramps on frontage roads). • Install a Iraff c signal. • Construct a northbound left turn lane. • Construct a southbound free -right turn lane. • Construct two eastbound left turn lanes and a right turn lane. The City and /or Caltrans may ultimately design alternative improvements at this intersection that would mitigate the impacts to the same or to a greater degree than the improvements outlined above ( "alternative improvements'). Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements or alternative improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effecl, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements or alternative improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation ofthese improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -25: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative lraffe conditions at the intersection of'Dexter Avenue / 11th Street are as follows • Install a traffic signal. • Construct a westbound left turn lane and a 2nd through lane. • Construct a northbound left turn lane. • Construct a southbound left turn lane. • Construct an eastbound left turn lane, 2nd through lane and a right turn lane with overlap signal phasing. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect; the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -26: If the Central Avenue (SR 74)/Dexter Avenue intersection has remained a full access intersection, the roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at that intersection are as follows: • Redesign the intersection to include a raised median to prohibit left terms onto Dexter Avenue. Lake Elsinore Walmad Sopercenter FIR 93 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The City and /or Caltrans may ultimately design alternative improvements at this intersection that would mitigate the impacts to the same or to a greater degree than the improvements outlined above (`alternative improvements'). Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements or alternative improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that the above improvements or alternative improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -27: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions al the intersection of Dexter Avenue /Allan Street are as follows: • The installation of a traffic signal at this location is not feasible do to the close proximity of intersection of Dexter Avenue and Central Avenue (SR -74.) Therefore the applicant shall be responsible for geometric improvement at this intersection, including a raised median or its equivalent, which will ensure that the intersection remains limited to a right -in, right out intersection. The timing of this improvement shall be determined by the City Engineer. To the extent there are future projects along Allen Street that will add traffic to this intersection, the City will require those projects to contribute proportionally to the cost of the improvements. Mitigation Measure TRA -28: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of Dexter Avenue /Crane Street are as follows: • The recommended installation of a traffic signal at this location is not a preferred measure for the City due to the location of the intersection and the City's desire to maintain future traffic flows on Dexter Avenue. However, such installation may be necessary in the future, based upon traffic levels and turn movement. In the interim, the applicant shall be responsible for the installation of stop control measures deemed appropriate by the City Engineer. These measures may include a 4 -way stop, if requested by the City Engineer. In addition, prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay its fair share cost of the installation of a traffic signal. The fair share shall be based on the project's highest number of peak hour left turns at the intersection, compared to those associated with the existing and future development along both sides of the portion of Crane Street east of Dexter Avenue. Mitigation Measure TRA -29: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of Dexter Avenue /3rd Street include the following: • Install a traffic signal • Construct a westbound left turn lane. • Construct a northbound left turn lane. • Construct a southbound left turn lane. • Construct an eastbound lefi turn lane. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 94 E vimnmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The City may ultimately design alternative improvements at this intersection that would rniligate the impacts to the same or to a greater degree than the improvements outlined above ( "Wlernative improvements'). Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements or alternative improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements or alternative improvements are not covered by the TIT' and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its./air share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -30: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative (ruff c conditions at the intersection of Dexter Avenue /2nd Street are as follows: • Install a traffic signal. • Construct a westbound • Construct a northbound • Construct a southbound • Construct an eastbound signal phasing. ?eft turn lane. left turn lane and a right turn lane with overlap signal phasing. left turn lane. left turn lane, 2nd through lane and a right turn lane with overlap Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF' in effect; the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that the above improvements are not covered by the TIF' and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its .fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -31: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative tragic conditions at the intersection of Camino del Norte / North Main Street are as _follows: • Install a traffic signal. • Construct two northbound left turn lanes. • Construct a southbound right turn lane wilh overlap signal phasinng. • Implement overlap signal phasing on the eastbound right turn lane. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To due extent that the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its.fair share toward installation of these innprovernerntsprior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -32: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of Summnerhill Drive /Railroad Canyon Road are aS fOIIOLVs: livo westbound right turn lanes, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap signal phasing on the right turn lanes. A 2nd northbound right turn lane. Lake Elsinoro Walman Supercenter EIR 95 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations • A 2nd southbound left turn lane and a 2nd right turn lane with overlap signal phasing. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect; the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that the above improvements are not covered by the TIF andlor TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -33: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative n °affie conditions at the intersection of Cambern Avenue / Central Avenue (SR 74) are as, follows: • A 2nd westbound left turn lane and 3rd through lane, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. cumulative traffic conditions at • A 2nd northbound left turn lane and right turn lane, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. are not covered by • Two southbound left turn lanes and a 2nd through lane, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. installation of These improvements prior to the issuance • A 3rd eastbound through lane and a right turn lane, and modify the tragic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall be required to dedicate the right - of -way necessary for the above improvements. In addition, prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF andlor TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -34: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of Cambern Avenue / 3rd Street are as follows: • Install a traffic signal. • Construct a westbound left turn lane and right turn lane. • Construct a northbound left turn lane and a 2nd through lane. • Construct a southbound left turn lane, a 2nd through lane, and a right turn lane. • Construct a 2nd eastbound left turn lane. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF andlor the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF andlor TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of These improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -35: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of Conard Avenue / Central Avenue (SR 74) are as follows: Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EAR 96 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations • A 31,d and 4th wesibormd through lanes and a right turn lane. • A southbound left turn lane and a right turn lane, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. • A 2nd eastbound left turn lane, a 3rd and 41h through lanes and a right turn lane. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect; the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those, fees. To the extent that the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its_fair share toward installation of these improveinews prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -36: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of Rosetta Canyon Drive / Central Avenue (SR 74) are as follows: • A 2nd westbound left turn lane and the 3rd and 4th through lanes. • A 2nd northbound left turn lane, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. • A 41h eastbound through lane and a right turn lane, and modify the lraffc signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect; the applicant shall pay its contribution , for these improvements through its payment of'those.fees. To the extent that the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure TRA -37: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of Riverside Street / Central Avenue (SR 74) are as follows: • A 2nd westbound left turn lane, a 3rd and 41h through lanes and a right turn lane, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. • Two northbound through lanes. • Two southhound left turn lanes, two through lanes and a right turn lane. • Two eastbound left turn lanes, a 3rd and 41h through lanes and a right lure lane, and raodifjr the buff c signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those.fees. To the extent that the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair° share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation¢ Measure TRA -38: The roadway improvements necessary to address the 2035 cumulative traffic conditions at the intersection of Greenwald Avenue / Central Avenue (SR 74) area as follows: Lake Elsinore Walman Smsercenter EIR 97 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations • A 2nd westbound left turn lane, a 3rd through lane and a right turn lane. • A northbound right lure Zane, and modify the irq.fic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn lane. • A southbound right turn lane. • A 2nd eastbound left turn lane and a 3rd through lane, and modify the traffic signal to implement overlap phasing on the right turn laze. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the I'IF andlor the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that the above improvements are not covered by the TIF andlor TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. In addition to the, fair share payments referenced above, the project applicant shall participate in the funding of off -site improvements, including traffic signals that a°e needed to serve traffic conditions through the payment of TUMF, and the City of bake Elsinore Traffic Impact Fees (TIF). These fees are collected as part of a funding mechanism aimed at ensuring that regional highways and arterial expansions keep pace with the projected population increases. Each of the improvements discussed above have been identified as being included as part of TUMF .tending program, City TIFfirndingprogram or fair share contribution. Significance after Mitigation: As stated above, while mitigation will be imposed, and the identified improvement can reduce the impacts to less than significant, it is unknown when all of the required funding for the improvements outlined above will be completed. In addition, with many of the subject improvements, Caltrans would be required to issue permits and approvals. Therefore, the City cannot control the completion and timing of the measures. For this reason, the DEIR assumes that the impacts will remain significant unless and until the improvements outlined above are completed. Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into the proposed project which will reduce potentially significant effects on the environment; however, there are no feasible mitigation measures available that will lessen these significant impacts to a less - than - significant level. In addition, some of the changes and alterations identified in the mitigation measures are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency ( Caltrans) and not the City. Such changes and alterations can and should be adopted by such other agency. Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that with implementation of the project, all roadways within the study area would be expected to have substantial traffic volumes and most of the intersection analysis locations would require improvements. Twenty -five of the 32 study area intersections would experience unacceptable LOS (i.e., LOS E or LOS F) during one or more of the peak hours under With Project conditions. As shown in DEIR Table 4.11 -16, the proposed project would contribute to significant cumulative impacts, as described below. The implementation of the improvements described in the mitigation measures would reduce the project's impacts to less - than - significant levels. However, as discussed below, Lake Elsinore Walmart Srram enter EIR 98 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations the timing of construction of the improvements in many cases is uncertain as it will take time to accumulative the funding necessary for the improvements. In addition, some of the improvements would be within the jurisdiction of other public agencies which the City does not control. Thus, in some cases, significant impact could exist even though the applicant for this particular project has made a contribution towards the improvement and satisfied its obligation with regard to the measures. For those reasons, without successful implementation of improvements identified in the mitigation measures, the proposed project could result in exceedances of the Thresholds of Significance. At intersection W. Graham Avenue/Nortb Main Street (SR 74) ( 42) — addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid- day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -12 would reduce impacts to less - than - significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIT and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. however, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection East Lakeshore Drive /Diamond Drive ( 0) — addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -13 would reduce impacts to less- than - significant Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, this DEIR assumes that the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Gunnerson Street / Riverside Drive (SR 74) ( #4) — addition of project- generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -9 (in addition to Mitigation Measure TRA -2) would reduce impacts to less- than - significant However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Collier Avenue / Riverside Drive (SR 74) ( #5) — addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. hnplementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -14 would Lake Elsinore Walmart Sopercenter EIR 99 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations reduce impacts to less -than- significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Collier Avenue / Central Avenue (SR 74) ( #6) — addition of project- generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak homy. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -15 would reduce impacts to less -than- significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Auto Center Drive / Diamond Drive ( #7) — Addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -16 would reduce impacts to less- than - significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection I -15 Southbound Ramps/Nichols Road ( #8) — Addition of project- generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -17 would reduce impacts to less- than - significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that Lake Elsinore Walmart Superoenter EMIR 100 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection 1 -15 Southbound Ramps / Central Avenue (SR 74) ( #9) — addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid- day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -18 would reduce impacts to less -than- significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIP and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection I -15 Southbound Ramps / North Main Street ( #10) — addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid- day peak hours. Implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA -19 would reduce impacts to less - than- significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIP and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIP and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection I -15 Southbound Ramps /Railroad Canyon Road ( #11) — this intersection was not analyzed for both Long -term Cumulative (General Plan Buildout Post -2035) Without and With Project traffic conditions due to the proposed new interchange design. However, if the existing diamond interchange remains, it is anticipated it would operate at unacceptable LOS during the peak hours. As such, this impact is considered potentially significant. Addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to unacceptable LOS conditions. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -20 would reduce impacts to less -than- significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercenter FIN 101 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection I -15 Northbound Ramps/Nichols Road ( #12) - addition of project- generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -21 would reduce impacts to less -than- significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection 1 -15 Northbound Ramps / Central Avenue (SR 74) ( 413) - addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid- day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -22 would reduce impacts to less- than - significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection I -15 Northbound Ramps /North Main Street ( #14) - Addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -23 would reduce impacts to less- than - significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection I -15 Northbound Ramps /Railroad Canyon Road ( 415) - this intersection was not analyzed for both Long -term Cumulative (General Plan Buildout Post -2035) Without and With Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 102 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Project traffic conditions due to the proposed new interchange design. However, if the existing diamond interchange remains, it is anticipated it would operate at unacceptable LOS during the peak hours. As such, this impact is considered potentially significant. Addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to unacceptable LOS conditions. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TILA -24 would reduce impacts to less -than- significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIP and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Dexter Avenue / 11th Street ( #16) — addition of project- generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -25 would reduce impacts to less- than - significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Dexter Avenue /Central Avenue (SR 74) ( #I7) — this intersection was not analyzed for both Long -term Cumulative (General Plan I3uildout Post -2035) Without and With Project traffic conditions due to the proposed access restriction to right -in /right -out only. However, if the existing full- access intersection remains, it is anticipated it would operate at unacceptable LOS during the peak hours. As such, this impact is considered potentially significant. Addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to unacceptable LOS conditions. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -26 would reduce impacts to less -than- significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 103 Environmental findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations As shown in Table 4.11 -16 above, at intersection Dexter Avenue / Crane Street ( 419) — addition of project - generated traffic would cause the level of service to degrade from an acceptable LOS D or better to an unacceptable LOS F during the PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -28 would reduce impacts to less - than - significant. The applicant shall be required to install the stop control measures deemed necessary by the City Engineer as described in the measure. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay its fair share toward installation traffic signal pursuant to the formula described in Mitigation Measure TRA -28. A signal may be warranted before there is sufficient funding for the signal. It will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the traffic signal, if it does become warranted. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Dexter Avenue / 3rd Street ( #20) — Addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -29 would reduce impacts to less -than- significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Dexter Avenue / 2nd Street ( 921) — addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -30 would reduce impacts to less - than- significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIP and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMP, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Camino del Norte / North Main Street ( 422) — addition of project- generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -31 would reduce impacts to less- than - significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIP and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements arc not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. Thus, Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenler EIR 104 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Summerhill Drive / Railroad Canyon Road ( #23) -- Addition of project- generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -32 would reduce impacts to less- than - significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Cambern Avenue / Central Avenue (SR 74) ( #25) — Addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -33 would reduce impacts to less- than - significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Cambern Avenue / 3rd Street ( #28) — Addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -34 would reduce impacts to less- than - significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Conard Avenue / Central Avenue (SR 74) ( #29) — addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -35 would reduce impacts to less- than - significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 105 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or "TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. FIowever, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City camiot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Rosetta Canyon Drive / Central Avenue (SR 74) ( #30) — Addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS E conditions during the AM peak hour and to LOS F conditions during the PM peak hour. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -36 would reduce impacts to less - than - significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIP and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIP and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Riverside Street / Central Avenue (SR 74) ( #31) — addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid -day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -37 would reduce impacts to less- than- significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. At intersection Greenwald Avenue / Central Avenue (SR 74) ( #32) — addition of project - generated traffic would contribute to LOS F conditions during the AM, PM and Saturday mid- day peak hours. Implementation of the improvements described in Mitigation Measure TRA -38 would reduce impacts to less - than - significant. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if the above improvements are covered by the TIF and /or the TUMF in effect, the applicant shall pay its contribution for these improvements through its payment of those fees. To the extent that any of the above improvements are not covered by the TIF and /or TUMF, the applicant shall contribute its fair share toward installation of these improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. However, it will take time to assemble the necessary funds to implement the improvement. In addition, because Caltrans has jurisdiction over the intersection, the City cannot guarantee that the improvement will be made. Thus, even though the applicant will help to fund Lake Elsinore Walman Sm ercenter EIF 106 Environmental Flntlings and Statement of Overriding Considerations these improvements, the significant impact will occur until such time as the improvements are completed. References: EIR pages 4.11 -37 through 4.11 -67. e. Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to, level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. Mitigation: TRA -1 through TRA -38 Finding /Facts in Support of the Finding: Based upon the analysis presented in the EIR and considering the information contained in the Record of Proceedings, the City Council hereby finds that impacts are significant and unavoidable. In addition, some of the changes and alterations identified in the mitigation measures are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency (Caltrans) and not the City. Such changes and alterations can and should be adopted by such other agency. Interstate 15 and State Route 74 (Central Avenue) are recognized as key transportation facilities within the study area that are designated as part of the Riverside County Congestion Management Program (CMP). The Riverside County Transportation Commission (ROTC) has adopted LOS E as the minimum standard for intersections and segments along the CMP system of Highways and Roadways. However, for the purposes of this traffic impact analysis, LOS D is considered to be the limit of acceptable traffic operations for the I -15 Freeway mainline segments and ramp junctions and for intersections along Central Avenue (SR 74). The proposed project's impacts (conflicts with the RCTC's CMP) are described under Impact 4.11 -2 (Baseline and Near -Term Cumulative conditions) and Impact 4.11 -3 (Long -Term Cumulative conditions) as significant. The improvements described in the mitigation measures would reduce those impacts to less - than - significant levels if implemented. While mitigation will be imposed, and the identified improvement can reduce the impacts to less than significant, it is unknown when all of the required funding for the improvements outlined above will be completed. In addition, with many of the subject improvements, Caltrans would be required to issue permits and approvals. Therefore, the City cannot control the completion and timing of the measures. For this reason, the DEIR assumes that the impacts will remain significant unless and until the improvements outlined above are completed. References: EIR page 4.11 -67. 4.5. Findings Regarding Alternatives to the Project CEQA requires that an EIR consider a reasonable range of feasible alternatives (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(a)). According to the State CEQA Guidelines, alternatives should be those that would attain most of the basic project objectives and avoid or substantially lessen one or more significant effects of the project (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6). The "range of alternatives" is governed by the "rule of reason," which requires the EIR to set forth Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercenter EIR 107 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations only those alternatives necessary to permit an informed and reasoned choice by the lead agency and to foster meaningful public participation (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(f)). CEQA also requires the feasibility of alternatives be considered. Section 15126.6(f)(1) states that among the factors that may be taken into account in determining feasibility are: site suitability; economic viability; availability of infrastructure; general plan consistency; other plans and regulatory limitations; jurisdictional boundaries; and (when evaluating alternative project locations) whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control, or otherwise have access to an alternative site. Furthermore, an EIR need not consider an alternative whose effects could not be reasonably identified, whose implementation is remote or speculative, or that would not achieve the basic project objectives. The alternatives addressed in the EIR were identified in consideration of the following factors: The extent to which the alternative could avoid or substantially lessen the identified significant environmental effects of the proposed project The extent to which the alternative could accomplish basic objectives of the proposed project The feasibility of the alternative The requirement of the State CEQA Guidelines to consider a "no project" alternative Alternatives Considered but Eliminated Alternatives may be eliminated from detailed consideration in an EIR if they fail to meet most of the project objectives, are infeasible, or do not avoid or substantially reduce any significant environmental effects (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 115126.6(c)). Alternatives that are remote or speculative, or the effects of which cannot be reasonably predicted, also do not need to be considered (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 151269f)(3)). As allowed by CEQA, the lead agency may make an initial determination as to which alternatives are feasible and warrant further consideration and which are infeasible (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15125.6(f)(3)). Accordingly, expansion of the existing Walmart was analyzed and determined to not be a feasible alternative. The existing Walmart store is located in the City, within a shopping center at the southeast corner of hiterstate 15 and Railroad Canyon Road and gains access directly from Grape Street. The shopping center is situated on a hill that is bounded by Railroad Canyon Road on the north and east and Grape Street on the west. Due to the restricted size of the existing property, including large slopes down to Railroad Canyon Road, the buildable portion for the site cannot be expanded to accommodate the proposed project and still meet the demand of the Lake Elsinore Market area. Alternatives Selected for Analysis Alternatives were selected because they would either reduce project - related impacts or describe what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future on the project site, and were selected for further analysis representing a reasonable range of alternatives that would be feasible from a development perspective. These alternatives include: Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EtR 108 Environmental findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Alterative 1: No Project /No Build. Under this alternative, no development would occur on the project site, although the project site has General Plan Land Use designations of C -2 (General Commercial) and CMU (Commercial Mixed Use) and zoning of General Commercial and Commercial Mixed Use. Under Alternative 1, the project site would remain vacant and undeveloped, although it is expected that it would be developed at some time in the future consistent with the underlying general plan and zoning designations. The specific alternative development options at the project site in the foreseeable future are too speculative. Alternative 2: Walmart Supercenter with Gas Station. Under this alternative the Walmart Supercenter would be developed, and an outlot (Pad 1) would be developed with a gas station and car wash. The total building area square footage would be 157,587 SF or four percent of the total building area square footage. One outlot would include a gas station with 16 fueling stations, an approximately 3,100 SF convenience store and a drive - through car wash. The two outlots that would not be developed under this alternative would remain in its existing unimproved condition. Alternative 3: Walmart Supercenter Only. Under this alternative, all of the outlots would be eliminated and only the Walmart Supercenter would be developed. Thus, the total square footage of the developed project site would be 154,487 SF. The three outlots that would not be developed under this alternative would remain in its existing unimproved condition. a) No Project /No Build (No Project Alternative) The No Project/No Build Alternative assumes that the proposed project is not developed. The project site would remain in its current condition and would remain vacant. The No Project/No Build Alternative is consistent with Section 15126.6(e) of the State CEQA Guidelines, and evaluates the existing conditions of the project site at the time the NOP was published, as well as what could occur in the foreseeable future if the proposed project were not approved. In this case, the project site is a vacant and available property without any significant environmental or physical constraints. Further, the project site is fully served by directly available utilities and supporting public services. The project site is accessible by existing regional and local roadways. Areas around the project site are developed with residential and commercial uses. The City General Plan Land Use Map designates the project site as General Commercial and Commercial Mixed Use. The Land Use chapter describes that the General Commercial land use designation provides for retail, services, restaurants, professional and administrative offices, hotels and motels, mixed -use projects, public and quasi - public uses, and similar and compatible uses. The FAR shall not exceed 0.40. The Commercial Mixed Use General Plan Land Use is intended for a mix of residential and non - residential uses within a single proposed development area, with an emphasis on retail, service, civic, and professional office uses. The floor area ratio (FAR) for non - residential uses is 0.80:1 and a minimum of 50% of the total floor area shall be commercial uses. Given the project site's General Commercial and Commercial Mixed -Use General Plan Land Use designations; availability of infrastructure /services, lack of environmental or physical Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 109 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations constraints; and proximity of urban development, it is unlikely that the project site would remain vacant or in a "No Build" condition indefinitely. Failure to proceed with the proposed project would likely not result in preservation of existing environmental conditions, and the practical result of the project's non - approval would be the development of another type or configuration of retail or commercial uses within the project site. Nonetheless, in order to be conservative, the No Project/No Build Alternative assumes the site remains vacant. Summary of Major Environmental Effects The No Project/No Build Alternative would maintain the undeveloped /vacant character of the project site and no changes would occur. Under the No Project Alternative, all of the proposed project's significant and unavoidable impacts would be avoided, and its potentially significant impacts would not occur. While the No Project Alternative would avoid all of the proposed project's significant unavoidable impacts and have less impact on all environmental issue areas. This alternative would not advance any of the project objectives. Furthermore, this alternative would not realize the project benefits of increased commercial retail opportunities, additional employment opportunities, and new tax revenues. Feasibility This alternative is infeasible. It would not meet the project objectives. It is not economically feasible as it is unreasonable to assume that the project site would remain undeveloped in an area surrounded by development. Comparative Merits Implementation of the No Project Alternative would avoid the environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of the project. However, this alternative would not meet the project objectives because it would not provide retail and commercial uses that would provide employment opportunities and economic benefits to the City. b) Alternative 2 — Walmart Supercenter with Gas Station Under this alternative the Walmart Supercenter would be developed and all outlet would be developed with a gas station and associated car wash. The total building square footage would be 157,587 SF. The outlet (Pad 1) would include a gas station with 16 fueling stations, an approximately 3,100 SF convenience store and a drive - through car wash. The project would not develop the two outlets designated for restaurant uses. Environmental Analysis Aesthetics Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter FIR 110 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The proposed project was found to have less- than - significant impacts on the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings, and would introduce new sources of light and glare. Alternative 2 would result in development of the site with a Walmart Supercenter building, including a seasonal outdoor garden center, a gas station with a convenience store and an associated drive - through car wash. The Walmart Supercenter would not be reduced in size from the proposed project. Similar to the proposed project, this alternative would change the visual character of the site by adding a commercial building and gas station; however, the overall development including building mass and scale, and surface parking would be similar to the proposed project and compatible with the nearby commercial development to the northwest and southwest. Additionally, because of the removal of two outlots, this Alternative would include less light and glare due to a reduction in commercial buildings. However, the visual change in character and site quality from the existing project site condition to that of Alternative 2 would result in similar impacts as the proposed project. Air Quality This Alternative would develop a total of 157,587 building SF, including the Walmart Supercenter and gas station. From a construction emissions perspective, this Alternative would not include as much grading, paving, and trenching as the proposed project and would have a lower level of construction building intensity. From an operational emissions perspective, this alternative would generate fewer daily hips relative to the proposed project, due to the removal of the two restaurants. This would result in fewer emissions of criteria pollutants on a daily basis. The proposed project would result in NOx emissions of 148.33 in 2015 (the most intense construction year). Alternative 2 would result in reduced NOx emissions because there would be less development intensity at the project site during construction. However, even under Alternative 2, the entire site would be graded. Additionally, the emissions of localized impacts, including odor, under the proposed project all resulted in a less - than - significant impact. As Alterative 2 reduces the amount of onsite uses and emissions, these impacts would only be further reduced and would therefore result in less - than - significant impacts. Biological Resources Development activities associated with the proposed project were found to have the potential to adversely affect special- status species, though these effects were determined to be less-than- significant with mitigation. Other biological resources impacts were found to be less -than- significant. This alternative would result in an amount of ground disturbance and tree removal that is similar to that of the proposed project. As such, this alternative would implement mitigation for special - status species similar to that of the proposed project. Therefore, this alternative would have similar biological resource impacts to the proposed project. Cultural Resources Lake Elsinore Waini Sukercenler EIR Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Alternative 2 would not develop the outlets with restaurant land uses. However, the potential to impact unknown archaeological and /or paleontological resources would still remain, and previously undiscovered artifacts or fossils could be uncovered during excavation or construction activities related to development of this Alternative. Therefore, Alternative 2 could adversely affect archaeological or paleontological resources, similar to the proposed project, which would be reduced to a less- than - significant level with implementation of mitigation measures. Therefore, impacts related to cultural resources would be similar to the impacts of the proposed project, and would be less- than - significant with mitigation. Energy Energy consumption related to construction and operation of Alternative 2 would be slightly less than to the proposed project, due to the reduced developed area. However, as the amount of retail and restaurant square footage would be four percent less under the Alternative 2, the energy consuming activities of the proposed project would be reduced. Moreover, restaurant trips would be eliminated, thereby reducing petroleum consumption. Therefore, Alternative 2 would result in similar but reduced effects related to energy consumption. Geology and Soils Under Alternative 2, development of the project site would have similar effects related to geology, soils, and seismicity as the proposed project. Alternative 2 would result in fewer buildings and structures when compared to the proposed project, which in turn would result in less exposure of people to seismic hazards. However, both Alternative 2 and the proposed project would still expose similar areas to erosion during construction and would expose additional people and structures to earthquake hazards compared to existing conditions. Therefore, Alternative 2 would result in similar impacts related to geology, soils, and seismicity. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Thus, the temporary short -term construction pollutant emissions that would be generated under Alternative 2 would be slightly less than the proposed project because two of the three outlots would not be developed and less construction equipment would be required. However, even under Alternative 2, the entire site would be graded. Given that the restaurant land uses would be eliminated from the project, mobile emissions sources during project operation would be reduced. Under Alternative 2, GHG emissions of the proposed project would be reduced. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ2 and AQ -3 would reduce energy and water consumption, similar to the proposed project. GHG emission impacts related to construction from Alternative 2 would be similar to the proposed project, and less - than - significant with implementation of mitigation measures. hydrology and Water Quality Although Alternative 2 would reduce some construction activities from the proposed project, due to the removal of the two restaurant outlots, Alternative 2 would still result in similar construction impacts compared to the proposed project because this alternative would still involve ground disturbing activities and soil impacts would occur. Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would be required to implement water quality BMPs that would treat water Lake Elsinore Walmart Suldercenter EIR 112 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations discharging from the site. Thus, construction related hydrology and water quality impacts from Alternative 2 would be similar to those of the proposed project. From an operational perspective, pollutants generated under Alternative 2 from commercial /retail uses would also be similar to the proposed project and would also be required to implement water quality BMPs and LID measures that would improve water quality discharging from the site similar to the proposed project; thus water quality from an operational perspective would be similar to the proposed project under Alternative 2. Because development of two outlots would not occur, the total amount of impervious area would be reduced by this Alternative, which would lessen the severity of impacts to water quality and drainage. The proposed project was determined to have less- than - significant impacts to groundwater supplies. Alternative would result in similar impacts and would have the same storinwater collection and conveyance options as the proposed project. Land Use Alternative 2 would develop a 154,487 SF Walmart Supercenter including a seasonal garden center, and a gas station and an associated carwash. This alternative is similar to the proposed project and would have similar impacts associated with land use and planning. Noise Similar to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would result in short -term construction- related noise impacts due to substantial temporary increases of the ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. While this Alternative would decrease the commercial space developed at the project site, it is anticipated that construction - related noise levels generated during a peak day at the site would be similar to those generated by the proposed project. As such, similar to the proposed project, implementation of Mitigation Measures NOIA and N0I -2 would be required to reduce construction noise levels. However, because of the reduced development under this alternative, the overall duration of the construction activities would be shorter than the proposed project. Nevertheless, construction noise impacts under Alternative 2 would similar the proposed project. In addition, because the construction equipment used during a peak construction day under this alternative would the same as those used by the proposed project, impacts associated with vibration during construction activities would be similar. With respect to operational noise levels, increases in ambient noise levels would occur from the on -site noise sources (i.e., dock activities, a trash compactor, roof -top air conditioning units, shopping cart carousels, parking lot vehicle movements, and car wash activities) and project - generated traffic on the local roadway system. However, because the proposed project would result in less - than - significant operational noises, a reduction of the same on -site uses would also result in a less - than- significaut impacts. Therefore, operational noise impacts related to Alternative 2 would be the same as the proposed project. Public Services Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercenter FIR 113 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The proposed project would not have the potential to adversely impact police or fire protection services. Alternative 2 would reduce the commercial space developed in the project area by removing the two outlots dedicated restaurant uses. Because implementation of this alternative would result in less developed building space and patrons than the proposed project, it would have a reduced demand for fire and police protection services. Therefore, impacts from Alternative 2 related to public services would be reduced the proposed project. Transportation and Traffic As described in Section 4.11, Transportation and Traffic, six intersections currently operate at LOS E or worse during the peak hours. These include the intersections of East Lakeshore Drive / Diamond Drive, I -15 Southbound Ramps / Railroad Canyon Road, I -15 Northbound Ramps / Nichols Road, and Summerhill Drive / Railroad Canyon Road. The addition of project- generated traffic would cause the average delay to increase during the peak hour by more than the City's threshold of significance. Under the proposed project, even with the implementation of mitigation measures impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Alternative 2 would decrease the amount of commercial space developed in the project area by four percent compared to the proposed project. This would result in a total building area of 157,587 SF. This alternative would also reduce daily trips by 342 trips. However, even with the trip reduction impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Urban Decay Alternative 2 would develop a 154,487 SF Walmart Supercenter, a gas station and a convenience store (3,100 SF). This Alternative would not develop 6,800 SF relative to the proposed project, which is a six percent reduction in area. However, this Alternative is not anticipated to change the size /scope of the proposed Walmart Supercenter. As a result, this Alternative would be expected to generate similar sales as the proposed project's capture of sales from competing retailers. Based on the Urban Decay Analysis for the proposed project, competing grocery stores and retail centers would not close as a direct or indirect result of the development of this Alternative, and urban decay would not be a foreseeable consequence. Therefore, this Alternative would have urban decay impacts similar to the proposed project. Utilities and Service Systems The proposed project would not significantly impact stormwater drainage facilities or water supplies. Alternative 2 would include the development of the Walmart Supercenter with develop of a gas station and convenience store within an outlot. Areas within the project site not utilized for retail or parking space would remain undeveloped. The reduction of six percent would be expected to result in less consumption of water, and less generation of wastewater and solid waste. Thus, this Alternative would demand fewer resources and generate less effluent, which would lessen impacts. This Alternative would result in less -than- significant impacts on utilities similar to the proposed project. Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercenter EIR 114 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Conclusion Compared to the proposed project, Alternative 2 would reduce impacts to construction noise and traffic; however, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Less -than- significant impacts related to aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, GHG emissions, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, operational noise, public services, and urban decay would be similar under Alternative 3 as compared to the proposed project. hnpacts related to air quality, construction noise and traffic would be reduced under the Alternative compared to the proposed project; however, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Therefore, the Reduced Project Alternative would reduce, but not eliminate the significant and unavoidable impacts that would result from the proposed project. Feasibility This alternative is infeasible. It fails to meet two of project's key objectives. It leave two of the outlet parcels undeveloped and fails to utilize their development potential. It fails to result in a cohesive shopping center that allows shoppers to complete multiple shopping opportunities in one stop. It is also economically infeasible, since it leaves valuable parcels with high visibility at critical locations undeveloped. Given the value of the property in this location and the cost of developing a shopping center to leave such a substantial portion of the site undeveloped would be inconsistent with the City's goals and objectives. Comparative Merits Implementation of Alternative 2 could meet the project objectives because it would provide retail and commercial uses that would provide employment opportunities and economic benefits to the City. However, this alternative would not eliminate the significant and unavoidable impacts that would occur with the proposed project. C) Alternative 3 — Walmart Supercenter Standalone Under the Walmart Supercenter Standalone Alternative all of the outlets would be eliminated from the project development. The total building square footage would be 154,487 Sr. This alternative would eliminate all development of the outlets. Environmental Analysis Aesthetics The proposed project was found to have less- than - significant impacts on the existing visual character of the project site and its surroundings, and would introduce new sources of substantial light and glare. Alternative 3 would result in development of one Walmart Supercenter building with a seasonal outdoor garden center. The Walmart Supercenter would not be smaller in size (154,487 SP); however, the outlets would not be developed with commercial buildings. Similar to the proposed Lake Elsinore Walman Supercenter EAR 115 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations project, this alternative would change the visual character of the site by adding a commercial building; however, the overall scale and massing and surface parking of the Walmart Supercenter would be similar to the surrounding development. Additionally, this Alternative would add less light and glare to the project site and surrounding vicinity. However, the visual change in character and site quality from the existing project site condition to that of the Alternative 3 would result in similar impacts as the proposed project. Air Quality Alternative 3 would develop a 154,487 SF Walmart Supercenter. From a construction emissions perspective, this Alternative would not include as much, paving and trenching as the proposed project and would have a lower level of construction intensity. From an operational emissions perspective, this alternative would generate fewer daily trips relative to the proposed project development that includes outlets, resulting in fewer emissions of criteria pollutants on a daily basis. However, this alternative would still result in significant emission. The proposed project would result in NOx emissions of 148.33 in 2015 (the most intense construction year). Alternative 3 would result in reduced NOx emissions because there would be no development of the outlets at the project site. Additionally, the emissions of localized impacts, including odor, under the proposed project all resulted in a less - than - significant impact. As Alternative 3 reduces the amount of on -site uses and emissions, these impacts would only be further reduced and would therefore result in less -than- significant impacts. Biological Resources Development activities associated with the proposed project were found to be less -than- significant with mitigation on special status species. Other impacts were found to be less -than- significant. Alternative 3 would result in similar ground disturbing activities and would still require tree removals. As such, similar to the proposed project this Alternative would be required to implement mitigation for special- status species. Therefore, this Alternative would have biological resources impacts similar to the proposed project. Cultural Resources Alternative 3 would require less ground disturbing activities than the proposed project, due to the outlot development areas remaining undisturbed. Nevertheless, the potential to impact unknown archaeological and /or paleontological resources would still remain under Alternative 3, and previously undiscovered artifacts or fossils could be uncovered during excavation or construction activities. Therefore, this alternative could adversely affect archaeological or paleontological resources, such as the proposed project, which would be reduced to a less -than- significant level with implementation of mitigation measures. Therefore, under Alternative 3, impacts related to cultural resources would be similar to the impacts of the proposed project. Energy Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 116 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Energy consumption related to construction and operation of Alternative 3 would be slightly less than to the proposed project, due to the reduced developed area. However, as the amount of retail and restaurant square footage would be six percent less under the Alternative 3, the energy consuming activities of the proposed project would be reduced. Moreover, restaurant trips and gas station trips would be eliminated, thereby reducing petroleum consumption. Therefore, Alternative 3 would result in similar but reduced effects related to energy consumption. Geology and Soils Under Alternative 3, development of the project site would have similar effects related to geology, soils, and seismicity as the proposed project. Alternative 3 would result in fewer building structures when compared to the proposed project, which in turn would result in less exposure of people to seismic hazards. However, both the proposed project and Alternative 3 would require ground disturbing activities and expose large areas to erosion during construction and would expose additional people and structures to earthquake hazards compared to existing conditions. Therefore, Alternative 3 would result in similar but reduced effects related to geology, soils, and seismicity. Greenhouse Gas Emissions GHG emission impacts related to construction from Alternative 3 would be slightly less than to the proposed project, due to the reduced construction area. However, as the amount of retail and restaurant square footage would be six percent less under the Alternative 3, the GHG emissions of the proposed project would be reduced. Moreover, mobile emissions sources generated from the restaurant trips would be eliminated. Thus, the temporary short -term construction pollutant emissions generated under Alternative 3 would be less than the proposed project. Similar to the proposed project, implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ -2 and AQ -3, would reduce energy and water consumption related to project development. Alternative 3 would have reduced impacts compared to than the proposed project related to GHG emissions. Hydrology and Water Quality Although Alternative 3 would develop a smaller project footprint (six percent less that the proposed project), overall it would still require similar construction activities and would result in similar construction impacts compared to the proposed project. As a result the Alternative 3 would also be require to implement water quality BMPs that would improve water quality discharging from the site,. Therefore, construction impacts related hydrology and water quality from Alternative 3 would be similar to those of the proposed project. Under Alternative 3 there would be less impervious surface areas due to the reduced development footprint, which would lessen the severity of impacts to water quality and drainage. Pollutants generated under the Alternative 3 from commercial /retail uses would be similar to the proposed project and would also be required to implement operational water quality BMPs and LID measures that would improve water quality discharging from the site similar to the proposed project. Thus, operational water quality impacts \would be reduced but similar under Alternative 3 compared to the proposed project. Land Use Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter FIR 117 Environmental findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Alternative 3 would develop a 154,487 SF Walmart Supercenter including a seasonal garden center. Nevertheless, this alternative is similar to the proposed project and would have similar impacts associated with land use and planning. Noise Similar to the proposed project, the Alternative 3 would result in short-term construction- related noise impacts due to a substantial temporary increase in the ambient noise levels at the project site. While this alternative would reduce the commercial space developed at the project site by nine percent, it is anticipated that construction- related noise levels generated during a peak day at the site would be similar to those generated by the proposed project on a peak construction day. As such, similar to the proposed project, implementation of Mitigation Measures NOI -1 and NOI -2 would be required to reduce construction noise. However, because of the reduced development under this alternative, the overall duration of the construction activities would be shorter than that for the proposed project. Consequently, construction noise impacts under the Alternative 3 would be reduced compared to the proposed project due to its shorter construction duration. However, because the construction equipment used during a peak construction day under this Alternative would the same as those used by the proposed project, impacts associated with vibration during construction activities would be similar to the proposed project. With respect to operational noise levels, similar to the proposed project, increases in ambient noise levels would occur from the on -site noise sources (i.e., dock activities, a trash compactor, roof -top air conditioning units, shopping cart carousels, and parking lot vehicle movements) and project- generated traffic on the local roadway system. Because the proposed project would result in less- than - significant operational noises, a reduction of the same on -site uses would also result in a less- than - significant impact. Therefore, operational noise impacts related to the Alternative 3 would be the similar but reduced from those of the proposed project. Public Services The proposed project would not have the potential to adversely impact police or fire protection services. Alternative 3 would reduce the developed area at the site by six percent compared to the proposed project. This would result in a total of 154,487 SF of commercial retail space. Because implementation of this Alternative would result in a less building space and patrons than the proposed project, it would reduce the demand for fire and police protection. Therefore, impacts from the Alternative 3 related to public services would be reduced from the proposed prej ect. Transportation and Traffic As described in Section 4.11, Transportation and Traffic, six intersections currently operate at LOS E or worse during the peak hours. These include the intersections of East Lakeshore Drive / Diamond Drive, I -15 Southbound Ramps / Railroad Canyon Road, I -15 Northbound Ramps / Nichols Road, and Summerhill Drive / Railroad Canyon Road. The addition of project - generated traffic would cause the average delay to increase during the peak hour by more than the City's threshold of significance. Under the proposed project, even with the implementation of mitigation measures impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. I are Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 118 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Alternative 3 would reduce the amount of developed building at the project site by six percent compared to the proposed project. This alternative would also reduce daily trips by 4,851 trips. Nevertheless, even with the overall trip reduction traffic impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Urban Decay Alternative 3 would only develop a 154,487 SF Walmart Supercenter, which is a six percent reduction of developed commercial buildings at the project site. However, this Alternative is not anticipated to change the size /scope of the proposed Walmart Supercenter. As a result, this Alternative would still be expected to generate similar sales as the proposed project's capture of sales from competing retailers. Based on the Urban Decay Analysis for the proposed project, competing grocery stores and retail centers would not close as a direct or indirect result of the development of this Alternative, and urban decay would not be a foreseeable consequence. Therefore, this Alternative would have similar urban decay impacts to the proposed project. Utilities and Service Systems The proposed project would not significantly impact stormwater drainage facilities or water supplies. Alternative 3 would include the development of the Walmart Supercenter without development of the outlots for commercial /retail uses. The percent reduced project would result in a reduced consumption of water and would generate less wastewater and solid waste. Thus, this Alternative would result in a reduced demand for resources and generate less effluent and water, reducing thereby reducing impacts of the proposed project. This Alternative would result in reduced impacts on utilities similar from the proposed project. Conclusion Compared to the proposed project the Walmart Supercenter Only Alternative would reduce impacts from the proposed project to air quality, construction noise and traffic. Less -than- significant impacts related to aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, GHG emissions, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, operational noise, public services, and urban decay would be similar under Alternative 3 as compared to the proposed project. Impacts related to air quality, construction noise and traffic would be reduced under the Alternative 3 compared to the proposed project; however, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Therefore, the Alternative 3 would reduce, but not eliminate the significant and unavoidable impacts that would result from the proposed project. Feasibility This alternative is infeasible. It fails to meet two of project's key objectives. It leave all of the outlot parcels undeveloped and fails to utilize their development potential. It fails to result in a cohesive shopping center that allows shoppers to complete multiple shopping opportunities in one stop. It is also economically infeasible, since it leaves valuable parcels with high visibility at critical locations undeveloped. Given the value of the property in this location and the cost of Lake Elsinore Walman Supercenter EIR 119 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations developing a shopping center to leave such a substantial portion of the site undeveloped would be inconsistent with the City's goals and objectives. Comparative Merits Implementation of Alternative 3 could meet the project's basic objectives because it would provide retail and commercial uses that would provide employment opportunities and economic benefits to the City. However, this alternative would not eliminate the significant and unavoidable impacts that would occur with the proposed project. Environmentally Superior Alternative The Environmentally Superior Alternative would be the No Project/No Build Alternative because no construction activities and no new commercial land uses would occur. The project site would remain undeveloped and significant air quality impacts that would occur by implementation of the proposed project would not occur. However, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) states: The "no project" analysis shall discuss the existing conditions at the time the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice of preparation is published, at the time environmental analysis is commenced, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services. If the environmentally superior alternative is the "no project" alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA, because the No Project/No Build Alternative has been identified as the Environmentally Superior Alternative under CEQA, the Environmentally Superior Alternative among the other alternatives would be that the Walmart Supercenter Standalone Only Alternative which would involve reduction of the proposed project by nine percent. The Walmart Supercenter Standalone Only Alternative (Alternative 3) would develop a 154,487 SF Walmart Supercenter with seasonal garden center. As previously analyzed, activity related to the Walmart Supercenter Standalone Only Alternative (Alternative 3) would be less and, consequently, the overall impacts from implementation of this alternative would be less than those of the proposed project. However, the Walmart Supercenter Standalone Only Alternative (Alternative 3) would not reduce significant unavoidable air quality, construction noise and traffic impacts to a less -than- significant level. Therefore, the Walmart Supercenter Standalone Alternative (Alternative 3) would result in the same type of significant and unavoidable impacts that would result from the proposed project. CEQA does not require the lead agency (City) to approve the environmentally superior alternative. Conversely, CEQA requires that an EIR consider a reasonable range of feasible alternatives (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(a)) and then the lead agency may elect to approve the project or any of the analyzed alternatives; in addition, the lead agency may also elect not to approve the project or any of its alternatives. This alternatives analysis has been prepared for the City to consider environmentally superior alternatives and also determine Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 120 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations whether the benefits of the project or its alternatives outweigh the potential environmental impacts. Table 3 -1 below provides a summary comparison of the alternatives to the proposed project. Table 3 -2, below provides a summary of the alternatives and the proposed project's ability to meet the project objectives. The City hereby incorporates Tables 6 -1 and 6 -2 from the DEIR. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 121 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 5. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 5.1. Unavoidable Significant Environmental Effects The Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter Project has identified and discussed significant effects that may occur as a result of the proposed project. With implementation of the proposed project including the project mitigation measures identified for each significant impact, most of the potentially significant impacts can be reduced to a level considered less than significant, except for unavoidable significant impacts as discussed below and in Section 3.0 of the Findings. The City has made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate or substantially mitigate the potential impacts resulting from the proposed project. Impacts, in these and all other cases, have been mitigated to the extent considered feasible. Environmental impacts identified in the Final FIR as potentially significant but which the City finds cannot be fully mitigated to a level of less than significant, despite the imposition of all feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final FIR and set forth herein, are described in this section. a) Transportation and Circulation As described above in Section 4.4, implementation of the project would increase traffic volumes and result in significant impacts identified above. (Impacts 4.11 -2.) Although mitigation will be imposed, and the identified improvement can reduce the impacts to less- than - significant, it is unknown when all of the required funding for the improvements will be completed. In addition, Caltrans would be required to issue permits and approvals. Therefore, the City cannot control the completion and timing of the measures, and thus the impacts will remain significant unless and until the improvements are complete. Development of the project, in combination with other reasonably foreseeable development, could conflict with level of service standards for the local circulation system. (Impact 4.11 -3.) Although mitigation will be imposed, and the identified improvement can reduce the impacts to less than significant, it is unknown when all of the required funding for the improvements will be completed. In addition, Caltrans would be required to issue permits and approvals. Therefore, the City cannot control the completion and timing of the measures, therefore, the impacts will remain significant unless and until the improvements are complete. Similarly, development of the project could conflict with the local applicable congestion management program. (Impact 4.11 -4.) While mitigation will be imposed, and although the identified improvement can reduce the impacts to less than significant, it is unknown when all of the required funding for the improvements will be completed. In addition, with many of the improvements, Caltrans would be required to issue permits and approvals. Therefore, the City cannot control the completion and timing of the measures and the impacts will remain significant unless and until the improvements are completed. b) Noise Implementation of the proposed project would result in the use of mobile construction equipment at the project site which would result in noise levels that exceed the City's noise standard of 60 Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercenter FIR 122 Environmental findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations dBA Lmax at single - family residential uses for construction activities occurring for more than 10 days, despite implementation of mitigation. C) Air Quality The proposed project would not be consistent with the AQMP since it would result in the development of a more intense land use. "Therefore, the project would conflict with, or obstruct, implementation of the AQMP and this impact would be significant. The proposed project is anticipated to exceed the thresholds of significance established by the SCAQMD for emissions of VOCs and NOx even with the incorporation of all feasible Mitigation Measures emissions of VOC and NOx will not be reduced to below significance levels. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a significant impact for VOCs and NOx for project - related regional operational emissions. Operational emissions associated with the proposed project would exceed the SCAQMD's thresholds of significance for VOC and NOx even with the implementation of Mitigation Measures. The proposed project could conflict with SCAQMD's air quality planning efforts for nonattainment pollutants and would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in nonattainment pollutants during operations, specifically for ozone precursors VOC and NOx. Therefore, cumulative impacts associated with operational emissions would be significant and unavoidable. 5.2. Overriding Considerations Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(a), the City Council must balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits" of the proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks" in determining whether to approve the project. If the specific benefits of the proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." Having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the proposed project to the extent feasible by adopting the mitigation measures; having considered the entire administrative record on the project; the City Council has weighed the benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation in regards to air quality, noise and transportation and circulation. While recognizing that the unavoidable adverse impacts regarding air quality, noise and transportation and circulation are significant under CEQA thresholds, the City Council finds that the unavoidable adverse impacts that will result from adoption and implementation of the proposed project are acceptable and outweighed by specific social, economic and other benefits of the project. The City Council further finds that except for the proposed project, all other alternatives set forth in the EIR are infeasible because they would prohibit the realization of project objectives and /or of specific economic, social, and other benefits that this City Council finds outweigh any environmental benefits of the alternatives. h1 making this determination, the factors and public benefits specified below were considered. Any one of these reasons is sufficient to justify approval of the proposed project. Thus, even if a court were to conclude that not every reason is supported by substantial evidence, the City Council would be able to stand by its determination that each individual reason is sufficient. The Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter GIR 123 Environmental Finings and Statement of Overriding Consderations substantial evidence supporting the various benefits can be found in the preceding findings, which are incorporated by reference into this section, and in the documents found in the Records of Proceedings, as defined in Section 4.0. The City Council finds that for each of the significant impacts which are subject to a finding under CEQA Section 21081(a)(3), that each of the following social, economic, and environmental benefits of the project, independent of the other benefits, outweigh the potential significant unavoidable adverse impacts and render acceptable each and every one of these unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. Following are the benefits of implementing the proposed project. • The development of a new major retail and commercial center along major roadways and within close proximity to the Interstate 15 (I- 15)/SR -74 interchange to facilitate regional public access and take advantage of the high visibility site to regional travelers. • Development of the vacant unused parcels comprising the project site for retail - commercial uses, consistent with the existing General Plan land use and zoning designations, in a manner that fully utilizes their development potential. • Development of a new major retail and commercial center which takes advantage of existing infrastructure. • Development that will provide local employment opportunities and that will provide economic benefits to the community and the City. • Development of a new retail center with sustainable project features that reduces project impacts on the environment. • Development that provides a full scale grocery use to serve the needs of the local residents. • Development that provides a cohesive shopping center that allows shoppers to complete multiple shopping opportunities in one stop thereby reducing the number of traffic trips. • Development that will expand and provide new retail options, with updated, modern and energy efficient buildings, proximate to local consumers by providing daytime and nighttime shopping opportunities in a safe and secure environment. The Project will include a well -lit parking lot, keeping the site safe for the community. The Walmart will be constructed with a number of enhanced building features such as low -flow restroom facilities, the use of skylights and lighting systems to monitor and maximize natural lighting and the use of LEDs; the reclamation of waste heat from refrigeration, and additional water conservation measures including the use of drought tolerant landscaping. • Generation of increased sales tax, property tax, and other miscellaneous taxes for the City's general fund. 6. CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL FIR The City has reviewed and considered the Final FIR in evaluating the proposed project. The City Council finds that the DEIR is an accurate and objective statement that fully complies with CEQA (California Public Resources Code, Sections 21000 et seq.), the State CEQA Guidelines and the City's Procedures for Implementing the State CEQA Guidelines; that the Final FIR reflects the independent judgment of the City; and that no new significant impacts as defined by Lake Elsinore Walmad Supercenter FIR 124 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 have been identified by the City after circulation of the DEIR which would require recirculation. The City Council certifies the Environmental Impact Report based on the following findings and conclusions: 6.1. Findings The following significant environmental impacts have been identified in the EIR and, although all applicable and feasible mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project, the impacts cannot be mitigated to less — than - significant levels: a) Transportation and Circulation Significant and unavoidable project and cumulative impacts on intersection and roadways in the project vicinity. b) Noise Significant and unavoidable project impacts related to construction noise. C) Air Quality Significant and unavoidable project and cumulative impacts associated with long -term emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx). 6.2. Conclusions I. All significant environmental impacts from the implementation of the proposed project have been identified in the EIR and will be mitigated to less - than - significant levels with implementation of the identified mitigation measures, except for the impacts listed above and described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. 2. Other reasonable alternatives to the proposed project that could feasibly achieve most of the basic objectives of the project have been considered. Some of the alternatives were feasible but did not meet the project objectives; others met the project objectives but were found not to reduce the significant and unavoidable impacts to less than significant. Since the alternatives considered either did not serve to reduce or avoid potentially significant impacts, or because the alternatives offer no feasible means of avoiding the significant effects identified in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the alternatives are rejected in favor of the proposed project. Environmental, economic, social, and other considerations and benefits derived from the development of the proposed project override and make infeasible any alternatives to the project or further mitigation measures beyond those incorporated into the project. Lake Elsinore Walmad Sulderoenter EIR 125 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 7. ADOPTION OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the City as the Lead Agency hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached to these Findings. In the event of any inconsistencies between the mitigation measures as set forth herein and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program shall control. 8. APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT Based on the entire record before the City, including the above Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations and all written and oral evidence presented to the City, the City as the Lead Agency hereby approves the Project with all the mitigation measures and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as set forth in these findings. 9. LOCATION AND CUSTODIAN OF RECORD For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the Project consists of, among other documents, the following documents: • The May 27, 2014 Notice of Preparation (NOP) issued by the City in conjunction with the proposed project. • All comments and correspondence submitted by public agencies and members of the public during a City- hosted public seeping meeting held on June 27, 2014. • The August 2015 DEIR, including appendices and technical studies included or referenced in the August 2015 DEIR. • The Final EIR. • All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the 45 -day public comment period on the DEIR which began on August 28, 2015. • All comments and correspondence submitted by members of the public during a City - hosted public meeting. • All comments and correspondence submitted to the City with respect to the proposed project and the EIR during public hearings held before the Planning Commission and the City Council. • The mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) for the proposed project. • All findings and resolutions adopted by the City decision makers in connection with the proposed project, and all documents cited or referred to therein. • All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents relating to the proposed project. • All documents and information submitted to the City by responsible, trustee, or other public agencies, or by individuals or organizations, in connection with the proposed project, the August 2015 DEIR through the date the City Council approved the proposed proj ect. • Matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to federal, state, and local laws and regulations. • Any documents expressly cited in these findings, in addition to those cited above. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR 126 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations • Any other materials required to be in the Record of Proceedings by Public Resources Code section 21167.6, subdivision (e). The custodian of the record of proceedings is the City of Lake Elsinore Community Development Department, Planning Division, whose office is located at 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530. The City has relied on all of the documents listed above in reaching its decision on the proposed project, even if every document was not formally presented to the City Council decision - makers as part of the City's files generated in connection with the proposed project. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supementer FIR 127 Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations EXHIBIT B (City Council Resolution No. 2015 -087) LAKE ELSINORE WALMART SUPERCENTER EIR MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Introduction This document is the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter Project (SCH #2014051093). This MMRP has been prepared pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the California Public Resources Code, which requires public agencies to "adopt a reporting and monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment." An MMRP is required for the proposed project because the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has identified mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant impact's. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program As the lead agency, the City of Lake Elsinore will be responsible for monitoring compliance with all mitigation measures. Different departments within the City are responsible for aspects of the project. The MMRP identifies the department with the responsibility for ensuring the measure is completed; however, it is expected that one or more departments will coordinate efforts to ensure compliance. The MMRP is presented in tabular form on the following pages. The components of the MMRP are described briefly below: • Mitigation Measure: The mitigation measures are taken from the EIR, in the same order that they appear in the EIR. • Method of Verification: Identifies the method that will be used to confirm that each mitigation measure has been implemented. Timing of Verification: Identifies at which stage of the project the mitigation must be completed. The term construction includes (but is not limited to) site preparation, vegetation clearing, grading, excavation, and building activities. Lake Elsinore Walmart Supercenter EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program • Monitoring Responsibility: Identifies the department within the City with responsibility for mitigation monitoring. Verification (Date and Initials): Provides a contact who reviewed the mitigation measure and the date the measure was determined complete. K 0 w IL IL U' z Ix 0 a w _w wz J Z M ¢ F- Z_ 0 Z E z 0 0 v 0 0 ° M a 0 a O O xo U W d Of 04 Mo 0 U O O d `I R C m c oJ E O v E 0 @ G D1 � O 2 O O ° N d o C � a m c a `o v U c @ J N N O N O a` m c oJ E J m � E 0 v r � O 2 O O ° c .N d o C W Y d o @ E U O O O O a` > o00 > > m c a `o v U c @ J N N O N O a` m v o w v O nK N'a e `m o w c L O O N d m m rn rn o v d a d is d UL-° dt d o N c a- � c .N C O yj N c J O C � d N O N p L ° N_ �_ C m - E t N c mu c d — N Q O1 y 3 D 3 d p`�j @ O J@ OI"O m m� O« C C 0 cm o mm E m N m C d U O N N d d 0 N@ 0 Q J O d d C@ O@ U d �� w o@ N z ¢ v a L v U 2 E d_ J,d E c m m v o w v O nK N'a e `m o w L O N d m m rn rn o v d is d UL-° dt d m v o w v O nK N'a e `m o w T 0 0 U > T a N c 0 a N d O) C O G O «G O U > O Ot G i a c 0 u 0 a 0 L O Lj d J N v O m 9 G � E C EO O 'N N N 'J d O. Ol N .` O` W C N m O N L Y C U= V O y O c J C ' 0 N o o w a U u m N O N C N L C OI (0 sL OJp . 1� c O 0 �mG N ..cO O . .N o u C �i oN oN N L o oC .J W oE W N � E `o n mmN � a aO p Ni 3 m C —Q �O U cvN i NLN1N 0 0 O p3 L (m 0 rn ❑ c V Q OJ . U O O O ON O N:— O : O EN v _ G w'u E N E 0O O 6 Y N N , N O. mO Q O O O �j ° -c N w_U cA mN Up NEy) C EaN J .c L O m O E LE N C 0 N n N m E b � a` T @ v 0 G 0 U i a 0 a rn c 0 «c 0 u w .O O) O U O O N @ @ N m O) _T 0 Em U v o @ c o' N v W Ul G v Cl m E J ¢ G O O N N w ry U 0 cl � m v `O U @ N N O r O a o G O U v a O N G a.� c G N O h C � O U N c v U N @ N N @ � v « N d � � "O -O G v N @ U � T �L ❑ W@ O U N O U C@ O O N N@@ C -L o•�o.c E-co v E v � m'o ma'N �W x.=o mUv 2 3'vo �3��. in m wo OI T C G @ E� EG U v @ C `0 10 c N D W .- v c v m E J O G O O O W .N v > > UE� m a ._ n v . _U N E N v N ¢ O 0 C O q d m c O YJ N N ¢ p N C_ v c .. C N O y �C O u m C V U N @ N G L @ aL+ ¢ d ~ O = O 0] N @ O N @ U U L N 0. E N2 0 Ol N W 0. N G N v E N v M K o w 2 n n� N � C m o m�- m @ c c O U 2 O U c 0 U O N C U O1 G G .. U U N N ¢ N c c � O N N c � O U � C U i ✓¢1 O L N Q 0 Y v 1 U 00 H O O @ > O S @ CJ c1- U�.owvv x-@o axi O` N `. n @ N @ o .c ` Y 1p O w @ O � 0 @�@ K. CmY 2��Om �'O o @-' vow"0 o.'�°, me =U o v .o m@v¢v N N 'C C i G 10 @ O v w v @fl� U'O U.c N L E O)@ m OI T C G @ E� EG U v @ C `0 10 c N D W .- v c v m E J O G O O O W .N v > > UE� m a ._ n v . _U N E N v N ¢ O 0 C O q d m c O YJ N N ¢ p N C_ v c .. C N O y �C O u m C V U N @ N G L @ aL+ ¢ d ~ O = O 0] N @ O N @ U U L N 0. E N2 0 Ol N W 0. N G N v E N v M K o w 2 n n� N � C m o m�- d 0 0 U T D .y C O Q N W K OI C O G O C O M u k J O O1 G C O u O 9 O L d 7 N v O � t N nS N N N (J c pf'O 'O L� O U d J @ C_ j W W -O 0Ea `0@ S p@ p U C= C C n O T U N O N- OO)Y OiOU N NO O `p N - _ O n >- D` E Ol p "_62 i 0@ V r@ am�v cr- �>��c�maTi L N N p > 0) E N -O 0 C Z rnm acim ¢�ati N . ` G y N J � O > O W O N W C@ O M c T c O.E P O w'�a> W U E 2 O C O C "O U O .0 .0 p @ L D > C @ W N. W O@ O L O @ O U T O W Y o.J o F N U O N U Q W O @ m oD o E m m O O L U D N O> N D E�vv ccN L O@ O Y N ku N 4.l 'O N CO p N d O D@ U C U w n 3o.a o.w -urn if u N m 3 E w m fl a N @ .0 d R C O U tC I T a y C O 6 N W C O C O �C O u 0 01 C E H C O U > O O L d d W O O) C .T+ C C J m Ea_ O G U E W r O m C N N ❑ W « m G W J p_ O C O W N T 1 - .. W > U❑❑ c 0 U J N c O U O `0 Q m a a C L c O « U U N W 0 N C_ 2 m C_ v_ G N O_ a N C J O U � C U � W > Vdl O G O O' N C O C O QO 0 0 0]'0 0 0 0 O O « U 3 G W N O L a m o L W O EE t UN O - i+ @ C N a W 0 O C Y @ m v,p G_ d W @ OI > h W w C C OI" U N X X J V 0 m W —oo �Q W a@ o.r«mw3�o �G ma_ WU O VOwIO m W . o.°`o o3 y o rn' > Jm > ' a�°w°m a W m E- 0Ja"^�� N co$O D V �0 3O N ZU J mLN N N "dtO N ° .Q_ 0 N O>@ N O U «y N c O Y J U ` @ O M@ C @ U 0 � -- C O G w O@ W cN a U N N N O c W O O m cZW E � @ c @rnc- �uz W "O@ O0 n m >c n`o " nn oou E - o vEo m � o W v Y. ¢K Y N 'o 0 2 w T v 0 0 q p a N C O O. N CI `o 0 «o U W O C E 0 U O O L W r N R G O m T C .J C C R E° E c U E W C O R c w N Q W � N O m E 0 c o p 0 T > U O O W � O R O ac o m c v "O aL. y t7 N C d E n =J `- 6 C 3 LL OI R _O .E v rn n o. ti c v W O R M G O O rn o ��Do 00 m mo O S m O E U M> cC ^ NJ LN E R N C'U N L W W W O = c W W R C N WWI O.R � n OU v � E N U N N JOOI �_'O J «O."NL�N"O "O N'.unN oc v° W¢ occt O RmY>�JVio °6 °0c� p-� G�O)4W'- _R-RCO C'O CO'V '0000 a' R O U O W O D R N N p` R R�� R E C O.0 S'c. LL'M.O O.O t wn L. 3 w c N E 2I7 U ER w l� C 3 w � a` � N o o` acs c a c v t �- 0 R c o c 0 R o c J v J C� C u > m LL .- J c O � N J � N a`on< W � O R O ac o m c v "O aL. y t7 N C d E n =J `- 6 C 3 LL OI R _O .E v rn n o. ti c v W O R M G O O rn o ��Do 00 m mo O S m O E U M> cC ^ NJ LN E R N C'U N L W W W O = c W W R C N WWI O.R � n OU v � E N U N N JOOI �_'O J «O."NL�N"O "O N'.unN oc v° W¢ occt O RmY>�JVio °6 °0c� p-� G�O)4W'- _R-RCO C'O CO'V '0000 a' R O U O W O D R N N p` R R�� R E C O.0 S'c. LL'M.O O.O t wn L. 3 w c N E 2I7 U ER w l� C 3 w � a` o` c c 0 0 '@ c o api v v u > m J c p•- � N O yj N j N C U p J O C i c E > U O O N U E � O d W � O R O ac o m c v "O aL. y t7 N C d E n =J `- 6 C 3 LL OI R _O .E v rn n o. ti c v W O R M G O O rn o ��Do 00 m mo O S m O E U M> cC ^ NJ LN E R N C'U N L W W W O = c W W R C N WWI O.R � n OU v � E N U N N JOOI �_'O J «O."NL�N"O "O N'.unN oc v° W¢ occt O RmY>�JVio °6 °0c� p-� G�O)4W'- _R-RCO C'O CO'V '0000 a' R O U O W O D R N N p` R R�� R E C O.0 S'c. LL'M.O O.O t wn L. 3 w c N E 2I7 U ER w l� C 3 w � a` @ 0 0 U i T a c 0 K m O C O .O p p w 0 m U 0 U O a O d d @ O m T N N O > O C@ o L N L O L U c mc'io~ rnaD— NCU @�E� —c t = D,., p N ONL.O U d O Cd 'v O O'OC ? N T 0 U @c vn wOU O OM LN = Q m Om O N O N � Q C OLO @ @ OOc m O N D @ m O L Y N v O N L N U N o p.... D N ND C.O d >i "O C N(") O.N C UD �L c rr C D• d U m c =o @ m @ 0 @ c @ m .L. o `o E d o m a m m c M.0 G_ U c o O N WC 3 C N N @ N c o m m — V o h@ N MO N U m J E N O O O Q a N c 0 SEm 0 c N c O m N O .p Z` o -o m T —° mu E m @— @ c@ o L o N @ @ o m v U o N o r rc o W o n K N c N � E c c o� Ic w 01 C T C c @ E� OC m U @ rn @ C @ c c o @ E N W c O y c @ J O j C O p N p N C T' D O " N > m c =o @ m @ 0 @ c @ m .L. o `o E d o m a m m c M.0 G_ U c o O N WC 3 C N N @ N c o m m — V o h@ N MO N U m J E N O O O Q a N c 0 SEm 0 c N c O m N O .p Z` o -o m T —° mu E m @— @ c@ o L o N @ @ o m v U o N o r rc o W o n K N c N � E c c o� Ic w d 0 ° ° Edo a N C O Q N d d' OI G Q G O mg nC O U 4= J O OI G U c O U O O O L m N m v 0 T N N O N t0 'O O U C c N c o ac c v 0 n ED.00 jJal m'm p om o" OC C ToJ QO °Y- o m =m O m m¢ c O c J E a` w o _ o c m N c o v m °° 0 0 E _ "wO °c N mv' om�v ¢ � °Y�L "2`"oowTaEt�m c."o caw "° Ca o ow w W 5cE¢o� m�°=v ' -EmEN0 0 o m np o v� rnt - o ' > E o on°mcoNoVvc°., ° 3O=Jw. °c Ox rnU m v c N m c 0 o w m 8 N c° o > g v v s N v o+ O N c v rn p . N o v L mo ` w m ^ ° co m o rn ON N nN �0 vm O p a 0 M ` N m c ¢ o o c E N U ma w T d N 'N o of O ONO �� Ey O ° E "" v o J .0 N > N N = J 0 pU o `o a [y O '� m ry 0 ma nvc O c c-o !L�NEO °_c c-°u�rn¢ci- �uWU�Q m °�ZVrnrnN N o wa!_^ n 0 0 C] n v 0 v, m E 3 w 0 fl � T m C v m O_ c O U a G n c a `o O «c O U M i O Ol L_ F C O q U O a 0 z m m C O dt a U E oNt °�=uaEmi °� rnw m 1-p�c o° -op v o m m m m yr 'o c v N r a m Nj �`o > 0 3 m u r o °.p L- oa°Z <ai�0 vui °mm�m °oaXi .YS �-O am '3,00- Ed "w o'E.- --'OOO O.= p�°rnY m o.rn =gym � D= O' O> m �aETyo�amo�n�vco��°.vrmc =mY >rn3 cum`m om NjU _O C OIa N�cO1'O dY OIaN� NLUCON 0C-NpM "O tO N O it - O1 L N p p 12 d O N U U N X 6> V N 0 0 o.Ur `orEw m aw w m °mmwm=oE EmN m U m^'°'.n m o. °o m c 0 m m c m c O N U v N 0) G > � N G N a m c 0 m c m o c U c 2 ow yr c Co �N v mo > c O O Aa_ > >;o wu'QEm�m vs m U�p N U a m O `J O= N .r O C o.m 2 c c N —? m o c N c O c p N 0 0 8 O N N a E m� >> M c i C %% N a N U N O y a N mNmm °�mU)a 00 K o W � arc N 9 r m `o w _ m E c E 'a E E U c y rn m c E E w o c 'N wo n d 0 O yY m z N E 2 J O o 0 N'N c 0 U U O O m c 0 m m c m c O N U v N 0) G > � N G N a m c 0 m c m o c U c 2 ow yr c Co �N v mo > c O O Aa_ > >;o wu'QEm�m vs m U�p N U a m O `J O= N .r O C o.m 2 c c N —? m o c N c O c p N 0 0 8 O N N a E m� >> M c i C %% N a N U N O y a N mNmm °�mU)a 00 K o W � arc N 9 r m `o w _ y v 0 ° U > T a N c O 6 N d OI Of G O C O «C O u 0 rn c E c 0 U a > O v O L d m N G O L V p p CO V N N @ L N 4= E w U O= VO y°-_ v C V .0 T a U c N E C L @ W N "O @ v O N "O 9 L @ L "@O ¢ L O L° O O N mn�m-a c °a E °omm °m:g @-a m.'.:wo ��cm @�mN�Vy- =Lm`°maai -oo m� oo�acym N.c coU Tgoo¢m 3.@c° '0 'omm~ m �mww. c�c-oo Ec y'om o° N 10 c�wvacio~ mm.� o �? ac mQ.o w�,•o -__ om N N 9 - `cO UL@ Y QL� ° U N N O C @ @ mm mcQ M`mdv° m❑oUS@m U� TJ S¢ 0)� `¢ ) 0 m ¢rn� u -N ¢� LN - o ryE '^ N> O m@ @ @ N U O • _> O> 0 m O c .O L° 0 L o c P. -vL� w `o @co@N V UM?,N O m cr oNNOZO@ J o o c OU vN CU`U¢ Z V0o COU @ N L N E d o O@@ H O m O N v @ @ @ L E N N rn o U _ o N@D v m m c �o ' N m �� w V F $ Ea>Ul Y.w=o @@ @E!3 c) C.) 0 m� Z @o@WQ¢@- N N c O O I N Y W C, 0 T m v 10 C O U i a c 0 a K `O O c O U O OI C E h C O U O O t m A 0 0 T (p 00 -` O ry OI C m N E N "O 0 _ C m N 0 O .t] O N = L N O C_ N 0 0 d m m E E m N a m a o x 0 c•• -E_� '?`m wo- =acv. Emu$ U U E O N 0 O- 0 m a O 0 0- O O O d d O° °d °m 0 U °_ �+ ✓ m m'w E m =o a Q o_ U Q 'm) m c m m c a m m 0 U C m N o E d m O Ot o a m c rna C U _ N C O O N N C U � G N cr N O � c G a a N_ ._ V N O 0 _ N N N N C a 0 O F O 2¢ 0 ` C (0 c° m O 0 L Jyw °�`o �3m. -�c arc `m5o° -u �crom o g'�{y" N CTc' €GyYV000c wcm o 3 .°accc° i -Z0 cm -_ E uuO O t -° C rn m �m °.v O O � v = c N 0 o 0 a�a- mcc mmom E-moc 0I 0? m O N 10 L N p C 0° G L O L 0 C O a m O X m N rn v � � U ❑ m m c O m 0) N O m 0 0 a m N C j O m a 0 0 vw= F o U ma 0 � m m Of N 0 c � x m 0 v N V C c @ m m �o w 2 2 R N D Y N O "sue A OI c_ c � � 'a E E y C E E m m c E O t Vi m m r c o ° w y0 N m E J O c ° O O W 'y m c O N 0 m c w Y O m c a m m 0 U C m N o E d m O Ot o a m c rna C U _ N C O O N N C U � G N cr N O � c G a a N_ ._ V N O 0 _ N N N N C a 0 O F O 2¢ 0 ` C (0 c° m O 0 L Jyw °�`o �3m. -�c arc `m5o° -u �crom o g'�{y" N CTc' €GyYV000c wcm o 3 .°accc° i -Z0 cm -_ E uuO O t -° C rn m �m °.v O O � v = c N 0 o 0 a�a- mcc mmom E-moc 0I 0? m O N 10 L N p C 0° G L O L 0 C O a m O X m N rn v � � U ❑ m m c O m 0) N O m 0 0 a m N C j O m a 0 0 vw= F o U ma 0 � m m Of N 0 c � x m 0 v N V C c @ m m �o w 2 2 R N D Y N O "sue A y v 0 0 p T d .N c 0 a N @ dl C O .0 L xC 0 u > O O) C i G O u `o a 0 L v v w d c O m F= m c c R m E r R ¢ m C @ E ¢ C O p @ N_ m .> • p L_ O O R v T C Q m G m o c m maao 6a0 aop N a N N G_ C Ul V .` N L K O R O 4 O O R d @ m U L N 1 R(J C,C C ¢O_ O TO O p O R O U O O =OW m O p R a 1, ro c C R U N T�: «LL O'¢C K ¢R O ¢w C L @ m C O L_ C O ou a. > p U U N Z' N C « pavw�x m�COao`o co m.L.. d w U O C m .00- O d O O 41 0cGOCO"O Fa a am3mp,o - N3co¢m¢E Z Ft v E c m QaE m 00=>-_w v m<uo O m O T c N @ a m @ O d @ N C p Oe C C N- O U W @ O N C N o.L Oim co �mc o « "o €mow N- c� N c Ol a T9 R « C NO O y m p a m N ¢cw @ p�N p � c'3 y@ c U N O N ro N 0 N n N r 3 E � a` T C UI m c 0 u WT T a Q N K C O O «c 0 u O m c E a 0 U > O 0 O L d v N @ v G O OI m c a @ m a @ c 0 U x N rn '> g '- o @ n rn a @ c rn o C U _ O C O O N N C U � G N O O > C N N T O m 0 N C@ T W V O L N@ C N 10 N C N T C O O O O C_ O U d > O N U Z`�V'..NCNU @N"OYC ~7NCOOCONCONO'DNVEYZ =�a o 60 W u 'd o O r- N `F O N N O va0.... C O d N C cc @ o ° E m — w °m c �Ec o c c cEc m ° Z W W v W�=> °° E o 0 0 K L@ y La -ON Q E i+0 U E .o M .Zo=c E c c c O oO c c C S ° ° w O ¢` >omno �cr' W0 E @N (O0.(n-ONO v a x°m 0mc@ E °LN L 0@ WN W NW ° ` C O E O O O@ E 0 Z NNN 0 t W� N.0ON0 NGdO N N N U0 Eoow L UO NSLQN�"6 K o W d d L' nK y D C m o O � m m c T C v � C @ E� O U C ° @ m � E @ � wO C @ o c O v y @ J c N E O O c O N C O ° T>' N'N N U U ❑ O m c a @ m a @ c 0 U x N rn '> g '- o @ n rn a @ c rn o C U _ O C O O N N C U � G N O O > C N N T O m 0 N C@ T W V O L N@ C N 10 N C N T C O O O O C_ O U d > O N U Z`�V'..NCNU @N"OYC ~7NCOOCONCONO'DNVEYZ =�a o 60 W u 'd o O r- N `F O N N O va0.... C O d N C cc @ o ° E m — w °m c �Ec o c c cEc m ° Z W W v W�=> °° E o 0 0 K L@ y La -ON Q E i+0 U E .o M .Zo=c E c c c O oO c c C S ° ° w O ¢` >omno �cr' W0 E @N (O0.(n-ONO v a x°m 0mc@ E °LN L 0@ WN W NW ° ` C O E O O O@ E 0 Z NNN 0 t W� N.0ON0 NGdO N N N U0 Eoow L UO NSLQN�"6 K o W d d L' nK y D C m o O � m T d m G O u `v E a 0 a Ol O C O «O U lC O Of C E O U O 9 O s d N N N c O N N U @ C O U h O U 0_t ❑ L N U L N 3 C O N N O C p p @ @ ¢ @ O C O D M O U U N @ c @ oc N U O C N O O C O V O O 3 c 2 � > @ c c � N U U > O _T _ ma _ N @� W N N a c 0` O N _ m d! m rn ''ZL¢ ¢ °Dmornwivmi. °a.vc cv��m N cHo00'co t m o E a: E y Dc `o "o �Ec v>3o3c�aN= `g C SS a o y: �Q oU oL o 0 3 N�'O n' C N r: E�3 O i' F w l'n m E 3 w E 3 0. E O C v U rn m r c � v @ E N ❑ w.. C O Y c v u @ E J ¢ ` w O O N N C T > O ` o U U ❑ N N U @ C O U h O U 0_t ❑ L N U L N 3 C O N N O C p p @ @ ¢ @ O C O D M O U U N @ c @ oc N U O C N O O C O V O O 3 c 2 � > @ c c � N U U > O _T _ ma _ N @� W N N a c 0` O N _ m d! m rn ''ZL¢ ¢ °Dmornwivmi. °a.vc cv��m N cHo00'co t m o E a: E y Dc `o "o �Ec v>3o3c�aN= `g C SS a o y: �Q oU oL o 0 3 N�'O n' C N r: E�3 O i' F w l'n m E 3 w E 3 0. T m C d i0 c O U T a N c 0 a H W K m c 0 c O «c 0 0 w 0 m c E c 0 U > O 0 O t N i_ N W O OI p O m 'F°-� N N O c D7 p O U - V T v N N ... 'ON N O W O t ` £ O m N '1 V y, U1 d C N ° N N O O, t O O O O E N ON _ >= O C N C . N 0 W , L I¢ a 3 E F E° w O . W O U N a� c IW -N O C O O C rm N 2 N U "O G "' ' r c ° c 0m Lc c �Lm m o c o.o °i I- w a 'Eao O C " W o" O W _ L O 2 Q O MC 0° 0 0 0O ° L O W C N W � O N p U� W E mW W '.0 w L W ` N 0 _ j N N N l V O O W W W O W G O N E " — _ O U ` N N c C £ U°10 l " m 3 v ° o c > s o° a a H m y o ° o 0 0 3 w v v °N =a °c c Q a co W a N K E E m K o W 4 � a nK N p� o o � w 'q v 0 0 U i T a �N O d m G O G O «c 0 u w C C O U 0 'O O t d d O O N O N O ^'wNE a L "OO 0 u' E O C. OU dNcONO o C_ 0= au m O d O= N c 0 1O y d°N N vrnC'm .N .. 6 O'L ^ N N L N N K O N N i NN 3'O OO O LOOUN O D N O m O 'F U" C Nr 3_ O N NENT».. w C¢ L o V u N = > 'N N ° �' C x o �0o oo N o o = c Oc F O N N N m `O aO > � c o VNi r 0 E U N p N EC m C °c_ a N N E Q w c c Y N j J p 0 N O N C T > U U � rn a a m o v U_ m N L_ O o E d r m U L N O N N O A � N O O N c m c c o S)w0 O U U N N V) O O U C 0 C N V d G y O O C 3 c m c > m c c'- N L O O N K N U U > C_ L ooh m�O'� w 12 O w" O N N U W Q n j Yl O. N N N C U .00 i m 2-6 N— O c> v •- U -Y'- y/ 0¢ N O U N O N N N y m m ow aE`K O-E �a nv;.o O rna m N C C N O e e O � e w m @ a 0 U J w a C O a N C O C O x0 U > O m G E 0 U 0 O d N G O N N C O C Y cnN oy�J�c UN$c mm °�O rn o E 2 O > V N m'o o m d O h N O) N 01 c c w w m � O O c c N _N w w d R Y Y J J o O _T _T U U m m c c a a L 4 O O U U C C R @ p J N N N N O N O N o E o E v m c c o � o E @ E R T m T °E °E c w c N o n lop Q U O () O w R N N d i O i O ai L N 1 O O L N > E v m R 4'O tOO�d� Q'ON ON NR Wrn N O %I U. IL NN O.CN KNNOGO!` N �: F o�� N v E N... W L R O C m L NLR• N N C N CO Y m C %o< o mm x onD R m N aEim E m C m O" Q — c 6 O _ E U 1 R "O N N C O U — R N m E J O- L ry o 6 n �i T N G N @ 0 O U > T a N O N O: m G O 0 O «O O ro U k O > O m E i= c N U O V L N 3 ro O N N C N N c m W C N W c W ry O we w w w c W N O C N O C N O G d O c @ `p c O O N O N O N O W W W W W m @ J m ro J m N J m Y J m Y j o O O O p U U U U U m c a d m c a B m c a d m c a O m D n O O O O 0 U C N N U C N N U C 7 N N U C p N N N O C � N N O O N O N O N O °_ o f o f O E o L L L ro @ O w O w O w p w 0 O O O O Em Em Em Em ° c c ° c o c m c N c 0 c N ° E ° , - E °- E .0 E O .m . 0 ro Q @ Q @ U O U 12 02 U O @ !� N - i "@O > 'O > "ro0 > a > �j @ m„' om'ct O I � m� 00 of E0mm >O ro aac c > p N r0 tOo. . �N N a o M 0 as Q°E on c o am a mE cm c- c�c: d cK ° CO Z F- 0 c °Z 0 E.> - ��0 w maa 0 °T ` vo Y � f : m a > nW rn° oa w O ` n m a@ � N .O 0° o al Y E L a. a Y _ 0 C) 06 0m � N N C@ m @ N UZ c E NL V ° O Q aIw L r N .o o L a° m NO@ o0o m- 1111, O O = N a @ 1. m G O -O L C m 0 0 uN° ° m c c IM m m�.- s °mu 'a�n $m0 vU Om 0 m O � >w_c 'o a° F. m N @ ro° u m @ L m . m O m 0 m 0 U U ° izi @ i N U ma _ w - ' 2460 amE c�inE cSw Y K 0 L IN N E 3 °c E w m N g a T @ .0 d m G O u i Z N O N d m C O C 0 xc 0 U d ° m O U `O 0 d N N C O OI N N N N m W W W W N O c N O c N O C N O C a- c W W W W Y J Y J Y J Y J O O O O U U U U 'o ¢ 3m €o. -o00 V c@ c .mc o mL" m m' of d LOO i-pm 0>o ades s ` mnC o C K E « ' m o 'EO a '« @ y ¢mO m L m mm' o ` a C o@ o vcc O� m @ mc E o0 'm N ¢ p @ of o � o� w `xm p m > > C > w _ m N N N ^ Nm m ° > � U N 0 L O O ❑ N OONw O Oa'O 'Yo-OA «'o 'mo �� DO�.r WLc� OTNOw ¢m LNNmUO �Oaoo «oJmN K �w_U ¢LO 3 @� >°N �m U ¢ O L N O U N a N T N O O 0m ' mN °NsOm m00mN @Z@ rn w °o w a` � a n K m m� E c o � w ' m c m m rn a- c o v o a n o n @ C @ C c C N N N N N N N « N O N O N O N O N `o NL O rN-. Ow Ow O`�N- E E E E ¢¢ c c c c a o 'o ¢ 3m €o. -o00 V c@ c .mc o mL" m m' of d LOO i-pm 0>o ades s ` mnC o C K E « ' m o 'EO a '« @ y ¢mO m L m mm' o ` a C o@ o vcc O� m @ mc E o0 'm N ¢ p @ of o � o� w `xm p m > > C > w _ m N N N ^ Nm m ° > � U N 0 L O O ❑ N OONw O Oa'O 'Yo-OA «'o 'mo �� DO�.r WLc� OTNOw ¢m LNNmUO �Oaoo «oJmN K �w_U ¢LO 3 @� >°N �m U ¢ O L N O U N a N T N O O 0m ' mN °NsOm m00mN @Z@ rn w °o w a` � a n K m m� E c o � w ' # / ( { ( \/ # : { {{ ) - ) \ { {} o \ j {$0c = -o \0 J° - _a;«y }/ I \$ ƒ} / }lWC:E !,. :._ { »§� \3j: {`« }))f£ / } / / }> /:E_&_„ !_ o Wr ) %} ) \ }\ �E f« 00 ±{/ \k }E \ _,�® ,rt §;= °`ZZ= = { « = ®: -E: /\ \/) ) {2 m,! ;;oCl Cl _ E` ;; ®m < §\ \( §} )( /\\ /) {# § §in /402E \(\° lEmQ-- ;f\ 0mae§ftE Wr ) T A C d i0 c O U i T a N c 0 n m D1 C O C O i xC O U O m C E H O U O v 0 w m m N C W m `O c N W m Y N J O T m c a 9 O m c N N O N, `o E ao o� N>H cmo m =nO) LU m o " � E C V L — .K 'wC L rn N E c amE moC L .L - a? 0 —m m m ,p y 2N ai ¢ 0, � o c OE E m C o � LL O 0 N w 0�o m O om Q 00c O ow N aj w o E LL n o L o O > E 0_OT cm @ C o N m m ° O 00cow O Dac 0(6 MO c >O ` o > c �o.. c c Uv Uv L�maiomd�mv'�os �ENa�m Qmm.�°o °'Q pw Q�pm O LL = 0 0 0 O -OO O m N • e OE O:5 T0.:�T 46 CyO ti+ mtF W> H °c H v c ¢¢° o D N m K o W 4 6K N � Y N C w ' `o .J T m m w C) U $ m O N T C O 6LC N'0 >N._ Em O c Oi T aoW °E m.5 m c o c mE'y o -E 3 > w o m O m v d°m E da> d' J > O o� N>H cmo m =nO) LU m o " � E C V L — .K 'wC L rn N E c amE moC L .L - a? 0 —m m m ,p y 2N ai ¢ 0, � o c OE E m C o � LL O 0 N w 0�o m O om Q 00c O ow N aj w o E LL n o L o O > E 0_OT cm @ C o N m m ° O 00cow O Dac 0(6 MO c >O ` o > c �o.. c c Uv Uv L�maiomd�mv'�os �ENa�m Qmm.�°o °'Q pw Q�pm O LL = 0 0 0 O -OO O m N • e OE O:5 T0.:�T 46 CyO ti+ mtF W> H °c H v c ¢¢° o D N m K o W 4 6K N � Y N C w ' oal ■ \ _ /§r :, M,0 `- /7\ {())kf)f2 { §) : §§7f {f yEle:JlE ;Pu=tt j\ #_E / {( }.7§;$ {} - }{ { / }){3(i){ )\) ) \$;);f :f / \�kt0�\ / { { / {#° / }t1)f3$ //£ ■ \ \�) \\ )[! %{ k\ \\ \{ 20 3 §k =§ 7f !0 ± ƒ/ k) #_E / {( }.7§;$ {} - }{ { / }){3(i){ )\) ) \$;);f :f / \�kt0�\ / { { / {#° / }t1)f3$ //£ ■ \ \�) \\ )[! {/\ 20 #_E / {( }.7§;$ {} - }{ { / }){3(i){ )\) ) \$;);f :f / \�kt0�\ / { { / {#° / }t1)f3$ //£ ■ \ T C d m O_ c 0 U i T y C n N d C C O C O u w O O) L O U O O d m d c O m c w OI N C W N O C N W Ul Y @ J O T N c v d O N c @ N O .N� o E a` a 0 .. T N = @ O T v C O O C O) T m u w ° E @ N C ° C t N � C N @ E'�j °- E > W @ o N O U O w v E > a m L E 0— E U o O O N C UJ @ 3 0 ° Eu. �orn�aLL `L"mE`o � cc'iYo3 w W= j t o mU N@ s > =0 cc c °0 0,LU c ° a «L o ON N @@ N L m> M@ N C Q > Q Q — ¢ o of v �. «O� O Nc `m O O O V LL OI 3 D O O n • • • • E° LL Y L o 0 m a w C o� o N °w o 0 m U N M N ¢ o W U � arc m E 3 0 o z w ' F m C d O C O U T A N c O d N d OI C O G O i5 YC O U k > O C E C O U 0 0 S d N 0 N N C W N 0 c _N w N Y N J O T 7 w 9 S O d c N_ N « O Y 0 E a` a NO m O E N W O N O Ot C V L c vn �= N"`m vo hcN vu a o - E c v c C.— o `oY v « c N O 02 'Z`EN « m m C o = « LE m > D « � v m O «d � « c o m E m E v o o "E ° E E ° N�n� N� �j M 0 0 ui u o Y�mm E =•N m - L vv, L-a -a Emma t-c mmm= a°'S ¢m� oELLNo '- N 10 N N C E M 0 >i N 'O 'O O O' E O W C m¢ C O N N Ol O. c N -O 'O UI « V N lO N j N N O@ O ] C= LO N 'N O. Y N C C N¢ Y O C O E ca O Qr-U r. N GI O` N O N w0 N -O G N L C .0 N .� N a N _O ° N c O E C m�v:c cv E Q m'w o>O'Q« c m >o c N > >`° >c Nma m >m va v �a3 qt o NCUV « o ai 0 o LL om 3-0 V O m c o�o�'�v m cl- i' 0 N N E o C 0 .. T N = d vU v O N T C O O G OI T_m o¢aW ¢E m c m o c m E .N 3 > w m ¢ N O U O Y > N E �p U1 N � E J > O NO m O E N W O N O Ot C V L c vn �= N"`m vo hcN vu a o - E c v c C.— o `oY v « c N O 02 'Z`EN « m m C o = « LE m > D « � v m O «d � « c o m E m E v o o "E ° E E ° N�n� N� �j M 0 0 ui u o Y�mm E =•N m - L vv, L-a -a Emma t-c mmm= a°'S ¢m� oELLNo '- N 10 N N C E M 0 >i N 'O 'O O O' E O W C m¢ C O N N Ol O. c N -O 'O UI « V N lO N j N N O@ O ] C= LO N 'N O. Y N C C N¢ Y O C O E ca O Qr-U r. N GI O` N O N w0 N -O G N L C .0 N .� N a N _O ° N c O E C m�v:c cv E Q m'w o>O'Q« c m >o c N > >`° >c Nma m >m va v �a3 qt o NCUV « o ai 0 o LL om 3-0 V O m c o�o�'�v m cl- i' 0 N N E o C T C d m O C O q U i u a N O a d m C O O F == •C O U O O1 E f O U 0 0 S N @ d 0 m c rn c N N N @ C c m ryO c c W W N N `o o E 0 c E N N W W N Y Y @ @ j J 0 0 @15 T _T U U m c rn c p a O 9 O T N != m ryO U C @ N N U c @ N N N w O N O w o E o E w C fn E'p E a d 0 TyC ,ONW ~N>WV rycEN3pN d aN N j,YC aNm ~N nc Ea 3 >> N3m o. c-o at v N m D >acUw nc Eac aIm mooD Qc c cc crn°- m ° @ -L mm @MooD Qc N@ D N N O N N C C pj N O O' LL O, r L N OIL N N E O C c o .D-. E o c L N U ar w Eom mNNC �E .L- F> y -- L � N> N N o� .O Ip OI w@ N D o o .O O1 J DO .. •� .« L O N v V C NDD @NOS �n.'C.. !'LN NCE3 OOI OINO`NND N�CNDDNN O N �n @ o Y O T O N C U w N T o rn a a 1>M o`oLL. o� m30 • . ° oo `l m Oo o oo o a w .m3 rn mo 4 O @m oc ou nn n 2 O.: `ow a n @I-n o@cI -U c N K o w a` v ntt N a r m c o � w -°-� 0 0 N = N T N != m U $ mU _ N m O w N o V r @ > N nn @15 c a c @ E E °O- E E m E m - W Ej m n N N O O O > O Y w > O Kw >v �E w C fn E'p E a d 0 TyC ,ONW ~N>WV rycEN3pN d aN N j,YC aNm ~N nc Ea 3 >> N3m o. c-o at v N m D >acUw nc Eac aIm mooD Qc c cc crn°- m ° @ -L mm @MooD Qc N@ D N N O N N C C pj N O O' LL O, r L N OIL N N E O C c o .D-. E o c L N U ar w Eom mNNC �E .L- F> y -- L � N> N N o� .O Ip OI w@ N D o o .O O1 J DO .. •� .« L O N v V C NDD @NOS �n.'C.. !'LN NCE3 OOI OINO`NND N�CNDDNN O N �n @ o Y O T O N C U w N T o rn a a 1>M o`oLL. o� m30 • . ° oo `l m Oo o oo o a w .m3 rn mo 4 O @m oc ou nn n 2 O.: `ow a n @I-n o@cI -U c N K o w a` v ntt N a r m c o � w -°-� T d 0 ° U �i d N G O Q N O m C O .0 O «c 0 U W > O C E 1- G O U O a 0 t d N d 0 m Ul W C W N O C W N Y N J O T i G C a j n 0 c N N O N O E a a 0 U C C O~ �w C O m c_ w QE m o m v o E c ° aci c m . - E E W o o W O o N => d J >'00 K J i'0> C p O _ d m rL.. L m m � N N N M L M O N N 'O N U y� N .'C N m i a O` C N' L 10 N � m 1- N N C .. N N Z O �. > O C Q (O m f0 N O v` YJ C m N 9 U W y N N c— O O O C Q N a J 3 a E ._ E ,� c o,� ° a m 1° ai ° Q m'aw ._ > m m n E E i C= o o c omOC (� �co Nc oo$Em0m N r°n °Eo m?M `oN Ec E N N O » L O N j N W a Nw a°O N O n C LN E UC l L m M iN C N C V0 - 0 N O C N O C ` U O Zcm U�> m o v � o U ° mo U a « N - o e G e 0 o o ooLL c ME 2 co N n >m A r d 0 ° U �i i T Ti N c 0 ¢ m v Q: m C O G O «C O U W O D) C U- O U k 7 O O d m N d c O m N N G w @ `o c N w Y N J O T O O c N 0 N O v O w O E a`o O "O N 0 j -(5 Lc E`o .°° .a 1p °N m a°im me E.EE mm a >c c c c cv ` o @Dvv@ �OE,wdO O L@in .0 L w O ..E o- m m v c U m E@ ca , > @ O 5 V U O N O N @ j N @ O T ¢ O O E N O N c W @ m ° ° m° y U z c w � °o m T E a Ly o N w m _ w 0 O O N O 7 D 3 • . . d N 3O 0-0 0G N ; 0LLo`0Lm °w �m c > oo • • 0 E E ° c v — @= S- 9 N c F- 0 0 r N m a o w o as t� o m � O off° 0 v T @ N N UL. 0 m O N C p T m' > > O C m T m ¢¢ E @ N � C C C c @ E 'y ° - E E 3 >w 10¢ u O O "O N 0 j -(5 Lc E`o .°° .a 1p °N m a°im me E.EE mm a >c c c c cv ` o @Dvv@ �OE,wdO O L@in .0 L w O ..E o- m m v c U m E@ ca , > @ O 5 V U O N O N @ j N @ O T ¢ O O E N O N c W @ m ° ° m° y U z c w � °o m T E a Ly o N w m _ w 0 O O N O 7 D 3 • . . d N 3O 0-0 0G N ; 0LLo`0Lm °w �m c > oo • • 0 E E ° c v — @= S- 9 N c F- 0 0 r N m a o w o as t� o m � O off° ra I k k E = \f if :t- = { ;} ;= :f { >p=0 }f -MOM, )E {e E6 \® \i /; - ;: % \0F 0mfe0 \{ \ \§ } }\ aj / - {f{j \»! , ) ; _,,_ ° - §f 1®:rZ` §® r«taff; :Eu0 m e uu \( 0 }\ > )\ /w \)} {{ 3 §k ]§ 00 -« ƒ {\ k\ )o \ \§ } }\ aj / - {f{j \»! , ) ; _,,_ ° - §f 1®:rZ` §® r«taff; :Eu0 m e uu \( 0 )\ \)} )o a#\ ;m \/0 :�0V \ \§ } }\ aj / - {f{j \»! , ) ; _,,_ ° - §f 1®:rZ` §® r«taff; :Eu0 m e uu \( T E N A 0 C O U Em a N C a N m o! m C O C O %C O u w 0 m t O U `o O m w 0 m U1 m c W W O c N w m Y N J O _T U m c a a 0 m c w w « o � `o E a a c c N N c `O .N.. L r O m O _Y m.N. t0 (p N O LL w �c Tw o o- - 'Ycmam�Cmmo -o>r - o m Ea> >mUN mN«Uw �mmm_Cc m > E o° K OOm ° o oEm a > m `cE «oo m'° cN wu «mw N :w oy >°` . «c 5m c � cO o _ E rn° om Ed �ENw oC c`oo '°. o a y � o o u > >ELL«co «E >LL- om E m w N w c c = mw 0 m c o o m O F w �mEO. `«NdSt `T 6] m « 0 m O G 1m °0 c E E c c y N > N a r c N Z' c -or cz Q a ° « o D o a �4=>.. m ai cT0 Eo Uaw m � ;' T�o N I > : rn « o m O . «oN `a o '>E E oo 0 � m L> E H u o0 ° 0 o Q - m N p o w a `w c a� EE c 3 0 o w `o �U «m N L w O O J m c o NBC d' > O Q w c W 0 o y E an w � d o � > W w O O N O U > O Y > E J mO > c c N N c `O .N.. L r O m O _Y m.N. t0 (p N O LL w �c Tw o o- - 'Ycmam�Cmmo -o>r - o m Ea> >mUN mN«Uw �mmm_Cc m > E o° K OOm ° o oEm a > m `cE «oo m'° cN wu «mw N :w oy >°` . «c 5m c � cO o _ E rn° om Ed �ENw oC c`oo '°. o a y � o o u > >ELL«co «E >LL- om E m w N w c c = mw 0 m c o o m O F w �mEO. `«NdSt `T 6] m « 0 m O G 1m °0 c E E c c y N > N a r c N Z' c -or cz Q a ° « o D o a �4=>.. m ai cT0 Eo Uaw m � ;' T�o N I > : rn « o m O . «oN `a o '>E E oo 0 � m L> E H u o0 ° 0 o Q - m N p o w a `w c a� EE c 3 0 o w v 0 0 p R N O o. N w Ot O O «c O m U W p to C E F- O U 4. O a O L d m 7 m v O m m c c, c v N N c c vU 0 `O c U C N U N h O U C m � N 0 w `p o c c N N W W Y o > d y N N 9 d J J m p C01 o a T _T p U U m c c, c a N N L n vU 0 `O `o U C N U N h O U C m � N v v O N O N ow w o O E a E O p N N _T vU 0 N = v y w O N c c w o > d d N 9 d O G CI T m p C01 m v p dd ° m c aw0 aw00 mE'y ow -E m_ �E._ `W p U O O W > w > dY w m w w > 6Y v E N N C pl d r-N amo v w c3 O N ° ''wC lN N N p a0 " . € L ItN QON - 7 I .�Q U C w0N w N Nac N v + cE o -L o c c -omN wO EC w U O E v �OI;E E 'ovC- N Eo Emy w Y LaTw . L C m N N O O V w O C N N> v o pv .,cN p - Lcvw (dT0 �Cry b � N mO c ' O wU dE La LL �r ".�� T. L v E N y ' a � Q ° ' 4 KN N c❑ .�E m U wc vEU `p_ _ o�o: v y m 3 v 7� U 0Z 00 C E O E >2J>O ` er' v 00m 0 orn ao u a o Swo v E w o rnw dE m u w° 0 N O ui m E M N a m a m m w U c U > O v c OLE w LL ° >N cm c c c U m O � _ w d m c ca w c v iva moo o w Qm Qm Qmm > E m E m w o E w > OZ 0 w ovD m 0 :6 wo ,0 oo— o`noUDC • e e ooc c O N w c v C m3�u No °O�`o� H�ELm -SLm. mo`. €`o u?o.E0 m0 c0�0 oo� O M n m m 3 C w m � u` N @ .0 a m c 0 U D N C O a d K C O C O �C O u w 0 m E E_ O O 'O O d @ m 0 m N m W m O c N W m Y N O T 7 rn c _a 3 D O N c @ m o a o N O9 E ' N d@ @ @ C U @ N N N O D °@ Q C G fn N oi — E O E N Uc w m w m @ d m0 mm E 0 mc�° « B @ 0 - E WO uC o E w u 0 w mm 0 ot co« @o6 Ec0 " p @ O" OO N i ° m > a mmoo Y�°o '�om Y o C cuN « mE° > .=« oN 41 L Q > rn 0o m � mE o N'ocU c O w N mo' 3o . Umo � LL o m m d O N o @ @C `o oO d'(n om F O m K o W d n o arc N v Y N j O w 0 m d U Lm. m O w N V O@ C O T@ C O Em O) O C OI T m E @ m 0 @ c @ of mEy ° -E O 0 N O w J O O N O9 E ' N d@ @ @ C U @ N N N O D °@ Q C G fn N oi — E O E N Uc w m w m @ d m0 mm E 0 mc�° « B @ 0 - E WO uC o E w u 0 w mm 0 ot co« @o6 Ec0 " p @ O" OO N i ° m > a mmoo Y�°o '�om Y o C cuN « mE° > .=« oN 41 L Q > rn 0o m � mE o N'ocU c O w N mo' 3o . Umo � LL o m m d O N o @ @C `o oO d'(n om F O m K o W d n o arc N v Y N j O w N m m 0_ C O U > T a N C O a N d 01 G O C O «C O U k O O1 C E_ h C O U O 9 O d v N m 0 N m C w N o` c N w N Y m J O T 7 c a `o U C m N u O O v N a ¢ 0 .. T N " m v U � v O > m > O C m O c m T ¢¢ E m � c O c mE'y o -E 3 > cu- 2 y_ > O Y > K E J > 6 L d N C C N ON O O OLC BO~N TL,c 'OO C, Ul 'N W>v O N �° c N m c O O N N L m m O c U N g m W e— 0 0> Q v m y a m a w._ > m m n a, N c E. .@ s m N m W.0 0 'o mcc m� me @cmm vHm`o rn�o.�`u �aVcio« o �� m iCL �C C iE'� >a,mO�rLOmwV! -Wm NwO0d�m ��CON UC •UO• �— Y UO_ Oe � Ge "@N dmUvn Nc~Oa "vN WNOCON � O " 'v� �0 U U� vS v o O ° U N O L o_ O L m N or o O U m E -a d o O ftt � a m es¢ o m c H o E o. a � U Q m °° m h o Y K N C7 n N ti E 3 0 iu m o T @ C d 10 O_ C O U r T 'a .N c 0 o. W O1 C O C O xC O U > O C E F- a N U O v L W m m c 0 N C W v `o c N W W Y @ J O T Lff 0 0 W C N N rL+ O N o E a` a �NivmCCCY L ° yNN f WU@ (0 'rN NU N. C� v'o vcWN TY YO h >v mg vm gmE _Es _ N@ D7 Y E 'J N N .rL. C Ul @ N N U N N r >E @NO -GL@ Up' WOwI OVwO WE `mNamao.`o o.coc- oaoY Kw?�c `o_— °aoU��ao.oa— °ismmo >� W `o E c¢ o L v v c o c o Y mom° v E c0 0 5 N E v` @ cGo a xo�ulvdoa�'°>mo1pv E-o L-v mEv� >E�' -Y co�W>LL -m`o_y O'er cc O�vw��m Nom_ N@ N @ O N F O .L.. ° E EFL N `p. N> N N J C @ O. N >> d L U1 N W c W 'O @_m >�on> W 5 I-W O.W NC 10o cc @w W�cc -E' cE�ny`o- ^- ^mcL-'t�cv N'o vc �NC_VV VS m o .L"@�.. -.0 < my > ° m v °_ = @ W LL Y > N W 0 3 N > W o o> E @ W o - O. N W @ O n' O @ °. L. LO UJ O v L E .rL. L...L. N CL 2 0 0 2 E 0 @@ UL. N E O r O N I- N M M N a o w � 5 g N � Y N 3 0 o �° `o r T d U w W N w L O c O C OI T m °aaW °E @ 0 ° v c c W °O @EN -E > W @ a 0 v o 0 �E� > Wa �NivmCCCY L ° yNN f WU@ (0 'rN NU N. C� v'o vcWN TY YO h >v mg vm gmE _Es _ N@ D7 Y E 'J N N .rL. C Ul @ N N U N N r >E @NO -GL@ Up' WOwI OVwO WE `mNamao.`o o.coc- oaoY Kw?�c `o_— °aoU��ao.oa— °ismmo >� W `o E c¢ o L v v c o c o Y mom° v E c0 0 5 N E v` @ cGo a xo�ulvdoa�'°>mo1pv E-o L-v mEv� >E�' -Y co�W>LL -m`o_y O'er cc O�vw��m Nom_ N@ N @ O N F O .L.. ° E EFL N `p. N> N N J C @ O. N >> d L U1 N W c W 'O @_m >�on> W 5 I-W O.W NC 10o cc @w W�cc -E' cE�ny`o- ^- ^mcL-'t�cv N'o vc �NC_VV VS m o .L"@�.. -.0 < my > ° m v °_ = @ W LL Y > N W 0 3 N > W o o> E @ W o - O. N W @ O n' O @ °. L. LO UJ O v L E .rL. L...L. N CL 2 0 0 2 E 0 @@ UL. N E O r O N I- N M M N a o w � 5 g N � Y N 3 0 o �° / \ | IN j\ } § {«k (\ E\ k \) \§ 0 C) ; §k ;§ \: !0 Um \ 0 , \> 0 00 { \E /)) / | IN j\ !E!{ } § {«k (\ E\ �(( \) \§ 0 ; §k ;§ \: !0 Um \ 0 \> 00 !E!{ } § {«k �(( \) !(�§i� Um \ 00 :\ {/{ =2l; -- § ®qr ) Q2{k! / \ © §e`2 § \\ / }J3 /E;) ©7t: 02 00 «�o2:'0 0! °E» :�_ =e0Q2{ ei0 0 a»e ( ( §) § \3{q {f! % §(!§§tf : {) \} Z ffe /# ;: = lem;2 ; :&&2,3&! { r @ d 0 0 T a N c 0 a N m K C Q O r •c O U O W C h O U O v t d v m 0 c W v `0 c N W m Y @ J O T 7 m c 9 a O m W o `o E C m a ¢ N L L OM .O 'O 'O "O .L.N. v w (p pGj O 0 C C m c N «I N y a N E 0 12 m h c0 rvm m m a L = w wrornmmvtEv `m muvi n.�Ec 3 m a" E Y o O��w @ovai 4a cEc.. v v O O v >,cE >m °o.�ca ¢w= Tc >E`0t c f c U Y� iF= N w m 0 m e N c FD N '� 0 0` E o m vOi N N N O m v 0 0 0 v mmrn o Nvo v E E E E ao m._ °_ :a cNmc =m o 0 0 ° L 6 lv - U w E� 9 Vc rnp v > '..N > o� o� o o U0 E U U U_ U_ o�0 M _ o - >avoE °2v� �Ym • • • • • V (6 N O LL .0 U yO UEN@Nc0m>EN V0LOm0 .. o o100 LV, L�cEv�E Na n °mom wE' c� 0�0 LL� M m rc o w u` v o a� `o W '� 0 v T T m Tn v vc 0 0 m m O C C O Ol T T m m ¢a E E @ v c o v o c c a v v c c v v @E'„ ° > w w O O O N O O U @ M U O N > ¢ ¢Y > > K E E OM .O 'O 'O "O .L.N. v w (p pGj O 0 C C m c N «I N y a N E 0 12 m h c0 rvm m m a L = w wrornmmvtEv `m muvi n.�Ec 3 m a" E Y o O��w @ovai 4a cEc.. v v O O v >,cE >m °o.�ca ¢w= Tc >E`0t c f c U Y� iF= N w m 0 m e N c FD N '� 0 0` E o m vOi N N N O m v 0 0 0 v mmrn o Nvo v E E E E ao m._ °_ :a cNmc =m o 0 0 ° L 6 lv - U w E� 9 Vc rnp v > '..N > o� o� o o U0 E U U U_ U_ o�0 M _ o - >avoE °2v� �Ym • • • • • V (6 N O LL .0 U yO UEN@Nc0m>EN V0LOm0 .. o o100 LV, L�cEv�E Na n °mom wE' c� 0�0 LL� M m rc o w u` v o a� `o W '� , / \ !; ; _ !0 {f i� } \ \�� f\ l� :: {/. /!9 ®{:g::» , §r © ;: 5 - - - - !20!2!9 _ /)§! /\ / { /k {{t{7)) {j) {\ /t(( \!2 {£ n;;:=/ . } E {!} /za$J ; /fa$a ; ;$ZJ /\ \ \}� \ } \ \§{ , ) \f \ }f§$= ,. . . . �''` ° ` - I� {) \\ ,$:; .0 :0 ) ; ;»rn! r&E k; :,t! : &;r:#0;M00 E: 2 227!: ■ \ \! j\ /\ !; ; _ !0 {f i� } \ \�� f\ l� :: {/. /!9 ®{:g::» , §r © ;: 5 - - - - !20!2!9 _ /)§! /\ / { /k {{t{7)) {j) {\ /t(( \!2 {£ n;;:=/ . } E {!} /za$J ; /fa$a ; ;$ZJ /\ \ \}� \ } \ \§{ , ) \f \ }f§$= ,. . . . �''` ° ` - I� {) \\ ,$:; .0 :0 ) ; ;»rn! r&E k; :,t! : &;r:#0;M00 E: 2 227!: ■ \ \! %{ §{ -Fu f\ § - ;§i \ §/ \ a»§ & !!: ; ou ± {\ \\ \ )E !; ; _ !0 {f i� } \ \�� f\ l� :: {/. /!9 ®{:g::» , §r © ;: 5 - - - - !20!2!9 _ /)§! /\ / { /k {{t{7)) {j) {\ /t(( \!2 {£ n;;:=/ . } E {!} /za$J ; /fa$a ; ;$ZJ /\ \ \}� \ } \ \§{ , ) \f \ }f§$= ,. . . . �''` ° ` - I� {) \\ ,$:; .0 :0 ) ; ;»rn! r&E k; :,t! : &;r:#0;M00 E: 2 227!: ■ \ \! a A 0 0 T a N C O a d K rn C O G O xG O U O OI c E H O w 0 L @ d N @ c 0 w O rn c N n d a 1M m N @ c a C O L L' O C O N @ C 2 E � w O � AM v G w @ O c N W @ Y @ J O T O 4 O @ G 3 @ O .N. o E a a `o « T mU �@ c o c 3 > w m @ O U O KE3 >oo O N n @« N T L «@ J N- N L L N.N N (0 --O E � O C N @ `� 4Ni M U !0 i � N m « O` (0 � .O 'O C @ O UJ � 2 0 n O G U N N N G O N Q C O C O V O N N Y "o E O _O- C@ O N NEL �- U 2�c- Ec� @o�� °so @H �N. mmo@ w @ @'w QL CC NCCQmo� v=i r«N. ~> p 9 O N d C C C C y N d O07> EL m'n N-O i@CG CEO `@ > E2 n 9 3 E m co ow v >ma Nn� >° m°a`0Eo . . . °�o' N (h G O w a` m C nK m m E p1 o � w ' m N 0_ O U T a N C 0 ¢ N m K m C O C O c 0 U 4 O O1 c E c O U ° D O L m m m v c O m m c N l W m C v � m_ C m m O m N¢ C C J m a o t c O« v LL- cu O 6 t c m O v N a c c ¢ v m E a s o m a LL O O j N 0 7ma�0omt as I-¢E`o mu$NE0 C K 0 m m C c W m `o c N W m Y m J O _T U o; c v n o � v M m N O N o E v a` ¢ 0 _T dU _ v m O C OI Tm Q m C m r ¢¢w ¢E N N c ° c m c m mEN °O -E 3 > w m ¢ v o u o v m K E G > o m Z` o N N E L N L c M Qm�cm cE W�M " m.Uacmo i N v m Ov Maaco Orn- O ¢c a oin L O 'O N WIIIII- ° .m c m ai w o� OL ai °E m O.C. ow 0 M m.n Ec E o K ` N> N N N 3 c m N ¢ c c m N¢ j O m O` m p Q c 'JU-_- m .0 a v `m t o Ni ai m ... .O ¢o ¢�` =cd' �ccm> O� cm> m 3c c m> of MC�m> m oE N-�mN Qm'°bo Q�ia; o.c Hmmb o'c Q�m'mo w 3 T ry 0 O ry m� D U ry C e e e e O 0 � °OE`oQ � a v 0 0 U I T a N C O a N d OI C O C O {G O U C > O D1 C E H O J 0 0 d m m O m C w N O c N w m Y m J O T 7 m c a n O N c N N v O (/1 O E a n o� O€ N E@ .N. W O) r N N TJ Ul = L O N O (p •� W N T r C m rn o o -om E`o vavdYCVm vE mv'9 Muo0 cn nm nc E�v�cvm v v_a)in n°o cp Q+N O`aV > m� «° an �N�cM 3o co Nmm N� maC.0 0w aic morn ¢- m. m me mcc mcc m- vEF mornvn w Em cv ~CL v �v,o v m m!o mm v c m O S `-' L O m °'"ate ~ °a a'�y vii v ovoQ m �'"' c c'='o c�oc c w yma"a� ~o mcvE�v cvin mYo ui �nL, :_ N ox o ox 0 v vc c Kirin o v 9 �m >D a m oa 3 N N ry NO O O LLm O �`- V m lc1 N$.. O aEi O v O L.. O m r= o D m c o o 0° `m o o m U m c 3. o ff ¢ - O m c H u. ¢¢ `o m d¢ m H ¢. o m O) M K O v t o¢ N a 3 0 o � W- `o vU ys `ow v O T W C o > N E m O C m T_m °E as m � v o � m v E c v 3 > W m U ¢ O v O ° � O v O o> d' f J i O o� O€ N E@ .N. W O) r N N TJ Ul = L O N O (p •� W N T r C m rn o o -om E`o vavdYCVm vE mv'9 Muo0 cn nm nc E�v�cvm v v_a)in n°o cp Q+N O`aV > m� «° an �N�cM 3o co Nmm N� maC.0 0w aic morn ¢- m. m me mcc mcc m- vEF mornvn w Em cv ~CL v �v,o v m m!o mm v c m O S `-' L O m °'"ate ~ °a a'�y vii v ovoQ m �'"' c c'='o c�oc c w yma"a� ~o mcvE�v cvin mYo ui �nL, :_ N ox o ox 0 v vc c Kirin o v 9 �m >D a m oa 3 N N ry NO O O LLm O �`- V m lc1 N$.. O aEi O v O L.. O m r= o D m c o o 0° `m o o m U m c 3. o ff ¢ - O m c H u. ¢¢ `o m d¢ m H ¢. o m O) M K O v t o¢ N a 3 0 o � W- L K N � @ G - N Z N 0 C O U i v v T m O1 C c n c c N W W C v v O a c � d N y � w w � Y Y G m m � J J C O O � U U rn rn c c o a � 9 O � jp U U O c c - m @ j N N N O � « OI O« p« C .E 5E of o `o •L- p O T N c Q O T N `w anw °E ap_W Q C v C CO O C O C @ E y E m E= 0 3>w curio 3>w ,L O O m y_ N m 0@ ° Y {G � EJ i'm0 ry K £J ..N. = r O C � L C j 'G Ol N✓ N C w m U m� O rn v m @ v LL w v c L c vvc ~ Ni> api> a :2.4 s LLNNQO �« NNN Lm 'C �Y O.NC OmN O°-LL p¢,rLNmD C «� �Om vEFm °mm «@omo cps N :c . �°c l=- ' c -u =�° `O_ a E m._ a cJi c� <e E N • m 7 m N • @ ` v�._ m>`` wUN a c«p " C o N m > LN N C "m C Oa ' .pm p F t , rn.m cp _ ° O 'n w N O N N N ° N E N O > v vTv cv � p pO O U E E U oLLamo p ° 3�Epo o- @ o> a °O ¢ o m u�`° °mF c o c ci �o � a N A .c d 10 cl c O U I T a .y C O 6 d K Ol C O C O «c 0 0 O O] c E O U n 0 v v c O m r m c w N O c N W v Y N O T Al m c a D 0 v c m N w `o E d o d C L d N w v N °I N a v c e . 22 wN> O dN Ca U c a =L vw � o ED O a o�w -- o h >Co -Oc m C E t v v o n Y Q c E c o 0 �N OMN.00wO O «OONN U U M v Vc 0 Mc c Nv�Etm 0 W O0 ca oai rno.c v'o -oo °'E c> vtc o�ou. =m o h c Erg mmm LvEcm wm�Ti ,n wi- .�YL�cNE woad ou) C) Nco NEm >M aC °»m'� -I V'o '`cm° c�co. �a «'�v� mtv¢!0�Q'.: o'c ¢t°m'w o'c Lymwovm`o.>• m mvm cEm"°-o v c o E E r � Svc °Em v N v"OO (O O C L N L � ai mac r 3@ L c ° 0 N C O E !C m > rn 3 ¢!a✓ «: I- E K o W v o 6 K I'n g Y N j O o � w•� 0 n. T v v o«Q-1 NL Ow c o v c E ° O C 01 T� o- rnO E a m c o. o. w m a E `o o ° v c c c c a v c c °O 4E a mE'N 3> w -E v o 0 a o v c v > > O Y E J > > O K > O d C L d N w v N °I N a v c e . 22 wN> O dN Ca U c a =L vw � o ED O a o�w -- o h >Co -Oc m C E t v v o n Y Q c E c o 0 �N OMN.00wO O «OONN U U M v Vc 0 Mc c Nv�Etm 0 W O0 ca oai rno.c v'o -oo °'E c> vtc o�ou. =m o h c Erg mmm LvEcm wm�Ti ,n wi- .�YL�cNE woad ou) C) Nco NEm >M aC °»m'� -I V'o '`cm° c�co. �a «'�v� mtv¢!0�Q'.: o'c ¢t°m'w o'c Lymwovm`o.>• m mvm cEm"°-o v c o E E r � Svc °Em v N v"OO (O O C L N L � ai mac r 3@ L c ° 0 N C O E !C m > rn 3 ¢!a✓ «: I- E K o W v o 6 K I'n g Y N j O o � w•� a 0 0 u R a N c 0 a N N rrA .0 O .0 O U W O O) C E c O U i 0 0 0 d N m 0 -°°'` aOm E Ern .n ocuaeii v¢i aci c ~a ° M 0 n ° °- OCmNmN oE�O�oNNO� 2O r M N d U N d O L U— O i C> Y Y O N LL= ». O N O N N O N O t0 « j 3c-OC 3 c °E m> rn N d'o N�cNO�cOCn o'c NLc�CNVdTNNN� o > 0 o e o f° w`_> o. o_`mH nEOmc°+ww�`o m c W N `o c N W Y N J O T 1 c. c a a 0 U C N h w O r `o E d dZ. `o o E cw .. T E E m U S w O W C Cp T (p L C N u T O C 01 Q� a o W a KcEcUm Q E N m o � :o o0 � c-oa mEN °O -E 3 m W m a U O dZ. o E cw v E E KcEcUm coc :o o0 0 c-oa c C C N> E N c N c c N ¢ '° ... o .c Q m ¢ m m rn 3 a U v c e e e e N N Q r N V n N c E 3 w E � a` N N C d N G O U T C O a N v K m c 0 0 «c O U V- i O m G E F= c 0 U O a 0 r v _ m N D)v N C L 10 co o N ND�Dr t !L NL N >t f' N N A ° c N v C N T (6 N N C •- N W 6 rn o o O.amF -¢E`o w 0 o RU d N N N E c O rnti a o � Z w N' N yi 10 m fn, N V N m rn o E ° p � � Z M a P rc o w o` v o �K N � 3 0 a � STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE } ss. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE } I, Susan M. Domen, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2015 -087 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at a regular meeting held on the 1st day of December 2015, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Council Member Johnson, Mayor Pro Tern Tisdale, Council Member Magee, and Mayor Manos NOES: None ABSENT- Hickman ABSTAIN: None &usan M. Domen, City Clerk