Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem No. 25 Third Street Storm Drain ProjectText File City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 www.lake-elsinore.org File Number: ID# 17-201 Agenda Date: 5/23/2017 Status: BusinessVersion: 1 File Type: ReportIn Control: City Council Agenda Number: 25) Page 1 City of Lake Elsinore Printed on 5/19/2017 Page 1 of 3 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL To:Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From:Grant Yates, City Manager Prepared by: Richard J. MacHott, Planning Manager Date:May 23, 2017 Subject:Third Street Storm Drain Project Recommendation adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE THIRD STREET STORM DRAIN PROJECT (ER 2017-00002); AND, adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA FINDING THAT THE THIRD STREET STORM DRAIN PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN. direct STAFF TO ADVERTISE PUBLICLY FOR BIDS FOR THE THIRD STREET STORM DRAIN PROJECT. Project Location The proposed Third Street Storm Drain Project (Project) is located south of State Route 74 (Central Avenue), in the central portion of the City of Lake Elsinore, and is generally aligned within Third Street, but also includes portions of Collier Avenue, Cambern Avenue, Conard Avenue, and Welch Drive. (Exhibit A, Site Vicinity Map and Exhibit B, Site Map). Project Description The Project proposes the phased installation of an underground reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) and a reinforced concrete box (RCB) structure in order to adequately collect and convey the drainage flows of approximately 704 tributary acres under a 100-year flood event. More specifically, the Project involves the construction of a master drainage facility that would provide flood protection to the existing Third Street channel watershed and adjacent properties. Existing flood control improvements on the southern side of Collier Avenue include an existing earthen trapezoidal channel aligned along potions of Third Street beginning on the north side of Page 2 of 3 Collier Avenue. These existing improvements were “Stage 1” of the overall planned flood control improvements. Phase 1 of the proposed Project (“Stage 2” of the overall flood control improvements) involves the installation of underground RCB ranging between 6’ height (H) x 10’ width (W) to 4’6” H x 14’ W along with RCP ranging between 24 to 96 inches in diameter. Phase 1 would capture flows traveling southwest from an existing natural channel through a proposed drop-inlet structure to be constructed on the northern edge of Cambern Avenue within the roadway right-of-way. The drop-inlet structure would collect and convey the flows to the proposed underground RCP that would be installed along Cambern Avenue. From here, the RCP would be extended southeast towards Third Street and connect to a proposed RCP line. At Third Street, the RCP would continue southwest towards Interstate 15 and continue under Interstate 15 within CalTrans right-of-way and constructed via jack and bore drilling, as approved by CalTrans. Once the RCP is clear of CalTrans right-of-way, it would transition to an underground RCB structure and tie-in to an existing double RCB (4’6” H x 14’ W) located to the north of the Collier Avenue/Third Street Intersection. (Exhibit E; Preliminary Third Street Storm Drain Plans – Stage 2) Phase 2 of the proposed Project (“Stage 3” of the overall flood control improvements) involves the installation of a RCP ranging between 72 to 78 inches in diameter. Phase 2 will capture flows from a proposed basin and headwall designed to accommodate 100-year storm flows. The basin and headwall will be located on adjacent vacant land at/near the end/stub of existing Welch Drive. Flows will continue through the basin and headwall through approximately 100 feet of 78-inch diameter buried pipeline that will continue to Welch Drive. The existing functioning channel and headwall at the eastern end of Welch Drive, located on private property, will not be modified. The RCP storm drain would continue west along Welch Drive towards Conard Avenue, southeast along Conard Avenue toward Third Street, and southwest along Third Street towards Cambern Avenue. Phase 2 would tie into the Phase 1 RCP improvements at the Cambern Avenue/Third Street intersection. (Exhibit F, Preliminary Third Street Storm Drain Plans – Stage 3) Both Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Project would include the installation of several lateral connection points for future land uses. Phase 1 and Phase 2 would be designed to meet Riverside County Flood Control District (RCFCD) standards. Environmental Determination A Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) (Exhibit G) was prepared to analyze the potential impacts of the proposed Third Street Storm Drain project. The City transmitted the IS/MND to the State Clearinghouse which commenced the public review period which started on April 19, 2017 and was completed on May 19, 2017. Notice to all interested persons and agencies inviting comments on the IS/MND was published in accordance with the provisions of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. Additionally, notice of the availability of the IS/MND for review and the May 23, 2017 consideration of the IS/MND by the City Council was sent to all owners of property within 300 feet of the Third Street Storm Drain project. Three comment letters or e-mails were received by the City by May 10, 2017. Commenters were the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Copies of the comments and responses to them is attached as Exhibit I. These comments did not require modification of the mitigation measures set forth in the IS/MND. Page 3 of 3 Fiscal Impact Sufficient funds were approved in the fiscal year 2016/2017 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget to cover the cost of the City’s CEQA Consultant (Michael Baker International Company) to prepare the CEQA documents for the Third Street Storm Drain Project and related State Department of Fish and Wildlife and County Clerk posting fees. The costs for City staff time to review and process the IS/MND documentation were including in staff costs contained in the 2016/2017 operating budget. Exhibits A – CEQA Resolution B – MSHCP Resolution C – Site Vicinity Map D – Site Map E – Preliminary Third Street Storm Drain Plans – Stage 2 F – Preliminary Third Street Storm Drain Plans – Stage 3 G – IS/MND H – Exhibit “A” - MMRP I – Comment Letters/Response to Comments RESOLUTION NO. 2017-___ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT THE THIRD STREET STORM DRAIN PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) Whereas, the City of Lake Elsinore (City) is planning the installation of an underground reinforced concrete pipe storm drain, a reinforced concrete box structure, and related facilities, known as the Third Street Storm Drain Project (Project); and, Whereas,Section 6.0 of the Western Riverside County MSHCP requires that all projects which are proposed on land covered by an MSHCP criteria cell and which require discretionary approval by the legislative body undergo the Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process (LEAP) and a Joint Project Review (JPR) between the City and the Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) prior to public review of the project applications; and, Whereas, Section 6.0 further requires that development projects not within an MSHCP criteria cell must be analyzed pursuant to the MSHCP “Plan Wide Requirements;” and, Whereas,the Project is not within an MSHCP Criteria Cell, Core or Linkage, but is within the Elsinore Plan Area of the MSHCP, and therefore, the Project was reviewed pursuant to the MSHCP “Plan Wide Requirements;” and, Whereas, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP requires that the City adopt consistency findings prior to approving any discretionary project entitlements for development of property that is subject to the MSHCP; and, Whereas,on May 23, 2017, at a duly noticed public meeting, the Council has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1:The Council has reviewed and analyzed the proposed Project and its consistency with the MSHCP prior to making a decision to adopt findings that the Project is consistent with the MSHCP. Section 2: That in accordance with the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), and the MSHCP, Findings for adoption have been made as follows: 1. The proposed project is a project under the City’s MSHCP Resolution, and the City must make an MSHCP Consistency Finding before approval. The proposed project is planning the installation of an underground reinforced concrete pipe storm drain, a reinforced concrete box structure, and related CC Res. No. 2017 - ___ Page 2 of 5 facilities, which requires CEQA review by the City. Pursuant to the City’s MSHCP Resolution, the project has been reviewed for MSHCP consistency, including consistency with “Other Plan Requirements.” These include the Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 6.1.2), Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 6.1.3), Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP, Section 6.3.2), Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 6.1.4), Vegetation Mapping (MSHCP, Section 6.5.1) requirements, Fuels Management Guidelines (MSHCP, Section 6.4), and payment of the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee (MSHCP Ordinance, Section 4). 2. The proposed project is not subject to the City’s LEAP and the County’s JPR processes. The proposed project is not located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell area, therefore, no formal LEAP submittal was required. However, the project is still required to demonstrate compliance with “Other Plan Requirements.” The project is in compliance as described further below. 3. The proposed project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. The majority of the Project site contains no jurisdictional drainage, ponds, basins, gravel pits or potential wetland features that would be considered jurisdictional by the Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, or California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). There are no areas or habitats within the Phase 1 portion of the project site that would qualify as riparian/riverine habitat as defined under Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP and there is no indication of vernal pools or suitable fairy shrimp habitat within that phase of the project site. However, a portion of Phase 2 of the proposed Project, located within the Ramsgate Specific Plan Area, would consist of a basin, headwall and approximately 100 feet of 78-inch diameter pipeline, which would impact Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and CDFW jurisdictional areas. This portion of Phase 2 includes riparian/riverine habitat. The MSHCP requires that all riparian/riverine habitats be avoided. If they cannot be avoided, a DBESP is required. Therefore, a DBESP will be prepared prior to the initiation of Phase 2 of the proposed Project, and the riparian/riverine habitat will be mitigated to the biological equivalent or better, in accordance with Mitigation Measure BIO-2. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the riparian/riverine and vernal pool requirements of the MSHCP. CC Res. No. 2017 - ___ Page 3 of 5 4. The proposed project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species (NEPS)Guidelines. The project site is not within the MSHCP NEPS survey area. There were no rare plants found within the project area and there is no suitable habitat for any of the NEPS. Thus, the project is consistent with the NEPS requirements of the MSHCP. 5.The proposed project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. The MSHCP requires additional surveys for certain species if the project is located in Criteria Area Species Survey Area (CASSA), Amphibian Species Survey Area with Critical Area, Burrowing Owl Survey Areas with Criteria Area, and Mammal Species Survey Areas with Criteria Areas of the MSHCP. The project site is located outside of any CASSA for plants and mammals and no CASSA plant species were observed during the focused surveys for the site. A portion of the proposed project is located within the survey area identified for the burrowing owl. No burrows capable of providing suitable roosting and nesting opportunities for the burrowing owl were found on the project site during a reconnaissance-level survey conducted on the Project site. No burrowing owls or burrowing owl sign was observed on the project site. As required by the MSHCP, mitigation has been included requiring pre-construction focused species surveys within 30-days prior to any ground-disturbing activities at the project site where suitable habitat is present and requiring appropriate mitigation if active nests are located. Based upon the above, it can be concluded that the proposed project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures of the MSHCP. 6. The proposed project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines. The MSHCP Urban/Wildland Interface Guidelines are intended to address indirect effects associated with locating development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area. 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. Thus, the proposed project is consistent with the Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildland Interface. 7. The proposed project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. No vegetation mapping requirements apply to the proposed project. CC Res. No. 2017 - ___ Page 4 of 5 8. The proposed project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. The proposed project site is separated from nearby criteria cells by other properties. Therefore, the fuels management guidelines set forth in the MSHCP are not applicable. 9. The City will pay any appropriate MSHCP Implementation Fee. Because the proposed Project is a local capital improvement project, the City may be required to pay local MSHCP implementation fees. The City will pay any appropriate MSHCP fee related to the proposed project. 10.The proposed project overall is consistent with the MSHCP. The Project is consistent with all applicable provisions of the MSHCP. No further actions related to the MSHCP are required. Section 3: Based upon the evidence presented and the above findings, the City Council hereby adopts findings that that the project is consistent with the MSHCP. Section 4: This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. Passed and Adopted this 23rd day of May, 2017. Robert E. Magee, Mayor Attest: Susan M. Domen, MMC City Clerk CC Res. No. 2017 - ___ Page 5 of 5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ) I, Susan M. Domen, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2017 - ___ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at the Regular meeting of May 23, 2017, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Susan M. Domen, MMC City Clerk Site Vicinity11/9/2016 JN M:\Mdata\148215\MXD\02 Site Vicinity.mxd Source: Riverside County, ESRI W orld Topo Exhibit 2 0 1 2 Miles° !"a$ ?± !"a$ Legend Pro ject Site (Stage 2 ) Pro ject Site (Stage 3 ) Ee. Ag a=X�<ozllw mow_ �a000 asp 0�3>0 �� 8appswwap <��< x o n om^ ;49,K zz o�� [� of ors_ � Q �6 ` '< <ap s o s E W�'82� 5 O z w W wwN.< W w- _ '�=a8��gwo _Ja o nff<� apo '� 3�>z g4 Y<8m m��m-ate s4x�a�a Z 11 Q �< t 9.9 Jw �HMZ0.... A aQ C6 m - W O O w E- O mac+_ m� Ni �� �.A <RQ�W-� g Aw a ' Www 8.2H, -gid mo>P=.m w --z ��� z Ma o 01,4 ds= aw wOBWS ff�N.81 Nisar nWwRilw. o� ���os S. °zo mo -2 X33 $ww;�"�N S. moo4�e3. �w �'p `8wp Bps 8p ,>g, 49 MMN N s a 31b1Sa31N! U) 0 C Ll o8 aC=8338$ L U 01w w o w s y m mp x m RR N 12 ;on.. 8iw w8� m T m�po g9s `tea �o moo �w51ni 2 64 <�m dao :11a<m - W 8 wp�s gE� I� �$mI 8$ 68 02 Rsig � zo g a�Uw W m��mm N -i =a wsp8wIom<cd8 >FS. o ° Z C �oS gg O =o Zab�� w Z = �a O O g d 8�3 F- WZ g ~W Q.�N w Ud Now N LIJ cn m <�oN� N U En 31b1Sa31N! U) 0 C Ll o8 aC=8338$ L U 01w w o w s y m mp x m RR N 12 ;on.. 8iw w8� m T m�po g9s `tea �o moo �w51ni 2 64 <�m dao :11a<m - W 8 wp�s gE� I� �$mI 8$ 68 02 Rsig � zo g a�Uw W m��mm N -i =a wsp8wIom<cd8 >FS. o ° c� d 8�3 g a g e z 88 Q � m � •Hy if9R• W � (n a C 8 U U S z Lu'f a wIn uz 8 a V s a • 9Ad- 83.LX3G z Z • a z ZS Q a x zg R��... 31b1Sa31N! U) 0 C Ll o8 aC=8338$ L U 01w w o w s y m mp x m RR N 12 ;on.. 8iw w8� m T m�po g9s `tea �o moo �w51ni 2 64 <�m dao :11a<m - W 8 wp�s gE� I� �$mI 8$ 68 02 Rsig � zo g a�Uw W m��mm N -i =a wsp8wIom<cd8 >FS. o ° _ fflq rn o n U 2 M F m O Z �- ^ > cad (n Z w 1 4 N w g o mo o No 3 4 ?m+ m y�� w �6 a Q � JN a I �zF, �I o ^oZZQ c;oo�x o iL�c�irc uuo Cia - I o _ l� W� LJ b o U g a x d w fi Io o q LLI I Z a Z2rc 9iipo; fin Q j J �0U) a xq �� = z N^ z z �,r � U F N cv Ea a!� f to N §z oma. d S R I 4m zp b o 0 0 8 oN o wr �w ac4I o Vg> N I iF{�17N1 OS+yZ 'V1:5 VW N+SZ vis .. .. .. ...�.. Y .. ... ... ,L£ .}i .6k .0£ f �k . 00.4"'r.. a e...I. �.. ... 1 I� z I N s k: I I z smK 8 e I .. . ..... 1 s��ffiw I .�.... i I I I , J Z. 9 j .1....... i1..} --. - • z z S a Q I _ o — I II of i ....�. � ,�� , �I i I � IIz w-- --------- 0 ----..o ........ I .....T o Nw ..... w.. . I ..� 4 .'oma .. _ .. (A� oz -- T ; 8 B yyffi Is8 z F o ., a f Q YY •-� ; Q �,i wa0 ... .L. .. .. ....u, 1" ` — y :,. �_ ,w - y t � � o Y o+-eo- ri / 5k <10 . ..I.. ���_- i =fig . _........ oao. ........... ..... .. .. I arrN . -- i -w' w � v=' -'---� �. t4�� � ! � _• _ R R 3�W�M oN 3 • I .... .. Ff [` `✓•� y h 4 Rol nlI z ...... .. ...... -<aUz e -...-..._.. W ��^ M II ......... . . ......... o �n _ S.0 Z D" O k� UJ LLI N z zoo2 1 o p O z O M o + b Q z N N b ZH W ti n U) z� V w W ��N o�` Qw z ��¢ o vVwig o. A m �Ofn N :. ..... .. .. .....1 .. ... . .... m.. w (/i * (n � J . •• z ; 8I H n qk .. . . ....... w ....... _ S.0 Z D" O k� UJ LLI N z zoo2 1 o p O z O M o + b Q z N N b ZH W ti n U) z� V w W ��N o�` Qw z ��¢ o vVwig o. A m �Ofn N Fes- J= ~ V)N w (/i * (n � N _ S.0 m QS+SZ ir wre � z ,ply 1 0 p IIIII �� t i C F .. IF:.- •.. m..c c m' �b 7 Z a CL - 3 61 OC pSEr Yr 09+9Z d15 f s� OA Z --Z, I61 O r q� Vi Z F�I � W 1 z(Xo 6 l O z O I'o4 o M V' 0 0 Z Ye a z zd z b Z w a nC"ME: W z z 5pCL f� ~ . �QN I< R - 08 88 W V) -I z 0 N o c� Cim m horn + oo rc w wo o m � J N U HN n N d 0 �a cnzaNw�a ELIR • WN� -Z a mmm� N'omonnn �s<auwm�'rroAu J ......... ... ... ... .... .. d'w�w i wj IIIIAAAIw and �AAIIAIA _ Ja z Ye a z zd z b Z nC"ME: —12. o Y 'I ``�I `I ON� �a • ......... ... ... ... .... .. .... .... -- ------- . .:.'.. ............... .. ................ w v 341 -IH Yh OS+££ VSs 3NI-IH01nIY os o¢ OS+££ V1S .... ..... ..... I . . b I$ J I USG � mss. �g i ... -, ... i........ 1 �. .. ...i 'r3 z x v in I� w � ¢ F 1 �N - p FZ �1- 11 4 I lI I. V k c CL .... ............ I ➢s � iC � xw m� i -ri------' ---------- -- I _ _ I•' I I I mo? z .lI a z I. ... a k i y ow* ,...... y. ---. } 91 4�j` I.. . cnI.1. .I 1 31vr uaw 's 3oT -o' 3 4k3Nr1H01Vn 09+6p Y1S 09+6Z VIS - -C ---0, - o - L�..-•------------ . 3N I3Hol H z� aFP Z O cy- gd I o O a o d" b o 0 z ~ ~ Iyf H M of F� N Q 0 w 1z CW9 OCH o A m cO(n r+r+� V) M rn W I UIz j I I• � o ........ a.....i� .....I. ....... .. Nry.... w o> - SS IV F Z2 -Oi - --. .._------- ------- - <w zz w a 3'1lJ3AY�i1317Li0_ '3nr-.3i113u 'p � ... �..... .. m - -- ----------- -- .�a10 8 _aF U ------ --- - O a O ..........:........I....... .... .... .. .... . a N - ' o� IrT�'j~ ti f om a . �. Z �j3NI353`J1tlVH 09+W YIS c�i�u~i 3NI3HOIYW ------------- 4J .._._...� Q Ni 9 a .❑c fi .... .. _. __ ... .. .. ... ... .. seo Q - Z W o 3 l7H3IVrM 91 OS+Ly tl15 I z O ----------`• rl o fir; co i a z -I LU EX o � r 0 o z �I H- ~ N V W a mow o c7 o N <�0V)i+ I IW M V 11 1 _ 3NI-IHOIVW 05+L£ tl1S 9L Q - Z W o o M O I z O o co I � a LU EX o b 0 o z �I H- ~ W Z a V W a mow o c7 o N <�0V)i+ m M V a -swd m� W 5 o ek2kWR gz g��y3�d Agm -nfr � iun1 Z � � O M C G� Q , �� ........ z O Z a z c0i O,w ........... .. .�-.- ..-- .. I w 6 W � ago o F w b 0 O Z �1 ~ F- NN 04 U~ow" iS L -j Q N Zp w 7 N O o FF N m -U `1 Z LL U O 1I11 � c� U) a Qw� F Z jl 11 ,. ! 'I X iun1 <U2 ........ ... Z a z c0i O,w ........... .. .�-.- ..-- .. I w 6 - ... ..... -- ..... ..... .... .. F w _ ._..FS�g•d�. ass.... _ NN JL L6t a iS Zp =ZZ,-� 7 FF NNS OUQ m -U `1 Z LL U O 1I11 � c� U Qw� F Z jl 11 ,. ! 'I X N O OZ r�(~A -o ....- I- ZF U ��l-Ii31VV4 Cly+lb tl15 0 hu M K.. _. .._................ .. ------------- .__--- .......... ........... -1 ... .. .. . ... ................... .... .. ....... .. . ... .... . ..... w w 0 jl -----.. .....'J ... 4 �. . wNW }... 'IN WS . � .x......1.1... .... wo �o ....... ..... ...I �..............1.�.._. FQ �m l U -'• o � o •' ro g 6 133HS 335_ rc+ aj w 00 Ntvaa NdOiS At j b 4. Ir Li ......... .......... .. i....... .i--� - - --. ...-:... ... .. lj7l I. ..... -1 .. ..... x _ f r. lz W � r •v I . . ---- z •I - .o w n . ......... ..... -------------------- , .J .. $g��...... lz ! �.. N �_r........................ m azz......... }.. .. 1 .. .. . I ..... .. . ......... .... er Z W N 6 <ZlI z I I oox ..I.... :::}.' .. ...... C5�� , g¢wo.. ...; ..I .....1 i--.. .....� ... o1� ..:....... .I 1 USN }1 FNI05+ d1S 3NDHOIVW el ------- - - -- .......... .... !.................. z ,os os I i 1 ' Z Ol O O O M �oF 4 O F� N_ Z o 0 _ 3 > LUT a O p o Z M lG• N ~ VLU W a. , N a a x d D W Z D A m I EON s y�1 M V_ N v rn <ZlI z I I oox ..I.... :::}.' .. ...... C5�� , g¢wo.. ...; ..I .....1 i--.. .....� ... o1� ..:....... .I 1 USN }1 FNI05+ d1S 3NDHOIVW el ------- - - -- .......... .... !.................. z ,os os I i 1 ' �oF 4 _ 3 k lG• � B a x Qr"� Z N $mow 6J JJ x o W Smr x F Na S S O t Z 1481 i �l <ZlI z I I oox ..I.... :::}.' .. ...... C5�� , g¢wo.. ...; ..I .....1 i--.. .....� ... o1� ..:....... .I 1 USN }1 FNI05+ d1S 3NDHOIVW el ------- - - -- .......... .... !.................. z ,os os I i 1 ' k o w Z rn C-4 o n O =� = I a - - I t •3 O �2r0 Q - W Z J x zgzo� o� ��� ii ala » uJ a 1 � ro (n i Q Z apom� N � D p%<` z b O g C0 - G w Q � p` m o H W M v c� ff z ir' Zo O .n o �yW'G��o w�� Y5 = rc �'J' z ` I—I (% w W jrx N N m yy � Z wcn ° rn S Ian s x �a s m�'m oo�q �d �rrn 'Rp m N g �w I oz N yY OyIRS �iFF Nm %�YOYff�rss�im efipH * to J Q SN O ~ pN L'ml � �poo�ZAl iN�c�`•NNZ � ulllu uw YYQMtlIN2W III III IIII U Q H < N Z^ U? 88UZw?& im® w IN EL i44 R:• � O O m T N � N ' j n ri _ - !�' ' 1 8 8 a V'5R_ 0 - N i :.� ..... ...... n_.._rr F �9'f5Kl •+o I t 'Ohm m k n' oI - - - -I o 1Q - `.... .... r a LA Z, - o k 1 ail i- �_ o �s 1 I €s - � w z x � k W � •_ .... .......... :— - Z I W l -- w mY„ = I a - - I t LL Al I 4-1 � � yy � ° S Ian s - 13381S dN£ I Z rn O M I ffI 11II o 01 w 0 I F o� ................ ....... ...... ............. W II .. ...... o II II _�V W N¢N ... .. ..... .... p 88 - -- -•I-- ------ ... ..... ... ..i ¢ ��r o I.... .i €€ II �.� .. ..... .. . ...... .. F N N W l I T a iC3 U I .. ... .... ... ... .. ... ...... . .... ' I I - - --- - --- - - --- - li 6 ..B waw ...... � a IL.,. I �zl 3 --- ..... ......i. .... foo s V...... ..... 4 a .....� �< 8 •.c-.-��.; � - I it I€. li � w - - n - I W �Fri I �...__.. . .. . .. .... . f �_ .I N011� [ 3 ...--- = 5[hr ... w°Y ...... ... ....... _ � o i s. � .is .� ..... e . .„ ... ..... ...- - -- .. ..... .. ... ...-- - - --- ....-. s s c I _ -... ...1 �. ..i....-. ry-- --------..... ..... .... ...... .............. ------..........._- _ SN0;8 .......................... ....... . ' .. .. .. . o 0, ... ... . ......... 2El Z O "o 1z El $< 8 < f a � 1.E �3 0 I 1-- I•ic'�o,l =res �I o z x n� A i...i..._ . I...I ........... :. ...... ......._I o _� m 0 o Z _ w U w N .... N x W q LU —1 ¢ CD F A m J o V) �g< V)F �I. V) .. �. ......y�. .._. I 2 . ... w ...... .. � ry y�ahq�pa ...... ..... o��-�zC w z O ¢ z a V 'LY1 18 51.m U a- z113 as<(a G) 4D J1a x m 0 a C3 ao U " 0 w L z N U L- U G' a H1 a <w 0� U .9 m wgx w rn 0 o 0, o0 2El Z O "o 1z El $< 8 � 1.E �3 0 I a j � W 0 o Z U w FAN sr� W q LU —1 ¢ CD F A m J o V) V)F U V) w 2El 1z El $< 8 � 1.E �3 0 5 E o a y�ahq�pa O ¢ z U W $~F$s F r � J 0 s s e W t Z w LL * Z o oo 1., m °rte 0Amez z o�Ng �rc� w r° aaw wiz 8w 0' cmgw i b o G s"a 666 W 8 o - Z 21 a n F- U C1 a a=UP Aar yyco �- mo o_ �� a� o - H5 X11 ooh 0 c� 'J - 1 •I 1 v I ll 1 maa 1 1 1 I w U $ I I 1 I N � I ra011I9ml d3 - y 1 £H"Lb+£Z 'Vls I g 1 1 Z i n i I I Z F..EL ¢ 1 J W I r W – 1 ' 'V it 1 p G i n , +0-b1+sZ 'VLS i � F o ~ a ! m`" I rc fqu O W I n i N r� d I zz vis f' r 1 ' o 1 I yy I tl o~ l a m r Ld}a I I I I 1 fl I' l LIVNLU !S z C-4 OZ.0 z C, \\�- m } - w ( ]e % 2 M / 'u-j z 0 § )ck m /§ ) ® w� U aenu�H \ § Sk\ m )E§ §(( u / 2 e 2§ �f �§ ` § ZW §§, , !,! . 0 },.. $I\� _� § � \ (\ |\\�, , _LU � - ecc0,lit. LU >z/ kƒ�, �§ L § k.) Z « ,LU ■ {§§ ■„E, z. \K p aN 2 Iz /( / ) ' LisF3 B-3� |. © ! �� 2 ; ©a !» } ; | ■: °. w�� \j caIz _ §§§ ®zz> o P\� (�z.2m\§\/\\.....21 ]�® - \/) \y)5\/}}2}\/\ - � \LU §��a ;=;;»t;;a§\(\\ 3 ®\) ram--�-; \ \; z \ §§Iz \{§)\« § ( �E^/ /LU )- :�j:{ LLI LU 'M ] ] wz X], } FHXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X XXXXXXXFHFHFHFHXXXX XXXX X FHFHXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X XXXXXXX X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X XXXXXXXXXFHXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXX X X XXXXX X X XXXXXXXXX X XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX X X X X XXXXXX X X X XXXXXXXXX X X X XX FHX X X X X X XXXXXXXXXX X X XXXXX X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X XXXXXXXXXXXXX X FHXX DRAFT INITIAL STUDY (ER 2017-00002)/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Third Street Storm Drain Project LEAD AGENCY: City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Contact: Brad Fagrell City Engineer (951) 673-3124 ext. 212 PREPARED BY: Michael Baker International 40810 County Center Drive, Suite 200 Temecula, California 92591 Contact: Mr. Darren Edgington, CEP-IT, LEED AP (951) 506-2083 April 2017 PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 i Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................1 1.1 STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................ 1 1.2 PURPOSE ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 CONSULTATION ............................................................................................................................ 2 1.4 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE .................................................................................................. 2 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................3 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING ............................................................................................... 3 2.2 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS .......................................................................................................... 3 2.3 Discretionary APPROVALS ............................................................................................................ 4 2.4 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST ............................................................................................................. 5 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS .............................................................................................. 20 3.1 AESTHETICS ................................................................................................................................. 20 3.2 AGRICULTURE RESOURCES ......................................................................................................... 23 3.3 AIR QUALITY ................................................................................................................................ 25 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................ 33 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................... 38 3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS .................................................................................................................. 42 3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ................................................................................................... 47 3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.................................................................................... 52 3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ............................................................................................ 56 3.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING ......................................................................................................... 61 3.11 MINERAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................................. 62 3.12 NOISE .......................................................................................................................................... 64 3.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING ...................................................................................................... 73 3.14 PUBLIC SERVICES......................................................................................................................... 75 3.15 RECREATION ............................................................................................................................... 77 3.16 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC ....................................................................................................... 78 3.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................... 82 3.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ................................................................................. 86 4.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 87 4.1 REPORT PREPARATION PERSONNEL ........................................................................................... 87 4.2 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS ........................................................................................................... 88 5.0 CONSULTANT RECOMMENDATION .................................................................................... 94 6.0 LEAD AGENCY DETERMINATION ........................................................................................ 95 City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 ii Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration LIST OF TABLES Table 2.3-1: Required Permit Approvals ....................................................................................................... 4 Table 3.3-1: Construction Related Emissions .............................................................................................. 25 Table 3.3-2: Localized Significance of Construction Emissions ................................................................... 29 Table 3.12-1: Noise/Land Use Compatibility .............................................................................................. 62 Table 3.12-2: Exterior Noise Limit ............................................................................................................... 63 Table 3.12-3: Maximum Noise Levels Generated by Construction Equipment .......................................... 65 Table 3.12-4: Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment .......................................................... 67 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Regional Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................... 9 Exhibit 2: Local Vicinity Map ....................................................................................................................... 11 Exhibit 3: Project Site Map .......................................................................................................................... 13 Exhibit 4: Site Photos .................................................................................................................................. 15 APPENDICES Appendix A: Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Data Appendix B: Biological Studies Appendix C: Cultural Resources Assessment City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 1.0 INTRODUCTION The City of Lake Elsinore is planning the installation of an underground reinforced concrete pipe storm drain, a reinforced concrete box structure, and related facilities, known as the Third Street Storm Drain Project (Project). The City of Lake Elsinore (City) has determined that the Project is subject to the guidelines and regulations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This Initial Study has been prepared to address potential impacts associated with the Project, as described below. This Initial Study addresses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects associated with implementation of the proposed Project. 1.1 STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND REQUIREMENTS In accordance with CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21000 - 21177) and pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) and the City’s Local CEQA Guidelines, the City, acting in the capacity of Lead Agency, is required to undertake the preparation of an Initial Study to determine if the proposed Project would have a significant environmental impact. If the Lead Agency finds that there is no evidence that the Project, either as proposed or as modified to include the mitigation measures (if any) identified in the Initial Study, may cause a significant effect on the environment, the Lead Agency shall find that the proposed Project would not have a significant effect on the environment and shall prepare a Negative Declaration or Negative Declaration for the Project. Such a determination can be made only if “there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the Lead Agency” that such impacts may occur (Public Resources Code Section 21080(c)). 1.2 PURPOSE The purpose of the Initial Study (IS) is to: (1) identify potential environmental impacts; (2) provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative Declaration (including a Mitigated Negative Declaration); (3) enable an applicant or Lead Agency to modify a project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared; (4) facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of the project; (5) provide documentation of the factual basis for the finding in a Negative Declaration that a project would not have a significant environmental effect; (6) eliminate needless EIRs; (7) determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used for the project; and (8) assist in the preparation of an EIR, if required, by focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant, identifying the effects determined not to be significant and explaining the reasons for determining that potentially significant effects would not be significant. As discussed further below, the City has determined that the Project will not result in significant environmental impacts with the incorporated mitigation and has circulated this Draft IS/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for public review and comment. Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines identifies specific disclosure requirements for inclusion in an Initial Study. Pursuant to those requirements, an Initial Study shall include: (1) a description of the project including the location of the project; (2) an identification of the environmental setting; (3) an identification of the environmental effects by use of a checklist, matrix or other method, provided that entries on a checklist or other form are briefly explained to indicate that there is City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration some evidence to support the entries; (4) a discussion of ways to mitigate significant effects identified, if any; (5) an examination of whether the project is compatible with existing zoning, plans and other applicable land use controls; and (6) the name of the person or persons who prepared or participated in the preparation of the Initial Study. 1.3 CONSULTATION As soon as the Lead Agency has determined that an Initial Study would be required for the Project, the Lead Agency is directed to consult informally with Responsible Agencies and Trustee Agencies that are responsible for resources affected by the Project, in order to obtain the recommendations of those agencies as to whether an EIR or Negative Declaration should be prepared for the Project. Following receipt of any written comments from those agencies, the Lead Agency would consider any recommendations of those agencies in the formulation of the preliminary findings. Following preparation of this Initial Study, the Lead Agency shall initiate formal consultation with these and other governmental agencies, as required under CEQA and its implementing guidelines. 1.4 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE Pertinent documents relating to this IS/MND have been cited and incorporated, in accordance with Sections 15148 and 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines. The following references were utilized during preparation of this Initial Study and are available for review: x City of Lake Elsinore General Plan, 2011 x City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Final Recirculated Program Environmental Impact Report, 2011 x Lake Elsinore Municipal Code City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING The proposed Third Street Storm Drain Project (Project) is located in southwestern Riverside County in the City of Lake Elsinore; refer to Exhibit 1, Regional Vicinity Map. The Project is situated within the Santa Ana River Basin and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) Zone 3 watershed. More specifically, the Project site is located south of State Route 74 (Central Avenue), in the central portion of the City of Lake Elsinore, and is generally aligned within Third Street, but also includes portions of Collier Avenue, Cambern Avenue, Conard Avenue, and Welch Drive; refer to Exhibit 2, Site Vicinity Map. The Project site consists of mostly disturbed areas associated with existing roadways and surrounding rural-residential properties. According to the City of Lake Elsinore Zoning Ordinance, the zoning adjacent to the Project site include C2 – General Commercial, CMU – Commercial Mixed Use, R2 – Medium Density Residential, R3 – High Density Residential, and RE – Residential Estate to the north, C2, CMU, R2, and RE to the south, CM – Commercial Manufacturing to the west, and RE and SP - Specific Plan to the east.1 According to the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan, land use designations surrounding the Project site include Limited Industrial, Business Professional, General Commercial, Commercial Mixed Use, Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential, and Low Density Residential to the north and south, Limited Industrial to the west, and Low Density Residential to the east.2 The Project site is subject to regular disturbance and is dominated by non-native vegetation and highly compacted soils. 2.2 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS The Project proposes the phased installation of an underground reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) and a reinforced concrete box (RCB) structure in order to adequately collect and convey the drainage flows of approximately 704 tributary acres under a 100-year flood event. More specifically, the Project involves the construction of a master drainage facility which would provide flood protection to the existing Third Street channel watershed and adjacent properties. Existing flood control improvements on the southern side of Collier Avenue include an existing earthen trapezoidal channel aligned along potions of Third Street beginning on the north side of Collier Avenue. This Initial Study will analyze the potential environmental impacts associated with two phases of drainage improvements located primarily along Third Street (Phase 1 and 2 of the proposed Project) which will connect to the existing flood control improvements.3 1 City of Lake Elsinore, City of Lake Elsinore Zoning Map, http://www.lake-elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=15059, Accessed December 13, 2016. 2 City of Lake Elsinore, City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Land Use Map, http://www.lake- elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=10907, Accessed December 13, 2016. 3 Engineering drawings consistent with Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District requirements indicate the existing flood control facilities as Stage I. Stage II and Stage III of these engineering drawings are equivalent to Phase I and Phase II (respectively) of this Initial Study. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Phase 1 involves the installation of underground RCB ranging between 6’ height (H) x 10’ width (W) to 4’6” H x 14’ W along with RCP ranging between 24 to 96 inches in diameter. Phase 1 would capture flows traveling southwest from an existing natural channel through a proposed drop-inlet structure to be constructed on the northern edge of Cambern Avenue within the roadway right- of-way. The drop-inlet structure would collect and convey the flows to the proposed underground RCP that would be installed along Cambern Avenue. From here, the RCP would be extended southeast towards Third Street and connect to a proposed RCP line. At Third Street, the RCP would continue southwest towards Interstate 15 and continue under Interstate 15 within CalTrans right- of-way and constructed via jack and bore drilling, as approved by CalTrans. Once the RCP is clear of CalTrans right-of-way, it would transition to an underground RCB structure and tie-in to an existing double RCB (4’6” H x 14’ W) located to the north of the Collier Avenue/Third Street Intersection; refer to Exhibit 3, Project Site Map. Phase 2 of the Project involves the installation of a RCP ranging between 72 to 78 inches in diameter. Phase 2 will capture flows from a proposed basin and headwall designed to accommodate 100-year storm flows. The basin and headwall will be located on adjacent vacant land at/near the end/stub of existing Welch Drive (refer to Exhibit 3, Project Site). Flows will continue through the basin and headwall through approximately 100 feet of 78-inch diameter buried pipeline that will continue to Welch Drive. The existing functioning channel and headwall at the eastern end of Welch Drive, located on private property, will not be modified. The RCP storm drain would continue west along Welch Drive towards Conard Avenue, southeast along Conard Avenue toward Third Street, and southwest along Third Street towards Cambern Avenue. Phase 2 would tie into the Phase 1 RCP improvements at the Cambern Avenue/Third Street intersection. Refer also to Exhibit 4, Site Photos. Both Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Project would include the installation of several lateral connection points for future land uses. Phase 1 and Phase 2 would be designed to meet Riverside County Flood Control District (RCFCD) standards. 2.3 DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS These discretionary approvals are anticipated for the proposed Project: Table 2.3-1: Required Permit Approvals Agreements, Permits, and Approvals Granting Agency CEQA Approval City of Lake Elsinore General Construction Permit Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) CalTrans Encroachment Permit CalTrans City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 2.4 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST 2.4.1 BACKGROUND 1. Project Title: Third Street Storm Drain 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, California 92530 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Brad Fagrell City Engineer (951) 674-3124 ext. 212 4. Project Location: The proposed Project is generally located in western Lake Elsinore located south of State Route 74 (Central Avenue). 5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, California 92530 6. General Plan Designation: The Project is mostly located in road right-of-way. The General Plan Land Use Designation’s adjacent to the Project site include Limited Industrial, Business Professional, General Commercial, Commercial Mixed Use, Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential, and Low Density Residential to the north and south, Limited Industrial to the west, and Low Density Residential to the east. 7. Zoning: The Project is mostly located in road right-of-way. The zoning adjacent to the Project site include C2 – General Commercial, CMU – Commercial Mixed Use, R3 – High Density Residential, and RE – Residential Estate to the north, C2, CMU, R2 – Medium Density Residential, and RE to the south, CM – Commercial Manufacturing to the west, and RE and SP - Specific Plan to the east. 8. Description of the Project: The Project addressed in this Initial Study consists of all actions related to the phased installation of an underground reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) storm drain and reinforced concrete box (RCB) structure beginning at Cambern Avenue and heading southeast along Third Street to terminate at Welch Drive. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The lands surrounding the Project site have the following land uses: North: Commercial land uses and vacant land South: Single-family residential and vacant land East: Single-family residential and vacant land West: Commercial land uses and vacant land 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement). See Table 2.3-1, Required Permit Approvals, above. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 2.4.2 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project. The issue areas evaluated in this Initial Study include: x Aesthetics x Air Quality x Agriculture Resources x Biological Resources x Cultural Resources x Greenhouse Gas Emissions x Geology/Soils x Hazards and Hazardous Materials x Hydrology and Water Quality x Land Use and Planning x Mineral Resources x Noise x Population and Housing x Public Services x Recreation x Transportation/Traffic x Tribal Cultural Resources x Utilities and Service Systems The environmental analysis in this section is patterned after the Initial Study Checklist recommended by the State CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G, and is used by the City in its environmental review process. For the preliminary environmental assessment undertaken as part of this Initial Study’s preparation, a determination that there is a potential for significant effects indicates the need to more fully analyze the Project’s impacts and to identify mitigation. For the evaluation of potential impacts, the questions in the Initial Study Checklist are stated and an answer is provided according to the analysis undertaken as part of the Initial Study. The analysis considers the long-term, direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of a project. To each question, there are four possible responses: x No Impact. The Project will not have any measurable environmental impact on the environment. x Less Than Significant Impact. The Project will have the potential for impacting the environment, although this impact will be below established thresholds that are considered to be significant. x Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The Project will have the potential to generate impacts which may be considered as a significant effect on the environment, although mitigation measures or changes to the development’s physical or operational characteristics can reduce these impacts to levels that are less than significant. x Potentially Significant Impact. The development will have impacts, which are considered significant, and additional analysis is required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. Where potential impacts are anticipated to be significant, mitigation measures will be required, so that impacts may be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 7 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 2.4.3 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this Project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics X Land Use and Planning Agriculture Resources Mineral Resources X Air Quality X Noise X Biological Resources Population and Housing X Cultural Resources Public Services X Geology and Soils Recreation Greenhouse Gas Emissions Transportation/Traffic X Tribal Cultural Resources X Hazards & Hazardous Materials Utilities & Service Systems X Hydrology & Water Quality X Mandatory Findings of Significance City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 8 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK. !"`$?q Perris Reservoir Lake Mathews Jurupa Valley Project Location )%&h( !"a$ ?¦ SAN DIEGO COUNTY RIVERSIDE COUNTY ?ª ?» !"a$ ?¦ ?¦ Riverside Perris Corona Moreno Valley Yucaipa Murrieta Lake Elsinore Temecula Norco S Calimesa an Clemente Regional Vicinity Exhibit 1 °02.55 Miles7/7/2016 JN M:\Mdata\148215\MXD\01 Regional Vicinity.mxd APSource: ESRI Relief Map, National Highway Planning Network Project Location ) THIRD STREET STORM DRAIN PROJECT Regional Vicinity Map City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 10 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 12 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK Phase 1 Phase 2 Exhibit 3 Site Map JN 156903 THIRD STREET STORM DRAIN PROJECT Existing Reinforced Concrete Box (4.5' X 14') Proposed Basin and Headwall City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 14 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK Exhibit 4 Site Photos JN 156903 THIRD STREET STORM DRAIN PROJECT Exhibit 4 Site Photos JN 156903 THIRD STREET STORM DRAIN PROJECT Exhibit 4 Site Photos JN 156903 THIRD STREET STORM DRAIN PROJECT Exhibit 4 Site Photos JN 156903 THIRD STREET STORM DRAIN PROJECT City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 20 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The following evaluation provides responses to the questions in the CEQA Environmental Checklist. A brief explanation for each question in the CEQA Environmental Checklist is provided to support each impact determination. All responses consider the whole of the action involved including construction and operational impacts, as well as direct and indirect impacts. Environmental factors potentially affected by the proposed Project are presented below and organized according to the format of the Checklist. Evaluation of the following resources was based on a site visit conducted by Michael Baker International on February 18, 2016, and review of preliminary design plans, available site geotechnical data, and other sources listed in Section 4.0, References, of this analysis. 3.1 AESTHETICS Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 1. AESTHETICS -- Would the Project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? … … ; … b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? … … ; … c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? … … ; … d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? … … ; … Would the proposal: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. A scenic vista is generally defined as a view of undisturbed natural lands exhibiting a unique or unusual feature that comprises an important or dominant portion of the viewshed. Scenic vistas may also be represented by a particular distant view that provides visual relief from less attractive views of nearby features. Other designated federal and state lands, as well as local open space or recreational areas, may also offer scenic vistas if they represent a valued aesthetic view within the surrounding landscape of nearby features. The City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Environmental Impact Report identifies Lake Elsinore, urban areas surrounding the Lake, and the rugged vacant hills in the northern and eastern portion of the City as scenic viewsheds. In order to preserve valued public views throughout the City, all new public and private development projects are reviewed to ensure that they will not obstruct public views of scenic resources. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 21 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Lake Elsinore is located approximately 1.12 miles to the southwest of the Project. Additionally, the rugged vacant hills in the northern and eastern portion of the City are located approximately 1.2 miles and 0.5 miles to the north and east of the Project, respectively. These three areas are all designated as General Plan viewsheds. The RCP storm drains and associated infrastructure will be buried within existing roadway right- of-way, and will not be visible to the surrounding community once construction is complete. As such, Project development will not affect scenic views to General Plan viewsheds. Construction activities are considered temporary and relatively short in duration. Because the proposed Project would not involve long-term impacts to significant scenic vistas, there would be no substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista and impacts are considered less than significant. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. According to the California Department of Transportation Scenic Highways Program Database, Project implementation would not affect designated scenic highways.4 A portion of the RCP storm drain would be installed via jack and bore drilling below/underneath Interstate 15, which is identified as an Eligible State Scenic Highway. Additionally, the Project is located approximately 0.15 miles south of Highway 74, which is also identified as an Eligible State Scenic Highway. However, all pipeline facilities will be buried within existing roadway rights-of-way and easements, and will not be visible to the surrounding community once construction is complete. Thus, Project implementation is not anticipated to involve long-term impacts to scenic resources. A less than significant impact would occur in this regard. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. The project site is characterized by paved asphalt roadway right-of-way and easements. The site is surrounded by rural-residential, commercial, vacant land, and transportation land uses. Construction activities related to pipeline installation may cause a temporary impact to the existing visual character or quality of the surrounding area. Project construction impacts to the existing visual character or quality of the Project site would include short-term visual impacts associated with the presence of heavy duty vehicles, materials and debris piles, and other general construction equipment and activities. However, these impacts would be temporary in nature and the condition would cease upon completion of construction. The Project would involve the installation of buried pipeline and associated infrastructure, which would not be visible once construction is complete. Impacts would be less than significant in this regard. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities would be limited to daylight hours and the Project would not involve any nighttime construction activities which would require the provision of nighttime construction lighting. Accordingly, the Project’s short-term impacts to light and glare would be considered less than significant. 4 California Department of Transportation, California Scenic Highway Mapping System, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/index.htm, accessed November 7, 2016. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 22 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The RCP storm drains and associated infrastructure would be buried and would not require any nighttime or safety lighting for operations. Thus, Project operations would not have the potential to introduce new sources of light and glare. No operational impact would occur in this regard. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 23 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.2 AGRICULTURE RESOURCES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? … … … ; b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? … … … ; c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? … … … ; d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? … … … ; e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? … … … ; Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? Determination: No Impact. According to the State of California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), the Project site is not located in an area designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance.5 Further, there are no agricultural uses adjacent to the Project site. No impacts would occur in this regard. 5 State of California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, California Important Farmland Finder, http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/ciff/ciff.html, Accessed November 7, 2016. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 24 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Determination: No Impact. Refer to Impact 3.2 (a) above. The Project site is not zoned for agricultural use and is not under a Williamson Act contract. No impacts would occur in this regard. c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? Determination: No Impact. According to the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan and City of Lake Elsinore Zoning Ordinance, the Project site does not encompass lands zoned as forest lands. The Project site consists of mostly disturbed areas associated with existing roadways and surrounding rural-residential properties and is neither forest land nor timberland as defined by the referenced code sections. As such, the proposed Project would not conflict with the existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land. No impacts would occur. d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Determination: No Impact. Refer to Impact 3.2 (c) above. No impacts would occur. e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Determination: No Impact. Refer to Impacts 3.2 (a) and 3.2 (b) above. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 25 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.3 AIR QUALITY Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 3. AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? … … ; … b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? … ; … … c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? … ; … … d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? … ; … … e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? … … ; … Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan (South Coast Air Basin)? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. The proposed Project is located within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin), which is governed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). On March 3, 2017, the SCAQMD Governing Board approved the 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (2016 AQMP), which outlines its strategies for meeting the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone (O3). According to the SCAQMD’s 2016 AQMP, two main criteria must be addressed. CRITERION 1: With respect to the first criterion, SCAQMD methodologies require that an air quality analysis for a project include forecasts of project emissions in relation to contributing to air quality violations and delay of attainment. a) Would the project result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations? Since the consistency criteria identified under the first criterion pertain to pollutant concentrations, rather than to total regional emissions, an analysis of a Project’s pollutant emissions relative to localized pollutant concentrations is used as the basis for evaluating Project consistency. As discussed in Response 3.3(d) below, localized concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOX), and fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5) would be City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 26 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration less than significant. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations. Because reactive organic gases (ROGs) are not a criteria pollutant, there is no ambient standard or localized threshold for ROGs. Due to the role ROG plays in ozone formation, it is classified as a precursor pollutant and only a regional emissions threshold has been established. b) Would the project cause or contribute to new air quality violations? As discussed in Response 3.3(b), operations of the proposed Project would result in emissions that would be below the SCAQMD operational thresholds. Therefore, the proposed Project would not have the potential to cause or affect a violation of the ambient air quality standards. c) Would the project delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP? The proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts with regard to localized concentrations during Project construction. As such, the proposed Project would not delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or 2016 AQMP emissions reductions. CRITERION 2: With respect to the second criterion for determining consistency with SCAQMD and Southern California Association of Government’s (SCAG) air quality policies, it is important to recognize that air quality planning within the Basin focuses on attainment of ambient air quality standards at the earliest feasible date. Projections for achieving air quality goals are based on assumptions regarding population, housing, and growth trends. Thus, the SCAQMD’s second criterion for determining project consistency focuses on whether or not the proposed Project exceeds the assumptions utilized in preparing the forecasts presented in the 2016 AQMP. Determining whether or not a project exceeds the assumptions reflected in the 2016 AQMP involves the evaluation of the three criteria outlined below. The following discussion provides an analysis of each of these criteria. a) Would the project be consistent with the population, housing, and employment growth projections utilized in the preparation of the AQMP? A project is consistent with the AQMP in part, if it is consistent with the population, housing, and employment assumptions that were used in the development of the AQMP. In the case of the 2016 AQMP, three sources of data form the basis for the projections of air pollutant emissions: the Lake Elsinore General Plan (General Plan), SCAG’s Growth Management Chapter of the Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP), and SCAG’s 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). The RTP/SCS also provides socioeconomic forecast projections of regional population growth. The Project involves the construction of a master drainage facility within easements and roadway rights-of-way in the City of Lake Elsinore. The proposed Project would provide flood protection to the existing Third Street channel watershed and adjacent properties. The Project does not involve any uses that would increase population beyond what is considered in the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan and County of Riverside General Plan and, therefore, would not affect City-wide and County-wide plans for population growth at the Project site. Thus, the proposed Project is consistent with the types, intensity, and patterns of land use envisioned for the site vicinity in the RCP. The population, housing, and employment forecasts, which are adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council, are based on the local plans and policies applicable to both cities, and are used by SCAG in all phases of implementation and City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 27 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration review. Additionally, as the SCAQMD has incorporated these same projections into the 2016 AQMP, it can be concluded that the Project would be consistent with the projections. b) Would the project implement all feasible air quality mitigation measures? Compliance with all feasible emission reduction measures identified by the SCAQMD would be required as identified in Response 3.3(b). As such, the proposed Project would meet this 2016 AQMP consistency criterion. c) Would the project be consistent with the land use planning strategies set forth in the AQMP? The proposed Project is an infrastructure improvement project and not a land use development project, but it would serve to implement various City policies. The proposed Project is located within a developed portion of the City and would provide flood protection to the existing Third Street channel watershed and adjacent properties. The Project site is located within roadway right-of-way in the vicinity of industrial, business professional, commercial, and residential land uses. In conclusion, the determination of 2016 AQMP consistency is primarily concerned with the long- term influence of a project on air quality in the Basin. The proposed Project would not result in a long-term impact on the region’s ability to meet State and federal air quality standards. Also, the proposed Project would be consistent with the goals and policies of the AQMP for control of fugitive dust. As discussed above, the proposed Project would also be consistent with SCAQMD and SCAG’s goals and policies and is considered consistent with the 2016 AQMP. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Determination: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS The Project involves construction activities associated with grading, construction, and paving. The Project would be constructed in two phases over approximately eight months, beginning in June 2017. Grading activities include approximately 19,140 cubic yards of export and approximately 8,670 cubic yards of import. Exhaust emission factors for typical diesel-powered heavy equipment are based on the California Emissions Estimator Model Version 2016.3.1 (CalEEMod) program defaults. Variables factored into estimating the total construction emissions include the level of activity, length of construction period, number of pieces and types of equipment in use, site characteristics, weather conditions, number of construction personnel, and the amount of materials to be transported on- or off-site. The analysis of daily construction emissions has been prepared utilizing CalEEMod. Refer to Appendix A, Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Data, for the CalEEMod outputs and results. Table 3.3-1, Construction Related Emissions, presents the anticipated daily short-term construction emissions. Table 3.3-1: Construction Related Emissions Emissions Source Pollutant (pounds/day)1 ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Unmitigated Emissions 2.56 51.80 16.83 0.11 78.59 9.38 Mitigated Emissions2,3 2.56 51.80 16.83 0.11 78.16 9.14 SCAQMD Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55 Is Threshold Exceeded After Mitigation? No No No No No No Notes: City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 28 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 1. Emissions were calculated using CalEEMod, as recommended by the SCAQMD. 2. The reduction/credits for construction emission mitigations are based on mitigation included in CalEEMod and as typically required by the SCAQMD through Rule 403. The mitigation includes the following: properly maintain mobile and other construction equipment; replace ground cover in disturbed areas quickly; water exposed surfaces three times daily; cover stock piles with tarps; water all haul roads twice daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. 3. Refer to Appendix A, Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Data, for assumptions used in this analysis. Fugitive Dust Emissions Construction activities are a source of fugitive dust emissions that may have a substantial, temporary impact on local air quality. In addition, fugitive dust may be a nuisance to those living and working in the Project area. Fugitive dust emissions are associated with land clearing, ground excavation, cut-and-fill, and truck travel on unpaved roadways (including demolition as well as construction activities). Fugitive dust emissions vary substantially from day to day, depending on the level of activity, specific operations, and weather conditions. Fugitive dust from grading, excavation, and construction is expected to be short-term and would cease upon Project completion. Additionally, most of this material is inert silicates, rather than the complex organic particulates released from combustion sources, which are more harmful to health. Dust (larger than 10 microns) generated by such activities usually becomes more of a local nuisance than a serious health problem. Of particular health concern is the amount of PM10 (particulate matter smaller than 10 microns) generated as a part of fugitive dust emissions. PM10 poses a serious health hazard alone or in combination with other pollutants. PM2.5 is mostly produced by mechanical processes. These include automobile tire wear, industrial processes such as cutting and grinding, and re-suspension of particles from the ground or road surfaces by wind and human activities such as construction or agriculture. PM2.5 is mostly derived from combustion sources, such as automobiles, trucks, and other vehicle exhaust, as well as from stationary sources. These particles are either directly emitted or are formed in the atmosphere from the combustion of gases such as NOX and sulfur oxides (SOX) combining with ammonia. PM2.5 components from material in the earth’s crust, such as dust, are also present, with the amount varying in different locations. Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would implement dust control techniques (i.e., daily watering), limitations on construction hours, and adherence to SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 (which require watering of inactive and perimeter areas, track out requirements, etc.), to reduce PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations. It should be noted that these reductions were applied in CalEEMod. The recommended mitigation measures would be required to ensure compliance with SCAQMD Rules and Regulations, which would be verified and enforced through the City’s capital improvement project construction process. As depicted in Table 3.3-1, total PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds during construction. Thus, construction air quality impacts would be less than significant. Construction Equipment and Worker Vehicle Exhaust Exhaust emissions from construction activities include emissions associated with the transport of machinery and supplies to and from the Project site, emissions produced on-site as the equipment is used, and emissions from trucks transporting materials to/from the site. As presented in Table 3.3-1, construction equipment and worker vehicle exhaust emissions would be below the established SCAQMD thresholds. Therefore, air quality impacts from equipment and vehicle exhaust emission would be less than significant. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 29 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ROG Emissions In addition to gaseous and particulate emissions, the application of asphalt and surface coatings creates ROG emissions, which are O3 precursors. The ROG content of paints are regulated by SCAQMD Regulation XI, Rule 1113 – Architectural Coating. Rule 1113 provides specifications on painting practices as well as regulates the ROG content of paint. ROG emissions associated with the proposed Project would be less than significant; refer to Table 3.3-1. Asbestos Asbestos is a term used for several types of naturally occurring fibrous minerals that are a human health hazard when airborne. The most common type of asbestos is chrysotile, but other types such as tremolite and actinolite are also found in California. Asbestos is classified as a known human carcinogen by state, federal, and international agencies and was identified as a toxic air contaminant by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in 1986. Asbestos can be released from serpentinite and ultramafic rocks when the rock is broken or crushed. At the point of release, the asbestos fibers may become airborne, causing air quality and human health hazards. These rocks have been commonly used for unpaved gravel roads, landscaping, fill projects, and other improvement projects in some localities. Asbestos may be released to the atmosphere due to vehicular traffic on unpaved roads, during grading for development projects, and at quarry operations. All of these activities may have the effect of releasing potentially harmful asbestos into the air. Natural weathering and erosion processes can act on asbestos-bearing rock and make it easier for asbestos fibers to become airborne if such rock is disturbed. According to the Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology, A General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California – Areas More Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos Report (August 2000), serpentinite and ultramafic rocks are not known to occur within the Project area. Thus, there would be no impact in this regard. Total Daily Construction Emissions In accordance with the SCAQMD Guidelines, CalEEMod was utilized to model construction emissions for ROG, NOX, CO, SOX, PM10, and PM2.5. CalEEMod allows the user to input mitigation measures such as watering the construction area to limit fugitive dust. Mitigation measures that were input into CalEEMod allow for certain reduction credits and result in a decrease of pollutant emissions. Reduction credits are based upon studies developed by CARB, SCAQMD, and other air quality management districts throughout California, and were programmed within CalEEMod. Table 3.3-1 also provides the reduction associated with recommended mitigation measures calculated by CalEEMod. As indicated in Table 3.3-1, impacts would be less than significant for all criteria pollutants during construction. Implementation of standard SCAQMD measures (required by Mitigation Measure AQ-1) would further reduce these emissions. Thus, construction related air emissions would be less than significant. LONG-TERM (OPERATIONAL) EMISSIONS Long-term air quality impacts would consist of mobile source emissions generated from Project- related traffic. The Project proposes a master drainage facility, which would provide flood protection to the existing Third Street channel watershed and adjacent properties. The Project would not attract or generate any new vehicular trips. Additionally, the proposed storm drain facility would not generate any stationary source emissions. Therefore, impacts in this regard would be less than significant. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 30 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration MITIGATION MEASURES: AQ-1 Prior to construction, the City Engineer shall confirm that the Grading Plan and project specifications stipulate that, in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, excessive fugitive dust emissions shall be controlled by regular watering or other dust prevention measures, as specified in the SCAQMD’s Rules and Regulations. In addition, SCAQMD Rule 402 requires implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance off-site. Implementation of the following measures would reduce short-term fugitive dust impacts on nearby sensitive receptors: • Pave or apply water every three hours during daily construction activities or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas. More frequent watering shall occur if dust is observed migrating from the site during site disturbance; • Any on-site stockpiles of debris, dirt, or other dusty material shall be enclosed, covered, or watered twice daily, or non-toxic soil binders shall be applied; • All grading and excavation operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour; • Disturbed areas shall be replaced with ground cover or paved immediately after construction is completed in the affected area; • Track-out devices such as gravel bed track-out aprons (3 inches deep, 25 feet long, 12 feet wide per lane and edged by rock berm or row of stakes) shall be installed to reduce mud/dirt track-out from unpaved truck exit routes. Alternatively, a wheel washer shall be used at truck exit routes; • On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 miles per hour; • All material transported off-site shall be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust prior to departing the job site; and • Trucks associated with soil-hauling activities shall avoid residential streets and utilize City-designated truck routes to the extent feasible. c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Determination: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. With respect to the proposed Project’s construction-related air quality emissions and cumulative Basin-wide conditions, the SCAQMD has developed strategies to reduce criteria pollutant emissions outlined in the 2016 AQMP pursuant to Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) mandates. As such, the proposed Project would comply with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements and implement all feasible mitigation measures (Mitigation Measure AQ-1). Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with the best available control measures in order to reduce dust so that it does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the proposed Project. In addition, the proposed Project would comply with adopted 2016 AQMP emissions control measures. Per SCAQMD rules and mandates, as well as the CEQA requirement that significant impacts be mitigated to the extent feasible, these same requirements (i.e., Rule 403 compliance, the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, and compliance with adopted 2016 AQMP emissions control measures) would also be imposed on construction projects throughout the Basin, which would include related projects. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 31 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration As discussed previously, the proposed Project would not result in long-term air quality impacts, as the project would include construction of a storm drain. Additionally, adherence to SCAQMD rules and regulations would alleviate potential impacts related to cumulative conditions on a project-by-project basis. Emission reduction technology, strategies, and plans are constantly being developed. As a result, the proposed Project would not contribute a cumulatively considerable net increase of any nonattainment criteria pollutant. Therefore, cumulative operational impacts associated with implementation of the proposed Project would be less than significant. MITIGATION MEASURES: Refer to Mitigation Measure AQ-1. No additional mitigation is required. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Determination: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Sensitive receptors are defined as facilities or land uses that include members of the population that are particularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses. Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, and daycare centers. CARB has identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly over 65, children under 14, athletes, and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis. Sensitive receptors near the Project site include adjoining residences along Third Street, Conard Avenue, and Welch Drive. In order to identify impacts to sensitive receptors, the SCAQMD recommends addressing localized significance thresholds (LSTs) for construction and operations impacts (area sources only). LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS (LST) LSTs were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards’ Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative (I-4). The SCAQMD provided the Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (dated June 2003 [revised 2008]) for guidance. The LST methodology assists lead agencies in analyzing localized air quality impacts. The SCAQMD provides the LST screening lookup tables for one, two, and five acre projects emitting CO, NOX, PM2.5, or PM10. The LST methodology and associated mass rates are not designed to evaluate localized impacts from mobile sources traveling over the roadways. The SCAQMD recommends that any project over five acres should perform air quality dispersion modeling to assess impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. The Project is located in Source Receptor (SRA) 25, Lake Elsinore. CONSTRUCTION Based on the SCAQMD guidance on applying CalEEMod to LSTs, the Project would disturb approximately three acres. Therefore, the LST thresholds for two acres were conservatively utilized for the construction LST analysis. It is noted that an operational LST analysis was not prepared, as the Proposed Project would not result in new operational emissions. As the nearest sensitive uses are within 25 meters to the southwest of the Project site along Conard Avenue, the LST value for 25 meters was utilized. Table 3.3-2, Localized Significance of Construction Emissions, shows the localized unmitigated and mitigated construction-related emissions. It is noted that the localized emissions presented in Table 3.3-2 are less than those in Table 3.3-1 because localized emissions include only on-site emissions (i.e., from construction equipment and fugitive dust). As seen in Table 3.3-2, mitigated on-site emissions would not exceed the LSTs for SRA 25. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 32 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Table 3.3-2: Localized Significance of Construction Emissions Source Pollutant (pounds/day) NOX CO PM10 PM2.5 Total Unmitigated On-Site Emissions1 12.76 8.07 1.48 1.11 Total Mitigated On-Site Emissions1 12.76 8.07 1.05 0.87 Localized Significance Threshold2 234 970 7 4 Thresholds Exceeded? No No No No Notes: 1. For construction year 2017, the grading phase emissions are presented as the worst case scenario. 2. The Localized Significance Threshold was determined using Appendix C of the SCAQMD Final Localized Significant Threshold Methodology guidance document for pollutants NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. The Localized Significance Threshold was based on the anticipated daily acreage disturbance for construction (approximately 3 acres; therefore the 2-acre threshold was conservatively used), the distance to sensitive receptors, and the source receptor area (SRA 25). Carbon Monoxide Hotspots CO emissions are a function of vehicle idling time, meteorological conditions, and traffic flow. Under certain extreme meteorological conditions, CO concentrations near a congested roadway or intersection may reach unhealthful levels (i.e., adversely affecting residents, school children, hospital patients, the elderly, etc.). The SCAQMD requires a quantified assessment of CO hotspots when a project increases the volume-to-capacity ratio (also called the intersection capacity utilization) by 0.02 (two percent) for any intersection with an existing level of service LOS D or worse. Because traffic congestion is highest at intersections where vehicles queue and are subject to reduced speeds, these hot spots are typically produced at intersections. The proposed Project involves the construction of a master drainage facility and would not generate new vehicle trips. Therefore, it would not increase the ICU of nearby intersections to warrant a CO hotspot analysis. MITIGATION MEASURES: Refer to Mitigation Measure AQ-1. No additional mitigation is required. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with odor complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The proposed Project does not include any uses identified by the SCAQMD as being associated with odors. Construction activity associated with the Project may generate detectable odors from heavy-duty equipment exhaust. Construction related odors would be short-term in nature, would disperse rapidly, and cease upon Project completion. Any impacts to existing adjacent land uses would be short-term and are considered less than significant given the Project size. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 33 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? … ; … … b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service? … ; … … c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? … ; … … d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? … … … ; e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? … … … ; f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? … ; … … Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 34 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Determination: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. A habitat assessment was prepared for the Project and included a site visit by biologists on July 12, 2016; refer to Appendix B, Biological Studies, for the full reports. It was determined that the existing roadways and surrounding rural residential development which encompass the Project site have greatly reduced, if not eliminated, the natural plant communities which once occurred onsite. As a result, the site predominately consists of disturbed areas dominated by non-native vegetation and heavily compacted soils. The City of Lake Elsinore is a permittee under the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP); as such, special attention was given to species listed under the MSHCP as well as to special-status habitats and/or undeveloped areas, which have higher potential to support special-status flora and fauna species. The project site is located in the Elsinore Area Plan of the MSHCP, but is not located within a Criteria Cell, conservation area, core, or linkage. Nonetheless, public and private development outside of Criteria Areas and Public/Quasi-Public Lands are required to demonstrate consistency with applicable MSHCP policies. VEGETATION No special-status plant species were observed during the habitat assessment and are presumed absent from the site based on specific habitat requirements for special-status plant species, known distributions, and availability and quality of onsite habitat. The habitat assessment also found that no special-status species occur in the land uses surrounding the Project site. WILDLIFE In regard to wildlife, observations were based on calls, songs, scat, tracks, burrows, and actual sightings of animals. No special-status wildlife species were observed during the habitat assessment. Based on existing site conditions, it was determined that the Project site has a high potential to support Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii) and sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus), a moderate potential to support Allen’s hummingbird (Selasphorus sasin) and Lawrence’s goldfinch (Spinus lawrencei), and a low potential to support California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia). All other special-status wildlife are presumed absent from the site based on specific habitat requirements for special-status species, known distributions, and availability and quality of onsite habitat. Cooper’s hawk, sharp-shinned hawk, and California horned lark are fully covered under the MSCHP and require no further analysis. Allen’s hummingbird and Lawrence’s goldfinch are not covered under the MSHCP. However, Project implementation is not anticipated to involve indirect or direct impacts to these species. Pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), it is unlawful to pursue, capture, kill, or possess or attempt to do the same to any migratory bird or part, nest, or egg of any such bird listed in applicable wildlife protection treaties. Although no burrowing owl have been observed on the project site, a portion of the project site is within the Ramsgate Specific Plan area. This area is within the MSHCP burrowing owl survey area, and potentially suitable habitat for burrowing owl has been identified on site. Mitigation Measure BIO-1 restricts the removal of any potential nesting habitat during the avian nesting season, and provides for the survey and potential presence of burrowing owl. With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, potential impacts on special-status species would be reduced to a less than significant level. BIO-1 Where feasible, construction shall occur outside of the avian breeding season (generally January 1–August 30). If construction occurs during the avian breeding season, a qualified City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 35 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration biologist shall conduct a preconstruction nesting bird clearance survey in all work areas and all areas within 500 feet of the general construction zone. This survey shall occur no more than one week prior to construction. Active nests shall be given an avoidance buffer, typically 300 feet for non-listed non-raptor species and 500 feet for listed and raptor species. The buffer is a no-work zone, and construction activities may not resume until the nest is no longer active (i.e., avian species are no longer showing nesting behavior, young have fledged). To determine when nesting behaviors are finished, a qualified biologist shall monitor the nest weekly until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. A qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction burrowing owl surveys in the area of the Project that is within the Ramsgate Specific Plan Area for the basin, headwall and pipeline portion of the Project. The pre-construction survey shall take place within 30 days prior to disturbance of the site. If burrowing owl is present, CDFW shall be consulted and a passive relocation effort shall be undertaken outside the nesting season. Burrowing owls shall be relocated passively to an area outside the impact zone and existing burrows shall be destroyed once they are vacated. No disturbance of active nests shall occur. b) 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 California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Determination: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Generally, riparian habitat is defined as a vegetated ecosystem along a water body through which energy, materials, and water pass. Riparian areas characteristically have a high water table and are subject to periodic flooding and influence from the adjacent water body. These systems encompass wetlands, adjacent uplands, or some combination of these two landforms. The Project was analyzed for its consistency with the policies for the protection of species associated with riparian and riverine areas and vernal pools as characterized by MSHCP Section 6.1.2 (Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools). MSHCP Section 6.1.2 requires an assessment of the potentially significant effects of a project on Covered Species occupying riparian/riverine areas and vernal pools. This assessment is independent from considerations given to waters of the U.S. and waters of the State under the CWA and the California Fish and Game Code. The majority of the Project site does not support habitats which would qualify as riparian/riverine habitat as defined under MSHCP Section 6.1.2. The easternmost portion of the site within the Ramsgate Specific Plan Area includes riparian/riverine habitat. The MSHCP requires that all riparian/riverine habitats be avoided. If they cannot be avoided, a DBESP is required. Therefore, a DBESP will be prepared, and riparian/riverine habitat would be mitigated to the biological equivalent or better, in accordance with Mitigation Measure BIO-2; see impact 3.4(c) below. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Determination: Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The majority of the project site lacks jurisdictional drainage, ponds, basins, gravel pits, and/or potential wetland features were identified within the Project site which would be considered City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 36 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration jurisdictional by the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board), or California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). However, the portion of the proposed Project that would be located within the Ramsgate Specific Plan Area would consist of a basin, headwall and approximately 100 feet of 78-inch diameter pipeline, which would impact Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) jurisdictional areas6. The Project would be required to mitigate impacts to Corps/CDFW jurisdictional areas through mitigation agreed upon and acceptable to the resource agencies as part of the DBESP and wetland permitting process. With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, impacts to jurisdictional areas would be reduced to less than significant levels. MITIGATION MEASURES BIO-2 Phase 2 of the project will be permitted through the Riverside County MSHCP DBESP and wetland permitting process. Impacts will be further detailed in project-specific DBESP and biologically equivalent or better mitigation identified. Mitigation for impacts to Corps/CDFW jurisdictional areas shall occur at a ratio agreed to between the City and regulatory agencies, and may include off-site, compensatory mitigation, or a combination thereof. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Determination: No Impact. Although Lake Elsinore is identified as a permittee under the MSHCP, the Project area is not located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell. Further, as Project implementation would involve the below-ground installation of RCP storm drains and associated infrastructure, all of which are located within public rights-of-way, no significant impacts to migratory fish, wildlife or wildlife corridors are anticipated. The Project does not affect any wildlife nursery sites. No impact would occur in this regard. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Determination: No Impact. According to the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Chapter 5.116, Palm Tree Preservation Program, the City aims to protect and preserve significant palm trees, specifically ones which exceed five feet in height. As described above, the Project site consists of disturbed areas associated with existing roadways and surrounding rural-residential properties. As currently designed, Project implementation would not involve impacts to significant palm trees. No impact would occur in this regard. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Determination: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Refer to Impact 3.4 (a) above. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, impacts would be less than significant. MITIGATION MEASURES 6 On August 14, 2007, the City approved the Wasson West Amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan. A Biological Technical Study and a DBESP Analysis were prepared for the Amendment, which includes the area that the proposed Project will construct the basin, headwall and drainage pipeline (refer to Appendix B, Biological Studies). City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 37 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration BIO-1 See Impact 3.4(a) above. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 38 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? … … … ; b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? … ; … … c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? … … ; … d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? … ; … … Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5? Determination: No Impact. A Cultural Resources Assessment was prepared for the project by BCR Consulting and is dated January 20, 2017. Refer to Appendix C, Cultural Resources Assessment, for the full report. Historic resources generally consist of buildings, structures, improvements, and remnants associated with a significant historic event or person(s) and/or having a historically significant style, design, or achievement. Damage to or demolition of such resources is typically considered to be a significant impact. Impacts to historic resources can occur through direct impacts, such as destruction or removal, and through indirect impacts, such as a change in the setting of a historic resource. BCR Consulting conducted a records search at the Eastern Information Center (EIC), the local clearinghouse for cultural resource records. This archival research reviewed the status of all recorded historic and prehistoric cultural resources, and survey and excavation reports completed within one mile of the project site. Additional resources reviewed included the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, and documents and inventories published by the California Office of Historic Preservation. These include the lists of California Historical Landmarks, California Points of Historical Interest, Listing of National Register Properties, and Inventory of Historic Structures. The records search conducted at the EIC revealed that 17 cultural resources studies have taken place resulting in the recording of four cultural resources within one half-mile of the project site. Of the 17 previous studies, three have assessed portions of the project site resulting in no cultural resources recorded within its boundaries. A summary of the records search is included in Appendix C. The records search and field survey did not identify any historical resources, including historic- period buildings, within the project site boundaries. No impacts to a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 would occur in this regard. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 39 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5? Determination: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Archaeological sites are locations that contain resources associated with former human activities and may contain such resources as human skeletal remains, waste from tool manufacture, tool concentrations, and/or discoloration or accumulation of soil or food remains. The records search conducted at the EIC identified 17 cultural resources studies have taken place resulting in the recording of four cultural resources within one half-mile of the project site. Of the 17 previous studies, three have assessed portions of the project site resulting in no cultural resources recorded within its boundaries. During the field survey, the project site exhibited approximately 70 percent surface visibility. Artificial disturbances consist of grading, excavation, soil import and intermittent paving for the construction of Third Street and for adjacent residences and businesses. No cultural resources have been recorded within the project site boundaries. A summary of the records search is included in Appendix C. Although no known material cultural resources are present on the project site, there is potential for unknown subsurface resources to exist. Project-related ground disturbing and construction activities would have a low potential to adversely affect such unknown resources. To lessen impacts to these potential resources, Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-4 requires the presence of an archaeological monitor during periodic and site specific project-related ground disturbance activities. Impacts are considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated. MITIGATION MEASURES CR-1 At least 30 days prior to excavation within any previously undisturbed native soils, the City shall contact both the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians and Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians to notify each Tribe of excavation activities and coordinate with the Tribes to develop Monitoring Agreements. The Agreements shall address the designation, responsibilities, and participation of Native American Tribal monitors during excavation and other ground disturbing activities within undisturbed native soils and construction scheduling. Native American monitoring shall be limited to only those periods during project construction where excavation within previously undisturbed areas is occurring. Ground disturbing activities within previously disturbed areas shall not require notification, monitoring or an Agreement. CR-2 In accordance with the agreement required in CR-1, the designated tribal monitor(s) assigned to the project by the Luiseño Tribe(s) shall have the authority to stop and redirect excavation in order to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. CR-3 All artifacts discovered at the development site shall be inventoried and analyzed by the Native American monitor(s). If any artifacts of Native American origin are discovered, all activities in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 50-foot radius) shall stop. The Native American monitor(s) shall analyze the Native American artifacts for identification as everyday life and/or religious or sacred items, cultural affiliation, temporal placement, and function, as deemed possible. The significance of Native American resources shall be evaluated in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and shall consider the religious beliefs, customs, and practices of the Luiseño tribes. All items found in association with Native American human remains shall be considered grave goods or sacred in origin and subject to special handling. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 40 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The City and/or landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources. Native American artifacts that cannot be avoided or relocated at the Project site shall be prepared in a manner for curation. Within a reasonable amount of time, the archaeological consultant shall deliver the materials to a qualified repository in Riverside County that meets or exceeds federal standards per 36 CFR Part 79 and which shall be made available to all qualified researchers and tribal representatives. If more than one Native American Group is involved with the project and cannot come to an agreement as to the disposition of cultural materials, they shall be curated at the Western Science Center by default. CR-4 If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeological/ cultural resources are discovered during grading, the City and the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians and the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians (Tribes) shall assess the significance of such resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources. If the Developer and the Tribes cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for 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 Tribes. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the CDD shall be final. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. Paleontological resources are the preserved fossilized remains of plants and animals. Fossils and traces of fossils are preserved in sedimentary rock units, particularly fine- to medium-grained marine, lake, and stream deposits, such as limestone, siltstone, sandstone, or shale, and in ancient soils (paleosols). Such resources are also found in coarse-grained sediments, such as conglomerates or coarse alluvium sediments. Additionally, fossils are rarely preserved in igneous or metamorphic rock units. Fossils may occur throughout a sedimentary unit and are more likely to be preserved subsurface, where they have not been damaged or destroyed by previous ground disturbance, amateur collecting, or natural causes such as erosion. In contrast, archaeological and historic resources are often recognized by surface evidence of their presence. According to the City’s General Plan EIR Section 3.2, Cultural and Paleontological Resources, the region is rich in paleontological resources, with an extensive and diverse fossil record. The County of Riverside sponsored an inventory of paleontological conditions and sensitivity within the County boundaries for inclusion in the Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) General Plan (including various incorporated areas) to ensure appropriate protection of valuable resources and information. The process entailed evaluation of known resources and delineation of resource areas as either “High A,” “High B,” “Low,” or “Undetermined” sensitivity for paleontological resources, consistent with guidelines published in 1995 by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology. The inventory serves as a general guide for environmental review of development proposals and identification of appropriate strategies for avoidance and mitigation of paleontological impacts. Section 4.6 (Cultural Resources and Paleontological Resources) of the City’s General Plan identifies the goal to preserve paleontological resources occurring in the City, which is implemented by Policy 8.1, which requires project applicants of development in areas delineated as “High” or “Undetermined” potential sensitivity for paleontological resources 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. General Plan City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 41 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Figure 4.6 (Paleontological Resources) shows that the project site has a low potential for paleontological resources. Therefore, mitigation monitoring during project development is not required. Impacts are considered less than significant. MITIGATION MEASURES None d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Determination: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. It is not anticipated that human remains or informal cemetery areas are present on the project site; however, ground-disturbing activities such as grading or excavation have the potential to disturb human remains. If human remains are found, those remains would require proper treatment, in accordance with applicable laws. California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and Health and Safety Code Sections 7050.5–7055 describe the general provisions regarding human remains, including the requirements if any human remains are accidentally discovered during project construction. As required by State law, procedures set forth in Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code would be implemented, including notification of the County Coroner, notification of the Native American Heritage Commission, and consultation with the individual identified by the Native American Heritage Commission to be the “most likely descendant.” If human remains are found during excavation, construction activities would be halted in the vicinity of the find and any area that is reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the County Coroner has been notified, and the remains have been investigated and appropriate recommendations have been made for the treatment and removal of the remains. Compliance with existing State regulations, which detail the appropriate actions necessary in the event human remains are encountered, would ensure that potential impacts on undiscovered human remains are less than significant with mitigation incorporated. MITIGATION MEASURES CR-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 free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall 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. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 42 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. … … ; … ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? … … ; … iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? … … ; … iv) Landslides? … … … ; b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? … ; … … c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? … … ; … d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (2004), creating substantial risks to life or property? … … ; … e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? … … … ; Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Determination: Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Lake Elsinore, like the rest of southern California, is located within a seismically- active region as a result of being located near the active margin between the North American and Pacific tectonic plates. Several major faults exist within the region and have the potential City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 43 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration to cause damage within the City. According to the California Department of Conservation Seismic Hazard Zonation Program, the Project site is affected by an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone.7 The most significant known active Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zone is the Elsinore Fault which is located approximately 1 mile southwest of the Project site. The Elsinore Fault runs north-south through Lake Elsinore and is capable of strong seismic ground shaking that could impact the Project and its surrounding. The Project does not include habitable structures and is limited to the construction of underground RCP stormwater drain and associated structures. These improvements are not particularly at-risk to earthquake-induced damage, and would not increase the potential for human loss, injury, or death as a result of fault rupture. Development of the Project would include minor grading, trenching, horizontal directional drilling and/or other ground-disturbing activities to allow for the installation of the RCP storm drain and appurtenant underground structures. Project compliance applicable local seismic- related requirements would reduce the potential for impacts to occur from the exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects as the result of fault rupture. The City of Lake Elsinore prepared the Plan Preparation and Design Manual in 2005 (revised 2015) in order to define the administrative procedures and technical requirements necessary to process maps and the design of improvement plans in the City. The Plan Preparation and Design Manual provides detailed information to regulate construction, grading, and encroachment within public rights-of-way, including several roadway design standards which would be applied to the proposed Project. The Project would also adhere to all requirements stipulated under the most current City of Lake Elsinore and CalTrans engineering standards and regulations. Compliance with the Plan Preparation and Design Manual, and current City of Lake Elsinore and CalTrans engineering standards/regulations, as well as any other applicable seismic- related requirements, would ensure project impacts are considered to be less than significant. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Determination: Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to Impact 3.6 (a)(i) above. The Project site is located approximately 1 mile from the Elsinore Fault, which has the potential to subject the Project site to strong seismic ground shaking. Adherence to standard engineering practices and design criteria relative to seismic and geologic hazards in accordance with the Plan Preparation and Design Manual, the 2013 current City of Lake Elsinore and CalTrans engineering standards/regulations, as well as any 7 State of California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Maps, http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/index.html?map=regulatorymaps, Accessed June 2, 2016. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 44 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration other seismic-related requirements would minimize potential impacts to a less than significant level. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. Liquefaction occurs when loose, water-saturated sediments lose strength and fail during strong ground shaking. Liquefaction is defined as the transformation of granular material from a solid state into a liquefied state as a consequence of increased pore-water pressure. According to the Figure 3.11-3 of the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR, the Project site is located in an area possessing a high historic occurrence of liquefaction. However, according to the State of California Department of Conservation Lake Elsinore Regulatory Map, the Project site is not affected by liquefaction hazards.8 Nonetheless, the Project would be required to adhere to the City of Lake Elsinore and CalTrans engineering standards and regulations, which would assist with minimize impacts to development within areas subjected to liquefaction. Compliance with these standards and regulations would minimize the Project’s risk to liquefaction to a less than significant level. iv) Landslides? Determination: No Impact. Landslides tend to occur in weak soil and rock found on sloping terrain, and earthquake induced landslides typically occur when these weak materials fail when shaken by an earthquake. According to the State of California Department of Conservation Regulatory Map for the Lake Elsinore Quadrangle, the Project site is not subject to landslide hazards.9 The City of Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR designates the hillside areas with slopes of 30 percent or steeper as areas conductive of landslides. According to the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR (Figure 3.3-8, Percent Slope), the proposed Project site is not located within the hillside areas of Lake Elsinore where slopes are greater than 30 percent, which are subject to seismically-induced landslides. As the RCP storm drain and associated infrastructure would be mostly installed below ground, the Project would not be at risk to landslide hazards. No impacts related to landslides are anticipated to occur in this regard. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Determination: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Construction-related grading, drilling and trenching activities would displace soils and temporarily increase the potential for soils to be subject to wind and water erosion. Soil erosion is most prevalent in unconsolidated alluvium and surficial soils and in areas that have slopes. To reduce potential impacts related to the loss of topsoil, the Project Applicant would be required to demonstrate compliance with City of Lake Elsinore and CalTrans engineering grading standards/regulations, and as required, would prepare site-specific grading plans to be signed by a registered civil engineer. Further, Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would require that the Project Contractor prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for City and CalTrans review and approval prior to grading. A SWPPP is typically required for issuance of stormwater permits and identifies potential sources of pollution that may affect water quality with discharges from 8 Ibid. 9 Ibid. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 45 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration construction of the Project. SWPPPs also indicate what techniques will be used to reduce pollutants and helps assure compliance with the terms and conditions of the stormwater permit. These plans would identify site-specific Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be implemented with the proposed development in order to prevent erosion, minimize siltation from impacting downstream water bodies, and protect water quality. BMPs may include covering of soil stock piles, planting, frequent watering of bare soil, limited or no construction during wind or storm events, jute bales, temporary settling basins or other construction features designed to ensure compliance with clean water standards. Compliance with the existing City of Lake Elsinore and CalTrans grading standards/regulations, in combination with Mitigation Measure GEO-1, would ensure that the Project’s potential impacts related to soil erosion and loss of topsoil are less than significant. MITIGATION MEASURES GEO-1 In accordance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System requirements, the Project Contractor shall prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for approval by the City and CalTrans prior to grading activities. The SWPPP shall include relevant Best Management Practices (BMPs) in order to minimize soil erosion and water quality impacts during Project construction. c) 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 an on-site or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. Lateral spreading involves the dislocation of near surface soils generally along a near-surface liquefiable layer. In many cases, this phenomenon of shallow landsliding occurs on relatively flat or gently sloping ground adjacent to a “free face,” such as a slope or retaining wall. As described under Impact 3.6 (a)(iii), the Project may be located in an area conductive of liquefaction. The proposed Project would be designed and constructed in conformance with the City of Lake Elsinore and Caltrans engineering standards and regulations. These regulations are designed to avoid/minimize structural failure in the event of seismically-induced liquefaction. Furthermore, backfill would be placed to meet standard engineering design requirements and local grading practices. Compliance with the City of Lake Elsinore and CalTrans engineering standards/regulations would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. Expansive soils are those that undergo volume changes as moisture content fluctuates, swelling substantially when wet or shrinking when dry. Soil expansion can damage structures by cracking foundations, causing settlement and distorting structural elements. Installation of the RCP and associated infrastructure would be implemented based on the recommendations of a geotechnical engineer, as part of the final design process. No serious soil conditions are known to exist; however, the expansion potential would be identified during the final design process, and it is expected that these soil materials would be monitored during Project grading activities. Thus, impacts in this regard would be considered less than significant. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 46 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Determination: No Impact. The Project would not involve the use of septic tanks. No impacts would occur. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 47 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS - Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? … … ; … b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? … … ; … Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE California is a substantial contributor of global greenhouse gases (GHGs), emitting over 400 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) per year.10 Climate studies indicate that California is likely to see an increase of three to four degrees Fahrenheit over the next century. Methane (CH4) is also an important GHG that potentially contributes to global climate change. GHGs are global in their effect, which is to increase the earth’s ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere. As primary GHGs have a long lifetime in the atmosphere, accumulate over time, and are generally well-mixed, their impact on the atmosphere is mostly independent of the point of emission. The impact of human activities on global climate change is apparent in the observational record. Air trapped by ice has been extracted from core samples taken from polar ice sheets to determine the global atmospheric variation of CO2, CH4, and nitrous oxide (N2O) from before the start of industrialization (approximately 1750), to over 650,000 years ago. For that period, it was found that CO2 concentrations ranged from 180 to 300 parts per million. For the period from approximately 1750 to the present, global CO2 concentrations increased from a pre- industrialization period concentration of 280 to 379 parts per million in 2005, with the 2005 value far exceeding the upper end of the pre-industrial period range. REGULATIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) developed several emission trajectories of GHGs needed to stabilize global temperatures and climate change impacts. It concluded that a stabilization of GHGs at 400 to 450 parts per million CO2 equivalent11 (CO2eq) concentration is required to keep global mean warming below two degrees Celsius, which in turn is assumed to be necessary to avoid significant levels of climate change. 10 California Environmental Protection Agency, California Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory - 2015 Edition, http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm, accessed December 20, 2016. 11 Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO2eq) – A metric measure used to compare the emissions from various greenhouse gases based upon their global warming potential. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 48 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Executive Order S-3-05 was issued in June 2005, which established the following GHG emission reduction targets: x 2010: Reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels x 2020: Reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels x 2050: Reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) requires that CARB determine what the statewide GHG emissions level was in 1990, and approve a statewide GHG emissions limit that is equivalent to that level, to be achieved by 2020. CARB has approved a 2020 emissions limit of 427 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2eq. Executive Order B-30-15, which was issued in April 2015, requires statewide GHG emissions to be reduced 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Senate Bill 32 (SB 32), signed into law in September 2016, codifies the 2030 GHG reduction target in Executive Order B-30-15. The bill authorizes CARB to adopt an interim GHG emissions level target to be achieved by 2030. CARB also must adopt rules and regulations in an open public process to achieve the maximum, technologically feasible, and cost-effective GHG reductions. Due to the nature of global climate change, it is not anticipated that any single development project would have a substantial effect on global climate change. In actuality, GHG emissions from the proposed Project would combine with emissions emitted across California, the United States, and the world to cumulatively contribute to global climate change. In June 2008, the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research published a Technical Advisory, which provides informal guidance for public agencies as they address the issue of climate change in CEQA documents. 12 This is assessed by determining whether a proposed project is consistent with or obstructs the 39 Recommended Actions identified by CARB in its Climate Change Scoping Plan, which includes nine Early Action Measures (qualitative approach). The Attorney General’s Mitigation Measures identify areas where GHG emissions reductions can be achieved in order to achieve the goals of AB 32. As set forth in the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research Technical Advisory and in the proposed amendments to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4, this analysis examines whether the proposed project’s GHG emissions are significant based on a qualitative and performance based standard (Proposed CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4(a)(1) and (2)). 12 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change Through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review, 2008. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 49 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration SCAQMD THRESHOLDS At this time, there is no absolute consensus in the State of California among CEQA lead agencies regarding the analysis of global climate change and the selection of significance criteria. In fact, numerous organizations, both public and private, have released advisories and guidance with recommendations designed to assist decision-makers in the evaluation of GHG emissions given the current uncertainty regarding when emissions reach the point of significance. Lead agencies may elect to rely on thresholds of significance recommended or adopted by State or regional agencies with expertise in the field of global climate change. The SCAQMD has formed a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group (Working Group) to provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in their CEQA documents. As of the last Working Group meeting (Meeting No. 15) held in September 2010, the SCAQMD is proposing to adopt a tiered approach for evaluating GHG emissions for development projects where SCAQMD is not the lead agency.13 With the tiered approach, the project is compared with the requirements of each tier sequentially and would not result in a significant impact if it complies with any tier. Tier 1 excludes projects that are specifically exempt from SB 97 from resulting in a significant impact. Tier 2 excludes projects that are consistent with a GHG reduction plan that has a certified final CEQA document and complies with AB 32 GHG reduction goals. Tier 3 excludes projects with annual emissions lower than a screening threshold. For all non-industrial projects, the SCAQMD is proposing a screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2eq per year. SCAQMD concluded that projects with emissions less than the screening threshold would not result in a significant cumulative impact. Tier 4 consists of three options. Under the Tier 4 first option, the SCAQMD initially outlined that the project would be excluded if design features and/or mitigation measures resulted in emissions 30 percent lower than business as usual emissions. However, the Working Group did not provide a recommendation for this approach. Under the Tier 4 second option, the Working Group folded this into the third Option. Under the Tier 4 third option, the project would be excluded if it was below an efficiency-based threshold of 4.8 MTCO2eq per service population (SP) per year or 3.0 MTCO2eq per SP for post-2020 projects.14 Tier 5 would exclude projects that implement offsite mitigation (GHG reduction projects) or purchase offsets to reduce GHG emission impacts to less than the proposed screening level. GHG efficiency metrics are utilized as thresholds to assess the GHG efficiency of a project on a per capita basis or on a “service population” basis (the sum of the number of jobs and the number of residents provided by a project) such that the project would allow for consistency with the goals of AB 32 (i.e., 1990 GHG emissions levels by 2020 and 2035). GHG efficiency thresholds can be determined by dividing the GHG emissions inventory goal of the State, by the estimated 2035 population and employment. This method allows highly efficient projects with higher mass 13 The most recent SCAQMD GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group meeting was held on September 2010. 14 The project-level efficiency-based threshold of 4.8 MTCO2eq per SP per year is relative to the 2020 target date. The SCAQMD has also proposed efficiency-based thresholds relative to the 2035 target date to be consistent with the GHG reduction target date of SB 375. GHG reductions by the SB 375 target date of 2035 would be approximately 40 percent. Applying this 40 percent reduction to the 2020 targets results in an efficiency threshold for plans of 4.1 MTCO2eq per SP per year and an efficiency threshold at the project level of 3.0 MTCO2eq/year. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 50 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration emissions to meet the overall reduction goals of AB 32, and is appropriate, because the threshold can be applied evenly to all project types (residential or commercial/retail only and mixed use). As the Project involves the construction of a master drainage facility, the 3,000 MTCO2eq/yr non- industrial screening threshold has been selected as the significance threshold, as it is most applicable to the proposed Project. The 3,000 MTCO2eq threshold is used in addition to the qualitative thresholds of significance set forth below from Section VII of Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines. Project-related GHG emissions would include emissions from construction activities. Construction of the proposed Project would result in direct emissions of CO2, N2O, and CH4 from the operation of construction equipment. Transport of materials and construction workers to and from the Project site would also result in GHG emissions. Construction activities would be short- term in duration and would cease upon Project completion. The Project involves the construction of a master drainage facility. The operation of the proposed Project would not result in any new sources of operational GHG emissions, as there would be no increase in vehicle trips and no new land uses are proposed. Consequently, Project-related GHG emissions would only be from construction activities. CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS Project-related GHG emissions would result from the proposed construction activities over the construction period. Construction GHG emissions are typically summed and amortized over the lifetime of the project (assumed to be 30 years), then added to the operational emissions.15 Table 3.7-1, Estimated Construction Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions, presents the estimated CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions of the Project. The CalEEMod outputs are contained within Appendix A. As shown in Table 3.7-1, the Project would result in 201.81 MTCO2eq (6.73 MTCO2eq when amortized over 30 years), which is well below the 3,000 MTCO2eq/year screening threshold. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. 15 The project lifetime is based on the standard 30-year assumption of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast Air Quality Management District, Minutes for the GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group #13, August 26, 2009). City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 51 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Table 3.7-1 Estimated Construction Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions Source CO2 CH4 N2O Total Metric Tons of CO2eq Metric Tons/yr Metric Tons/yr Metric Tons of CO2eq1 Metric Tons/yr Metric Tons of CO2eq1 Construction Emissions Total emissions 200.92 0.034 0.86 0.00 0.00 201.81 Total emissions (amortized over 30 years) 6.70 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 6.73 Notes: 1. CO2 Equivalent values calculated using the U.S. EPA Website, Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator, http://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator, Accessed December 2016. 2. Totals may be slightly off due to rounding. Due to rounding, the results given by the equation calculations used in the Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator may not return the exact results shown in CalEEMod. Refer to Appendix A, Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data, for detailed model input/output data. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Determination: Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Lake Elsinore adopted a Community Climate Action Plan (CAP) in December 2011. The CAP is a strategy for Lake Elsinore to grow in a sustainable way that meets GHG reduction goals while continuing to allow for public and private development and redevelopment that will keep Lake Elsinore a vibrant and livable community. The Project involves the construction of a master drainage facility which would provide flood protection to the existing Third Street channel watershed and adjacent properties. The Project would not conflict with the City of Lake Elsinore’s CAP as the Project does not change the City’s land use designations and would not increase population beyond that considered in the General Plan. In addition, the Project would be subject to applicable federal, State, and local regulatory requirements, further reducing project-related GHG emissions. The Project would not conflict with or impede implementation of reduction goals identified in AB 32 and other strategies to help reduce GHG emissions. Therefore, the implementation of the proposed Project would not affect any plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. A less than significant impact would occur in this regard. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 52 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? … … ; … b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? … … ; … c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? … … … ; d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? … … … ; e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? … … … ; f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? … … … ; g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? … … ; … h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? … … … ; Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. The routine transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials can result in hazards to the public through the potential for accidental release. Such hazards are typically associated with certain City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 53 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration types of land uses, such as chemical manufacturing facilities, industrial processes, waste disposal, and storage and distribution facilities. Hazardous materials could be used during the Project’s short-term construction activities, including standard construction materials such as diesel fuel and gasoline for construction equipment, asphalt, concrete, adhesives and cleaners. This analysis assumes that all potentially hazardous materials and chemicals used during Project construction would be transported, stored, handled, and used in accordance with all applicable federal, State, and local standards and regulations in order to reduce the potential for a hazardous materials incident. With compliance with the existing procedures that are intended to minimize potential health risks associated with their use or the accidental release of such substances, impacts associated with the transport, storage, handling, and use of these hazardous materials would be less than significant. Project operation is not anticipated to involve the use of hazardous materials. No operational impacts are identified in this regard. c) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. Refer to Impact 3.8 (a). The Project’s short-term construction activities have the potential to accidentally release hazardous materials into the environment. However, compliance with the applicable federal, State, and local laws and regulations in place to minimize hazards to the public or environment would reduce impacts related to the accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment to less than significant levels. Project operation is not anticipated to involve the use of hazardous materials. No operational impacts are identified in this regard. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Determination: No Impact. Three schools are located within the vicinity of the Project site. Lake Elsinore Head Start is located approximately 0.4 mile southwest of the Project site. In addition, Temescal Canyon High School and Earl Warren Elementary School are located approximately one mile to the northwest and 0.5 mile to the east of the Project site, respectively. As described in Impact 3.8 (a), all potentially hazardous materials and chemicals used during Project construction would be stored, handled, and used in accordance with all applicable federal, State, and local standards and regulations in order to reduce the potential for a hazardous materials incident. Operation of the proposed Project would not involve the routine use of hazardous materials. As such, construction and operation of the proposed Project is not anticipated to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste to these three schools. No impacts would occur in this regard. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 54 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Determination: No Impact. According to the California Department of Toxic Substances EnviroStor Database, the Project site is not affected by a hazardous materials site compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. 16 No impacts would occur in this regard. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Determination: No Impact. There are no public use airports within two miles of the Project site. No impacts would occur. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Determination: No Impact. The Skylark Airport is a private use airport located at the south end of Lake Elsinore. According to City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Figure 2.7 (Airport Influence Areas), the Project alignment is not affected by the Skylark Airport Influence Area. The Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan establishes policies applicable to land use compatibility planning in the vicinity of airports throughout Riverside County. The Project alignment is located more than four miles northeast of the Skylark Airport, and is thus not subject to the policies identified under the Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. No impact would occur. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Determination: Less Than Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed Project may cause temporary impacts to local traffic flow; refer to Section 3.16, Transportation/Traffic. However, while the proposed project will minimally impact traffic flow during the temporary construction period, it would not conflict with or interfere with emergency evacuation of the project area. Project construction would not substantially interfere with traffic circulation, as emergency access to the affected roadways would be maintained during project construction. Thus, it is not anticipated that construction of the proposed Project would substantially interfere with traffic circulation in such a way that would impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The Project would be required to prepare a Traffic Control Plan that would indicate if any road closures due to Project construction would be necessary. The Traffic Control Plan would be circulated to emergency personnel so that responders would be aware of any change to traffic patterns as a result of Project construction. The roadways surrounding the Project site would continue to function as emergency access routes as necessary, and no revisions to an adopted emergency response plan would be required. 16 California Department of Toxic Substances Control, EnviroStor Database, http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/, Accessed November 7, 2016 City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 55 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Determination: No Impact. According to the City of Lake Elsinore Fire Hazard Zone Map, the Project alignment is located in a moderate, high, and very high fire zone.17 The Project area is identified as a “Local Responsibility Area” according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire, Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP) Map.18 The proposed Project would involve the installation of underground RCP storm drain and associated infrastructure. As the Project would not involve aboveground facilities, other than a basin and headwall, the proposed Project would not be at risk to wildland fire exposure. No impacts would occur in this regard. 17 City of Lake Elsinore GIS, “Fire Hazard Zones,” http://www.lake-elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=10153, Accessed November 7, 2016. 18 California Department of Fire and Forestry Fire, Fire and Resources Assessment Program, http://frap.fire.ca.gov/webdata/maps/riverside_west/fhszs_map.60.pdf, Accessed November 7, 2016. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 56 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? … ; … … b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? … … … ; c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site? … … ; … d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? … … ; … e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? … … ; … f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? … … ; … g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? … … … ; h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? … … ; … i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? … … … ; j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? … … … ; City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 57 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Determination: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Surface water quality is subject to federal, State, and local water quality requirements administered and enforced by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) with cooperation from each county. The principal law governing pollution of the nation’s surface waters is the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act). Under the Clean Water Act, regulatory requirements for industrial and municipal dischargers were set, as well as requirements for states to adopt water quality standards. To achieve its objectives, the Clean Water Act is based on the concept that all discharges into the nation’s water are unlawful, unless specifically authorized by a permit. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) is the permitting program for discharge of pollutants into waters of the United States under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. To accomplish this, the RWQCB requires the issuance of a General Construction Permit. The permit is required for discharges from construction sites that are one acre or larger and from discharges on smaller sites that are part of a larger common plan of development or sale. The General Construction Permit includes effluent limits for erosion and sediment control, pollution prevention, and site stabilization from the Construction and Development Effluent Guidelines and Standards regulations. Through these permits, levels of erosion, sediment, and other constituents are regulated to ensure that water quality standards are met on project sites. In order to comply with these permit requirements, a project must submit a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) outlining the site protocols that will be implemented to reduce stormwater pollution impacts; refer to Mitigation Measure GEO-1. Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would also include site- specific Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be implemented with the proposed development in order to prevent erosion, minimize siltation from impacting downstream water bodies, and protect water quality. Compliance with Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would ensure the Project’s construction-related impacts to water quality standards and waste discharge requirements are less than significant. Project operation would occur belowground and thus is not anticipated to involve impacts to surface water quality. No operational impacts would occur in this regard. MITIGATION MEASURES GEO-1 Refer to Impact 3.6 (b). b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Determination: No Impact. The Project entails the installation of RCP storm drain facilities and associated infrastructure. No aspect of the proposed Project would involve nor require the use of groundwater supplies. Therefore, construction and operation of the proposed Project would not involve impacts to groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 58 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Determination: Less Than Significant Impact. Project implementation would not increase the amount of impervious surface on the site. The purpose of the Project is to adequately collect and convey the drainage flows of approximately 704 tributary acres under a 100-year flood event. More specifically, the Project involves the construction of a master drainage facility which would provide flood protection to the existing Third Street channel watershed and adjacent properties. Construction of the proposed Project would be subject to applicable federal, State, regional, and County regulations aimed at reducing or eliminating adverse impacts to natural drainage courses. The Project does not involve the alteration of the course of a stream or river; refer to Impact 3.4 (c). The existing regulatory framework would reduce the Project’s potential impacts to drainage facilities to less than significant levels. d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. Refer to Impact 3.9 (c) above. The purpose of the Project is to adequately collect and convey the drainage flows of approximately 704 tributary acres under a 100-year flood event. More specifically, the Project involves the construction of a master drainage facility which would provide flood protection to the existing Third Street channel watershed and adjacent properties. The Project would be subject to applicable federal, State, County, and local regulations aimed at reducing or eliminating adverse impacts on natural drainage courses during the construction phase of the Project. Prior to the commencement of Project construction, the Project Applicant would be required to develop a SWPPP and obtain a General Construction Permit from the Regional Water Quality Control Board in order to reduce the Project’s potential to result in offsite runoff and erosion and sedimentation. Compliance with such regulations would reduce potential impacts related to flooding on- or offsite to less than significant levels. e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Determination: Less Than Significant Impact. The purpose of the Project is to adequately collect and convey the drainage flows of approximately 704 tributary acres under a 100-year flood event. More specifically, the Project involves the construction of a master drainage facility which would provide flood protection to the existing Third Street channel watershed and adjacent properties. Construction stormwater runoff would be reduced through preparation of a SWPPP to ensure that measures are implemented during the Project’s construction phase to avoid or minimize any adverse effects of runoff. For this reason, construction activities 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. The proposed Project would involve the construction and operation of a below-ground RCP storm drain system along with associated infrastructure. Accordingly, Project operation would reduce the potential for substantial polluted runoff to occur. No impacts would occur in this regard. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 59 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Determination: Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to Impacts 3.9 (a) and 3.9 (e) above. With the implementation of BMPs and compliance with existing federal, State, regional, and local regulations, the Project is not expected to substantially degrade water quality. g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Determination: No Impact. The purpose of the Project is to adequately collect and convey the drainage flows of approximately 704 tributary acres under a 100-year flood event. More specifically, the Project involves the construction of a master drainage facility which would provide flood protection to the existing Third Street channel watershed and adjacent properties. The Project does not propose any housing. No Impacts would occur. h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? Determination: No Impact. The purpose of the Project is to adequately collect and convey the drainage flows of approximately 704 tributary acres under a 100-year flood event. More specifically, the Project involves the construction of a master drainage facility which would provide flood protection to the existing Third Street channel watershed and adjacent properties. According to FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Program, portions of the proposed Project would be located within a designated 100-year and 500-year flood hazard areas.19 However, the RCP storm drains and associated infrastructure would be installed below ground, thus, Project implementation would not have the potential to impede or redirect flood flows. No impact would occur. i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Determination: No Impact. Refer to Impact 3.9 (h) above. In regards to levee or dam failure, the Project site is not located in the high inundation zone of the Railroad Canyon Dam, which is located approximately 3.4 miles southeast of the Project site in the City of Canyon Lake. The City of Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR identifies the Railroad Canyon Road area of the City and eastern floodplain of the lake as within the Railroad Canyon Dam inundation zone; refer to City of Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR Figure 3.9-1 (Hydrologic Resources). Further, the subsurface nature of the RCP storm drains and associated infrastructure would ensure the Project has no impacts associated with flooding. By its nature, the Project would entail storm drain improvements to reduce the potential for flooding impacts. No impact would occur in this regard. j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Determination: No Impact. The nearest large body of water to the Project site is Lake Elsinore (located approximately 1.12 miles to the southwest). Seiching is defined as a periodic oscillation of liquid within a container or reservoir. Its period is determined by the resonant characteristics of the container as 19 Federal Emergency Management Agency Website, FEMA Flood Map Service Center, https://msc.fema.gov/portal, Accessed November 7, 2016. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 60 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration controlled by its physical dimensions. There are no anticipated impacts to the proposed Project from seiche, tsunami or mudflow, as the Project would not involve above-ground structures which would be at risk to inundation. Because of the factors discussed above, the Project is not anticipated to involve impacts from seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 61 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? … … … ; b) 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? … … … ; c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? … ; … … Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? Determination: No Impact. The proposed Project does not involve above-ground components which would physically divide an established community. The RCP storm drains and associated infrastructure would be installed belowground within existing roadway rights-of-way and easements. The basin and headwall would be an above ground feature, but would not physically divide an established community. Due to the nature and scope of the proposed Project, no impact would occur in this regard. b) 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? Determination: No Impact. The proposed RCP storm drains and associated infrastructure would be installed below ground within existing roadway rights-of-way and easements. The basin and headwall would be an above ground facility and is a part of a storm drain system. For this reason, Project implementation would not result in impacts relative to conflicts with land use or zoning plans, policies, or regulations. The Project is not affected by a local coastal plan or specific plan area. No impacts would occur in this regard. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Determination: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Refer to Impact 3.4 (a) above. Less than significant impacts would occur with implementation of BIO-1. MITIGATION MEASURES BIO-1 See Impact 3.4 (a) above. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 62 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.11 MINERAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 11. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? … … … ; b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? … … … ; Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Determination: No Impact. The State Mining and Geology Board (SMGB) has established Mineral Resources Zones (MRZs) to designate lands that contain mineral deposits. The classifications used by the State to define MRZs are as follows: x MRZ-1: Areas where the available geologic information indicates no significant likelihood of significant mineral deposits. x MRZ-2a: Areas where the available geologic information indicates that there are significant mineral deposits. x MRZ-2b: Areas where the available geologic information indicates that there is a likelihood of significant mineral deposits. x MRZ-3a: Areas where the available geologic information indicates that mineral deposits exist, however, the significance of the deposit is undetermined. x MRZ-3b: Areas where the available geologic information indicates that mineral deposits are likely to exist, however, the significance of the deposit is undetermined. x MRZ-4: Areas where there is not enough information available to determine the presence of a known mineral deposit. Figure 3.12-1 (City of Lake Elsinore Mineral Resource Zones) of the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR designates the Project alignment as MRZ-3. MRZ-3 areas contain sedimentary deposits which could potentially supply sand and gravel for concrete applications and crushed stone for aggregate materials. Additionally, the Project site is not identified by the California Department of Conservation as having mineral resources that could be of value to the region and residents of the State.20 The Project’s facilities are all located within existing roadway rights-of-way and thus no adverse impacts to mineral resources are anticipated. 20 California Department of Conservation, CGS Information Warehouse: Mineral Land Classification, http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/, Accessed November 9, 2016. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 63 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Determination: No Impact. Refer to Impact 3.11 (a) above. The Project site is designated MRZ-3 by the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR and is thus not anticipated to result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 64 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.12 NOISE Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 12. NOISE – Would the project result in: a) 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? … ; … … b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? … … ; … c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? … … … ; d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? … … ; … e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? … … … ; f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? … … … ; Would the project result in: Sound is mechanical energy transmitted by pressure waves in a compressible medium such as air, and is characterized by both its amplitude and frequency (or pitch). The human ear does not hear all frequencies equally. In particular, the ear deemphasizes low and very high frequencies. To better approximate the sensitivity of human hearing, the A-weighted decibel scale (dBA) has been developed. On this scale, the human range of hearing extends from approximately 3 dBA to around 140 dBA. Noise is generally defined as unwanted or excessive sound, which can vary in intensity by over one million times within the range of human hearing; therefore, a logarithmic scale, known as the decibel scale (dB), is used to quantify sound intensity. Noise can be generated by a number of sources, including mobile sources such as automobiles, trucks, and airplanes, and stationary sources such as construction sites, machinery, and industrial operations. Noise generated by mobile sources typically attenuates (is reduced) at a rate between 3 dBA and 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance. The rate depends on the ground surface and the number or type of objects between the noise source and the receiver. Hard and flat surfaces, such as concrete or asphalt, have an attenuation rate of 3 dBA per doubling of distance. Soft surfaces, such as uneven or vegetated terrain, have an attenuation rate of about 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 65 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Noise generated by stationary sources typically attenuates at a rate between 6 dBA and about 7.5 dBA per doubling of distance. There are a number of metrics used to characterize community noise exposure, which fluctuate constantly over time. One such metric, the equivalent sound level (Leq), represents a constant sound that, over the specified period, has the same sound energy as the time-varying sound. Noise exposure over a longer period of time is often evaluated based on the Day-Night Sound Level (Ldn). This is a measure of 24-hour noise levels that incorporates a 10-dBA penalty for sounds occurring between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. The penalty is intended to reflect the increased human sensitivity to noises occurring during nighttime hours, particularly at times when people are sleeping and there are lower ambient noise conditions. Typical L dn noise levels for light and medium density residential areas range from 55 dBA to 65 dBA. Two of the primary factors that reduce levels of environmental sounds are increasing the distance between the sound source to the receiver and having intervening obstacles such as walls, buildings, or terrain features between the sound source and the receiver. Factors that act to increase the loudness of environmental sounds include moving the sound source closer to the receiver, sound enhancements caused by reflections, and focusing caused by various meteorological conditions. STATE OF CALIFORNIA The State Office of Planning and Research Noise Element Guidelines include recommended exterior and interior noise level standards for local jurisdictions to identify and prevent the creation of incompatible land uses due to noise. The Noise Element Guidelines contain a land use compatibility table that describes the compatibility of various land uses with a range of environmental noise levels in terms of the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE General Plan Section 3.0, Public Safety and Welfare, of the Lake Elsinore General Plan includes subsection 3.7, Noise. The Noise subsection is a tool for local planners to use in achieving and maintaining land uses that are compatible with environmental noise levels. The Noise subsection identifies noise sensitive land uses and noise sources, and defines areas of noise impact for the purpose of developing programs to ensure that Lake Elsinore residents will be protected from excessive noise intrusion. The Noise subsection of the General Plan identified roadway traffic as a major source of noise within the City. Some other reported noise sources in Lake Elsinore include industrial and manufacturing facilities, Skylark Airport, schools, construction activities, and recreational activities associated with the lake, the motocross park, and Diamond Stadium. Table 3.12-1, Noise and Land Use Compatibility presents the City’s land use compatibility criteria. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 66 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Table 3.12-1 Noise/Land Use Compatibility Lan Use Categories Day-Night Noise Level (Ldn) Category Uses <55 60 65 70 75 80> Residential Single Family, Duplex, Multiple Family A A B B C D D Residential Mobile Home A A B C C D D Commercial Regional District Hotel, Motel, Transient Lodging A A B B C C D Commercial Regional Village, District Special Commercial, Retail, Bank, Restaurant, Movie Theatre A A A A B B C Commercial Industrial Institutional Office Building, Research and Development, Professional Offices, City Office Building A A A B B C D Commercial Regional Institutional Civic Center Amphitheatre, Concert Hall Auditorium, Meeting Hall B B C C D D D Commercial Recreation Children’s Amusement Park, Miniature Golf Course, Go-cart Track, Equestrian Center, Sports Club A A A B B D D Commercial General, Special Industrial Institutional Automobile Service Station, Auto Dealership, Manufacturing, Warehousing, Wholesale, Utilities A A A A B B B Institutional General Hospital, Church, Library, Schools, Classroom A A B C C D D Open Space Parks A A A B C D D Open Space Golf Courses, Cemeteries, Nature Centers, Wildlife Reserves, Wildlife Habitat A A A A B C C Agriculture Agriculture A A A A A A A Notes: Zone A Clearly Compatible - Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements. Zone B Normally Compatible - New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements are made and needed noise insulation features in the design are determined. Conventional construction, with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning, will normally suffice. Zone C Normally Incompatible - New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Zone D Clearly Incompatible – New construction or development should generally not be undertaken. Source: City of Lake Elsinore, General Plan Public Safety and Welfare, December 13, 2011. Municipal Code The City of Lake Elsinore Noise Ordinance is contained within City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (Municipal Code), Title 17, Zoning; Chapter 17.176, Noise Control. Based on Municipal Code, excessive noise is a serious hazard to the public health, welfare, safety and the quality of life. Community members have a right to, and should be ensured of, an environment free from excessive noise. Therefore, it is the policy of Lake Elsinore to prevent excessive noise that may jeopardize the health, welfare, or safety of the citizens or degrade their quality of life. Additionally, Section 17.176.080(F), Construction/Demolition, states that construction shall not occur between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, or at any time on weekends or holidays, except for emergency work of public service utilities or by variance issued by the City. Section 17.176.060, Exterior Noise Limits, applies to all properties within a designated noise zone unless otherwise specifically indicated. The Table 3.12-2, Exterior Noise Limits indicates exterior noise standards. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 67 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Table 3.12-2 Exterior Noise Limit Receiving Land Use Category Time Period Noise Level (dBA) Single-Family Residential 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 40 dBA 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 50 dBA Multiple Dwelling Residential 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 45 dBA 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 50 dBA Public Space Limited Commercial and Office 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 55 dBA 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 60 dBA General Commercial 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 60 dBA 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 65 dBA Light Industrial Anytime 70 dBA Heavy Industrial Anytime 75 dBA According to Section 17.176.060, no person shall operate, or cause to be operated, any source of sound at any location within the incorporated City or allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied or otherwise controlled by such person, which causes the noise level when measured on any other property, either incorporated or unincorporated, to exceed: a. The noise standard for that land use as specified in Table 1 for a cumulative period of more than 30 minutes in any hour; or b. The noise standard plus five dB for a cumulative period of more than 15 minutes in any hour; or c. The noise standard plus 10 dB for a cumulative period of more than five minutes in any hour; or d. The noise standard plus 15 dB for a cumulative period of more than one minute in any hour; or e. The noise standard plus 20 dB or the maximum measured ambient level, for any period of time. If the measured ambient level differs from that permissible within any of the fast four noise limit categories above, the allowable noise exposure standard shall be adjusted in five dB increments in each category as appropriate to encompass or reflect said ambient noise level. In the event the ambient noise level exceeds the fifth noise limit category, the maximum allowable noise level under this category shall be increased to reflect the maximum ambient noise level If the measurement location is on a boundary between two different zones, the noise level limit applicable to the lower noise zone plus six dB shall apply. If possible, the ambient noise shall be measured at the same location along the property line utilized in subsection (A)(2) of this section with the alleged offending noise source inoperative. If, for any reason, the alleged offending noise source cannot be shut down, the ambient noise must be estimated by performing a measurement in the same general area of the source but at a sufficient distance such that the noise from the source is at least 10 dB below the ambient in order that only the ambient level be measured. If the difference between the ambient and the noise source is five to 10 dB, then the level of the ambient itself can be reasonably determined by subtracting a one-decibel correction to account for the contribution of the source. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 68 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Correction for Character of Sound. In the event the alleged offensive noise, as judged by the Noise Control Officer, contains a steady, audible tone such as a whine, screech, or hum, or is a repetitive noise such as hammering or riveting, or contains music or speech conveying informational content, the standard limits set forth in Table 3.12-2 shall be reduced by five dB. EXISTING NOISE SOURCES The Project area is urbanized, consisting of industrial, business, commercial, and residential uses. The primary sources of stationary noise in the Project vicinity are urban-related activities (i.e., mechanical equipment and pedestrians). The noise associated with these sources may represent a single-event noise occurrence, short-term, or long-term/continuous noise. However, the majority of the existing noise in the Project area is generated from vehicle sources, which are mobile sources. Would the project result in: a) 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? Determination: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. It is difficult to specify noise levels that are generally acceptable to everyone; what is annoying to one person may be unnoticed by another. Standards may be based on documented complaints in response to documented noise levels, or based on studies of the ability of people to sleep, talk, or work under various noise conditions. However, all such studies recognize that individual responses vary considerably. Standards usually address the needs of the majority of the general population. As stated above, the City’s Municipal Code includes some regulations controlling unnecessary, excessive, and annoying noise within the City. As outlined in the Municipal Code, maximum noise levels are based on land use. Short-Term Noise Impacts Construction activities generally are temporary and have a short duration, resulting in periodic increases in the ambient noise environment. Construction of the proposed Project would occur over approximately eight months. Construction activities would include grading, construction of the new storm drain, and paving. Ground-borne noise and other types of construction-related noise impacts typically occur during the initial demolition and earthwork phases. These phases of construction have the potential to create the highest levels of noise; however, it is generally the shortest of all construction phases. Typical noise levels generated by construction equipment are shown in Table 3.12-3, Maximum Noise Levels Generated by Construction Equipment. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 69 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Table 3.12-3 Maximum Noise Levels Generated by Construction Equipment Type of Equipment Acoustical Use Factor1 Lmax at 50 Feet (dBA) Concrete Saw 20 90 Concrete Mixer Truck 40 79 Backhoe 40 78 Dozer 40 82 Excavator 40 81 Forklift 40 78 Paver 50 77 Roller 20 80 Tractor 40 84 Water Truck 40 80 Grader 40 85 General Industrial Equipment 50 85 Note: 1. Acoustical Use Factor (percent): Estimates the fraction of time each piece of construction equipment is operating at full power (i.e., its loudest condition) during a construction operation. Source: Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model (FHWA-HEP-05- 054), January 2006. Operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings. Other primary sources of acoustical disturbance would be due to random incidents, which would last less than one minute (such as dropping large pieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts). Sensitive uses surrounding the Project site include residential uses along Third Street, Cambern Avenue, Conrad Avenue, and Welch Drive adjoining to the Project site. These sensitive uses may be exposed to elevated noise levels during Project construction. The City’s Municipal Code does not establish quantitative construction noise standards. Instead, the Municipal Code has established allowable hours of construction (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and at no time on weekends and holidays), of which the proposed Project would adhere. Thus, construction activities would be conducted during allowable daytime hours, per the City’s Municipal Code. Implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1 would not only require compliance with the City’s allowed hours of construction, but would also require construction equipment to be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other state required noise attenuation devices. Implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1 would ensure construction noise is consistent with the levels in Table 3.12-3. Thus, with implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1, construction noise would be less than significant. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 70 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Long-Term Operational Noise Impacts As stated in Response 4.12(c), Project implementation would not increase noise within the Project area. The Project involves installation of a master drainage facility and does not propose roadway improvements. The proposed Project would not generate any stationary or operational mobile source noise impacts. Mitigation Measures: N-1 Prior to construction, the City of Lake Elsinore Department of Public Works shall verify that the Project complies with the following: • Construction contracts specify that all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other state required noise attenuation devices. • Property owners and occupants located within 200 feet of the Project boundary shall be sent a notice, at least 15 days prior to commencement of construction of each phase, regarding the construction schedule of the proposed Project. A sign, legible at a distance of 50 feet shall also be posted at the Project construction site. All notices and signs shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Lake Elsinore Public Works Department, prior to mailing or posting and shall indicate the dates and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a contact name and a telephone number where residents can inquire about the construction process and register complaints. • Construction haul routes shall be designed to avoid noise sensitive uses (e.g., residences, convalescent homes, etc.). • During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers. • Construction equipment staging areas shall be located as far away from adjacent sensitive receptors as possible. • Construction activities shall not take place outside of the allowable hours specified by the City's Municipal Code Section 17.176.080(F) (7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday; construction activities are not permitted on Saturday, Sundays or national holidays). b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. Short-Term Construction Project construction can generate varying degrees of ground-borne vibration, depending on the construction procedure and the construction equipment used. Operation of construction equipment generates vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish in amplitude with distance from the source. The effect on buildings located in the vicinity of the construction site often varies depending on soil type, ground strata, and construction characteristics of the receiver building(s). The results from vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibration at moderate levels, to slight damage at the highest levels. Ground-borne vibrations from construction activities rarely reach levels that damage structures. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has published standard vibration velocities for construction equipment operations. In general, the FTA architectural damage criterion for City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 71 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration continuous vibrations (i.e., 0.20 inch/second) appears to be conservative. The types of construction vibration impact include human annoyance and building damage. Human annoyance occurs when construction vibration rises significantly above the threshold of human perception for extended periods of time. Building damage can be cosmetic or structural. Typical vibration produced by construction equipment is illustrated in Table 3.12-4, Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment. Table 3.12-4 Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment 3.12.1 Equipment Approximate peak particle velocity at 15 feet (inches/second) Approximate peak particle velocity at 25 feet (inches/second) Approximate peak particle velocity at 50 feet (inches/second) Large bulldozer 0.191 0.089 0.031 Loaded trucks 0.164 0.076 0.027 Small bulldozer 0.006 0.003 0.001 Jackhammer 0.075 0.035 0.012 Notes: 1. Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines, May 2006. Table 12-2. 2. Calculated using the following formula: PPV equip = PPVref x (25/D)1.5 where: PPV (equip) = the peak particle velocity in in/sec of the equipment adjusted for the distance PPV (ref) = the reference vibration level in in/sec from Table 12-2 of the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver Ground-borne vibration decreases rapidly with distance. As indicated in Table 3.12-4, based on the FTA data, vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipment operations that would be used during Project construction range from 0.003 to 0.089 inch-per-second peak particle velocity (PPV) at 25 feet from the source of activity. The nearest sensitive receptors (residential uses to the south/southwest) are located adjacent the Project site (as close as 15 feet). As noted in Table 3.12-4, vibration at 15 feet would range from 0.006 to 0.191 PPV and vibration at 50 feet would range from 0.001 to 0.031 PPV. With regard to the proposed Project, groundborne vibration would be generated primarily during demolition activities/pavement removal on-site and by off-site haul-truck travel. Primary equipment for construction phase are excavators and backhoes. Pile driving equipment is not required. Therefore, vibration from construction activities experienced at the nearest sensitive receptors (residences to the south/southwest) would be expected to be below the 0.20 inch-per-second PPV significance threshold. Thus, a less than significant impact would occur in this regard. Long-Term Operational Impacts The Project proposes installation of a master drainage facility that would not generate ground- borne vibration. The proposed Project would not involve railroads or heavy truck operations, and therefore would not result in vibration impacts at surrounding uses. Less than significant impact would occur is this regard. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 72 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Determination: No Impact. Off-Site Mobile Noise Impacts The proposed Project includes the installation of a master drainage facility. The Project does not propose roadway improvements; therefore, the Project would not generate additional trips. Future storm drain development generated by the proposed Project would not result in additional traffic on adjacent roadways; therefore, there would be no vehicular noise increasing in the vicinity of existing land uses. Thus, no impact would occur in this regard. Long-Term Stationary Noise Impacts Upon Project completion, noise in the Project area would not increase. The Project involves installation of a master drainage facility. Project operation would not generate any stationary source noise impacts. Therefore, no impacts would occur in this regard. d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. Refer to Responses 4.12(a) and 4.12(b), above. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Determination: No Impact. The Project is not located within an airport land use plan and there are no public or private airports or airstrips within two miles of the Project site. The Skylark Field Airport is located approximately 4 miles to the southeast of the Project site and is the nearest airport. Thus, no impact would occur. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Determination: No Impact. There are no private airstrips located within the Project area or in the vicinity. Thus, no impacts would occur in this regard. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 73 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? … … ; … b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? … … … ; c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? … … … ; Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Determination: Less Than Significant Impact. Population growth can be induced either directly (i.e., through the provision of new homes or businesses) or indirectly (i.e., through roadway extensions or other infrastructure improvements). The storm drain improvements proposed under the Project have the potential to indirectly induce population growth as it represents an extension of infrastructure. However, the purpose of the Project is to install a storm drain pipeline to improve stormwater flow and collection to the existing Lake Elsinore stormwater system during peak periods of rainfall. The volume of stormwater to be accommodated by the proposed Project is intended to serve an existing and established community, and would not induce directly, or indirectly, the growth of new homes, businesses, or populations. Furthermore, that City of Lake Elsinore General Plan accommodates potential future growth in the project vicinity. As such, the project is not inducing growth that is not anticipated in the General Plan. The proposed development adjacent to the Project, along Welch Street would be approved by the city and would have its own CEQA compliance document. The City would determine if this new proposed development would cause significant unavoidable impact through the separate CEQA process for the development. In regards to Phase 2, the Project basin and headwall is in an area where future residential development is proposed. The Ramsgate Specific Plan accounts for future development in the vicinity of the basin and headwall portion of the Project. Any proposed development within the Ramsgate Specific Plan area would need approvals by the City and would require it’s own separate CEQA compliance documentation.As such, the Project is not considered growth inducing. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 74 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Determination: No Impact. The Project would be sited below ground within existing roadway rights-of-way. As a result, the Project would not displace existing housing necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impacts would occur. c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Determination: No Impact. Refer to Impact 3.13 (b) above. Project implementation would not displace existing residences or people. No impacts would occur. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 75 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.14 PUBLIC SERVICES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 14. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? … … … ; Police protection? … … … ; Schools? … … … ; Parks? … … … ; Other public facilities? … … … ; a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: 1) Fire protection? Determination: No Impact. The Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD) provides fire protection and emergency medical services to the Project site and the entire City of Lake Elsinore. The Rosetta Canyon Fire Station (Station 97) is the nearest fire station to the Project site and is located in the north of the City at 41725 Rosetta Canyon Drive, approximately 0.35 miles east of the Project site. The subsurface nature of the Project does not represent a significant fire hazard, nor is the proposed Project forecast to require additional fire protection services/facilities for construction or operation. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in a considerable demand on fire protection services resulting in the requirement for new or altered fire protection services. No impacts would occur in this regard. 2) Police protection? Determination: No Impact. The City of Lake Elsinore contracts with the Riverside County Sheriff Department (RCSD) for police protection services. The nearest Sheriff’s station is approximately 1.4 miles west from the Project site at 333 Limited Avenue. The subsurface nature of the proposed Project would not result in onsite human occupation which would represent onsite security concerns and necessitate additional police presence. No significant impacts related to police protection or City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 76 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration services are anticipated with implementation of the proposed Project, since no special provisions for security are deemed necessary. 3) Schools? Determination: No Impact. The proposed Project would not involve new housing or employment and would not impact schools in any way. Therefore, Project implementation would not create a demand for new school facilities. No impacts in this regard would occur. 4) Parks? Determination: No Impact. The proposed Project would not involve new housing or employment that would impact parks. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities and no impacts in this regard would occur. 5) Other public facilities?21 Determination: No Impact. Due to the nature and scope of the proposed Project, implementation would not increase the demand for other public facilities such that it would create the need for alteration or construction of any new governmental facilities. No impact in this regard would occur. 21 For the purposes of this impact analysis, “Other Public Facilities” refers to library services. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 77 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.15 RECREATION Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 15. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? … … … ; b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? … … … ; a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Determination: No Impact. Refer to Impact 3.14 (a)(4) above. Project implementation would not create an increased use of an existing recreational facility. Therefore, substantial physical deterioration of these facilities would not occur or be accelerated due to Project construction or operation. No impacts would occur. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Determination: No Impact. The proposed Project involves the installation of belowground RCP storm drain facilities and associated infrastructure within existing roadway right-of-way. The Project does not propose or warrant construction of recreational facilities. No impacts would occur. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 78 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.16 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? … ; … … b) Conflict with an applicable congestion 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 and highways? … ; … … c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? … … … ; d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? … … … ; e) Result in inadequate emergency access? … ; … … f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? … ; … … Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? Determination: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The volume of automobile and truck traffic associated with Project-related construction activities would vary throughout the construction phase as different activities occur. During the construction phase, the Project would generate additional trips in the vicinity of the RCP storm drain alignments and associated infrastructure. These trips would be associated with construction City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 79 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration worker commutes and transport of materials and equipment to and from the Project site. However, the construction process would be temporary, and any increase in traffic would be localized to the Project area and would cease upon completion of construction. Pursuant to existing regulatory requirements, construction-related traffic would be required to use established truck routes that involve Major and Secondary Arterials in order to best avoid impacts to local streets, particularly those that traverse residential neighborhoods. Nonetheless, several RCP storm drain alignments would affect roadway rights-of-way serving residential land uses; refer to Exhibit 3. For construction of the RCP storm drain alignments and associated infrastructure, the Project contractor would be required to implement any traffic control measures necessary to access the site and maintain unobstructed traffic flow during installation activities. Delivery and parking of vehicles would be coordinated to minimize impacts to local traffic, and construction equipment would be staged in areas along the alignments that would be agreed upon by the City of Lake Elsinore. Although generally restricted to Major/Secondary arterials, the addition of Project-related construction traffic to affected roadways and intersections could temporarily conflict with an adopted plan, ordinance, or policy which establishes measures of effectiveness for performance by reducing the existing LOS or creating increased intersection delays. As such, mitigation would be required. Mitigation Measure TRA-1 requires the preparation of a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) by a Registered Civil Engineer and subject to the approval by the permitting agency (City of Lake Elsinore) prior to any trenching in public streets for distribution pipelines. Mitigation Measure TRA-1 would also require that appropriate signage is posted warning motorists, bicycle traffic, or pedestrians of potential dangers associated with Project construction, and would ensure adequate access to and from residential areas. With implementation of Mitigation Measures TRA- 1, all construction-related impacts to traffic/circulation would be reduced to less than significant levels. Operation of the RCP storm drain and associated infrastructure would include periodic, scheduled inspections, the replacement of any equipment that reaches the end of its lifetime or failed during use, and maintenance of erosion control. Project operations and maintenance would not require routine staffing and, as such, it is not anticipated that operation of the Project would generate substantial new traffic in the area or significantly impact LOS in the Project area. A less than significant impact would occur in this regard. Mitigation Measures TRA-1 Short-term mitigation for temporary impacts to local roadways shall be mitigated by a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) to be approved by the permitting agency (i.e., City of Lake Elsinore), prior to any trenching in public streets for pipelines. The TMP shall consist of prior notices, adequate sign posting, detours (if needed), phased construction and temporary driveways where necessary. The TMP shall specify implementation timing of each plan element (prior notices, sign posting, detours, etc.) as determined appropriate by a City Engineer. Adequate access to and from residential areas shall be provided at all times. Proper detours and warning signs shall be established to ensure public safety. The TMP shall be devised so that construction shall not interfere with any emergency response or evacuation plans. Construction activities shall proceed in a timely manner in an effort to reduce impacts. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 80 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration b) 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 and highways? Determination: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Project construction-related trips are qualitatively described under Impact 3.16 (a) above. The minimal increase in traffic in the proposed Project area that may result from the transport of workers and materials to the site during the temporary construction phase of the Project would be fully mitigated through Mitigation Measure TRA-1. Compliance with Mitigation Measure TRA- 1, which requires the preparation of a Traffic Management Plan to be approved by the permitting agency, would ensure congestion management program facilities would not be significantly impacted. With implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-1, Project construction is not anticipated to result in a change to the existing level of service and would not result in a significant impact related to travel demand measures. Operation of the RCP storm drains and associated infrastructure would require occasional maintenance; however, such work efforts would not generate substantial numbers of vehicle trips that would contribute to significant traffic congestion or that would significantly impact level of service. It is anticipated that a limited number of maintenance vehicles and/or workers would be required at any one location for periodic maintenance of these facilities. As such, impacts would be less than significant in this regard. Mitigation Measures TRA-1 Refer to Impact 3.16 (a) above. c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? Determination: No Impact. Due to the nature and scope of the proposed Project and the Project proximity to private and public airports, Project implementation would not have the capacity to result in a change in air traffic patterns. Therefore, no impact would occur. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Determination: No Impact. The proposed Project does not have any safety hazards and would not otherwise create hazards due to incompatible uses. No impacts are anticipated. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? Determination: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Refer to Impact 3.16 (a) above. The proposed Project would be required to prepare a Traffic Management Plan to be approved by the permitting agency (i.e., City of Lake Elsinore) as described in Mitigation Measure TRA-1, which would reduce impacts in this regard. Impacts related to emergency access impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. Mitigation Measures TRA-1 Refer to Impact 3.16 (a) above. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 81 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Determination: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed Project would install subsurface RCP storm drain alignments and appurtenant facilities within existing road rights-of-way. Public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities may be temporarily adversely affected on area roadways during the construction phases of the Project. According to City of Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR Figure 3.4-11 (Existing Bikeway Plan), Project construction could impact the existing Class II Bicycle Route along Collier Avenue and Dexter Avenue. Installation of the RCP storm drain and associated infrastructure would have the potential to disrupt such facilities and may result in the temporary disruption, relocation, or closure of such facilities. Impacts may also occur as a result of construction equipment and vehicles traveling on roadways to and from construction areas. To minimize the Project’s impacts to alternative transportation, Mitigation Measure TRA-1 is required. Mitigation Measure TRA-1 requires the preparation of a Traffic Management Plan to require that appropriate signage is posted warning motorists, bicycle traffic, or pedestrians of potential dangers associated with Project construction and specify detours as necessary. With implementation of TRA-1, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures TRA-1 Refer to Impact 3.16 (a) above. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 82 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 5. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)?, or … ; … … b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe? … … ; … Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)? Determination: Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. California State Assembly Bill No. 52 (AB 52) amended CEQA by creating a new category of cultural resources, tribal cultural resources, and requires consultation with Native American Tribes. Governor Brown signed AB 52 on Sept 25, 2014, and the Bill became effective July 1, 2015. Pursuant to AB 52, lead agencies are required to consult with Native American tribes who request consultation for projects located within their traditional territory. AB 52 consultation is required for projects that have a Notice of Preparation, Notice of Negative Declaration, or Notice of Mitigated Negative Declaration on or after July 1, 2015. AB 52 consultation is ongoing throughout the processing of a project until mutual agreement can be reached. Consultation is considered concluded when: (1) all parties are in agreement; (2) acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, mutual agreement cannot be reached; or, (3) tribes are non-responsive. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 83 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The City initiated Tribal consultation pursuant to AB-52 requirements by sending project status letters to six tribes. The tribes included the Soboba Band of Lusieño Indians, Rincon Band of Lusieño Indians, Pechanga Band of Lusieño Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians. Four tribes, which included Rincon Band of Lusieño Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians received their letters on January 27, 2017. The 30-day period to respond to the City’s letter expired on February 27, 2017. The Soboba Band received theirs on January 30, 2017. The 30-day period to respond to the City’s letter expired on March 1, 2017. The Pechanga Band received their letter on February 3, 2017. The 30-day period to respond to the City’s letter expired on March 6, 2017. Only the Soboba Band of Lusieño Indians responded and requested further consultation. The Soboba Tribe did not indicate that known tribal cultural resources are within the project area of potential effect for the proposed project. If inadvertent human remains are uncovered during earthwork activities, construction activities would be halted in the vicinity of the find and any area that is reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the County Coroner has been notified, and the remains have been investigated and appropriate recommendations have been made for the treatment and removal of the remains. Such requirements would ensure that any tribal resources discovered would be properly evaluated for significance and avoided and/or otherwise preserved, as appropriate, in perpetuity. Because of State legal requirements, impacts are considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated. MITIGATION MEASURES See Mitigation Measure CR-5, above. b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Determination: Less than Significant Impact. The construction activities proposed under the project have low potential to result in a significant impact to tribal cultural resources. Potential impacts within the boundaries of Traditional Cultural Property could cause a substantial adverse change of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code section 21074. As no tribe has identified a Traditional Cultural Landscape near the project site, impacts are considered less that significant. MITIGATION MEASURES None City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 84 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? … … … ; b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? … … … ; c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? … … … ; d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? … … … ; e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? … … … ; f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? … … ; … g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? … … ; … Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Determination: No Impact. Project implementation would not result in any new wastewater generation or changes to wastewater treatment facilities. No impact would occur in this regard. b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Determination: No Impact. The proposed Project entails the installation of an underground RCP storm drain and associated infrastructure. No aspect of the Project would require nor result in any new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. No impact would occur. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 85 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Determination: No Impact. As described in Section 2.0, Project Description, the intent of the Third Street Storm Drain Project is to install a below-ground RCP storm drain and associated infrastructure in order to safely convey a 100-year flood event from up to 737 tributary acres. Thus, the focus of this IS has been to determine whether the construction and operation of the Project would cause significant and unavoidable environmental effects. Where appropriate, the document has proposed mitigation measures to reduce the Project’s potential environmental effects to a less than significant level. No impact would occur in this regard. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Determination: No Impact. Refer to Impact 3.17 (b) above. No aspect of the Project would not require nor result in any new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. No impact would occur. e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? Determination: No Impact. Refer to Impact 3.17 (b) above. Construction and operation of the proposed Project would have no impact to wastewater treatment capacity. f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. Small amounts of debris or solid waste will be generated during the construction phase of the Project. Some of these materials would be transported to an approved solid waste disposal facility. According to the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR, solid waste generated by the City is typically transported to the El Sobrante, Lamb Canyon, and Badlands Landfills. According to the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR, as of 2010, the El Sobrante, Lamb Canyon, and Badlands Landfills had a remaining disposal capacity of 110.783, 8.987, and 8.648 million tons, respectively. Based on the anticipated quantity of material, Project construction is not expected to substantially affect the capacity of these existing landfills. It is expected that one, or a combination of, these landfills could accommodate construction-related waste. Project construction would be required to adhere to all federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste disposal. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. Project operations would not involve the generation of solid waste. No operational impacts would occur in this regard. g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Determination: Less than Significant Impact. Refer to Impact 3.18 (f) above. Construction of the proposed Project would be required to comply with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste, and less than significant impacts would occur in this regard. Project operations would not involve the generation of solid waste. No operational impacts would occur. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 86 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 3.19 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? … ; … … b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? … … … … c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? … … … … a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Determination: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Potential impacts to wildlife, particularly avian species, would be reduced to a less than significant level through the proposed mitigation measures; refer to Section 3.4, Biological Resources. Potential impacts to cultural resources, particularly unknown buried resources, would be reduced to a less than significant level through the proposed mitigation measures; refer to Section 3.5, Cultural Resources. As such, potential impacts as noted above would be mitigated through implementing standard City-approved measures and the recommended mitigation measures as identified above. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 87 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and the effects of probable future projects)? Determination: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project would not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. Given the project’s relatively small scale, the disturbed nature of the project site, the temporary nature of construction activities, and the mitigatable long-term operational impacts, project-related cumulative impacts are not considered significant. c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Determination: Less Than Significant Impact The proposed Project would not result in environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, following implementation of recommended mitigation measures. Construction and operational activities are anticipated to have some minor impacts, all of which have been mitigated where appropriate. All potential long- term impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels through implementation of required mitigation measures, as described in the impact discussions above. 4.0 REFERENCES 4.1 REPORT PREPARATION PERSONNEL City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, California, 92530 Contact: Brad Fagrell, City Engineer Richard MacHott, LEED Green Assoc., Planning Manager Michael Baker International 40810 County Center Drive, Suite 200 Temecula, California 92591 Darren Edgington, CEP-IT, LEED AP BD+C, Environmental Services Project Manager Tom McGill, PhD, Natural Resources Specialist Ryan Winkelman, Natural Resources Specialist Achilles Malisos, Manager of Air Quality and Noise Studies Alicia Gonzalez, Environmental Associate Peter Minegar, CEP-IT, Environmental Associate Hilary Potter, Technical Writer BCR Consulting (Cultural Resources) 1420 Guadalajara Place Claremont, California 91711 Mr. David Brunzell, Principal Investigator/Archaeologist City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 88 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 4.2 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS BCR Consulting. 2017. Cultural Resources Assessment for the Third Street Storm Drain Project California Department of Conservation. 2000. Division of Mines and Geology. A General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California – Areas More Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos Report. ———. 2012. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. http://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/Riverside.aspx. ———. 2013. California Geologic Survey. Publications of the SMARA Mineral Land Classification Project Dealing with Mineral Resources in California. ———. 2016. California Geologic Survey. CGS Information Warehouse: Regulatory Maps. http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/index.html?map=regulatorymaps. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2007. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in SRA, Western Riverside County [map]. http://frap.fire.ca.gov/webdata/maps/riverside_west/fhszs_map.60.pdf. California Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2015. EnviroStor. http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public. California Environmental Protection Agency. 2015. California Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory, 2015 Edition. http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm. CalRecycle (California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery). 2016. Facility/Site Summary Details: El Sobrante Landfill (33-AA-0217). http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/33-AA-0217/Detail/. Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. ———. 2015. Scenic Highway Mapping System. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/index.htm. Federal Airport Administration. 2015. Airport Contacts Information. http://www.faa.gov/airports/airport_safety/airportdata_5010/menu/contacts.cfm?Region=&Di strict=&State=&County=RIVERSIDE&City=&Use=&Certification=. Federal Highway Administration. 2006. Roadway Construction Noise Model (FHWA-HEP-05-054). Federal Transit Administration. 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines. FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2015. Flood Map Service Center. Accessed December 29. https://msc.fema.gov/portal. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. 2008. CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change Through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review. Lake Elsinore, City of. General Plan, 2011 Lake Elsinore, City of. General Plan Environmental Impact Report. Certified December 2011 Michael Baker International. Third Street Storm Drain Project Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis. 2016 City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 89 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission. 2004. Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Riverside County Transportation Commission. 2011. 2011 Riverside County Congestion Management Program. SCAQMD (South Coast Air Quality Management District). 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority. 2003. Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 90 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration INVENTORY OF MITIGATION MEASURES AIR QUALITY AQ-1 Prior to construction, the City Engineer shall confirm that the Grading Plan and project specifications stipulate that, in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, excessive fugitive dust emissions shall be controlled by regular watering or other dust prevention measures, as specified in the SCAQMD’s Rules and Regulations. In addition, SCAQMD Rule 402 requires implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance off-site. Implementation of the following measures would reduce short-term fugitive dust impacts on nearby sensitive receptors: • Pave or apply water every three hours during daily construction activities or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas. More frequent watering shall occur if dust is observed migrating from the site during site disturbance; • Any on-site stockpiles of debris, dirt, or other dusty material shall be enclosed, covered, or watered twice daily, or non-toxic soil binders shall be applied; • All grading and excavation operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour; • Disturbed areas shall be replaced with ground cover or paved immediately after construction is completed in the affected area; • Track-out devices such as gravel bed track-out aprons (3 inches deep, 25 feet long, 12 feet wide per lane and edged by rock berm or row of stakes) shall be installed to reduce mud/dirt track-out from unpaved truck exit routes. Alternatively, a wheel washer shall be used at truck exit routes; • On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 miles per hour; • All material transported off-site shall be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust prior to departing the job site; and • Trucks associated with soil-hauling activities shall avoid residential streets and utilize City-designated truck routes to the extent feasible. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES BIO-1 Where feasible, construction shall occur outside of the avian breeding season (generally January 1–August 30). If construction occurs during the avian breeding season, a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction nesting bird clearance survey in all work areas and all areas within 500 feet of the general construction zone. This survey shall occur no more than one week prior to construction. Active nests shall be given an avoidance buffer, typically 300 feet for non-listed non-raptor species and 500 feet for listed and raptor species. The buffer is a no-work zone, and construction activities may not resume until the nest is no longer active (i.e., avian species are no longer showing nesting behavior, young have fledged). To determine when nesting behaviors are finished, a qualified biologist shall monitor the nest weekly until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 91 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration A qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction burrowing owl surveys in the area of the Project that is within the Ramsgate Specific Plan Area for the basin, headwall and pipeline portion of the Project. The pre-construction survey shall take place within 30 days prior to disturbance of the site. If burrowing owl is present, CDFW shall be consulted and a passive relocation effort shall be undertaken outside the nesting season. Burrowing owls shall be relocated passively to an area outside the impact zone and existing burrows shall be destroyed once they are vacated. No disturbance of active nests shall occur. BIO-2 Phase 2 of the project will be permitted through the Riverside County MSHCP DBESP and wetland permitting process. Impacts will be further detailed in project-specific DBESP and biologically equivalent or better mitigation identified. Mitigation for impacts to Corps/CDFW jurisdictional areas shall occur at a ratio agreed to between the City and regulatory agencies, and may include off-site, compensatory mitigation, or a combination thereof. CULTURAL RESOURCES CR-1 At least 30 days prior to excavation within any previously undisturbed native soils, the City shall contact both the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians and Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians to notify each Tribe of excavation activities and coordinate with the Tribes to develop Monitoring Agreements. The Agreements shall address the designation, responsibilities, and participation of Native American Tribal monitors during excavation and other ground disturbing activities within undisturbed native soils and construction scheduling. Native American monitoring shall be limited to only those periods during project construction where excavation within previously undisturbed areas is occurring. Ground disturbing activities within previously disturbed areas shall not require notification, monitoring or an Agreement. CR-2 In accordance with the agreement required in CR-1, the designated tribal monitor(s) assigned to the project by the Luiseño Tribe(s) shall have the authority to stop and redirect excavation in order to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. CR-3 All artifacts discovered at the development site shall be inventoried and analyzed by the Native American monitor(s). If any artifacts of Native American origin are discovered, all activities in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 50-foot radius) shall stop. The Native American monitor(s) shall analyze the Native American artifacts for identification as everyday life and/or religious or sacred items, cultural affiliation, temporal placement, and function, as deemed possible. The significance of Native American resources shall be evaluated in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and shall consider the religious beliefs, customs, and practices of the Luiseño tribes. All items found in association with Native American human remains shall be considered grave goods or sacred in origin and subject to special handling. The City and/or landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources. Native American artifacts that cannot be avoided or relocated at the Project site shall be prepared in a manner for curation. Within a reasonable amount of time, the archaeological consultant shall deliver the materials to a qualified repository in Riverside County that meets or exceeds federal standards per 36 CFR Part 79 and City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 92 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration which shall be made available to all qualified researchers and tribal representatives. If more than one Native American Group is involved with the project and cannot come to an agreement as to the disposition of cultural materials, they shall be curated at the Western Science Center by default. CR-4 If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeological/ cultural resources are discovered during grading, the City and the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians and the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians (Tribes) shall assess the significance of such resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources. If the Developer and the Tribes cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for 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 Tribes. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the CDD shall be final. CR-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 free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall 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. GEOLOGY AND SOILS GEO-1 In accordance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System requirements, the Project Contractor shall prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for approval by the City and CalTrans prior to grading activities. The SWPPP shall include relevant Best Management Practices (BMPs) in order to minimize soil erosion and water quality impacts during Project construction. NOISE N-1 Prior to construction, the City of Lake Elsinore Department of Public Works shall verify that the Project complies with the following: • Construction contracts specify that all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other state required noise attenuation devices. • Property owners and occupants located within 200 feet of the Project boundary shall be sent a notice, at least 15 days prior to commencement of construction of each phase, regarding the construction schedule of the proposed Project. A sign, legible at a distance of 50 feet shall also be posted at the Project construction site. All notices and signs shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Lake Elsinore Public Works Department, prior to mailing or posting and shall indicate the dates and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a contact City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 93 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration name and a telephone number where residents can inquire about the construction process and register complaints. • Construction haul routes shall be designed to avoid noise sensitive uses (e.g., residences, convalescent homes, etc.). • During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers. • Construction equipment staging areas shall be located as far away from adjacent sensitive receptors as possible. • Construction activities shall not take place outside of the allowable hours specified by the City's Municipal Code Section 17.176.080(F) (7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday; construction activities are not permitted on Saturday, Sundays or national holidays). TRANSPORTATIONA AND TRAFFICTRA-1 Short-term mitigation for temporary impacts to local roadways shall be mitigated by a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) to be approved by the permitting agency (i.e., City of Lake Elsinore), prior to any trenching in public streets for pipelines. The TMP shall consist of prior notices, adequate sign posting, detours (if needed), phased construction and temporary driveways where necessary. The TMP shall specify implementation timing of each plan element (prior notices, sign posting, detours, etc.) as determined appropriate by a City Engineer. Adequate access to and from residential areas shall be provided at all times. Proper detours and warning signs shall be established to ensure public safety. The TMP shall be devised so that construction shall not interfere with any emergency response or evacuation plans. Construction activities shall proceed in a timely manner in an effort to reduce impacts. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain April 2017 96 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FINAL INITIAL STUDY (ER 2017-00002)/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Third Street Storm Drain Project LEAD AGENCY: City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Contact: Brad Fagrell City Engineer (951) 673-3124 ext. 212 PREPARED BY: Michael Baker International 40810 County Center Drive, Suite 200 Temecula, California 92591 Contact: Mr. Darren Edgington, CEP-IT, LEED AP (951) 506-2083 JN 156903 Comments Received as of May 11, 2017 City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain May, 2017 2 Response to Comments PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain May, 2017 3 Response to Comments COMMENT LETTER NO. 1 Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, dated April 25, 2017 Response 1.1: The commenter notes that Project site is not located within the Agua Caliente Band of Mission Indians Traditional Use Area, and that they defer to other local tribes. These comments have been noted. The City of Lake Elsinore appreciates the Tribe’s comments on the IS/MND and values its participation during the public review period. No further response is necessary. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain May, 2017 4 Response to Comments PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain May, 2017 5 Response to Comments COMMENT LETTER NO. 2 Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians, dated April 25, 2017 Response 2.1: The commenter notes that the project is located within the territory of the Luiseño people. This comment has been noted. Response 2.2: The commenter notes that while the Project is located in Luiseño Aboriginal Territory, it is not located within Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians historic boundaries. Therefore, the Tribe defers to the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians and Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians. These comments have been noted. Both the Pechanga and Soboba Bands of Luiseño Indians were notified in regards to the Project. Response 2.3: This comment serves as the conclusion of the letter. The City of Lake Elsinore appreciates the Tribe’s comments on the IS/MND and values its participation during the public review period. No further response is necessary. City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain May, 2017 6 Response to Comments PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain May, 2017 7 Response to Comments COMMENT LETTER NO. 3 Department of Toxic Substances Control, dated May 4, 2017 Response 3.1 The commenter notes that the Department of Toxic Substance Control (Department) has reviewed the Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration. This comment is noted and no further response is necessary. Response 3.2 The commenter states that a review of historic uses should be conducted on the Project site to determine whether current or historic uses may have resulted in the release of hazardous wastes/substances. The commenter notes that a Phase I Environmental Assessment may be an appropriate means to make this determination. As noted in Response 3.8(d) of the Draft IS/MND, the Project site does not contain any hazardous materials sites listed pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Further, the Project generally follows an existing road right of way. Existing periodic uses have been limited to those associated with the operational roadway. As such, it was determined that the Project site is not affected by a hazardous materials site. Therefore, a Phase I site assessment is not warranted for the proposed Project. Response 3.3 The commenter notes that if there are any recognized existing environmental conditions on the Project site, proper investigation, sampling, and remediation actions should be undertaken. This comment is noted. As stated above, the site is located along an existing roadway, generally within the road right-of-way. Existing research does not indicated the presence of potential hazardous materials on the Project site. Response 3.4 The commenter notes that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit may be required for the Project. As noted in Table 2.3-1, Required Permit Approvals, it is anticipated that the project will require the issuance of a Construction General Permit from the Santa Ana RWQCB, which would be issued pursuant to the NPDES program. Response 3.5 The commenter states that if the Project includes structure/building modifications, then planned activities should address potential contaminating building materials (lead, asbestos, etc.) in accordance with relevant laws and regulations. This comment is noted. The proposed project does not include the demolition of structures or buildings. Potential impacts related to these pollutants are not anticipated during Project construction activities. Response 3.6 The commenter states that if the Project is adjacent to a freeway, potential contamination for Aerially Deposited Lead (ADL) should be anticipated during construction. The portion of the Project that crosses beneath Interstate 15 will be constructed utilizing a jack and bore technique that will limit trenching along the project site closest to Interstate 15. This will reduce the potential for disturbance of Aerially Deposited Lead. The jack and bore technique construction period is considered to be a relatively short duration from disturbance to completion, which is anticipated to take approximately three months. The City will be required to obtain permitting through CalTrans for portions of the Project that City of Lake Elsinore Third Street Storm Drain May, 2017 8 Response to Comments cross Interstate 15. All ADL monitoring requirements required by CalTrans will be implemented during Project construction. Response 3.7 The commenter notes that the environmental document should address potential contamination from electrical transformers containing polychlorinated biophenyl, which was an additive utilized in electrical transformers. While the Project site is adjacent to existing electrical transmission infrastructure, including overhead transformers, it does not propose the realignment or movement of these facilities. As such, impacts related to electrical transformers is not anticipated. Response 3.8 The commenter states that if potential soil contamination is suspected, proper steps should be utilized during the grading process. These comments are noted. Contamination of the Project site is not anticipated; however, in the event that contaminated soils are encountered the Contractor would be required to adhere with applicable laws/regulations regarding the treatment and disposal of potential contaminants. Response 3.9 The commenter states that if contamination of the groundwater or soil is anticipated, the environmental document should identify required remediation. This comment is noted; however, as noted above contamination is not anticipated on the Project site. In the event that potential contaminants are encountered during the construction process, the contractor would be required to adhere to all applicable laws/regulations related to the treatment and disposal of potential contaminants. Response 3.10 This comment serves as the conclusion to the comment letter. The City of Lake Elsinore appreciates the Department of Toxic Substances Control’s comments on the IS/MND and values its participation during the public review period. No further response is necessary. 1 Richard J. MacHott, LEED Green Assoc. From:THPO Consulting <ACBCI-THPO@aguacaliente.net> Sent:Tuesday, April 25, 2017 1:00 PM To:Richard J. MacHott, LEED Green Assoc. Subject:Third Street Storm Drain Project Good Afternoon, Mr. MacHott, Thank you for including us in the consultation process for this project. However, a records check of the ACBCI cultural registry revealed that this project is not located within the Tribe’s Traditional Use Area (TUA). Therefore, we defer to the other tribes in the area. This letter shall conclude our consultation efforts. Have a great day, Victoria Harvey M.A., R.P.A. Archaeological Monitoring Coordinator Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians 760-699-6981 (Desk) (760) 406-1909 (Cell) vharvey@aguacaliente.net The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer RESOLUTION NO. 2017 – ___ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE THIRD STREET STORM DRAIN PROJECT (ER 2017-00002) Whereas, the City of Lake Elsinore (City) is planning the installation of an underground reinforced concrete pipe storm drain, a reinforced concrete box structure, and related facilities, known as the Third Street Storm Drain Project (Project); and, Whereas, the Project is subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.: “CEQA”) and the State Implementation Guidelines for CEQA (14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15000, et seq.: “CEQA Guidelines”) because the Project involves an activity which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and involves the issuance of a lease, permit license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies (Public Resources Code Section 21065); and, Whereas, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, the City conducted an Initial Study to determine if the Project would have a significant effect on the environment. The Initial Study revealed that the project would have potentially significant environmental impacts but those potentially significant impacts could be mitigated to less than significant levels; and, Whereas,based upon the results of the Initial Study, and based upon the standards set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, it was determined that it was appropriate to prepare and circulate Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (ER 2017-00002) for the Project (Mitigated Negative Declaration); and, Whereas,pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072, on April 18, 2017, the City duly issued a Notice of Availability and Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration; and, Whereas,in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15073, the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was made available for public review and comment for a minimum of thirty days beginning on April 19, 2017, and ending on May 19, 2017, and, Whereas,a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Project has been prepared in accordance with Section 21081.6 of CEQA; and, Whereas,on May 23, 2017, at a duly noticed public meeting, the City Council (Council) has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: CC Res. No. 2017-___ Page 2 of 3 Section 1: The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into these findings by this reference. Section 2: The Council has evaluated all comments, written and oral, received from persons who have reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Council hereby finds and determines that all public comments have been addressed. Section 3: The Council hereby finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project is adequate and has been completed in accordance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City’s procedures for implementation of CEQA. The Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration represents the independent judgment of the City. Section 4: TheCouncilfurther finds and determines that none of the circumstances listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5 requiring recirculation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration are present and that it would be appropriate to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration as proposed to the Council. Section 5: A MMRP for the Project has been prepared in accordance with Section 21081.6 of CEQA, and the Council hereby adopts the MMRP, which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.” Section 6: The Council hereby makes, adopts, and incorporates the following findings regarding the lack of potential environmental impacts of the Project and the analysis and conclusions set forth in the Mitigated Negative Declaration: 1.Revisions in the Project plans made by or agreed to by the Council before the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was released for public review and mitigation measures set forth in the Initial Study would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. Based upon the Initial Study conducted for the Project, there is substantial evidence suggesting that all potential impacts to the environment resulting from the Project can be mitigated to less than significant levels. All appropriate and feasible mitigation has been incorporated into the Project design. The Mitigation MMRP contains an implementation program for each mitigation measure. After implementation of the mitigation contained in the MMRP, potential environmental impacts are effectively reduced to less than significant levels. 2.There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency including the initial study and any comments received, that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to the evidence received, including comment letters, and in the light of the whole record presented, the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. CC Res. No. 2017-___ Page 3 of 3 Section 7: Based upon the evidence presented, and the above findings, the Council of the City of Lake Elsinore adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and the MMRP for the Third Street Storm Drain Project (ER 2017-00002). Section 8: This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. Passed and Adopted this 23rd day of May, 2017. Robert E. Magee, Mayor Attest: Susan M. Domen, MMC City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ) I, Susan M. Domen, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2017 - ___ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, at the Regular meeting of May 23, 2017, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Susan M. Domen, MMC City Clerk