HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem No. 19 Plan App. 2017-74 New Auto Sales FacilityText File
City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
www.lake-elsinore.org
File Number: ID# 17-771
Agenda Date: 8/14/2018 Status: BusinessVersion: 1
File Type: ReportIn Control: City Council / Successor Agency
Agenda Number: 19)
Page 1 City of Lake Elsinore Printed on 8/9/2018
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
To:Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From:Grant Yates, City Manager
Prepared by: Justin Kirk, Assistant Community Development Director
Date:August 14, 2018
Project: Planning Application 2017-74:A proposed development of a new automobile sales and
service facility including a 53,425 square foot single story building and related on and
offsite improvements.
Applicant:Brent Tally, Tally CM
Recommendation
ADOPT A RESOLUTION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THECITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING AMITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PLANNING APPLICATION 2017-74
(COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2018-02; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37534;
CONDITIONALUSE PERMIT NO. 2017-18); AND,
ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
ADOPTINGFINDINGS THAT PLANNING APPLICATION2017-74 (COMMERCIALDESIGN REVIEW
NO. 2018-02; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37534; CONDITIONAL USEPERMIT NO. 2017-18)IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT
CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP); AND,
ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVINGTENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37534PROVIDING FOR THE CONSOLIDATIONOF
THREE(3) LOTS INTO ONE (1) LOTAND THE RECONFIGURATION OF THE ADJACENT; AND,
ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA
APPROVINGCONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-18FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN
APPROXIMATELY 53,425SQUARE FOOT AUTOMOBILE SALES ANDSERVICE FACILITY; AND,
ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVING
COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2018-02PROVIDING BUILDING DESIGNS FORA53,425
SQUARE FOOT SINGLE STORY BUILDING AND RELATED ON AND OFFSITE IMPROVEMENTS.
Project Request
The applicant is requesting the approval of several entitlements which include a Tentative TractMap for
the consolidation of three (3) lots into one (1) lots and the reconfiguration of the adjacent right of way, a
Conditional Use Permit to permit the operation of a vehicle sales and repair facility andaCommercial
Design Review applicationfor development ofa53,425 square foot of building.
PA 2017-74(Honda)
Page 2of 4
Project Location
The Project site is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Crane Avenues in
Lake Elsinore, California and is comprised of three parcels, totaling approximately 6.97 acres in size, and
known as Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 377-080-053, 377-080-057, and 377-080-079.
Environmental Setting
EXISTING LAND USE ZONING GENERAL PLAN
Project Site Vacant Land C-2 General Commercial(GC)
North I-15, restaurant, and park and ride lot. C-2 GC
South Industrial uses CM Business Professional(BP)
East I-15/Vacant C2 GC
West Vacant/Industrial C2/CM GC/BP
Project Description
The proposed Project, Lake Elsinore Honda, will be a new automobile sales and service facility. The
building will be 53,425 square feet, and it will be single story. Two new driveways are proposed on Collier
Avenue. The northern driveway will provide vehicular access for sales customers. The southern
driveway will provide access for employee parking and deliveries. The building architecture comprised of
Honda’s iconic architectural standard including a blue metal entry cylinder, a blue metal “Wave”, off-white
colored EIFS and clear glass in aluminum window framing. Vehicle repair occurs within the fully enclosed
air-conditioned building. Mechanical and air-conditioning equipment is roof mounted and screened from
view by building parapet walls, which match the architectural vocabulary. Display and parking lot lighting
will be energy efficient LED lighting with full horizontal light spill cut-off. The wet and dry utilities and
offsite improvements will consist of water lines, sewer lines, dry utilities (including gas, cable and
telephone) and offsite improvements to adjacent streets.
Planning Commission Action
On August 7, 2018, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Project by a
vote of 5-0. As part of its action, the Planning Commission recommended approval of enhanced mitigation
measures as requested by the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians.
Analysis
General Plan
The subject site is located in the Business District and has a land use designation of General Commercial.
The General Commercial land use designation has a FAR of 0.4 and the project has a total FAR 0.18,
thus complying with the General Plan FAR requirements. The primary goal of the Business District is to
encourage its position as the industrial and commercial hub of the City and to ensure that new growth
respects the environmental sensitivity of the natural wetlands, floodway and floodplain. Furthermore, the
goal of the Business District is to support a vibrant commercial and industrial hub with high quality
developments that have a strong orientation towards major corridors. Because the proposed project
complies with the FAR requirements and creates development that is oriented to major corridors and
facilitates further commercial development within a commercial hub the proposed project is found to be
consistent with the General Plan.
PA 2017-74(Honda)
Page 3of 4
Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC)
The Project has a zoning designation of C2 General CommercialTable 1-1 details the Project’s
consistency with the LEMC:
Table 1-1
Development Standard Required/Limit Proposed
Building Height 45’-0”30’-4”
Front Setback 20’-0”25’-0”
Side Setback 15’-0” –Minimum/20’-0” -Average 15’-0”/28’-0”
Side Setback N/A 9’-0”
Rear Setback N/A 5’-0”
The proposed parking spaces have all been designed at 18’0” depth and 9’-0” width, thus meeting the
LEMC standard. Furthermore the proposed project has designed drive aisles which are at a minimum
26’-0” when not adjacent to buildings and 30’-0” when adjacent to buildings thereby complying with the
LEMC, building code, and fire code.The proposed project has a parking demand of 214 space and
provides 221meeting the minimum parking requirement; in addition, 244 spaces have been allocated to
display and storage. The proposed project proposes uses, whichare permitted or permitted subject to
the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed project’s design meets all LEMC requirements.
Because the use is permitted subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit and the development
complies with the subject development standards, it is found to be consistent with the LEMC.
Overall the proposed project is of a high quality, functional designand has been found to be consistent
with the General Plan and Municipal Code. Care has been takento incorporate all required elements and
that the project adequately mitigates all potential significant impacts to levels of less than significant. The
project’s uses complement the existing surrounding land uses.
Environmental Determination
A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration “MND” was prepared to analyze the potential impacts of the
proposed project. The public review period began on ThursdayJuly 19, 2018, and endedon Tuesday
August7,2018. Notice to all interested persons and agencies inviting comments on the MND was
published in accordance with the provisions of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code. The City received threeletter fromRiverside County Transportation Commission
(RCTC), the Department ofToxic Substances Control (DTSC), and from the Pechanga Band of Mission
Indians. Correspondence received from RCTC requested additional hydrological analysis, which will be
performed as part of the Final Water Quality Management Plan and onsite grading permit to ensure
potential runoff from the easterly edge of the project has been accounted and necessitates no further
action. The letter received from DTSC requested monitoring of contaminated soil or groundwater, which
occurs as part of the grading permit, thus no additional action is required. The letter received from the
Pechanga band of Mission Indians requested modification of cultural resources mitigation measures.
Staff has reviewed the requested changes, has incorporated these changes into the final Monitoring
Reporting Plan “MMRP” included as Exhibit A of the attached CEQA resolution, and will incorporate them
into the final MND to be prepared following the action taken on the project. Since these mitigation
measures are superior than the measures included in the circulated MND and have been incorporated
into the Final MND and MMRP, recirculation of the MND is not required. Upon approval of the MND with
the modified mitigation measures Pechanga will be notified.
PA 2017-74(Honda)
Page 4of 4
Fiscal Impact
The time and costs related to processing this Project have been covered by the Developer Deposit paid
for by the applicant. No General Fund budgets have been allocated or used in the processing of this
application. The approval of the Project is anticipated to positively influence the City’s General Funddue
to increase sales tax revenue generated from the sales and services performed on site. Mitigation
Measures to protect the City fiscally have already been included in the Conditions of Approval.
Exhibits:
A.CEQA Resolution
B.MSHCP Resolution
C.TPM Resolution
D.CUP Resolution
E.CDR Resolution
F.Conditions of Approval
G.IS/MND
H.Vicinity Map
I.Aerial Map
J.Project Plans
I 15
COLLIER AVE
3RD ST
CHANEY ST
DEXTER AVE
MINTHORN ST
CENTRAL AVE
POTTERY ST
D
I
A
N
A
L
N
2ND ST
POE ST
C
A
MIN
O D
E
L N
O
R
T
E
SUMNER AVE
DAVIS STP
A
L
M
D
R
H W Y 74
CAMBERN AVE
MOHR ST
PASADENA ST
MAIN ST
RIVERSIDE DR ALLAN ST
HEALD AVE
CRANE ST
FLINT ST
HUNCO W AY
10TH ST
RYAN AVE
H
I
L
L
A
V
E
EL TORO RD
COOLIDGE AVE
GED G E AVE
ENTERPRISE W AY
I 15
ALLAN ST
CRANE ST
3RD ST
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, U SDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN,IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community
I 15
COLLIER AVE
3RD ST
CHANEY ST
DEXTER AVE
MINTHORN ST
CENTRAL AVE
POTTERY ST
D
I
A
N
A
L
N
2ND ST
POE ST
C
A
MIN
O D
E
L N
O
R
T
E
SUMNER AVE
DAVIS STP
A
L
M
D
R
H W Y 74
CAMBERN AVE
MOHR ST
PASADENA ST
MAIN ST
RIVERSIDE DR ALLAN ST
HEALD AVE
CRANE ST
FLINT ST
HUNCO W AY
10TH ST
RYAN AVE
H
I
L
L
A
V
E
EL TORO RD
COOLIDGE AVE
GED G E AVE
ENTERPRISE W AY
I 15
ALLAN ST
CRANE ST
3RD ST
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, U SDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN,IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community
PLANNING APPLIC ATION 20 17-74AERIAL MAP
PROJECT SITE
´
f / v�`'� KEYNOTES PROJECT INFO
PHOJECT NAME: LAKE ELSINORE HONDA
O PLANS L ASPHALT PAVING PER GEOTECH REPORT B CIVIL PROJECT ADDRESS: 19250 N 101 LOOP JOHN �NAHONEY
6" HIGH VERTICAL CURB OWNER 3158 AUTO CENTER CIRCLE SUITE F A R C H I T E C T
siocrciON. CALIFORNIA 95212 850 W. ELLIOT ROAD #108
��+,j *}[_ MONUMENT SIGN- BY SEPARATE PERMIT TEMPE, ARIZONA 85284
h / �. ARCHITECT: JOHN MAHONEY ARCHITECT INC P480,345.6457 F480,345.1759
if 4O CONCRETE DRIP CONTAINMENT SLAB - DRAIN TO SAND/OIL 850 W ELLIOT RD SUITE 108
N.
INTERCEPTOR TEMPE, AZ 85284
�f F1 (480) 345 -8457
f � /r 5 REFllSE YARD
,(�j,, C� // \ O SITE AREA 696
AC GROSS G63 AC NET r
f ' Jf / 10 TYPICAL ROLL CURB ZONING C2 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL)
1/ V '� OCCUPANCY GROUP MIXED (B S -I)
n CONCRETE SIDEWALK RAMP fnNSTRUCTION TYPE II.B. AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINEL6R
j'
' SYSTEM PER CBC PART 2 SECTION 903 ,
CONCRETE CURB RAMP NG STORIES
BUILDING HEIGHT PROVIDED: 30 -4 _
KNOX LOCK BO%IIEIR {1VDH ATID]HIDNEAAWI Poi'AO BUILDING AR EA: 53, 125SF `� •,4 A
FINISH GRADE PAD�YIE A.FHLL "SET OF KEYS TO OPEN ALL
LOT COVERAGE; 18 E%
DOORS INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE BUILDING, TO INCLUDE
FIRE ALARM PANEL- LABELED AND PLACED INSIDE KEY BOX 577inB
'P �. / r _ `•.� j ASSESSORS PARCEL HUMBLES: 377-080 053
LANDSCAPE AREA 377 - 080 -057
'� / 377 OBO 079
UTILITY PROVIDERS
Syr �► f/ / Y ~ � � �.� ELECTRICAL TRANSFORM ¢N,CONCRETE PAD BBOLLARDS pOMESTIC WATER SERVICE
11) ;, /fit} AS REOD BY UTILITY CAM7�rWI' ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
\ ,/R J•f / `f / \ \'' 12 STEEL SECURITY RAIL- SEE DETAIL VA510 31315 CHANEY STREET
` 0. r \ LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA 92531
' "!
39 11� ` yt, � 13 TYPICAL CONCRETE APRON AT VEHICLE DOORS (951)674 -3146
FIRE RISER INSIDE BUILDING SEWAGE DISPOSAL
VALLEY MUNICIPAL
55yy6 ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
/// '4 Y,/ y •� ,v :{ `4 /° !r \ 75 STEEL SECURITY GATE - SEE 2/A510- PROVIDE KNOX BOX 31315CHANEY SEEM
* ! /.,,/ '3 y,7 `� { {aq - \ t ✓ - x— •� ^�" PER FIRE DEPT REQUIREMENTS LAKEELSINORE CALIFORNIA 92531
e q NI 1I _ -.� (951) 674-3146
�� .` �/ 'r b * O \� ! 10 'r� �; .,�,. 1fi ELECTRICALSERNCE ENTRANCE SECTION
! { f5 \ r' O ELECTRICAL SERVICE
'.�"[+� 'C 17 IXIS ➢TUG SIGN TO REMAIN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
(800) 655 4555
J1 \ hr 8T, tI ✓ NIA DISPLAY HARDSCAPE- 5' CONCRETE OVER 4' ABC
`a. o �:.� FA \ O MEDIUM BROOM FINISH NATURAL GAS SERVICES
` SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
FIRE HYDRANT - SEE CIVIL (BOO)427 -2200
NN
NEW DRIVEWAY TELEPHONE SERVICES
N, / 4 VEROON
EXISTING SIGN - TO HE REMOVED (800)403 -5000
J R
{{ 22 PROPOSED TREATMENT AREA - SEE CIVIL FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES
�•y r '2 f6 \ f NIB { + / !t 4 `t,� LAKE ELSINORE FIRE DEPARTMENT
y , �'"I` ! I 23 DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE BY SEPARATE PERMIT (951) 674 -3124
{
/{ / °� { i J DECORATIVE CONCRETE SIDEWALK FLUSH WIPAVEMENT PARKING CALCULATIONS: � Z
or 4 CONC ON 4" ABC MEDIUM BROOM FINISH REQUIRED O
-
' CCFS� ' . / % \ \ ••.. �� y �' \ `� ,� �' / 11250 S F GROSS FLOOR AREA - 53,425/250 -214 (7 A •-'
ff \ BUILDING AREA UNDER HOOF- SEE FLOOR PLAN CLEAR AIR VEHICLE PARKING = 8m - 18 J
�f ! J •1 a� / i7 ! BICYCLE PARKNG - 5" SHORT TERM + 5% LONG TERM LJ.J
• 19 ' ✓ r • �{ % 4c�� J 4� 3 27 5' CONC ON 4 ABC VEHICLE DISPLAY PAD = 11 SHORT TERM - 11 LONG TERM U
LOADING BAY =(1) TYPE B 40 L X 12'W X 14'H
{/ ,� ` f r f �44. /� •� { 28 LOADING BAY 41TL X 12'W (OPEN TO SKY) O LLi
Z LY
BICYCLE PARKING (11) Q
\ •.� \4 ! \� ! r f • / S` { /J/ rs ® LONG TERM BICYCLE STORAGE LOCKERS (11)
INVENTORY 8 DISPLAY SPACES = 244 SPACES w
04 74 ELECTRIC CHARGING STATION SEE ELECTRICAL PLANS cam TOTAL - 465 Lu LLI
ELECTRIC VEHICLE PANNING CALCULATION w
,/f/ 32 FUTURE ELECTRIC CHARGING STATION - SEE ELECTRICAL - - < Q
r ,� /' '� r' �. 1. J / f PAS 214 (REQUIRED PARKING SPACES) XB a = 17 SPACES Jl J
r TOTAL EV CHARGERS INSTALLED = 4
�" ` ,. ✓ r j 33 PRECAST TRASH AND ASH CONTAINER ENTRANCE OR TOTAL CONDUIT INSTALLED FOR FUTURE CHARGING STATIONS =13
` r / f ' r f SMOKING AREA> 25 FROM BUILDING ENTRANCE OR TOTAL E4 CHARGING STATIONS - 17
�� \ `�, � yy % P`r ^ r ✓fry/ 'v. T r+1,+45./ ff� / / MECHANICAL AIR INTAKE
r� ` ✓/l / / /�(` ! 34 CHECK VALVE AND STEEL BOLLARDS �J
��
\ \ ', r .t .' r r rr f 'stir � � •�4� � ^Yx '� / Pal /" ✓ �1y
LEGAL DESCRIPTION \ \�� �� r ". 'c
fl11A%D PfFFk8E0 TO P0104U7D'W U58FI11TFDIN THE 1UFf ON LIRE'EL91101IE IN TFECIRF14YOf WRIAMWK. 34141Ep faUFOKNIA ` •�. / f r' f f-f f '� \ �. -! f t ��>
ORS 12AND RECORD' 13OF WAlLSFA151 AOD1FNAITOE E111dC A§;SMDMI Bf MA7'DN I1fEFl WW: 17 f9IGE k'FDIF MN+s. EFWIp:GOCMIPf t ` `t ` r 6 4 `\ / %✓ \ / / PROJECT NO.: 1709
EAO MW 11c71FBOUT14NORSH+oEX1EmTRIMOF 5AIT-Of 11ASCENYERp roPAT f.TA4AWEN ttIB ROSE A D:CLAWEA 1\ \ \ \. N, t7 12 1�\� 1+'• % \\ �f Q - �• '�rF,� �'Cf, y; ISSUE DATE: 5/25/18
I03"DAND WEE: IM DEED W401GL➢ AIRA'JS414. PIN 91 MRS PACE 4V OF DIM `' y `\0 `�\ IS+ • ` /16 �, r! � SYMBOLS `� "�' •A' �{
.SSOfl'lYT'TVIG THERFRfOY tlBU IW(IRkI DdIESfCW411ED 1OOUE SLATE iif PiADlptOMFDR IfiIAVATI4JFP1i 58f DELO 0 "\ - .'� ,% 'Ff
IHCD111107eMMI?I$%FPSDDl]►W PAGE 122OFONKAAR OM$
ti
7f ED EXCE 4A10 EAKIF$I BLAT CORIN1N TRINDF CO)AWDTO ANEAIVERSIN COMID?FLOOD F MMI AM WATER CDNSERIIABDII � t % f FIREHYDRrIIT- SEFCML
MURCF BYIEFO FECOADEO AAMN(rF A IM Ad 015TR141F111 IFTIKE 01" 0101110AL RFCI1PFf `�.
1110 WPINPH11EFOOM WAA 0011tN7N IFNAEDF CONKTK 10 [FIE ElS11o0R[. POOP 4 ICI; .AMGEILE3MWAYL4d.MNU pY iEM
IE4]FtITRMARDllNI L14Ii114111W32 PAGE joor DEEDS \ �- / �,/� 'r•/ #}' LIGHT POLE ON CONCRETE BASE ��a+
M-50 DEEMING MM LW POIIRt/11140E# C11AIM TO NINE STACL OF MONA&V DIED ECORDED PECCA®ER421Pr1.1S � � �
'YIEIwrl I* Zfi? A OF pPMk IECdif15 ` �. %� °' �IYPICALOROINANCE REOUlAEO
F'A
PRL},EC.�.
THAI POPTI /I OF i0NI IA 11BLOM5 OF HOR11H EL11NO*. ASLWWNNN`DN ACERIAI LIP LffiOILED'LIP OF KM FLIDILIIE IDMI ` !� 11� 1YPICA: C191xtW I'm' umw SITE s 4
AAID COLCIff Li MIS' (It FILE FI AE OFFKE OF THE COUNTY RE011 OFRI]F 17E CDANTYOF;M DEED W EODC 10 WR 453 DF AAAY5
7AORE PARRC4AAALY DE A5FT4LVWk �% "_ L - -_ SPACE 11A5710toki OKAU l �1
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT I3: �y - f 18 ,NOi9FT'AY17Ep r. rA 4
THENCE 62 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 13 TO A POINT 4o ,`
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY AND PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 13, 660FEETTOAPOINT.
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY 62 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 13. ! ` \ / Two; RAM SITE PLAN 1
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAIO'NESTERLY LINE 660 FEE F TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL MIN WIDTH TO BE
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO THE ELSINORE POMONA B LOS ANGELES RAIL'NAY COMPANY BY DEED r 4 4' -0" RUNNING SLOPE SHALL NOT EXCEED 1.20
RECORDED MARCH 131896 IN BOOK 32 PAGE 369 of DEEDS - - CROSS SLOPE SHALL NOT EXCEED 1:48 SURFACE
SITE PLAN OBE FIRM, STABLE AND SLIP RESISTANT VICINITY MAP Al Q�
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BY ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED REFERENCE TRUE NOT 7O SCALE !RUE
RECORDS SEPTEMBER 12, 1980 AS INSTflUME14T NO. 166604 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS NORTH NORTH yF,Nll
APPLICANT: ARCHITECT:
SRZ YUMA, LLC JOHN MAHONEY ARCHITECT
3158 AUTO CENTER CIRCLE, SUITE E 850 W ELLIOT ROAD 3108
STOCKTON, CA 95212 TEMPE. AZ 85284
ATTN. BOB ZAMORA (480) 345 -8457
(209) 481 -5191 (480) ]45 -1759 FAX
CIVIL ENGINEER:
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES
41951 REMINGTON AVENUE, SUITE 220
TEMECULA, CA 92590
ATTN: AARON COOK
(951) 294 -9326
(951) 394 -9301 FAX
BENCHMARK:
RIVERSIDE COUNTY BM AM -31 SET 3 J• ALUMINUM DISK STAMPED RIV CO SURVEYOR M -31 RESET
APRIL 1996, FLUSH AT THE SOUTH WEST CORNER OF BRIDGE ON TOP OF SIDEWALK NEAR FACE OF
CURB LOCATED AT THE CROSSING OF PERRIS BLVD AND RIV CO FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL (PERRIS
LATERAL "A "). 43 FL WEST OF THE CENTERLINE OF PERRIS BLVD AND 4.5 FT EAST CONCRETE
BRIDGE BARRIER (EDGE OF BRIDGE) ELEVATION 1474674' (NGVD29)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, IN THE COUNTY OF
RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS.
PARCEL A:
LOTS 12 AND 13 OF WALL'S FIRST ADDITION TO ELSINORE, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 13 PAGE 620
OF MAPS SAN DIEGO COUNTY RECORDS;
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTHWESTERLY 62 FEET OF SAID LOT 13 AS CONVEYED TO PATRICK GALLAGHER
AND ROSE A GALLAGHER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, BY DEED RECORDED AUGUST 14 1929 IN BOOK 821. PAGE 432
OF DEEDS;
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR HIGHWAY
PURPOSES BY DEED RECORDED JANUARY 17 1956 IN BOOK 1848 PAGE 122 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT BY DEED RECORDED JANUARY 26 1994 AS INSTRUMENT NUMBER 034739
OF OFFICIAL RECORDS
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION TTIEREOF CONVEYED TO THE ELSINORE, POMONA & LOS ANGELES
RAILWAY COMPANY BY DEED RECORDED MARCH 13 1896, IN BOOK 32 PAGE 369 OF DEEDS
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA BY COED
RECORDED DECEMBER 20 1978 AS INSTRUMENT NO 2672115 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS
PARCEL B:
THAT PORTION OF LOT 13, IN BLOCK 5 OF NORTH ELSINORE, AS SHOWN UPON A CERTAIN MAP ENTITLED 'MAP
OF NORTH ELSINORE TOWN AND COLONY LANDS' ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO IN BOOK IQ PACE 459 OF MAPS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 13;
THENCE 62 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 13 TO A POINT;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY AND PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 13, 660 FEET TO A POINT;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY 61 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 13;
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE 660 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO THE ELSINORE POMONA & LOS ANGELES RAILWAY
COMPANY BY DEED RECORDED MARCH 13 1896 IN BOOK 32 PAGE 369 OF DEEDS
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA BY ORDER OF
CONDEMNATION RECORDED RECORDS SEPTEMBER 12, 198D AS INSTRUMENT N0. 166604 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
APN NUMBERS-
377-080-053
377- 080 -057
377 -080 -079
LAND USE INFORMATION
1 EXISTING ZONING, C2 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL)
2 PROPOSED ZONING: C2 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL)
3 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
4. SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION:
5 EXISTING LAND USE: VACANT LOT
6 PROPOSED LAND USE: COMMERCIAL (AUTO DEALER)
7 ADJACENT LAND USE: COMMERCIAL/ PUMP STATION
EARTHWORK QUANTITIES
8 TOTAL AREA:
GROSS AREA: 696 AC
NET AREA: 663 AC.
9. EARTHWORK
CUT 3,800 CY
FILL: 24,000 CY
IMPORT: 20,200 CY
10. ALL SLOPES SHALL BE 2:1 UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED
CY CATCH BASIN
11 STREETS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED PER CITY STANDARDS
WA
12 ALL PROPOSED ACCESS ROADS/ STREETS ARE PRIVATE
GB
PROPOSED fA
f%
ijW
R/W
0 5`
1 1
F
I. 56,5 -I - 50'
•J
-1
��f✓�'
EX RETAINING WALL
° - -.1 TO BE REMOVED
< u
-
4'2AiT}y.w N46 "17'92'M
— min Oi
-.
PROPOSED AC
1� ,4..•
71SIDEWALK
0051NG
_
. E% 411" SD4�°'"' _
`MI�i76Q'1C 2310V -
- - - ----- —
'. _
an.,
PROUD SlT1RAI DRAIN
-,�
N1d37 i12*w 6$.21
PROPOSED SIDEWALK '
PROPOSED CURBEx15TING
& GUTTER MAJOR ARTERIAL
CURB
& GUTTER
TYPICAL SECT ON
PROP R /W'
COLLIER STREET
M4616WN8SIb'
NOT TO SCALE
IEdCiS
� _ ...
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37534
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA �
1 -15 SB ON RAMP
E% 54' STORM DRAIN OUTLET
Z' E% J6" STORM GRAIN OUTLET
_.,.
err E17SiWIG TREES •_� F; l
a m EX BILLS RD SIGN { { { ///
+ TO REMAIN _ J
I
�Pr �
EX CALTRANS
RIGHT OF WAY J J
EX BILLBOARD SIGN
TO BE REMOVED
._ Jr' j �_ PROPO ED I - I `�• _ I_ V 1-
I L-
I L� a O' -- +l• �: 4 T'�i�J',K�' B �' � a l ii q11 ?J Jii:.� -- --�
PARC Ij Li
I _
BUILDING N
E% POWER (POLE
I
! I
3 E"
°I (
!Z
0
-41 . � I
EX POWER POLE
fX FH
I
I
f
I+ I
K -
I
E% FH
EX RIPRAP (TO BE
REMOVED BY OTHERS) —
E% POWCjf POLE
I '� FiJI Si LIGHT - -' EX 57 LIGHT V I SST LIGHT
EX ST LIGHT EX ST LIGHT
I r-
CRANE STREET 7 3RD STREET
A14E RT RpyiSSi Q 41951 Rem nglon Avenue Suile 220
y y OTemeculanglonmianue Suile2
OAV ID EVAN$ Phone. 9512949300ANr9
wNO AggOCIATN. ire•
# ro EtiSA�
DIAL TIIO WYNhW114G
BEFORE pA'Y$ BffORE • txso[L6 6r
1'(7U E}lC rdA plC e6„ EMAL � PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF
NO DESCRIPTION DATE BY of Tµ1 0410, D 11,
PU Ti LT 4- SOD -7Y7 -2590 ,
A PUBLIC SERVICE BY lAw9ER4AIGINB SERWE M{RF REVISONS 7 --oA18 OSBU
AARBIA W 0001[ ACC LO aY -
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
UTILITY PURVEYORS
ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
31315 CHANEY ST
LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92531
(951) 674 -3146
ARF �AI VR
ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
31315 CHANEY ST
LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92531
(951) 674 -3146
tl WI'I,Fr Iplvm
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
(800) 655 -4555
NWRJRAI CAS Xt=
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
(800) 427 2200
IEI [LPMENK VNAU S,
VERIZON
(BDO) 483-5000
69 PRD1(F.11CW4 R14 2 t
LAKE ELSINORE FIRE DEPARTMENT
(951) 674 -3124
LEGEND
PROPERTY BOUNDARY •riarr�
PROPOSED 2 1 �.
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
FIRE HYDRANT
CY CATCH BASIN
WATER
WA
GRADE BREAK
GB
e�
TC
FINISH SURFACE
FS
--
1
ex pIv-k
��f✓�'
EX RETAINING WALL
° - -.1 TO BE REMOVED
< u
-
4'2AiT}y.w N46 "17'92'M
— min Oi
-.
EX fH
� •
1� ,4..•
r•:
P5' . R.106'IO'
.. E71 +16 SO
' -•,{' ""
_
. E% 411" SD4�°'"' _
`MI�i76Q'1C 2310V -
- - - ----- —
'. _
an.,
PROUD SlT1RAI DRAIN
-,�
N1d37 i12*w 6$.21
EX CURB AND 071 TER
N46'1IWO
}
N ill'
—
C ,
PROP R /W'
- EX 12' WA
dr = rs�
- EX R/W
M4616WN8SIb'
E% POWER (POLE
I
! I
3 E"
°I (
!Z
0
-41 . � I
EX POWER POLE
fX FH
I
I
f
I+ I
K -
I
E% FH
EX RIPRAP (TO BE
REMOVED BY OTHERS) —
E% POWCjf POLE
I '� FiJI Si LIGHT - -' EX 57 LIGHT V I SST LIGHT
EX ST LIGHT EX ST LIGHT
I r-
CRANE STREET 7 3RD STREET
A14E RT RpyiSSi Q 41951 Rem nglon Avenue Suile 220
y y OTemeculanglonmianue Suile2
OAV ID EVAN$ Phone. 9512949300ANr9
wNO AggOCIATN. ire•
# ro EtiSA�
DIAL TIIO WYNhW114G
BEFORE pA'Y$ BffORE • txso[L6 6r
1'(7U E}lC rdA plC e6„ EMAL � PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF
NO DESCRIPTION DATE BY of Tµ1 0410, D 11,
PU Ti LT 4- SOD -7Y7 -2590 ,
A PUBLIC SERVICE BY lAw9ER4AIGINB SERWE M{RF REVISONS 7 --oA18 OSBU
AARBIA W 0001[ ACC LO aY -
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
UTILITY PURVEYORS
ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
31315 CHANEY ST
LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92531
(951) 674 -3146
ARF �AI VR
ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
31315 CHANEY ST
LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92531
(951) 674 -3146
tl WI'I,Fr Iplvm
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
(800) 655 -4555
NWRJRAI CAS Xt=
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
(800) 427 2200
IEI [LPMENK VNAU S,
VERIZON
(BDO) 483-5000
69 PRD1(F.11CW4 R14 2 t
LAKE ELSINORE FIRE DEPARTMENT
(951) 674 -3124
LEGEND
PROPERTY BOUNDARY •riarr�
PROPOSED 2 1 �.
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
FIRE HYDRANT
CY CATCH BASIN
WATER
WA
GRADE BREAK
GB
e�
TC
FINISH SURFACE
FS
R•lISG.SR
--
i
ex pIv-k
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
Y ;
f. LM }Q4' - - -• _ -- E•}064
.
"'.
-
4'2AiT}y.w N46 "17'92'M
— min Oi
-.
EX fH
� •
1� ,4..•
r•:
P5' . R.106'IO'
.. E71 +16 SO
' -•,{' ""
w
25.53'
-
. E% 411" SD4�°'"' _
`MI�i76Q'1C 2310V -
- - - ----- —
'. _
;
-,�
N1d37 i12*w 6$.21
EX CURB AND 071 TER
N1517'D;2'V' 525 'sr
T f k 12" WA
_
Eli 45 SIR
-
- EX 12' WA
dr = rs�
- EX R/W
-.
nr
IEdCiS
� _ ...
EX CURB AND
COLLIER AVE
p,b4°`
GUTTER
-- _
— - - 8Y CAS
.
E% POWER (POLE
I
! I
3 E"
°I (
!Z
0
-41 . � I
EX POWER POLE
fX FH
I
I
f
I+ I
K -
I
E% FH
EX RIPRAP (TO BE
REMOVED BY OTHERS) —
E% POWCjf POLE
I '� FiJI Si LIGHT - -' EX 57 LIGHT V I SST LIGHT
EX ST LIGHT EX ST LIGHT
I r-
CRANE STREET 7 3RD STREET
A14E RT RpyiSSi Q 41951 Rem nglon Avenue Suile 220
y y OTemeculanglonmianue Suile2
OAV ID EVAN$ Phone. 9512949300ANr9
wNO AggOCIATN. ire•
# ro EtiSA�
DIAL TIIO WYNhW114G
BEFORE pA'Y$ BffORE • txso[L6 6r
1'(7U E}lC rdA plC e6„ EMAL � PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF
NO DESCRIPTION DATE BY of Tµ1 0410, D 11,
PU Ti LT 4- SOD -7Y7 -2590 ,
A PUBLIC SERVICE BY lAw9ER4AIGINB SERWE M{RF REVISONS 7 --oA18 OSBU
AARBIA W 0001[ ACC LO aY -
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
UTILITY PURVEYORS
ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
31315 CHANEY ST
LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92531
(951) 674 -3146
ARF �AI VR
ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
31315 CHANEY ST
LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92531
(951) 674 -3146
tl WI'I,Fr Iplvm
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
(800) 655 -4555
NWRJRAI CAS Xt=
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY
(800) 427 2200
IEI [LPMENK VNAU S,
VERIZON
(BDO) 483-5000
69 PRD1(F.11CW4 R14 2 t
LAKE ELSINORE FIRE DEPARTMENT
(951) 674 -3124
LEGEND
PROPERTY BOUNDARY •riarr�
PROPOSED 2 1 �.
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
FIRE HYDRANT
FH
WATER
WA
GRADE BREAK
GB
TOP OF CURB
TC
FINISH SURFACE
FS
LOT NUMBER
DIRECTION OF FLOW
^
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
FDC/ PIV [1-
R
�a
40 0 40 BOA
scale leet ° E
1 "= 40'
SRZ YUMA, LLC
LAKE ELSINORE HONDA y
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP WI
AS SHOWN I
.-
NO 37534 WTI.
11 -17 -2017 -
y4F NR
1 OF 1
OWNER /DEVELOPER
BOB ZAMORA
SRZ YUMA, LLC
3158 AUTO CENTER CIRCLE, SUITE E
STOCKTON' CA 95212
(209) 481 -5191
ARCHITECT
JOHN MAHONEY ARCHITECT
850 W. ELLIOT ROAD 3108
TEMPE, AZ 85284
400- 345 -8457
480 -345 -1759 FAX
ENGINEER
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES
41951 REMINGTON AVENUE.
SUITE 220
TEMECULA, CA 92590
DINO SAN BUENAVENTURA
951- 294 -9325
951- 294 -9301 FAX
AREA
GROSS: 6 96 AC
NET: 663 AC
EARTHWORK QUANTITIES; RAW
CUT: 3,800 CY
FILL: 24,000 CY
IMPORT: 20,200 CY
PARKING SPACES:
480 PARKING SPACES (4 HC STALLS)
IMPERVIOUS AREA:
EXIST: 30,318 SF
PROPOSED: 280,019 SF
REQUIRED: 0,148 SF
40 0 44 "0
stole I "= 40' (w
CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN
LAKE ELSINORE HONDA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
-
------------
EXIST 36" SD
(CALTRANS)
F = -
II 3m
126663 WE IOM .
BASIN •A'
2,195 SF a
I
4f1274.48 TII
EXIST OILLDOAIID TO REMAIN
I' & PROTECT IN PLACE
1 ,+I
1266 70 IE
typ
9
PROP 36" WIDE
CUNC CHANNEL
F4 �
-�-1�
Y°
_ -B - - ________�;
II _H I
EM51 54"
t' CALTRANS R/W LINE, EXIST 96" SO I .�PROR, 48° SD
i PROP C &G
dl'
12a4.57 i
.i
I
B�
I
i
I
i
I
I
D
t fi
7f+99'�
� �f'
PROP W
FF= 1276.00
PAD = 1275.30
DGE 76
y -It ll 4- LINE 1 0 17 .0p 1276.00
126441 BOTTOM
- BASIN 'B
L3 - 5,953 S F�
L
Ll
.9 Jy
7 -
1
( FU7URE 48"
SD LATERAL
OV OTHERS
/' -- PROP.
BAL80WRD
III RELOCATION
176_110 _ �1
1 7IF,
I �x
R
111 I
PROP
II fl, I. I
]8,55" 18" YB' IS 2]`
I� -,
L71ThI
t2644t IE I I �
VICINITY MAP
16' IN' 24' IN
J4 PNNMG PMMNG D" pw m
I iP W
FF.1276.00
PAO =,275.30 /
1126656 R I ,iii 7r+ai ep' 6aaD I °'
PROP 3' RIBBON 1 7 14 u
GUTTER - PROP SD ,�• �, _ PACP WAe 4
-- -, 7 7 + JJ WIIEA
J — a 1xsi.n[ PROP, esC } 7 t °1, 7x7 f' ^ I SECTION C -C
r F764E 76a 91 R ml `� 287. - : ±341' % F {'
• �,r.
1 "H" - PROP q/K rEa16F F!7 "FD COVER ATENUE
EMT [1G _ j/ RFWR1 44
1x62.80 [ _ - -•°U ' p N le 16 1Y ARwR
1 L
a s
. PAR NG oar[ rSI Ylc r lAu NqY v c
r 065' T 1 I STALL yyq.
_.- - - - EXIST EP - "•; b' P
AD= 127530 _
COLLIER AVENUE EXIST 48" So
-. . ._ .._ _...._ Wr7ER _
�A W . 90EWALK
o LUi1E
- - --- =i2 o-- ----
— -- v
_T 7'� ---1, -
`J PROPOSED E%
` SECTION D -D
Sir
W.
I :� r -1 . I 6y' S0' 3C -x2• Ts -14' � g
CRANE STREET KLI 0 AG 3RD STREET
IKgOB05[0 4M'MALK " -' - -.
KW05W W.9
& CUTTER MAJOR ARTERIAL
TYPICAL SECTION
COLLIER STREET
IHUMAb WILL LUlb
PAGE: 866 GRID: D2
a
a3
E59.
,�q arr
'3 � �.
FIP W34F tn^
Oil CAL
e'
41951 Remington Avenue Suite 220
Temecula California 92590 -2553
Phone: 951 2949300
LAKE ELSINORE HONDA ,
PAM�IINC
6'
CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN
%ALE:
1 " =20'
A,E:
11/02/2017 ,
'9Tt
PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF:
E USL WPB
E S
NOT TO SCALE
b nVl6
7I30I201H
AARON w Cs7aN R- ]6T OAT
UIEau 8Y:
DSBU
[A
NU: x
�7
OF 2 c 3
p.ic
T+
1
7as
iUP9 & WITER
WPOSM7 WATER
WAUTY BASIN
SECTION A -A
1' =3D
11e 1a
?�
PAP" PAINING
eA T
=W
PLF
A7530
-'
LaST GWNO
a
Qli®A pJIgA
CURB
Ra & p7ra
S. CONIC. CHANNEL
oma
SECTION B
1' =3G"
16' IN' 24' IN
J4 PNNMG PMMNG D" pw m
I iP W
FF.1276.00
PAO =,275.30 /
1126656 R I ,iii 7r+ai ep' 6aaD I °'
PROP 3' RIBBON 1 7 14 u
GUTTER - PROP SD ,�• �, _ PACP WAe 4
-- -, 7 7 + JJ WIIEA
J — a 1xsi.n[ PROP, esC } 7 t °1, 7x7 f' ^ I SECTION C -C
r F764E 76a 91 R ml `� 287. - : ±341' % F {'
• �,r.
1 "H" - PROP q/K rEa16F F!7 "FD COVER ATENUE
EMT [1G _ j/ RFWR1 44
1x62.80 [ _ - -•°U ' p N le 16 1Y ARwR
1 L
a s
. PAR NG oar[ rSI Ylc r lAu NqY v c
r 065' T 1 I STALL yyq.
_.- - - - EXIST EP - "•; b' P
AD= 127530 _
COLLIER AVENUE EXIST 48" So
-. . ._ .._ _...._ Wr7ER _
�A W . 90EWALK
o LUi1E
- - --- =i2 o-- ----
— -- v
_T 7'� ---1, -
`J PROPOSED E%
` SECTION D -D
Sir
W.
I :� r -1 . I 6y' S0' 3C -x2• Ts -14' � g
CRANE STREET KLI 0 AG 3RD STREET
IKgOB05[0 4M'MALK " -' - -.
KW05W W.9
& CUTTER MAJOR ARTERIAL
TYPICAL SECTION
COLLIER STREET
f>rSiwG
r SIDEWALK
=
F3tt5bNC CURB
& GUTTER
a
a3
E59.
,�q arr
'3 � �.
FIP W34F tn^
Oil CAL
Io
�f Li AV ID EVANS
AND ASSOC IATE....
41951 Remington Avenue Suite 220
Temecula California 92590 -2553
Phone: 951 2949300
LAKE ELSINORE HONDA ,
mm Br,
MXGO
CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN
%ALE:
1 " =20'
A,E:
11/02/2017 ,
'9Tt
PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF:
MXGO
NOT TO SCALE
b nVl6
7I30I201H
AARON w Cs7aN R- ]6T OAT
UIEau 8Y:
DSBU
APIh1mDE;T:
NU: x
�7
OF 2 c 3
p.ic
P"
�� l I fa►q
NORTH ELEVATION
i \l PaIYPEB ETFi iC'=1T�:i fdx>
�i...� y. _ i,, - -- sF:C _ 'rAP:t� --{_"• _J - -"—+,] MP -z,
FINISH LEGEND
41 STM. lurillMm usaw,
I
! ` � ' M1AT, L cnF FLaaN'4o
yP I'll ,
4p k .,
CF-1 ,C—F G
0 P5cF H B1 smCH (P-1
ttErA. nrm,L^COLRi.'a Md
�. .. - u4EE�t KI Vw +LIJP
D- `-
VAEE:L l'WW.l:55L:i�FA P:C?I
...(u rrl `c_`; eJ'� (7Y! - ➢r"- 1w•fP!i L�pi 0 -3 WVK P19MEMGCY11 kY,.:YYi
QRW 4rJPUgpgEO'RL"�.M
I:i.1rFUL ry77Ni,N'.9llIG 5E ?p L'L>�
_ 04 :aaveF a'rAri+hblpO,p:
WESTELEVATION hV^ °L`9 NMRi';ALI41 Ga
_ IYA?1C r- ESF�c acarFm mo=
mLE sPlaa .�
EIFS -1 u u cwNiTJ11WpL1n15.TP1
as: smu 1-
„ —� r(24D' � .__.� Up11'MFlIY77 -161J CR.,
� Ml drrueaTnxtra.rl,T.wslsev
// ,yam.
L��' � °'..gip -1?
, j''C+ �J' ti EP -1 W[[IW. FxiL+IMiN7
4W! i@hdKislMaE z Q
milt {1.E6 SLID. pAULW, - -'pr! Z Z
milt NA'E! SW°! ,Ell wa rJ�T44 ana O (r
IMP -1 xrz 1 L a'�I.vll
7 - - - r a3 + r ar r i+ Yw. ''. • FY '- - in'k 10prT"1 ;q IaP.o -s.IR u[ us um.rtESr w J
i L`o, W RKVI kACA:ETrM-CMT U
1 0 LJ
I
IMP -1 Q
+ G • .—Y ±1. ('y: ` + =1 -r _ .••i k{Ib'if4w$HFw =110. w J
-1A __'• all asdl, Ah� '•; (L1.` r; ul [+!A!
1 . MP -2 W� ,[41EM+51CL1TiCYEf11E Q Q
ALMC ��l� OPT•1
LJ •Sl �� 3-U7 ,7 YA[A ML'AAY ?NNp.h'M
°'? ^ � - -� :{ CN?' {GR•T •„� WCA1&t 1Cd[S :AV},ySC.iNVIC[cn1.W
MP -2 WlE7E,L YW'4M c1M:iaE WI1•lA{
vv
1PT•2 'fN1� 1lEQA ks�la^#.ItE:HilY1!]L --
EAST ELEVATION
�• .. m� cP �rtsSKw
MP -3 YATERLaL arc �rvurA LCnac.IrE rA,iEPL;_
OPT-1
:Gi:i rp•,CA ww`E,u,IPVEEVi
{ !OC,:iI "r LIIJFPCIDF JP r- M1ICPIF_
T2 aTLwL �`a %t�+k�5!1 A.
1 I _
MP -3 a _ PROJECT NO.: 1708
OP T-2
A5 _ ISSUE OpTE: 4/10/15
w or.Tl
LN,ER SIO o
111 !.0ITSYS V
P9— -- - ` WTERAL 1U 1 11,A CFA' VA1 SIS Eli
• T,r V OW1 %w us >LUN t AEOUa
141M 32W0 B A L i..CVE
I 'iNAVhOCIZE9ALUM1trILF.I
ra 1 .Iw4'�
M1+>TFII ACv"v cw'm WM I"IW
CW -2 ;FUP ME FIIAC!tMi71 %A
• • -„ 'STEM S;l1F71 xR?k4A4'HK!:141r
} 4i EXTERIOR
EBTERIOR
[s5•I �, �, -
.0 — _ ELEVATIONS
>LL HFAL PANELS SRALL BE FER ASR -3704
SOUTHELEVATION T52E15 �0T3U %1]_SE H RMALTATZCFORFE "AEQU1APIPflS Re;ATor,ao-lo A200
30. =F�.L HCa� THERM4L FERFOhIANCE RE0l11REP ,IEhRS
GENERAL NOTES
JOHN MAHONEY
ARCHITECT
_ _ _
f
IXI L lIIXP
II
+
1
r
�tl I A
- -
" . Ca "Is
850 W ELLIOT ROAD 4108
TEMPE, ARIZONA 85284
P4803455457 F4803451759
KEYNOTES
LAKE iLSINORE
(I� clam °c a sEP.:a *�sL=r. LS rPm
-
u1,'J—^ RT-11- SH EL LTlG
* � M
r
--7�
I
uvECFeco-BE:n12
►d r
t
,
P EH, EH Ecn nCa ua .e 3 :_L]
NORTH ELEVATION
i \l PaIYPEB ETFi iC'=1T�:i fdx>
�i...� y. _ i,, - -- sF:C _ 'rAP:t� --{_"• _J - -"—+,] MP -z,
FINISH LEGEND
41 STM. lurillMm usaw,
I
! ` � ' M1AT, L cnF FLaaN'4o
yP I'll ,
4p k .,
CF-1 ,C—F G
0 P5cF H B1 smCH (P-1
ttErA. nrm,L^COLRi.'a Md
�. .. - u4EE�t KI Vw +LIJP
D- `-
VAEE:L l'WW.l:55L:i�FA P:C?I
...(u rrl `c_`; eJ'� (7Y! - ➢r"- 1w•fP!i L�pi 0 -3 WVK P19MEMGCY11 kY,.:YYi
QRW 4rJPUgpgEO'RL"�.M
I:i.1rFUL ry77Ni,N'.9llIG 5E ?p L'L>�
_ 04 :aaveF a'rAri+hblpO,p:
WESTELEVATION hV^ °L`9 NMRi';ALI41 Ga
_ IYA?1C r- ESF�c acarFm mo=
mLE sPlaa .�
EIFS -1 u u cwNiTJ11WpL1n15.TP1
as: smu 1-
„ —� r(24D' � .__.� Up11'MFlIY77 -161J CR.,
� Ml drrueaTnxtra.rl,T.wslsev
// ,yam.
L��' � °'..gip -1?
, j''C+ �J' ti EP -1 W[[IW. FxiL+IMiN7
4W! i@hdKislMaE z Q
milt {1.E6 SLID. pAULW, - -'pr! Z Z
milt NA'E! SW°! ,Ell wa rJ�T44 ana O (r
IMP -1 xrz 1 L a'�I.vll
7 - - - r a3 + r ar r i+ Yw. ''. • FY '- - in'k 10prT"1 ;q IaP.o -s.IR u[ us um.rtESr w J
i L`o, W RKVI kACA:ETrM-CMT U
1 0 LJ
I
IMP -1 Q
+ G • .—Y ±1. ('y: ` + =1 -r _ .••i k{Ib'if4w$HFw =110. w J
-1A __'• all asdl, Ah� '•; (L1.` r; ul [+!A!
1 . MP -2 W� ,[41EM+51CL1TiCYEf11E Q Q
ALMC ��l� OPT•1
LJ •Sl �� 3-U7 ,7 YA[A ML'AAY ?NNp.h'M
°'? ^ � - -� :{ CN?' {GR•T •„� WCA1&t 1Cd[S :AV},ySC.iNVIC[cn1.W
MP -2 WlE7E,L YW'4M c1M:iaE WI1•lA{
vv
1PT•2 'fN1� 1lEQA ks�la^#.ItE:HilY1!]L --
EAST ELEVATION
�• .. m� cP �rtsSKw
MP -3 YATERLaL arc �rvurA LCnac.IrE rA,iEPL;_
OPT-1
:Gi:i rp•,CA ww`E,u,IPVEEVi
{ !OC,:iI "r LIIJFPCIDF JP r- M1ICPIF_
T2 aTLwL �`a %t�+k�5!1 A.
1 I _
MP -3 a _ PROJECT NO.: 1708
OP T-2
A5 _ ISSUE OpTE: 4/10/15
w or.Tl
LN,ER SIO o
111 !.0ITSYS V
P9— -- - ` WTERAL 1U 1 11,A CFA' VA1 SIS Eli
• T,r V OW1 %w us >LUN t AEOUa
141M 32W0 B A L i..CVE
I 'iNAVhOCIZE9ALUM1trILF.I
ra 1 .Iw4'�
M1+>TFII ACv"v cw'm WM I"IW
CW -2 ;FUP ME FIIAC!tMi71 %A
• • -„ 'STEM S;l1F71 xR?k4A4'HK!:141r
} 4i EXTERIOR
EBTERIOR
[s5•I �, �, -
.0 — _ ELEVATIONS
>LL HFAL PANELS SRALL BE FER ASR -3704
SOUTHELEVATION T52E15 �0T3U %1]_SE H RMALTATZCFORFE "AEQU1APIPflS Re;ATor,ao-lo A200
30. =F�.L HCa� THERM4L FERFOhIANCE RE0l11REP ,IEhRS
CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN
LAKE ELSINORE HONDA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
1 -15 SB ON RAMP
II
� IcALrRAMSJ
/ EXIST CALTRANS R/W
J
E?*T BILLBOARD TO
&, BE RELOCATED ;•,T F -,.sl E wxlTsi
PROPOSED FH
r
WATM P.
EXIST 6' WA I I
I.
IF7 - I
C451 PROPE TY ueE -�� _ I- ® I FFc 12'moo .
(i •' �
PAD= �- ii6.30
X I
`T' � _ 'r ��>TaaoSEO SENiR• PRpPpSEp oaresnt sER,�cE
PROPOSED FIRE SFIRVa
If m I
i_ I
„•
PRgpwo r WATER
r I�69W.SEWER
II I
"'S4 R/W
EXIST
-_) �CpHwECf T9 EXIST
E. 4EYrtYr uR
SEWER Itil
I� II
CRANE STREET
-- - -- - - - -- - -- - -EXIST TELECOM _
EXTSi 12" WA
-� _SEXIST OAS
man
M J,
W S
EXIST 7B "STUB-
T � \�
I .I
III
EXIST
BE RF
Z I,I
,1
�I
�a
a
C7
z,
Ln
LW I
x
EXIST IPROPERTY/ROW LINE
I
Ezsr F�HIM REMAIN
:I r I
I
• � 3 I
-- T '- EfXMTITO TO REMAIN
EXIST FH rII
1 r41RE11AM�
EXIST EP WATER POCK - �- -EXIST 16' IVA _
44677.02 -W
_ EXIST IS' 5R
COLLIER AVENUE 'EXIST OAS _
, ::.: �•
I I 1
3RD STREET
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
0 40
94 7 "= 40' reN
LIMIT OF WORK
COLLIER AVE
{ !
VJ
Lu
z
a
I V i
LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS:
SITE AREA (GROSS): 303,178 SF (6.96 A.C.)
LANDSCAPE AREA: 40,169 15 SF
LANDSCAPE PERCENTAGE: 13.25%
I J _
11
411 P7 Ail pM°1
F. Ica. T "- 40' eel
Is
PLANT SCHEDULE
TREES BOT WCAL NAM- COMMCN NAME SZE WUC17 S QTY REMARKS
40 AR3UN5 X. 'MARINA' AP.BLFUS MLLTI- TRJNh; 24 "BDX NOD ACCENT TREE A ENFR'f
0 V,GERSTROENIA INDICA -INW CRAPE MYRT_E MULTI- TRUM1M. 24 "8OX NOD 4 FLOW'ERINC ACCENT TREE AT aNTRY
AbLOPiOSTEMON CCNFERTU5 BRI33ANE BOX 24 "BOX NOD 17
PIA "ANUS X ACERITOLA LONDON PLANE TREE 24 "B7X NOD 12 STREET TREE
POCCAPPUS HENHELII LCNG LEAFED YELLOW WOOD CCLUMN 24 "B7X NOD 18 SCREENINC TREE
PYRJS CALLERYANA ORNAM:1JTA_ PEAR 24 "BDX NOD 18
SYACRJS P.OM,ANZCFFIANA QUEEN 'AL14 15 CAL NOD 24
5H RUB fionlyuk COMMON NAME ZE WUCO'_S
GROUNOCOVERS
BOTANICAL NAME
ACAVE ATTENUATA
FOXTAIL AGNF
S CAL
LOW
CISTUS ( PLRPUR_JS 'SJNSET'
ANfAN.A X 'N_W GOLD'
MAGENTA ROCNROSE
NEW ZTLC LANTANA
OCPP,OSMA REPEN5 MARBLE QUEEN'
MIRROR, PLANT
3 CAL
NOD
MYUPUkLM
I .AL
DIETES VEGC.4
FOP,TNIGFT FLY
5 GAL
NOD
1 CAL
LOW
AYLNJULA ALCUSHFULIA 'FIU:::llt
LN G LISH LAVLNULH
1 GAL
LM
LOW
BASIN SCRF VE IN
_EPTUSPEF MUM SCOPARIUM
NEW ZEAaND TEA IREL
5 CAL
N00
3UeUS MCROPiri.LA V42 JAPONICUM
_GUSTROM JAFCNICUN _T W UMW
TEXAS PRIVET
5 GAL
NOD
_UUSWum JAPCNI_UM 'TLXANUM'
TEXAS PHIVEI
'ITTOSPOR:IN T08 RA 'WHIFF] FRS DW4R'
DWARF MK'K.K. ORANGE
i GAI
NOD
DWARF CCK ORANCE
i CAL
7HAFHI']I. FPIS IN OI'A
IN-AA HAWTH!7RNF
i GAL
NOD
SAL'JA LELICANTHA SAN .-A BARBARA
MEXICAN BUSH SAGE
5 GAL
LOW
GROUNOCOVERS
BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON ,NAME
=
WUC0._
J
CISTUS ( PLRPUR_JS 'SJNSET'
ANfAN.A X 'N_W GOLD'
MAGENTA ROCNROSE
NEW ZTLC LANTANA
I 'LL
I GAL
LOW
LJW
VTYCPUNUN PARVI -;JIJUM
MYUPUkLM
I .AL
L'JW'
SENECIO NANDRALISCAE
BLUE CHA_KSTCRS
1 CAL
LOW
SKI-NA14
BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME
SZE
WUCO S
11111111 C:AFRII =A '(:A.S.SA 11 IF"
-SSA ll,t= FA{ IIIY
I -,
NOD
_DMANBRA 0NFERTIFOLA 'SEASCAPE
SEASCAPE NAT RUSH
1 CAA_
NOD
!ONANBRA LOVGIFOLIA 'OREEZC'
DWARF MAT RLISII
3 GAL
LOW
3UCHLOE DACTfLODES
BIIC VERDE BUFFALO GRASS
PJJGS
LOW
BASIN SCRF VE IN
; BOTAWCAI NAIAE
COMMCN NAME
SZE
WuCO._3
3UeUS MCROPiri.LA V42 JAPONICUM
JAPANESE BOXWOOD
3 GAL
NOD
_UUSWum JAPCNI_UM 'TLXANUM'
TEXAS PHIVEI
] GAL
NUU
�170SPORJN TOBIRA 'WHEELERS DWAR-
DWARF CCK ORANCE
i CAL
NOD
211AfHOLEl'IS INDI-A
INYA IIAWTHOFNE
5 GAL
NOD
LANDSCAPE NCTES:
T SRAM HkF RFI'N 4IffTFD Ak"_ ON HFIrHT (OA HTM'iR) .AID CONTINULN: TIFF SC.H=,,ff FROM ll, 1KFNT SHOPPNG C.=VT =R ALL
d-Rllb
4 JC; [.P,i NI'WCORER P_Xf1RNG -0 3E CISP.EISEE AFPROP7ATELY TYROUG�UT THE PLANTING Aff'AS PLMIIN, AREAS ALSO TO
LNU,.0 A. I"LKI VAIFJWAIS, SUL71' A t'UbbLE AND LTULC'H
2. LANCSCAPINC IS TQ CONSIST OF PERMANENT IRRICATFDN, TREES CROJNU COYER ANC /OR FURF.
3. ALL UNPAVED, UNUSED ADEAS SHALL OC - ANDSCA.PED.
LANCSCAPE PLANS ANC INSTAL.ATIONS SHALL CDNPLY WIT 1 711E CIT/ OF LAKE ELEANORE CODES, 00INATJC75 AND LAHDSCAP_ DEIGN
GUI)ELNES AS .A'PLY TO PLA.NTINS CESIGV AND IRRIGATION.
TRASH ENP J)SU5E5 AND AND ABOVE GRDLND EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY APPROPRA -E PUNTING,
6 ALL PLANTIIJG AREAS TO P,ECENE A MINIMUM OF 3" OF MULCH.
. ALL STREET 7REES IVSTA_ED TO BE 24' BOX YIN MUM FOR EACH 30 UNEAL FEE-.
8. PARM14G AREA TO BE SCREENED UTILIZING SHRUBS AND OTHER DECORATFr TREATMENTS OF SU= =ICIENT SIZE AND FEIG'AT TO MEET CITY
RCOUR2EMCN7S.
IRRIGATION NOES,
THE Fvk 1411ICATI014 FJ/i.'S Wll PROW lFr HEC=SSMY INFORMArOH sX A CpWIPLJ -TE ANC TUII:CY AVOW lC 1717U_13N VSIrd FO@ PIE
A ROJ1f,T SfTF WFIF-H wwr)F5 STRFPT TRFfS A7 W. CC91 NFR AV0,L4P THE PINIS'MI I 4!iEA"f 'HF P-m- Ar 7NNFrTI(N RASED rA IkF
PE9UR€MENFS 'SE7 F7RTL- LT` -HE `SNORE 'WkIE`' Lil FAI WATER OSLgJCI, W-KfO(W PPEWN`L:H OR 3A%F..T STRAINER ANC PYIESiII iF
P,ECUUh -M (A6 NECCS5,WfI. EQU*%KH' SIZE. W4UfACTBRGR WD M WILL BE Pg*WN Eo 1.4 7T-E SAWION LEND UAR"" MAMA
APPLIGTIWJ TC,IiOLOGIES (3WA7) WILL fl_ LJTIIJM FLOW NON`FXIS. V013T:AJE „.EN^AOR3. AND ET EKSEG COlITZ' Vr. WL_ BE lV_°VENI'EC..
IN ACCOFIWCF WBN T,f STATE CF CF1.60RtdA'S WATER )Vtuw- (AB mal). AIP ANw -#'ATE FRCIWCAHG 4 FCLLCA w, WFCiFRIANON:
• ''REPAHE WA ER JSA,UL CALCULAIIUNS (NAWA ANJ LI'WL) kASkU ANN IHL WAILR U.RLYNANL:E NLQUINEAILM S.
• 'RCUDE HATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET AND HY1)RD:..LFE TABLE FOR FACH REMOTE CONTROL VALVE PER ORCINAVCE,
• DETAIN I IORTICUL -URA_ ;DILS REPORT (AGRONOMIC DA A) EASED ON S01_ SAMPLES OBTAINED FROM TI E SITE
• 'RCVIDE IRRIGATION RUN TIME CCHEDU_E PER ORDINANCE RAS_) CH SOL TYPE,
• STATEIAENF NOTE WILL BE ADDED REGARDING ORDINANCE,
• RRI�ATOII SYSTEM WI_L JTLIZE _OA V'OLUTA_ %CFIP SYSTEM TC AVOID OVER, -SPRAY ON -O HAROSL'APE AND EUMINATE RUN -CFF
• RRICATOL! SYSTEM WI_L 3E DESIGNED BAS OV WATER NEED FOR EP.CH CROLP OF NATEFAL (SEPARATE HYDRCQOIJESI. TREES
RRIuATON SYSTEM WI_L 3E SEPARATED FROM :HP,UB/SRCUND COVER.
■i
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-__
A RESOLUTION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR
PLANNING APPLICATION 2017-74 (COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO.
2018-02; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37534; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 2017-18)
Whereas, Tally CM hassubmitted an application for several entitlements which include a
Tentative Tract Map for the consolidation of three (3) lots into one (1) lots and the reconfiguration
of the adjacent right of way, a Conditional Use Permit to permit the operation of a vehicle sales
and repair facility and a Commercial Design Review application for development of a 53,425
square foot of building.. The Project site is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of
Collier and Crane Avenues in Lake Elsinore, California and is comprised of three parcels, totaling
approximately 6.97 acres in size, and known as Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 377-080-053,
377-080-057, and 377-080-079; 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 Cityconducted an Initial Study to
determine if the Project would have a significant effect on the environment. The Initial Study
revealed that the project would have potentially significant environmental impacts but those
potentially significant impacts could be mitigated to less than significant levels; and
Whereas,based upon the results of the Initial Study, and based upon the standards set forth in
CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, it was determined that it was appropriate to prepare and
circulate Mitigated Negative Declaration(Environmental ReviewNo. 2018-01)for the Project (the
“Mitigated Negative Declaration”); and
Whereas,pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072, on February 17, 2017, the City duly
issued a notice of intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
Whereas,in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15073, the Mitigated Negative
Declaration was made available for public review and comment for a minimum of twentydays
beginning on July 19, 2018, and endedon August 7,2018and
Whereas,a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”)(Exhibit A)for the Project
has been prepared in accordance with Section 21081.6 of CEQA; and
Whereas, pursuant to LEMC Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Map), 17.186 (Conditional Use Permits),
17.184 (Design Review), and 17.196 (Signs –Advertising Structures) the Planning Commission
has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council
pertaining to Design Review of residential projects; and
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 2of 18
Whereas,on August 7, 2018, at a duly noticed public hearing the Planning Commission
considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested
parties with respect to this item and adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council
adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Whereas,on March28, 2017, at a duly noticed public hearing the City Councilconsidered
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:
Section1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into these
findings by this reference.
Section2. The City Council evaluated all comments, written and oral, received from persons
who have reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The City Council hereby finds and
determines that all public comments have been addressed.
Section3. The City Council hereby finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project
is adequate and has been completed in accordance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and
the City’s procedures for implementation of CEQA; and recommends to the City Council that it
make the same finding. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained
in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration represents
the independent judgment of the City.
Section4. TheCity Councilfurther 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 City Council.
Section5.The City Council hereby makes, adopts, and incorporates the following findings
regarding the lack of potential environmental impacts of the Project and the analysis and
conclusions set forth in the Mitigated Negative Declaration:
1.Revisions in the Project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant
before a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study was released for public
review and mitigation measures set forth in the Initial Study would avoid the effects
or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur.
Based upon the Initial Study conducted for the Project, there is substantial
evidence suggesting that all potential impacts to the environment resulting from
the Project can be mitigated to less than significant levels. All appropriate and
feasible mitigation has been incorporated into the Project design. The Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Plan contains an implementation program for each
mitigation measure. After implementation of the mitigation contained in the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, potential environmental impacts are
effectively reduced to less than significant levels.
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 3of 18
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.
Section6. Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the attached conditions
of approval, the City Councilof the City of Lake ElsinoreadoptstheMitigated Negative Declaration
and the MMRP for Planning Application 2017-74 (Commercial Design ReviewNO. 2018-02;
Tentative ParcelMapNO. 37534; Conditional Use Permit NO. 2017-18).
Section7. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of August2018, by the following vote:
_____________________________
Natasha Johnson
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. 2018-____ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore,
California, at the regular meeting of August 14, 2018, and that the same was adopted by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Susan M. Domen, MMC
City Clerk
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 4of 18
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 5of 18
5
Exhibit “A”
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
PROJECT NAME:LakeElsinore Honda: Planning Application 2017-74
DATE:August2018
PROJECT MANAGER:Justin Kirk, PrincipalPlanner
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:The proposed Project, Lake Elsinore Honda, will be a new automobile sales and service facility. The building will be
53,425 square feet, and it will be single story. Two new driveways are proposed on Collier Avenue. The northern
driveway will provide vehicular access for sales customers. The southern driveway will provide access for employee
parking and deliveries.
The building architecture comprised of Honda’s iconic architectural standard including a blue metal entry cylinder, a
blue metal “Wave”, off-white colored EIFS and clear glass in aluminum window framing.
Vehicle repair occurs within the fully enclosed air-conditioned building. Mechanical and air-conditioning equipment is
roof mounted and screened from view by building parapet walls which match the architectural vocabulary.
PROJECT LOCATION:The Project site is located on the northern side of Collier Avenue in Lake Elsinore, California and is comprised of
three parcels, totaling approximately 6.97 acres in size, and known as Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 377-080-
053, 377-080-057, and 377-080-079. The Project site is located within Section 31, Township 5S, Range 4W as shown
on the Lake Elsinore, California 7.5 minute U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) topographic map. The property is bound
to the northeast by I-15, to the southeast by 3rd Street, to the southwest by Collier Avenue, and to the northwest by a
currently vacant site that is in the process of constructing an extension of Crane Street. Surrounding properties are
composed of vacant land, existing light industrial, and a retail commercial center currently under construction.
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
Section 1.
OURCE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
IV.
BIOLOGICAL
RESOURCES
MM BIO 1: MSHCP Fees. Prior to issuance of
a grading permit, the applicant/developer
shall pay the Western Riverside County
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
(MSHCP)development mitigation fee for
commercial development in effect at the time
the permits are issued.
CEQA
Initial Study/
General
Biological
Resources
Assessment
Applicant CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Planning Division
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 6of 18
6
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
Section 1.
OURCE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
MM BIO 2:Focused Survey, Pre-
ConstructionSurvey, and Avoidance. Prior to
receiving a final grading permit, the Project
applicant shall conduct a focused survey for
Burrowing Owl (BUOW) in accordance with
the MSHCP provisions. Additionally, within
30 days prior to initiating ground-disturbance
activities, the Project applicant shall retain a
qualified biologist to complete a pre-
construction take avoidance survey in
accordance with the MSHCP. If the take
avoidance survey is negative and BUOWs are
confirmed to be absent, then ground-
disturbing activities shall be allowed to
commence, and no further mitigation would
be required.
If the surveys are positive and BUOWs are
confirmed to be present on site, the Project
applicant shall consult with the California
Department of Wildlife (CDFW) and prepare
and implement a Project-specific BUOW
mitigation plan. The plan shall be reviewed
and approved by the CDFW. To avoid take,
any impacted individuals shall be relocated
outside of the impact area by a qualified
biologist using passive or active
methodologies approved by CDFW. The
Projectapplicant shall further mitigate BUOW-
occupied habitat in accordance with the
MSHCP.
CEQA
Initial Study/
General
Biological
Resources
Assessment
Applicant and CDFW CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Planning Division
MM BIO 3: Pre-Construction Nesting Bird
Survey and Avoidance. Vegetation clearing
should be conducted outside the nesting
season, which is generally defined as
February 15 to August 31. If vegetation
clearing must take place during the nesting
CEQA
Initial Study/
General
Biological
Resources
Assessment
Qualified biologist CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Planning Division
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 7of 18
7
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
Section 1.
OURCE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
season, a qualified biologist shall perform a
pre-construction survey for nesting birds no
more than seven days prior to vegetation
impacts.
If active bird nests are confirmed to be present
during the pre-construction survey, temporary
avoidance of the nests shall be requireduntil
a qualified biologist has verified that the young
have fledged, or the nest has otherwise
become inactive.
V.
CULTURAL
RESOURCES
MM Cult 1: UNANTICIPATED RESOURCES
The developer/permit holder or any successor
in interest shall comply with the following for
the life of this permit:
If during ground disturbance activities,
unanticipated cultural resources* are
discovered, the following procedures shall be
followed:
1.All ground disturbance activities
within 50 feet of the discovered cultural
resource shall be halted until a meeting is
convened between the developer, the Project
Archaeologist, the Native American tribal
representative (or other appropriate
ethnic/cultural group representative), and the
Community Development Director or their
designee to discuss the significance of the
find.
2.The developer shall call the
Community Development Director or their
designee immediately upon discovery of the
cultural resource to convene the meeting.
3.At the meeting with the
aforementioned parties, the significance of
CEQA
Initial Study/
Cultural
Resources
Inventory
Applicant CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Planning Division
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 8of 18
8
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
Section 1.
OURCE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
the discoveriesshall be discussed and a
decision is to be made, with the concurrence
of the Community Development Director or
their designee, as to the appropriate
mitigation (documentation, recovery,
avoidance, etc.) for the cultural resource.
MM Cult 2: IF HUMAN REMAINS ARE
FOUND
In the event that human remains (or remains
that may be human) are discovered at the
project site during grading or earthmoving, the
construction contractors, project
archaeologist, and/or designated Native
American Monitor shall immediately stop all
activities within 100 feet of the find. The
project applicant shall then inform the
Riverside County Coroner and the City of
Lake Elsinore Community and Economic
Development Department immediately, and
the coroner shall be permitted to examine the
remains as required by California Health and
Safety Code Section 7050.5(b). Section
7050.5 requires that excavation be stopped in
the vicinity of discovered human remains until
the coroner has made the necessary findings
as to origin. If human remains are determined
to be Native American, the applicant shall
comply with the state law relating to the
disposition of Native American burials that fall
within the jurisdiction of the NAHC (PRC
Section 5097). The coroner shall contact the
NAHC within 24 hours and the NAHC will
make the determination of most likely
descendant(s). The MLD shall complete his or
her inspection and make recommendations or
preferences for treatment within 48 hours of
being granted access to the site. Treatment
CEQA
Initial Study/
Cultural
Resources
Inventory
Applicant,
archaeological monitor,
and Native American
monitor
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Planning Division
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 9of 18
9
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
Section 1.
OURCE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
and disposition of the remains shall be
determined in consultation with the most likely
descendant(s) to determine the most
appropriate disposition of human remains and
any associated grave artifacts. In the event
that the applicant and the MLD are in
disagreement regarding the disposition of the
remains, State law will apply and the
mediation process will occur with the NAHC,
if requested (see PRC Section 5097.98(e)
and 5097.94(k)).
The specific locations of Native American
burials and reburials are confidential and may
not be disclosed to thegeneral public. The
locations will be documented by the
consulting archaeologist in conjunction with
the various stakeholders and a report of
findings will be filed with the Eastern
Information Center. A Sacred Lands File form
will be submitted to the NAHC by the project
archaeologist and the Monitoring Tribe(s).
According to the California Health and Safety
Code, six or more human burials at one
location constitutes a cemetery (Section
8100), and disturbance of Native American
cemeteries is a felony (Section 7052).
MM Cult 3: ARCHAEOLOGIST/CRMP
Prior to issuance of grading permits, the
applicant/developer shall provide evidence to
the Community Development Department,
Planning Division, that a Secretary of Interior
Standards qualified and certified Registered
Professional Archaeologist (RPA) has been
contracted to implement a Cultural Resource
Monitoring Program (CRMP), in consultation
with the Tribes, that addresses the details of
all activities that must be completed and
CEQA
Initial Study/
Cultural
Resources
Inventory
Archaeological monitor
and Native American
monitor
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Public
Works/Engineering
Department
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 10of 18
10
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
Section 1.
OURCE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
procedures that must be followed regarding
cultural resources associated with this project.
The CRMP document shall be provided to the
Community Development Director or their
designee for review and approval prior to
issuance of the grading permit. The CRMP
provides procedures to be followed and are to
ensure that impacts on cultural resources will
not occur without procedures that would
reduce the impacts to less than significant.
Archaeological Monitor -An adequate number
of qualified monitors shall be present to
ensure that all earth-moving activities are
observed and shall be on-site during all
grading activities for areas to be monitored
including off-site improvements. Inspections
will vary based on the rate of excavation, the
materials excavated, and the presence and
abundance of artifacts and features. The
frequency and location of inspections will be
determined by the Project Archaeologist and
if required, in consultation with the Tribal
monitor.
MM Cult 4: Cultural Sensitivity Training -–
The Project Archaeologist and if required, a
representative designated by the Tribe shall
attend the pre-grading meeting with the
contractors to provide Cultural Sensitivity
Training for all Construction Personnel.
Training will include a brief review of the
cultural sensitivity of the Project and the
surrounding area; what resources could
potentially be identified during earthmoving
activities; the requirements of the monitoring
program; the protocols that apply in the event
unanticipated cultural resources are
identified, including who to contact and
CEQA
Initial Study/
Cultural
Resources
Inventory
Archaeological monitor
and Native American
monitor
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Public
Works/Engineering
Department
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 11of 18
11
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
Section 1.
OURCE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
appropriate avoidance measures until the
find(s) can be properly evaluated; and any
other appropriate protocols. This is a
mandatory training and all construction
personnel must attend prior to beginning work
on the project site. A sign-in sheet for
attendees of this training shall be included in
the Phase IV Monitoring Report.
MM Cul 5: Tribal Monitoring.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the
applicant shall contact the consulting Native
American Tribe(s) that have requested
monitoring through consultation with the City
during the AB 52 and/or the SB 18 process
(“Monitoring Tribes”). The applicant shall
coordinate with the Tribe(s) to develop
individual Tribal Monitoring Agreement(s). A
copy of the signed agreement(s) shall be
provided to the City of Lake Elsinore Planning
Department prior to the issuance of a grading
permit. The Agreement shall address the
treatment of any known tribal cultural
resources (TCRs) including the project’s
approved mitigation measures and conditions
of approval; the designation, responsibilities,
and participation of professional Tribal
Monitors during grading, excavation and
ground disturbing activities; project grading
and development scheduling; terms of
compensation for the monitors; and treatment
and final disposition of any cultural resources,
sacred sites, and human remains/burial
goods discovered on the site per the Tribe(s)
customs and traditions and the City’s
mitigation measures/conditions of approval.
The Tribal Monitor will have the authority to
stop and redirect grading in the immediate
CEQA
Initial Study/
Cultural
Resources
Inventory
Applicant,
archaeological monitor,
and Native American
monitor
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Public
Works/Engineering
Department
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 12of 18
12
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
Section 1.
OURCE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
area of a find in order to evaluate the find and
determine the appropriate next steps, in
consultation with the Project archaeologist.
MM Cult 6: Unanticipated Resources
In the event that previously unidentified
potentially significant cultural resources are
discovered, the Archaeological and/or Tribal
Monitor(s) shall have the authority to divert or
temporarily halt ground disturbance
operations in the area of discovery to allow
evaluation of potentially significant cultural
resources. The Project Archaeologist, in
consultation with the Tribal monitor shall
determine the significance of the discovered
resources. The Community Development
Director or their designee must concur with
the evaluation before construction activities
will be allowed to resume in the affected area.
Before construction activities are allowed to
resume in the affected area, the artifacts shall
be recovered and features recorded using
professional archaeological methods. The
Project Archaeologist in consultation with the
Tribe(s) shall determine the amount of
material to be recovered for an adequate
artifact sample for analysis. Under no
circumstances shall any destructive methods
of archaeological analysis of artifacts,
including but not limited to radiocarbon dating,
be undertaken without the Tribes’ written
approval. No archaeological analysis of any
kind is allowed on sacred or ceremonial items.
Removal of any sacred ceremonial and/or
burial related items, including human remains,
shall not occur unless the Tribes approve
such actions in writing. Isolates and clearly
non-significant deposits shall be minimally
CEQA
Initial Study/
Cultural
Resources
Inventory
Archaeological monitor
and Native American
monitor
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Public
Works/Engineering
Department
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 13of 18
13
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
Section 1.
OURCE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
documented in the field and the monitored
grading can proceed.
MM Cult 7: Cultural Resources Disposition
-In the event that Native American cultural
resources are discovered during the course of
grading (inadvertent discoveries), the
following procedures shall be carried out for
final disposition of the discoveries:
1.One or more of the following
treatments, in order of preference, shall be
employed with the tribes. Evidence of such
shall be provided to the City of Lake Elsinore
Community Development Department:
a.Preservation-In-Place of the cultural
resources, if feasible. Preservation in place
means avoiding the resources, leaving them
in the place where they were found with no
development affecting the integrity of the
resources.
b.Relocation of the resources on the
Project property. The measures for relocation
shall include, at least, the following: Measures
and provisions to protect the future reburial
area from any future impacts in perpetuity.
Relocation shall not occur until all legally
required cataloging and basic recordation
have been completed, with an exception that
sacred items, burial goods and Native
American human remains are excluded. Any
reburial process shall be culturally
appropriate. Listing of contents and location of
the reburial shall be included in the
confidential Phase IV report. The Phase IV
Report shall be filed with the City under a
CEQA
Initial Study/
Cultural
Resources
Inventory
Project Archaeologist CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Planning Division
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 14of 18
14
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
Section 1.
OURCE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
confidential cover and not subject to Public
Records Request.
c.If preservation-in-place and/or
relocation cannot be employed, then the
resources shall be curated at a culturally
appropriate manner at a Riverside County
curation facility that meets State Resources
Department Office of Historic Preservation
Guidelines for the Curation of Archaeological
Resources ensuring access and use pursuant
to the Guidelines. The collection and
associated records shall be transferred,
including title,and are to be accompanied by
payment of the fees necessary for permanent
curation. Evidence of curation in the form of a
letter from the curation facility stating that
subject archaeological materials have been
received and that all fees have been paid,
shall be provided by the landowner to the City.
There shall be no destructive or invasive
testing on sacred items, burial goods and
Native American human remains. Results
concerning finds of any inadvertent
discoveries shall be included in the Phase IV
monitoring report.
MM Cult 8: PHASE IV REPORT
Upon completion of the implementation
phase, a Phase IV Cultural Resources
Monitoring Report shall be submitted that
complies with the Riverside County Planning
Department's requirements for such reports
for all ground disturbing activities associated
withthis grading permit. The report shall
follow the County of Riverside Planning
Department Cultural Resources
(Archaeological) Investigations Standard
CEQA
Initial Study/
Cultural
Resources
Inventory
Archaeological monitor
and Native American
monitor
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Public
Works/Engineering
Department
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 15of 18
15
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
Section 1.
OURCE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
Scopes of Work posted on the County website
and shall include at a minimum: a discussion
of the monitoringmethods and techniques
used; the results of the monitoring program
including any artifacts recovered; an inventory
of any resources recovered; updated DPR
forms for all sites affected by the
development; final disposition of the
resources including GPS data; artifact catalog
and any additional recommendations. The
report shall include results of any feature
relocation or residue analysis required as well
as evidence of the required cultural sensitivity
training for the construction staff held during
the required pre-grade meeting. A final copy
shall be submitted to the City, Project
Applicant, the Eastern Information Center
(EIC), and the Tribe.
VI.
GEOLOGY &
SOILS
MM GEO 1: Compliance with
Recommendations from the Geotechnical
Evaluation. Prior to issuance of grading
permit, the proposed Project
applicant/developer shall comply with all
recommendations contained within the
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation.
CEQA
Initial Study/
Geotechnical
Engineering
Evaluation
Applicant CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Public
Works/Engineering
Department
VII.
GREENHOUSE
GAS
EMISSIONS
MM GHG 1:CAP-1 Electric Vehicle Spaces.
The Project shall designate at least ten
percent of the total employee and visitor four
additional parking spaces for Clean Air
Vehicles. Parking spaces for Clean Air
Vehicles may be any combination of low-
emitting, fuel-efficient and carpool/vanpool
vehicles. Based on the current site plan, this
measure would require 22 spaces out of the
total of 221 spaces to be designated for Clean
Air Vehicles.
CEQA
Initial Study/
CAP
Consistency
Assessment
Applicant CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Building & Safety
Division
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 16of 18
16
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
Section 1.
OURCE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
MM GHG 2: CAP-2 Energy Efficient Building
Standards Tier 1 Electives. The Project shall
demonstrate consistency with Measure E-3.1
by selecting one of the following electives
from the 2016 CALGreen Tier 1 Checklist
(CBSC 2016):
On-site renewable energy with
documentation (A5.211.1 and
A5.211.1.1);
Green power (A5.211.3);
Elevators with car lights and fan
(A5.212.1.1 and A5.212.1.1.1);
Escalators with controls (A5.212.1.1
and A5.212.1.4); or
Steel framing (A5.213.1).
CEQA
Initial Study/
CAP
Consistency
Assessment
Applicant CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Building & Safety
Division
MM GHG 3: CAP-3 Indoor Water
Conservation Tier 1 Electives. The Project
shall demonstrate consistency with Measure
E-4.2 by selecting one of the following
electives from the 2016 CALGreen Tier 1
Checklist (CBSC 2016):
Nonpotable water systems for indoor
use (A5.303.2.3.4);
Appliances and fixtures for
commercial application (A5.303.3);
Nonwater supplied urinals
(A5.303.4.1);
Dual plumbing (A5.303.5);
Outdoor potable water use
(A5.304.2);
Restoration of areas disturbed by
construction (A5.304.6);
Previously developed sites with
exception (A5.304.7);
Graywater irrigation system
(A5.304.8);
CEQA
Initial Study/
CAP
Consistency
Assessment
Applicant CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Building & Safety
Division
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 17of 18
17
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
Section 1.
OURCE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
Nonpotable water systems
(A5.305.1); or
Irrigation systems (A5.305.2).
MM GHG 4: CAP-4 Construction Waste
Management Plan. The Project shall provide
a Construction Waste Management Plan
which demonstrates how the Projectwould
recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum
of 65% of nonhazardous construction and
demolition waste.
CEQA
Initial Study/
CAP
Consistency
Assessment
Applicant CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Building & Safety
Division
VIII.
HAZARDS &
HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS
MM HAZ 1:Asbestos-Containing Materials
(ACM). Prior to any planned renovation or
demolition, the Project applicant shall perform
an ACM survey of all potentially suspect
material identified on site. The applicant shall
comply will any and all applicable remediation
recommendations contained in the ACM
survey.
CEQA
Initial Study/
Phase I ESA
Applicant CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Building & Safety
Division
MM HAZ 2: Lead-Based Paint (LBP). Prior
to any planned renovation or demolition, the
Project applicant shall perform an LBP survey
of all potentially suspect material identified on
site. The applicant shall comply will any and
all applicable remediation recommendations
contained in the LBP survey.
CEQA
Initial Study/
Phase I ESA
Applicant CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Building & Safety
Division
IX.
HYDROLOGY
& WATER
QUALITY
MM HYDRO 1: Building Elevations. Prior to
issuance of occupancy permit, all Project
buildings shall be constructed such that the
structures are elevated by a minimum of the
depth designation of one foot, above the
highest adjacent existing ground per the
established flood elevation published by
FEMA.
CEQA
Initial Study/
Preliminary
Hydrology
Report
Applicant CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
City Building &
Safety Division
X.
LAND USE &
PLANNING
See MM BIO 1, above.
CCReso.No. 2018-___
Page 18of 18
18
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
Section 1.
OURCE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
XVI.
TRANS./
TRAFFIC
MM TR 1: Fair-Share Payment. In the event
the Central Plaza development does not
implement the traffic signal at the Collier
Avenue / Crane Street / Private Driveway prior
to the Project’s opening day, the Project may
be required to implement the traffic signal and
be reimbursed through a fair-share
agreement with the Central Plaza
development. The fair-share responsibility of
the Project and the Central Plaza
development is based on the proportion of
weekday PM peak hour trips using the
intersection by each development. The
Project fair-share percentage is 61%.
CEQA
Initial Study/
Traffic Impact
Analysis
Applicant CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Public
Works/Engineering
Department
XVII.
TRIBAL
CULTURAL
RESOURCES
See MM CUL 1 –MM CUL 8, above.
MM CUL 9: Monitoring Agreement. At least
30 days prior to grading, excavation and/or
other ground-disturbing activities the
applicant shall contact the appropriate Tribe
to notify the Tribe of excavation activities and
coordinate with the Tribe to develop a
Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall
address the designation, responsibilities, and
participation of Native American tribal
monitors during excavation and other ground
disturbing activities and construction
scheduling.
CEQA
Initial Study/
Cultural
Resources
Inventory
Applicant CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Public
Works/Engineering
Department
MM CUL 10: Avoidance of Sacred Sites.
All sacred sites, should they be encountered
within the Project area, shall be avoided and
preserved as the preferred mitigation, if
feasible.
CEQA
Initial Study/
Cultural
Resources
Inventory
Applicant CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Public
Works/Engineering
Department
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-___
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTINGFINDINGS THAT PLANNING APPLICATION 2017-
74 (COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2018-02; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
NO. 37534; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-18) IS CONSISTENTWITH
THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT
CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP)
Whereas,Tally CM hassubmitted an application for several entitlements which include a
Tentative Tract Map for the consolidation of three (3) lots into one (1) lots and the reconfiguration
of the adjacent right of way, a Conditional Use Permit to permit the operation of a vehicle sales
and repair facility and a Commercial Design Review application for development of a 53,425
square foot of building.. The Project site is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of
Collier and Crane Avenues in Lake Elsinore, California and is comprised of three parcels, totaling
approximately 6.97 acres in size, and known as Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 377-080-053,
377-080-057, and 377-080-079; and,
Whereas,Section 6.0 of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation
Plan (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 reviewof the project applications; and,
Whereas, Section 6.0 further requires that discretionary development projects be analyzed
pursuant to the MSHCP “Plan Wide Requirements”even if not within an MSHCP criteria cell; and,
Whereas, the Project is discretionary in nature and requires review and approval by the Planning
Commission and City Council; and,
Whereas,the Project isnot locatedwithinaMSHCP Criteria Celland 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, pursuant to LEMC Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Map), 17.186 (Conditional Use Permits),
and 17.184 (Design Review) the Planning Commission(Commission)has been delegated with
the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council (Council) pertaining to Design
Review, Conditional Use Permits, and Tentative Maps; and,
Whereas,on August 7,2018 at a duly noticed Public Hearing the Planning Commission has
considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested
parties with respect to this item; and,
Whereas, pursuant to LEMC Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Map), 17.186 (Conditional Use Permits),
and 17.184 (Design Review) the Council has the responsibility of making decisions to approve,
modify or disapprove recommendations of the Commission for Tentative Maps, Conditional Use
Permits, and Design Review applications; and;
CC Reso. No. 2018-____
Page 2of 4
Whereas,on August 14, 2018, at a duly noticed Public Hearing the Councilhas considered
evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with
respect to this item.
NOW,THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCILOF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,CALIFORNIA,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDERAS FOLLOWS:
Section 1:The Council has considered the Project and its consistency with the MSHCP prior to
adopting Findings of Consistency with the MSHCP
Section2:That in accordance with the MSHCP, the Council makes the following findings for
MSHCP consistency:
1.The proposed project is a project under the City’s MSHCP Resolution, and the City must make
an MSHCP Consistency Finding before approval.
Pursuant to the City's MSHCP Implementing Resolution, prior to approving any discretionary
entitlement, the City is required to review the Project to ensure consistency with the MSHCP
criteria and other "Plan Wide Requirements." The Project, as proposed, was found to be
consistent with the MSHCP criteria. In addition, the Project was reviewed and found consistent
with the following "Plan Wide Requirements". Protection of Species Associated with
Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (MSHCP § 6.2), 1.Protection of Narrow
Endemic Species MSHCP § 6.3), 1.Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines (MSHCP § 6.4),
1.Vegetation Mapping (MSHCP § 6.1), 3.Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP
§ 6.2), 3. Fuels Management (MSHCP § 6.4), and payment of the MSHCP Local Development
Mitigation Fee (MSHCP Ordinance § 4.0).
2.The proposed project is subject to the City’s LEAP (Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process) and
the County’s Joint Project Review 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.
Section 6.21.of the MSHCP focuses on protection of riparian/riverine areas and vernal pool
habitat types based upon their value in the conservation of a number of MSHCP covered
species.No riparian/riverine areas are located within the project site and there are no
potential vernal poolswithin the project site,therefore, the Project is consistent with Section
6.21.of the MSHCP.
4.The proposed project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species
Guidelines.
The project site is not within the MSHCP Narrow Endemic Plant Species (NEPS) or Criteria
Area Species (CAS) survey areas. There were no rare plants found within the project area
CC Reso. No. 2018-____
Page 3of 4
and there is no suitable habitat for rare plants. Thus, the project is consistent with the Narrow
Endemic Plant Species requirements of the MSHCP.
5.The proposed project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures.
The proposed project is not within any MSHCP Criteria Area Species Survey Area (CASSA)
forplantor animalspecies.
6.The proposed project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.
Section 6.41.of the MSHCP sets forth guidelines which are intended to address indirect
effects associated with locating development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area,
where applicable. Future Development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area may
result in Edge Effects that will adversely affect biological resources within the MSHCP
Conservation Area. To minimize such Edge Effects, guidelines shall be implemented in
conjunction with review of individual public and private Development projectsin proximity to
the MSHCP Conservation Area. Currently, the proposed project is not located adjacent to
land dedicatedto the MSHCP Reserve.
7.The proposed project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements.
Vegetation mapping was conducted as part of the biological surveys conducted on the entire
Project Site and is consistent with the MSHCP Section 6.13.Vegetation Mapping
requirements.
8.The proposed project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.
The Fuels Management Guidelines presented in Section 6.4 of the MSHCP are intended to
address brush management activities around new development within or adjacent to the
MSHCP Conservation Area and shall be implemented as part of the Project. As such, the
Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.The project will not be affected
by fuels management requirements either on site or on adjacentundeveloped land.
9.The proposed project is conditioned to pay the City’s MSHCP Local Development Mitigation
Fee.
As a condition of approval, the Project will be required to pay the City's MSHCP Local
Development Mitigation Fee at the time of issuance of building permits.
10.The Project is consistent with the reserve assembly requirements of the MSHCP.
The MSHCP provides for the assembly of a Conservation Areaconsisting of Core Areas
and Linkages for the conservation of covered species. The subject project isnot located in
a Criteria Cell, existing Reserve Area, or in Public/Quasi-Public habitat conservationland.
11.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.
CC Reso. No. 2018-____
Page 4of 4
Section 3: Based upon the evidence presented, both written and testimonial, and the above
findings, the Council hereby finds that the Project is consistent with the MSHCP.
Section 4:This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Section 5:The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book
of original Resolutions.
Passed and Adopted onthis 14th day of August, 2018.
Natasha Johnson, 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. 2018-____ wasadopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore,
California, at the regular meeting of August 14, 2018, and that the same was adopted by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Susan M. Domen, MMC
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVALOF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37534 PROVIDING
FOR THE CONSOLIDATION OF THREE (3) LOTS INTO ONE (1) LOT ANDTHE
RECONFIGURATION OF THE ADJACENTRIGHT OF WAY
Whereas,Tally CM hassubmitted an application for several entitlements which include a
Tentative Tract Map for the consolidation of three (3) lots into one (1) lots and the reconfiguration
of the adjacent right of way, a Conditional Use Permit to permit the operation of a vehicle sales
and repair facility and a Commercial Design Review application for development of a 53,425
square foot of building.. The Project site is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of
Collier and Crane Avenues in Lake Elsinore, California and is comprised of three parcels, totaling
approximately 6.97 acres in size, and known as Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 377-080-053,
377-080-057, and 377-080-079; and,
Whereas, pursuant to Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Map) the
Planning Commission(Commission)has been delegated with the responsibility of making
recommendations to the City Council(Council)pertaining to the tentative map; and,
Whereas, on August 7, 2018,at a duly noticed Public Hearing, the Commission considered
evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with
respect to this item; and,
Whereas, pursuant to LEMC Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Map)the Council has the responsibility of
making decisions to approve, modify or disapprove recommendations of the Commission for
Tentative Maps; and;
Whereas, on August 14, 2018, at a duly noticed Public Hearing the Council has considered
evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with
respect to this item.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCILOF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The Council has reviewed and analyzed Tentative Parcel Map No. 37354pursuant
to the appropriate Planning and Zoning Laws,and Chapter 16 (Subdivisions) of the LEMC.
Section 2:On August 14, 2018, after consideration and evaluation of all written reports and
comments and oral testimony presented by the Community Development Department and other
City departments, property owners, residents and other interested parties and such other matters
as are reflected in the record of the noticed Public Hearing on the Project, the Counciladopted
Resolution No. 2018-___ finding and determining thattheMitigated Negative Declaration is
adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA.
Section 3:Thatin accordance with State Planning and Zoning Lawand the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code, the Councilmakes the following findings for approvalofTentativeParcelMap
No. 37354:
1.The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvements, is
consistent with the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan, Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
CC Reso. No. 2018-____
Page 2of 3
(LEMC), andthe Subdivision Map Act. The proposed subdivision is compatible withthe
objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan
(Government Code Section 66473.5).
The General Plan designates the site for General Commercial. Consistent with that
designation, the proposed Tentative Parcel Map can accommodate future commercial land
uses. The Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the designated land use, development
and design standards, and all other appropriate requirementscontained in the General Plan
and the Subdivision Map Act.
2.The site of the proposed subdivision of land is physically suitable for the proposed density
of development in accordance with the General Planand the LEMC.
The project site is vacant and is relatively flat. The proposed Tentative Parcel Map which
will consolidatethree(3) lots into one(1) lots and the reconfiguration of the adjacent right of
way. The proposed subdivision creates a functional lot, whichcan be developed in manner
suitable and in accordance with the General Plan and MunicipalCode.
3.The effects that this project are likely to have upon the housing needs of the region, the
public service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and environmental
resources have been considered and balanced.
The proposed project is has a General Plan land use designation of General Commercial
and is zoned C-2 General Commercial neither of which permit residential uses. The
proposed development would not convert any residentially zoned properties and will provide
commercial uses to serve the surrounding and adjacent residential communities.
4.The design of the proposed division of land or type of improvements is not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
The Project has been adequately conditioned by all applicable departments and agencies
and will not therefore result in any significant environmental impacts. The proposed use,
together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, or welfare or materially injurious toproperties or improvements in the vicinity.
Section 4:Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the conditions of
approval, the Council hereby approvesTentative ParcelMap No. 37354.
Section 5:This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Section 6:The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book
of original Resolutions.
Passed and Adopted onthis 14th day of August, 2018.
Natasha Johnson, Mayor
CC Reso. No. 2018-____
Page 3of 3
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. 2018-____ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore,
California, at the regular meeting of August 14, 2018, and that the same was adopted by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Susan M. Domen, MMC
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.2018-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-18 FOR
THE ESTABLISHMENT OFAN APPROXIMATELY 53,425 SQUARE FOOT
AUTOMOBILE SALES ANDSERVICE FACILITY
Whereas, Tally CMsubmitted an application for A Conditional Use Permit to permit the operation
of a vehicle sales and repair facility and a Commercial Design Review application for development
of a53,425 square foot of building.. The Project site is located on the southeast corner of the
intersection of Collier and Crane Avenues in Lake Elsinore, California and is comprised of three
parcels, totaling approximately 6.97 acres in size, and known as Assessor Parcel Numbers
(APNs) 377-080-053, 377-080-057, and 377-080-079; and,
Whereas, Chapter 17.168 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) provides that certain uses
have operational characteristics that, depending on the location and design of theuse, may have
the potential to negatively impact adjoining properties, businesses or residents and therefore are
permitted subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit, which allows the City to
comprehensively review and approve the use; and
Whereas, pursuant to LEMC Chapter 17.186 (Conditional Use Permits)the Planning Commission
(Commission)has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City
Council (Council) pertaining to Conditional Use Permits; and,
Whereas,on August 7,2018 at a duly noticed Public Hearing the Planning Commission has
considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested
parties with respect to this item; and,
Whereas, pursuant to LEMC Chapter 17.186 (Conditional Use Permits) the Council has the
responsibility of making decisions to approve, modify or disapprove recommendations of the
Commission for Conditional Use Permits; and;
Whereas, on August 14, 2018, at a duly noticed Public Hearing the Councilhas considered
evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with
respect to this item.
NOW,THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCILOF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,CALIFORNIA,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: On August 14, 2018, after consideration and evaluation of all written reports and
comments and oral testimony presented by the Community Development Department and other
City departments, property owners, residents and other interested parties and such other matters
as are reflected in the record of the noticed Public Hearing on the Project, the Council adopted
Resolution No. 2018-___ finding and determining that the Mitigated Negative Declaration is
adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA.
Section 2: That in accordance with California Planning and Zoning Law and the LEMCSection
17.168.060 (Findings), the Councilmakes the following findings regarding Conditional Use Permit
No. 2017-18:
CC Reso. No. 2018-____
Page 2of 3
1.That the proposed use, on its own merits and within the context of its setting, is in accord
with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning district in which the
site is located.
The subject site is located in the Business District and has a land use designation of General
Commercial. The General Commercial land use designation has a FAR of 0.4 and the
project has a total FAR 0.18, thus complying with the General Plan FAR requirements. The
primary goal of the Business District is to encourage its position as the industrial and
commercial hub of the City and to ensure that new growth respects the environmental
sensitivity of the natural wetlands, floodway and floodplain. Furthermore, the goal of the
Business District is to support a vibrant commercial and industrial hub with high quality
developments that have a strong orientation towards major corridors. Because the proposed
projectcomplies with the FAR requirements and creates development that is oriented to
major corridors and facilitates further commercial development within a commercial hub the
proposed project is found to be consistent with the General Plan.
2.The proposed use will not be detrimental to the general health, safety, comfort or general
welfare of persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed use or the
City, or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the City.
The proposed use isto belocated within aproposed new development, which does not
propose a development which would be detrimental or injurious to the neighborhood or the
City. The project has been conditioned as such to avoid any possible negative impacts
associatedwith the conversion and operation of the proposed facility.
3.The Site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, and
for all the yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping, buffers and other features required
by this title.
The proposed use has been analyzed and staff has determined that the proposed use meets
all applicable sections of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Codeand will complement the existing
uses, based on the submitted plans and attached conditions of approval.
4.The Site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways with proper design both as to
width and type of pavement to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the subject
use.
The proposed use is located within an existing built environment, inclusive of streets. The
existing streets are of adequate size to facilitate safe and convenient transportation to and
from the site. Conditions of Approval have been proposed which require additional
infrastructure to reduce potential impacts, consistent with the Mitigated Negative
Declaration.
5.In approving the subject use at the specific location, there will be no adverse effect on
abutting properties or the permitted and normal use thereof.
The Conditional Use Permit has been thoroughly reviewed and conditioned by all applicable
City departments thereby eliminating the potential for any adverse effects.
6.Adequate conditions and safeguards pursuant to LEMC 17.68.050, including guarantees
and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the approval of
CC Reso. No. 2018-____
Page 3of 3
the subject project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the objectives
of this chapter and the planning district in which the site is located.
Pursuant to Section 17.168.040of the LEMC, the Project was considered by the City Council
at a duly noticed Public Hearing on August 14, 2018, appropriate and applicable conditions
of approval have been included to protect the public health, safety and general welfare.
Section 3: Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the Conditions of
Approval, the Council herebyapprovesConditional Use Permit No. 2017-18.
Section 4:This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Section 5:The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book
of original Resolutions.
Passed and Adopted onthis 14th day of August, 2018.
Natasha Johnson, 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. 2018-____ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore,
California, at the regular meeting of August 14, 2018, and that the same was adopted by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Susan M. Domen, MMC
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-
ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE APPROVAL OFCOMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2018-02
PROVIDING BUILDING DESIGNS FOR A 53,425 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE
STORY BUILDING AND RELATED ON AND OFFSITE IMPROVEMENTS
Whereas, Tally CM,has filed an application for Commercial Design Review 2018-02with the City
of Lake Elsinore(City)requesting approval of architectural plans fora 53,425 square foot of
building.The Project site is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Crane
Avenues in Lake Elsinore, California and is comprised of three parcels, totaling approximately
6.97 acres in size, and known as Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 377-080-053, 377-080-057,
and 377-080-079; and,
Whereas, pursuant to the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC)Chapter 17.184 (Design
Review) the Planning Commission (Commission) has been delegated with the responsibility of
making recommendations to the City Council (Council) pertaining to Design Reviewapplications;
and,
Whereas,on August 7, 2018 at a duly noticed Public Hearing the Commission has considered
evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with
respect to this item; and,
Whereas, pursuant to LEMC Chapter 17.184 (Design Review) the Council has the responsibility
of making decisions to approve, modify or disapprove recommendations of the Commission for
Design Review applications; and;
Whereas,on August 14, 2018, at a duly noticed Public Hearing the Council has considered
evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with
respect to this item.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCILOF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The Councilhas considered the proposed design for Commercial Design Review No.
2018-02for a 53,425square foot commercial development. The Councilhas reviewed and
analyzed the proposed Project pursuant to the California Planning and Zoning Laws (Cal. Gov.
Code §§ 65000 et seq.), the Lake Elsinore General Plan the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and
finds and determines that the proposed Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02is consistent
with the requirements of California Planning and Zoning Law and with the goals and policies of
the Lake Elsinore General Plan and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code.
Section 2:On August 14, 2018, after consideration and evaluation of all written reports and
comments and oral testimony presented by the Community Development Department and other
City departments, property owners, residents and other interested parties and such other matters
as are reflected in the record of the noticed Public Hearing on the Project, the Counciladopted
Resolution No. 2018-___ finding and determining that the Mitigated Negative Declaration is
adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA.
CC Reso. No. 2018-____
Page 2of 3
Section3:That in accordance with State Planningand Zoning Law and the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code,the Councilmakes the following findings regarding CommercialDesign Review
No. 2018-02:
1.The project, as approved, will comply with the goals and objectives of the General Plan and
the zoning district in which the project is located.
The subject site is located in the Business District and has a land use designation of General
Commercial. The General Commercial land use designation has a FAR of 0.4 and the
project has a total FAR 0.18, thus complying with the General Plan FAR requirements. The
primary goal of the Business District is to encourage its position as the industrial and
commercial hub of the City and to ensure that new growth respects the environmental
sensitivity of the natural wetlands, floodway and floodplain. Furthermore,the goal of the
Business District is to support a vibrant commercial and industrial hub with high quality
developments that have a strong orientation towards major corridors. Because the proposed
project complies with the FAR requirements and creates development that is oriented to
major corridors and facilitates further commercial development within a commercial hub the
proposed project is found to be consistent with the General Plan.
2.The project complies with the design directivesand all other applicable provisions of the
Municipal Codeor Specific Plan.
The proposed project is located inthe C2-General Commercial zone district. The proposed
project proposes uses which are permitted or permitted subject to the approval of a
Conditional Use Permit. The proposed project’s design meets all Municipal Code
requirements. Because the uses are permitted or permitted subject to the approval of a
Conditional Use Permit and the development complies with the development standards, it
is found to be consistent with the LEMC.
3.Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Chapter 17.184.070 of the Municipal Code,including
guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the
approval of the Project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the
objectives of Chapter 17.184.
Pursuant to Section 17.184.070 ofthe LEMC, the Projectbeen consideredby the Council
at a duly noticed Public Hearing onAugust 14, 2018.The proposedproject, as reviewed
and conditioned by all applicable City divisions, departments and agencies, will not have a
significant effect on the environment. Furthermore, appropriate Conditions of Approval have
been included that would mitigate any potential issues associated with the future
development and establishment of use.
Section4: Based upon all of the evidence presented, the above findings, and the conditions of
approval, the Council hereby approvedCommercialDesign Review No. 2018-02.
Section 5:This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Section 5:The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book
of original Resolutions.
CC Reso. No. 2018-____
Page 3of 3
Passed and Adopted onthis 14th day of August, 2018.
Natasha Johnson, 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. 2018-____ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore,
California, at the regular meeting of August 14, 2018, and that the same was adopted by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Susan M. Domen, MMC
City Clerk
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 1 of 20
C:\Users\legistar\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 8\@BCL@683162E6\@BCL@683162E6.docx
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
RESOLUTIONS:
PROJECT NUMBER: PA 2017-74(TPM 37534, CDR 2018-02, and CUP 2017-18)
PROJECT NAME:Lake Elsinore Honda
PROJECT LOCATION:Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs):377-080-053, 377-
080-057, and 377-080-079
APPROVAL DATE:
EXPIRATION DATE:
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1.Planning Application No. 2017-74 (TPM 37534, CDR 2018-02, and CUP 2017-18)
consists of the consolidationof three(3) lots into one(1) lot and the reconfiguration of the
adjacent right of way and the development of a 53,425 square foot single story building
and associated site improvements (“project”). The project site is located on 6.97 acres
generally located at the southeastcorner of Collier Avenueand Crane. The site contains
threeparcels, identified as Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 377-080-053, 377-080-
057, and 377-080-079.
2.The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold
harmless the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, Agents, and Consultants agents
(collectively referred to individually and collectively as "Indemnities") from any claim,
action, or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval by Indemnitees
concerning approval of the project, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations
taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or
validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant's indemnification is intended to
include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by
Indemnities and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys' fees,
penalties and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnities in connection
with such proceeding. The City will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action,
or proceeding against the City. If the project is challenged in court, the City and the
applicant shall enter into formal defense and indemnity agreement, consistent with this
condition.
3.Within 30 days of project approval, the applicant shall sign andreturn the final Conditions
of Approvalto the Community Development Department for inclusion in the case records.
4.Permittee shallrequire that all qualifying contractors and subcontractors exercise their
option to obtain a Board of Equalization sub-permit for the jobsite and allocate all eligible
sales and use tax payments to the City of Lake Elsinore. Prior to commencement of any
construction activity on-site the developer will require that the contractor or subcontractor
provide the City of Lake Elsinore with either a copy of their Board of Equalization account
number and sub-permit, or a statement that the sales & use tax does notapply to their
portion of the project. To accomplish this, Permittee shall either cause its construction
contractor to treat the project in accordance with California Regulation 1521 (b)(2)(B),
California Regulation 1521 (c)(13)(B), and California Regulation 1826(b) for sales and use
tax purposes or form a "Buying Company:" as defined in the State of California Board of
Equalization Regulation 1699(h). Permittee can adopt an alternative methodology to
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 2 of 20
accomplish this goal if such methodology is approved bythe City of Lake Elsinore City
Manager, or designee prior to issuance of building permits.
Permittee shall direct use taxes on out-of-City taxable purchased construction related
items to the City of Lake Elsinore, consistent with state sales and use tax law. Permittee
shall use its best efforts, consistent with state law, to source taxable purchases from price
competition construction retail vendors within the City of Lake Elsinore to further source
sales to the City.
5.All services and materials providedfrom or at the subject site will be processed for sale in
compliance with the Bradley Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law, and all
applicable Board of Equalization (BOE) local tax regulations (as may be amended from
time to time) including Regulation 1802, such that the BOE will recognize all sales tax from
the site to be indisputably designated to the City during the term of this Conditional Use
Permit. The intent of this condition is to ensure that the principal negotiations for the sale
of all services and products provided from or at the subject site occur in the City. Prior to
the issuance of an occupancy permit, the applicant shall establish a sales office within the
jurisdictional boundaries of the City and thereafter, for the entire term of the permit,
conduct its taxable sales operations for all sales from the subject site in accordance with
the California Sales and Use Tax laws and all other applicable provisions of local, state
and federal law. The applicant will use all good faith efforts to market, promote and
administer its taxable sales activity with the objective of maximizing the amount of local
sales tax revenue. In all Sales and Use Tax Returns filed with the BOE relating to taxable
sales generated at the sales office for the subject site, Taxpayer agrees to specify the City
as the place of sale. The applicant recognizes that violation of this condition and/or the
failure of the City to receive local sales tax in accordance with this condition will subject
the conditional use permitto revocation pursuant to Section 17.168.110 of the LEMC.
PLANNING DIVISION
6.Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534will expire two years from date of approval unless within
that period of time a Final Map has been filed with the County Recorder, or an extensionof
time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council in accordance with the State of
California Subdivision Map Act and applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal
Code.
7.Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map
Act and applicable requirements contained in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC),
unless modified by approved Conditions of Approval.
8.Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02shall lapse and become void two years following
the date on which the design review became effective, unless one of the following: (1)
prior to the expiration of two years, a building permit related to the design review is issued
and construction commenced and diligently pursued toward completion; or (2) prior to the
expiration of two years, the applicant has applied for and has been granted an extension
of the design review approval pursuant to subsections (B) and (C) of Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code (LEMC) Section 17.184.120. Notwithstanding conditions to the contrary,
a design review granted pursuant to LEMC Chapter 17.184 shall run with the land for this
two-year period, subject to any approved extensions, and shall continue to be valid upon
a change of ownership of the site which was the subject of the design review application.
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 3 of 20
9.Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18shall lapse and become void two years following the
date on which the conditional use permit became effective, unless one of the following:
(1) prior to the expiration of two years, a building permit related to the conditional use
permit is issued and construction commenced and diligently pursued toward completion;
or (2) prior to the expiration of two years, the applicant has applied for and has been
granted an extension of the design review approval pursuant to subsections (B) and (C)
of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) Section 17.168.080. Subject to the provisions of
LEMC Section 17.168.110, a conditional use permit granted pursuant to the provisions of
this section shall run with the land and shall continue to be valid upon a change of
ownership of the site or structure which was the subject of the conditional use permit
application.
10.All Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced on page one of building plans prior to their
acceptance by the Building and Safety Division, Community Development Department.
All Conditions of Approval shall be met prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
and release of utilities.
11.All site improvements shall be constructed as indicated on the approved building plans,
as modified by these conditions of approval.
12.Any proposed minor revisions to approved plansshall be reviewed and approved by the
Community Development Director or designee. Any proposed substantial revisions to the
approvedplansshall be reviewed according to the provisions of the Municipal Code in a
similar manner as a new application.Grading plan revisions shall be reviewed by the City
Engineer.
13.If operation of this use triggers concerns related to parking, noise, traffic, or other impacts,
at the discretion of the Community Development Director, this Conditional Use Permit may
be referred back to the Planning Commission for subsequent review at a Public Hearing.
If necessary, the Commission may modify or add conditions of approval to mitigate such
impacts, or may revoke said Conditional Use Permit.
14.All roof mounted or ground support air conditioning units or other mechanical equipment
incidental to development shall be architecturally screened or shielded by landscaping so
that they are not visible from neighboring property or public streets.
15.A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed to
ensure that all exterior on-site lighting shall be shielded and directed on-site so as not to
create glare onto neighboring property and streets orallow illumination above the
horizontal plane of the fixture.
16.The propertyaddress (in numerals at least sixinches high) shall be displayed near the
entrance and be easily visible from the front of the subject propertyand public right-of-
way.
17.The applicant shall constructtrash enclosure(s) solid block and with a decorative roof to
match the colors, materials and design of the project architecture.
18.A uniform hardscape and street furniture design including seatingbenches, trash
receptacles, free-standing potted plants, bike racks, light bollards, etc., shall be utilized
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 4 of 20
and be compatible with the architectural style. Detailed designs shall be submitted for
Planning Division review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
19.Three (3) sets of the Final Landscaping/Irrigation Detail Plansshall be submitted to the
Community Development Departmentwith appropriate fees, reviewed by the City’s
Landscape Architect Consultant and approved by the Community Development Director
or designee, prior to issuance of a building permit.
a)All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler system with 50%
plant coverage using a drip irrigation method.
b)All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six inch (6”) high and
six inch (6”) wide concrete curb.Runoff shall be allowedfrom paved areas into
landscape areas.
c)Planting within fifteen feet (15’) of ingress/egress points shall be no higher than
twenty-fourinches (24”).
d)Landscape planters shall be planted with an appropriate parking lot shade tree
pursuant to the LEMC and Landscape Design Guidelines.
e)No required tree planting bed shall be less than 5 feet wide.
f)Root barriers shall be installed for all trees planted within 10 feet of hardscape
areas to include sidewalks.
g)Any transformers and mechanical or electrical equipment shall be indicated on
landscape plan and screened as part of the landscaping plan.
h)The landscape plan shall provide for ground cover, shrubs, and trees and meet all
requirements of the City’s adoptedLandscape Guidelines.
i)All landscape improvements shall be bonded 100% for material and labor for two
years from installation sign-off by the City. Release of the landscaping bond shall
be requested by the applicant at the end of the required two years with
approval/acceptance reviewed by the Landscape Consultant and approved by the
Community Development Director or Designee.
j)All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed within affected portion of any phase
at the time a Certificate of Occupancy is requested for any building.
k)Final landscape plan must be consistent with approved site plan.
l)Final landscape plans to include planting and irrigation details.
m)Final landscape plans shall include drought tolerant planting consistent with
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District standards subject to plan check and
approval by the City’s landscape plan check consultant.
n)No turf shall be permitted.
20.Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable
satisfaction of the Community Development Director. If it is determined that the
landscaping is not being maintained, the Director of Community Development shall have
the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with
the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall
be the responsibility of the developer or any successors ininterest.
21.No individual signs are approved as part of this approval. The applicant or designee shall
submit an application for a sign permit, pay appropriate fees and receive approval from
the Community Development Department for any sign(s)installed at the project site. OR
The applicant shall submit a sign program for review and approval of the Planning
Commission prior to installation.
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 5 of 20
22.The project shall connect to sewer and meet all requirements of the Elsinore Valley
Municipal Water District (EVMWD). The applicant shall submit water and sewer plans to
the EVMWD and shall incorporate all district conditions and standards.
23.Provisions of the City’s Noise Ordinance shall be satisfied during all site preparation and
construction activity. The applicant shall place a weatherproof 3’ x 3’ sign at the entrance
to the project site identifying the approved days and hours of construction activity 7:00
a.m. –5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Only finish work and similar interior construction
maybe conducted on Saturdays and may commence no earlier than 8:00 a.m. and shall
cease no later than 4:00 p.m. with no construction activity to occur on Sundays or legal
holidays. The sign shall identify the name and phone number of the development
managerto address any complaints.
24.The proposed location of on-site construction trailers shall be approved by the Community
Development Director or designee. A cash bond of $1,000 shall be required for any
construction trailers placed on the site and used during construction. Bonds will be
released after removal of trailers and restoration of the site to an acceptable state, subject
to approval of the Community Development Director or designee. Such trailer(s) shall be
fully on private property and outside the public right of way.
25.Graffiti shall be removed within 24 hours.
26.The entire site shall be kept free from trash and debris at all times and in no event shall
trash and debris remain for more than 24 hours.
27.Install, operate and maintain full capture systems for all storm drains that captures runoff
from the facility or site.
28.If any of the conditions of approval set forth herein fail to occur, or if they are, by their
terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintainedaccording to their terms, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted, deny or further condition issuance of all
future building permits, deny, revoke, or further condition all certificates of occupancy
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; record a notice of violation on the
property title; institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said
conditions or seek damages for their violation.
29.The unloading of vehicles are required to done onsite. Added by the Planning Commission
on August 7, 2018.
FEES
30.The developer shall pay all development fees, including but not all inclusive: TUMF, TIF,
Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat, Railroad Canyon Benefit District and Area Drainage
Fees. Fee rate will be assessed at the prevalent rate at time of payment in full.
31.The developer shall pay all City assessed Development Impact, Capital Improvement,
Plan Check and Permit fees (LEMC 16.34; LEMC 16.74). Applicable mitigation fees may
include: Traffic Infrastructure Fee (TIF), Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF),
and Drainage Fee. Fee rate will be assessed at the prevalent rate at time of payment in
full.
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 6 of 20
32.Mitigation Fees will be assessed at the prevalent rate at time of payment in full. Fee rate
will be assessed at the prevalent rate at time of payment in full.
BUILDING AND SAFETY
General Conditions
33.Final Building and Safety Conditions will be addressed when building construction plans
are submitted to Building and Safety for review. These conditions will be based on
occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), and related codes which are
enforced at the time of building plan submittal.
34.All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2016edition of the
California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes: 2016California Electrical Code;
California Administrative Code, 2016California Energy Codes, 2016California Green
Building Standards, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code.
35.The application shall provide 10% voluntary green measures on the project, as stipulated
by the 2016California Green Building Standards.
36.Applicant shall provide details of all applicable disabled access provisions and building
setbacks on plans to include:
a)All ground floor units to be adaptable.
b)Disabled access from the public way to the entrance of the building.
c)Van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
d)Path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
e)Path of travel from public right-of-way to all public areas on site, such as club
house, trach enclosuretot lots and picnic areas.
37.Applicant must obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings by requesting street
addressing and submitting a site plan for commercial or multi-family residential projects or
a recorded final map for single-family residential projects.
38.A receipt or clearance letter from the Lake Elsinore School District shall be submitted to
the Building and Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School
Mitigation Fees.
39.Applicant must obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of
any construction work.
40.Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls will require separate
approvals and permits.
41.On-site sewer and water plans will require separate approvals and permits.
42.Applicant shall provide a house electrical meter to provide power for the operation of
exterior lighting, irrigation pedestals and fire alarm systems for each building on the site.
Developments with single user buildings shall clearly show on the plans how the operation
of exterior lighting and fire alarm systems when a house meter is not specifically proposed.
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 7 of 20
At Plan Review Submittal
43.Applicant must submit to Building and Safety four (4) complete sets of plans and two (2)
sets of supporting calculations for review and approval including:
a)An electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing
schematic, and mechanical plan applicable to scope of work.
b)A Sound Transmission Control Study in accordance with the provisions of the
Section 1207, of the 2013 edition of the California Building Code.
c)A precise grading plan to verify accessibility for the persons with disabilities.
d)Truss calculations that have been stamped by the engineer of record of the building
and the truss manufacturer engineer.
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s)
44.Onsite water and sewer plans, submitted separately from the building plans, shall be
submitted to Building and Safety for review and approval.
45.A demolition permit shall be obtained if there is an existing structure to be removed as part
of the project.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s)
46.Applicant shall provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original
signature on the plans.
47.A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the
building construction.
ENGINEERING DIVISION
General
48.All slopes and landscaping within public right-of-way shall be maintained by the property
owner or property owner’s association or another maintenance entity approved by the City
Council.
49.All open space and slopes except for public parks and schools andflood control district
facilities, outside the public right-of-way shall be owned and maintained by property owner
or property owner’s association.
50.In accordance with the City’s Franchise Agreement for waste disposal & recycling, the
developer shall be required to contract with CR&R Inc. for removal and disposal of all
waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning,
demolition, clear and grubbing or all other phases of construction.
51.Developer shall mitigate to prevent anyflooding and/or erosion downstream caused by
development of the site and or diversion of drainage.
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 8 of 20
52.The developer shall provide a copy of an encroachment permit or any approval documents
from the Riverside County Flood Control District for encroaching, grading, or discharging
into County flood control facilities.
53.All required soils, geology, hydrology and hydraulic, and seismic reports shall be prepared
by a Registered Civil Engineer.
Flood Plain
54.Project lies within a FEMA mapped special flood hazard zone and within the Floodplain
Management area as defined at LEMC 15.68.
55.Meet all requirements of LEMC 15.68 regarding floodplain management. Any fill placed
in the 100-year flood plain for the purposes of elevating the building floor out of the flood
plain shall require a CLOMR/CLOMR-F and LOMR/LOMR-F to be processed with FEMA.
56.Meet all requirements of LEMC 15.64 regarding flood hazard regulations to include
elevation of the lowest floor a minimum of 2 feet above the base flood elevation in FEMA
mappedspecial flood hazard areas (100 year).
Final Tract or Parcel Map
57.The developer shall submit for plan check review and approval a final map.
58.Prior to City Council approval of the Parcel Map, the developer shall, in accordance with
Government Code, have constructed all improvements or noted on the title sheet of the
map the improvements to be constructed or have improvement plans submitted and
approved, agreements executed and securities posted.
Utilities
59.All arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, valves,
fire hydrants, etc.) out of the roadway shall be the responsibility of the property owner or
his agent.
60.All overhead utilities shall be undergrounded in accordance with Chapter 12.16 of the Lake
Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC)
61.Underground water rights shall be dedicated to the City pursuant to the provisions of
Section 16.52.030 (LEMC), and consistent with the City’s agreement with the Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District.
62.The developer shall apply for, obtain and submit to the City Engineering Division a letter
from Southern California Edison (SCE) indicating that the construction activity will not
interfere with existing SCE facilities (aka SCE NIL).
63.The developer shall submit a copy of the "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division
from the applicable water agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been
made for this project and specify the technical data for the water service at thelocation,
such as water pressure and volume etc.
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 9 of 20
IMPROVEMENTS
Design
64.Sight distance into and out of the project location shall comply with CALTRANS Standards.
65.The developer shall install permanent bench marks per City of Lake Elsinore Standards
and at locations to be determined by City Engineer.
66.The developer shall install blue dot markers in the roadway at a right angle to Fire Hydrant
locations per Lake Elsinore Standards.
67.The developer shall coordinate with Riverside Transit Authority for location and installation
of bus transit facilities.
68.10 year storm runoff shall be contained within the curb and the 100 year storm runoff shall
be contained within the street right-of-way. When either of these criteria are exceeded,
drainage facilities shall be provided.
69.All drainage facilities in this project shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control
District Standards. Storm Drain easements will be required for facilities constructed on
private property.
70.A drainage study shall be provided. The study shall identify the following: identify storm
water runoff from and upstream of the site; show existing and proposed off-site and onsite
drainage facilities; and include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of the facilities.
The drainage system shall be designed to ensure that runoff from a 10-yr storm of 6 hours
or 24 hours duration under developed condition is equal or less than the runoff under
existing conditions of the same storm frequency. Both 6 hour and 24hour storm duration
shall be analyzed to determine the detention basin capacities necessary to accomplish
the desired results.
71.All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be
collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer. All off-site drainage,
if different from historic flow, shall be conveyed to a public facility.
72.Roof drains shall not be allowed to outlet directly through coring in the street curb. Roofs
should drain to a landscaped area.
73.The site shall be planned and developed to keep surface water from entering buildings
(California Green Building Standards Code 4.106.3).
74.All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of development as
specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) and Lake Elsinore Public Works
Standard Plans.
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 10 of 20
75.The owner shall dedicate, in fee title to the City, right-of-way along Collier Avenue adjacent
to the property frontage for a total right-of-way of 50’ wide from centerline to the project
property line.
76.The developer shall construct street improvements on Collier Avenue per General Plan
Major Arterial street right-of-way requirements. The cross section of roadway
improvements with a parkway, street lights, curb, sidewalk and gutter shall be consistent
with other development on Collier Avenue.
77.A traffic signal at the intersection of Collier and Crane will be required to mitigate increased
traffic trips and degrading intersection level of service. If the traffic signal has not been
constructed or bonded by others at the time of building permit, the project will be required
to construct the four leg traffic signal at the intersection of Collier and Crane.
78.The developer shall implement mitigation measures identified in the Traffic Analysis dated
June 19, 2018, as specified in Section 6, page 23 ofthe Study.
79.Street improvement plans shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and the plans
shall include curb and gutter, sidewalk, ac pavement, street lighting, median, and drainage
improvements.
80.The developer shall provide signing and striping plans for the required improvements of
this project.
81.If existing improvements are to be modified, the existing improvement plans on file shall
be modified accordingly and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building
permit.
Permitting/Construction
82.An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained prior to any work on City and/or Riverside
County Flood Controlright-of-way. The developer shall submit the permit application,
required fees and executed agreements, security and other required documentation prior
to issuance.
83.All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie notes
delineated on 8 ½" x 11" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering Division before final
inspection of public works improvements will be scheduled and approved.
84.The developer shall be responsible for acquiring right-of-ways in which the developer or
the City has no legal title or interest.
85.All streets shall be constructed per Lake Elsinore City Standards and/or applicable specific
plan. Any deviation from City standards shall be approved by the City Engineer.
Acceptance of Improvements
86.The developer shall participate in “fair share” payment of offsite improvements as
described in Section 6, page 24 of the Traffic Analysis dated June 19, 2018, if the traffic
signal has been constructed at the time of project building permit.
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 11 of 20
87.A portion of the required improvements for this development may be covered under the
Traffic Impact Fee (TIF). Request for reimbursement or credits shall be approved by the
City Engineer and based on allowable costs in the fee program and availability of funds.
88.The developer shall submit a written request for acceptance to the City Engineer.
89.As-built plans shall be completed and signed by the City Engineer.
GRADING
Design
90.A grading plan signed and stamped by a California Registered Civil Engineer shall be
submitted for City review and approval for all addition and/or movement of soil (grading)
on the site. The plan shall include separate sheets for erosion control, haul route and
traffic control. The grading submittal shall include all supporting documentation and be
prepared using City standard title block, standard drawings and design manual (available
at www.lake-elsinore.org).
91.All grading plan contours shall extend to minimum of 50 feet beyond property lines to
indicate existing drainage pattern.
92.The grading plan shall show that no structures, landscaping, or equipment are located
near the project entrances that could reduce sight distance.
93.If the grading plan identifies alterations in the existing drainage patterns as they exit the
site, a Hydrology and Hydraulic Report for review and approval by City Engineer shall be
required prior to issuance of grading permits. All grading that modifies the existing flow
patterns and/or topography shall be approved by the City Engineer.
94.A seismic study shall be performed on the site to identify any hidden earthquake faults,
liquefaction and/or subsidence zones present on-site. A certified letter from a registered
geologist or geotechnical engineer shall be submitted confirming the absence of this
hazard.
95.The developer shall obtain all necessary off-site easements and/or permits for off-site
grading and the applicant shall accept drainage from the adjacent property owners.
Permit/Construction
96.Developer shall execute and submit grading and erosion controlagreement, post grading
security and pay permit fees as a condition of grading permit issuance.
97.Prior to grading permit issuance, compliance with IS/MND Mitigation Measures shall be
achieved, with confirmation receive in writing from the Planning Department/Project
Planner. This approval shall identify and clear all proposed grading activity anticipated for
this project.
98.A preconstruction meeting with the City Public Works Inspector (Engineering Division) is
required prior to commencement of ANY gradingactivity.
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 12 of 20
99.Developer shall provide the city with a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) and Waste
Discharge Identification (WDID) letter issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board
for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program
100.Prior to commencement of grading operations, developer is to provide to the City with a
map of all proposed haul routes to be used for movement of export material. All such
routes shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. Haul route shall
be submitted prior to issuance of a grading permit. Hauling in excess of 5,000 cy shall be
approved by City Council. (LEMC 15.72.065)
101.Export sites located within the Lake Elsinore City limits must have an active grading permit.
102.Applicant to provide to the City a video record of the condition of all proposed public City
haul roads. In the event of damage to such roads, applicant shall pay full cost of restoring
public roads to the baseline condition. A bond may be required to ensure payment of
damages to the public right-of-way, subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
103.All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer. Slopes
steeper than 2 to 1 shall be evaluated for stability and proper erosion control and approved
by the City.
104.Approval of the project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post construction
shall be received prior to issuance of any construction permit.
105.Developer shall pay all grading permit applicable processing, permit, security and
development fees including those fees identified in an applicable development agreement,
Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT
106.Provide final soils, geology and seismic report, including recommendations for parameters
for seismic design of buildings, and walls prior to building permit.
107.Approval of a letter of map revision (CLOMR) or letter of map revision based on fill
(CLOMR-F) must be received from FEMA.
108.All required public right-of-way dedications and storm drain easements shall be prepared
by the developer or his agent and shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for review
and approval prior to issuance of building permit.
109.Prior to issuance of certificates of use and occupancy or building permits for individual
tenant improvements or construction permits for a tank or pipeline, uses shall be identified
and, for specified uses (where the proposed improvements will store, generate or handle
hazardous materials in quantities that will require permitting and inspection once
operational), the developer shall propose plans and measures for chemical management
(including, but not limited to, storage, emergency response, employee training, spill
contingencies and disposal) to the satisfaction of the County/City Building Official(s).
110.The Parcel or Final Tract Map shall be recorded.
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 13 of 20
111.All street improvement plans, traffic signal plans and signing and striping plans shall be
completed and approved.
112.The developer shall pay all Capital Improvement TIF and Master Drainage Fees and Plan
Check fees (LEMC 16.34).
PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY
113.The traffic signal at Collier and Crane shall be installed and operational per the Traffic
Analysis (revised) dated June 19,2018.
114.All public improvements shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans or as
condition of this development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
115.The fair share cost of future improvements as a condition of this development shall be
paid.
116.The LOMR or LOMR-F shall be approved by FEMA.
117.All water and sewer improvements shall be completed in accordance with Water District
requirements.
118.Proof of acceptance of maintenance responsibility of slopes, open spaces, landscape
areas, and drainage facilities shall be provided.
119.TUMF fees shall be paid. The TUMF fees shall be the effective rate at the time of payment
in full in accordance with the LEMC.
120.As-built plans for all approved plan sets shall be submitted for review and approval by the
City. The developer/developer/owner is responsible for revising the original mylar plans.
121.In the event of damage to City roads from hauling or other construction related activity,
applicant shall pay full cost of restoring public roads to the baseline condition.
122.All final studies and reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie notes
delineated on 8 ½ x 11” mylar) shall be submitted in .tif format on a CD/DVD. Studies and
reports include, Soils, Seismic, Hydrology, Hydraulics, Grading, SWPPP, WQMP, etc.
123.All plan sets and recorded maps shall be digitized and provided on CD/DVD as follows:
Final Map(s) -GIS Shape files* and .tif of recorded map.
Improvement Plans –GIS Shape files* and .tif of approved as built mylar.
Grading Plans -.tif of approved as built mylar.
o *GIS Shape files must be in projected Coordinate System: NAD 83 State Plane
California Zone VI U.S. Fleet.
124.Developer shall provide FEMA elevation certificates for all buildings (includes trailers and
storage facilities) prior to final approvals. If a LOMR-F has been processed and approved
by FEMA, the letter of determination and certification may be in the form of a letter signed
and sealed by a licensed civil engineer.
125.Final soil report showing compliance with recommendations, compaction reports, grade
certifications, monument certifications (with tie notes delineated on 8 ½ x 11” mylar) shall
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 14 of 20
be submitted in .tif format on CD to the Engineering Division before final inspection will be
scheduled.
126.All required public right-of-way dedications, storm drain easements, dedications and
vacationsand easement agreement(s) not processed on the final map for ingress and
egress through adjacent property(ies)shall be recorded with a recorded copy provided to
the City prior to building permit issuance.
127.Documentation of responsibility for slope maintenance along right-of-ways and open
spaces to be maintained by the HOA or other entity shall be provided in a recordable
format and recorded prior to occupancy/final.
128.All signing and striping and traffic control devices onsite and on Collier Avenueshall be
installed.
129.Prior to grading or building permit close-out and/or the issuance of a certificate of use or
a certificate of occupancy, developer shall:
Demonstrate that all structural BMPs have been constructed, installed and are
functioning in conformance with approved plans and specifications and the WQMP;
Demonstrate that they are prepared to implement all non-structural BMPs included in
the conditions of approval or building/gradingpermit conditions;
Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved project specific
WQMP are available for the future owners/occupants; and
The developer shall provide all education guidelines for Water Quality Management
Practices to the tenants, operators and owners of the businesses of the development,
regarding the environmental awareness on good housekeeping practices that
contribute to protection of storm water quality and meet the goals of the approved
WQMP in the Riverside County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. Contact
the City NPDES Coordinator for handout/guideline information.
130.Chemical management plans shall be approved by the County/City and other appropriate
agencies such as County/City Fire Department, the Health ServicesAgency’s Department
of Environmental Health, and sewering and/or water agencies to ensure implementation
of each agency’s respective requirements. Approval by the appropriate agencies shall be
furnished to the Engineering Division, prior to the issuance of any certificates of use and/or
occupancy.
131.Certificates or permits may be ministerially withheld if features needed to properly manage
chemicals cannot be incorporated into a previously completed building, center, or
complex.
132.The property owner (aka Legally Responsible Party) shall execute and cause to be
recorded a “Covenant and Agreement” in the form provided by the City to inform future
property owners of the requirement to implement the approved final project-specific
WQMP.
133.Developer shall pay all outstanding applicable processing and development fees including
but not all inclusive: TUMF, MSHCP, TIF, Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat and area
drainage prior to occupancy/final approval.
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 15 of 20
STORM WATER MANAGEMENT / POLLUTION PREVENTION / NPDES
Design
134.The project is responsible for complying with the Santa Ana Region NPDES Permits as
warranted based on the nature of development and/or activity. These Permits include:
General Permit –Construction
Deminimus Discharges
MS4
135.A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) (preliminary and final) shall be prepared
using the Santa Ana Region 8 approved template and guidance and submitted for review
and approval to the City. The preliminary WQMP shall be approved prior to Planning
Commission hearing. The Final WQMP shall be approved by the City prior to rough or
precise grading plan approval and issuance of ANY permit for construction.
136.The Final WQMP shall document the following:
Detailed site and project description.
Potential stormwater pollutants.
Post-development drainage characteristics.
Low Impact Development (LID) BMP selection and analysis.
Structural and Non-Structural source control BMPs.
Treatment Control BMPs
Site design and drainage plan (BMP Exhibit).
Documentation of how vector issues are addressed in the BMP design, operation and
maintenance.
GIS Decimal Minute Longitude and Latitude coordinates for all LID and Treatment
Control BMP locations.
HCOC –demonstrate that discharge flow rates, velocities, duration and volume for the
post construction condition from a 2 year and 10 year, 24 hour rainfall event will not
cause adverse impacts on downstream erosion and receiving waters, or measures are
implemented to mitigate significant adverse impacts downstream public facilities and
water bodies. Evaluation documentation shall include pre-and post-development
hydrograph volumes, time of concentration and peak discharge velocities, construction
of sediment budgets, and a sediment transport analysis.
Operations and Maintenance Plan and Agreement as well asdocumentation of
formation of funding district for long term maintenance costs.
137.The 2010 SAR MS4 Permit requires implementation of LID Principles and LID Site Design,
where feasible, to treat the pollutants of concern identified for the project, in the following
manner (from highest to lowest priority): (Section XII.E.2, XII.E3, and XII.E.7).
Preventatives measures (these are mostly non-structural measures, e.g., minimizing
impervious areas, conserving natural areas, minimizing directly connected impervious
areas, etc.)
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 16 of 20
The Project shall in the order presented, infiltrate, harvest and use, evapotranspire
and/or bio-treat the Design Capture Volume (DCV).
The Project shall consider a properly engineered and maintained bio-treatment system
only if infiltration, harvesting and use and evapotranspiration cannot be feasibly
implemented at the project site.
Any portion of the DCV that is not infiltrated, harvested and used, evapo-transpired,
and/or bio-treated shall be treated and discharged in accordance with the
requirements set forth in Section XII.G.
138.Parking lot landscaping areas shall be designed to provide for treatment, retention or
infiltration of runoff.
139.Project hardscape areas shall be designed and constructed to provide for drainage into
adjacent landscape.
140.If CEQA identifies resources requiring Clean Water Act Section 401 Permitting, the
applicant shall obtain certification through the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control
Board and provide a copy to the Engineering Division.
141.All storm drain inlet facilities shall be appropriately marked “Only Rain in the Storm Drain”
using the City authorized marker.
142.The project shall use either volume-based and/or flow-based criteria for sizing BMPs in
accordance with NPDES Permit Provision XII.D.4.
143.The project site shall implement trash full capture methods/devices approved by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board on new stormwater facilities. New and existing
catch basins adjacent to the project shall be fitted with connector pipe screens.
Construction
144.A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) (as required by the NPDES General
Construction Permit) and compliance with the Green Building Code for sediment and
erosion control are required for this project.
145.Prior to grading or building permit for construction or demolition and/or weed abatement
activity projects subject to coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit shall
demonstrate that compliance with the permit has been obtained by providing a copy of the
Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy
of the notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number or
other proof of filing to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A copy of the SWPPP shall be
kept at the project site, updated, and be available for review upon request.
146.Erosion & Sediment Control –ALL PROJECTS -Prior to the issuance of any grading or
building permit for construction or demolition, the applicant shall submit for review and
approval by the City Engineer, an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan as a separate sheet
of the grading plan submittal. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall identify how
all construction materials, wastes, grading or demolition debris, and stockpiles of soil,
aggregates, soil amendments, etc. shall be property covered, stored and secured to
prevent transport into local drainages or waters by wind, rain, tracking, or dispersion. The
plan shall also describe how the project will ensure that all BMPs will be maintained during
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 17 of 20
construction of any future right of ways. A copy of the plan shall be incorporated into the
SWPPP as applicable, kept updated as needed to address changing circumstances of the
project site, be kept at the project site and available for review upon request.
Post-Construction
147.Prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and/or occupancy, the applicant shall
demonstrate compliance with applicable NPDES permits for construction,
industrial/commercial, MS4, etc. to include:
Demonstrate that the project has complied with all non-structural BMPs described in
the project’s WQMP.
Provide signed, notarized certification from the engineer of work that the structural
BMP’s identified in the project’s WQMP are installed in conformance with approved
plansand specifications and operational.
Submit a copy of the fully executed, recorded City approved Operations and
Maintenance (O&M) Plan and Agreement for all structural BMPs.
The Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan and Agreement shall (1) describe the
long-term operation and maintenance requirements for BMPs identified in the BMP
Exhibit; (2) identify the entity that will be responsible for long-term operation and
maintenance of the referenced BMPs; (3) describe the mechanism for funding the
long-term operation and maintenance of the referenced BMPS; and (4) provide for
annual certification of water quality facilities by a registered civil engineer. The City
format shall be used.
Provide documentation of annexation into a CFD for funding of facilities to be
maintained by the City.
Demonstrate that copies of the project’s approved WQMP is onsite.
Agree to pay for a Special Investigation from the City of Lake Elsinore for a date twelve
(12) months after the issuance of a Certificate of Use and/or Occupancy forthe project
to verify compliance with the approved WQMP and O&M Plan. A signed/sealed
certification from the engineer of work dated 12 months after CofO will be considered
in lieu of a Special Investigation by the City.
Provide the City with a digital .pdf copy of the Final WQMP.
148.Chemical Management –Prior to the issuance of building permits for any tank or pipeline,
the uses of said tank or pipeline shall be identified and the applicant shall submit a
Chemical Management Plan in addition to a WQMP withall appropriate measures for
chemical management (including, but not limited to, storage, emergency response,
employee training, spill contingencies and disposal) in a manner meeting the satisfaction
of the Manager, Permit Intake, in consultation with theRiverside County Fire Department
and wastewater agencies, as appropriate, to ensure implementation of each agency’s
respective requirements. A copy of the approved “Chemical Management Plans” shall be
furnished to the Fire Marshall, prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Use and
Occupancy.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE FIRE MARSHAL
GENERAL CONDITIONS
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 18 of 20
149.Riverside County Fire Department Lake Elsinore Office of the Fire Marshal -It is the
responsibility of the recipient of these Fire Department conditions to forward them to all
interested parties. The permit number (as it is noted above)is required on all
correspondence.
Questions should be directed to the Riverside County Fire Department, Lake Elsinore
Office of the Fire Marshal at 130 S. Main St., Lake Elsinore, CA 92530. Phone: (951) 671-
3124 Ext. 225. The following fire department conditions shall be implemented in
accordance with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and the adopted codes at the time of
project building plan submittal, these conditions are in addition to the adopted code
requirements.
150.Fire hydrants and fire flow: prior to building permit issuance, the applicant or developer
shall install a water system capableof providing the required fire flow in accordance with
the California Fire Code and City of Lake Elsinore standards in effect at the time of building
permit application. Fire hydrants shall be spaced in accordance with the California Fire
Code. The required fire flow is estimated to be 2,500 GPM at 20 PSI for 2 hours based
Type II-B construction, the building having a fire sprinkler system, and current standards.
151.Hazardous materials: hazardous materials use, storage, and handling must be in
accordance with the California Fire Code and all applicable regulations.
152.These comments are preliminary; further review will occur upon receiving building plans.
Additional conditions may be necessary at that time.
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
153.Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall consent to the formation
of Community Facilities District or annex into the proposed Community Facilities District
No. 2015-2 (Maintenance Services) to fund the on-going operation and maintenanceof
the public right of way landscaped areas and neighborhood parks to be maintained by the
City and for street lights in the public right of way for which the City will pay for electricity
and a maintenance fee to Southern California Edison, including parkways, open space
and public storm drains constructed within the development and federal NPDES
requirements to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project. Applicant shall,
make a tenthousand dollar ($10,000) non-refundable deposit to cover the cost of the
formation or annexation process, as applicable. The applicant may propose alternative
financing mechanisms to fund the on-going operation and maintenance of the public right
of way landscaped areas and neighborhood parks to be maintained by the City and for
street lights in the public right of way for which the City will pay for electricity and a
maintenance fee to Southern California Edison, including parkways, open space and
public storm drains constructed within the development and federal NPDES requirements
to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project in lieu of creating/annexing into
a district.
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
154.The applicant shall comply with the following mitigation measures, which are set forth in
the Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Project -Mitigated
Negative Declaration(SCH#).
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 19 of 20
Conditions of Approval PC: TBD
PA 2017-74/TPM 37534/CDR 2018-02/CUP 2017-18 CC: TBD
Applicant’s Initials:_____ Page 20 of 20
I hereby state that I acknowledge receipt of the approved Conditions of Approval for the above
named project and do hereby agree to accept and abide by all Conditions of Approval as approved
by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council on_________. I also acknowledge that all Conditions
shall be met as indicated.
Date:
Applicant’s Signature:
Print Name:
Address:
Phone Number:
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 1 of 94
LAKE ELSINORE HONDA
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-18
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37534 (2017-74)
COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2018-02
INITIAL STUDY FOR
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2018-01
Prepared By:
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
Applicant:
SRZ YUMA, LLC
3158 Auto Center Circle, Suite E
Stockton, CA 95212
Environmental Consultant:
Matthew Fagan Consulting Services, Inc.
42011 Avenida Vista Ladera
Temecula, CA 92591
JULY 2018
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 2 of 94
I. INTRODUCTION
A. PURPOSE
This document is an Initial Study for evaluation of environmental impacts resulting from implementation of
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design
Review No. 2018-02. For purposes of this document, this application will be called the “proposed Project”.
B. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
As defined by Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an Initial
Study is prepared primarily to provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for determining
whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or Mitigated Negative Declaration
would be appropriate for providing the necessary environmental documentation and clearance for any proposed
project.
According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15065, an EIR is deemed appropriate for a particular proposal if the
following conditions occur:
• The proposal has the potential to substantially degrade quality of the environment.
• The proposal has the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term
environmental goals.
• The proposal has possible environmental effects which are individually limited but cumulatively
considerable.
• The proposal could cause direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings.
According to Section 21080(c)(1) of CEQA and Section 15070(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, a Negative
Declaration can be adopted if it can be determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the
environment.
According to Section 21080(c)(2) of CEQA and Section 15070(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, a Mitigated
Negative Declaration can be adopted if it is determined that although the Initial Study identifies that the
project may have potentially significant effects on the environment, revisions in the project plans and/or
mitigation measures, which would avoid or mitigate the effects to below the level of significance, have been
made or agreed to by the applicant.
This Initial Study has determined that the proposed Project may result in potentially significant
environmental effects but that said effects can be reduced to below the level of significance through the
implementation of mitigation measures and therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is deemed the
appropriate document to provide the necessary environmental evaluations and clearance.
This Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration are prepared in conformance with the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.); the State
Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA Guidelines”), as amended
(California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000, et. seq.); applicable requirements of the
City of Lake Elsinore; and the regulations, requirements, and procedures of any other responsible public
agency or agency with jurisdiction by law.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 3 of 94
The City of Lake Elsinore City Council is designated the Lead Agency, in accordance with Section 15050 of
the CEQA Guidelines. The Lead Agency is the public agency which has the principal responsibility for
carrying out or approving a project which may have significant effects upon the environment.
C. INTENDED USES OF INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
This Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration are informational documents which are intended to
inform the City of Lake Elsinore decision-makers, other responsible or interested agencies, and the general
public of the potential environmental effects of the proposed Project. The environmental review process has
been established to enable public agencies to evaluate environmental consequences and to examine and
implement methods of eliminating or reducing any potentially adverse impacts. While CEQA requires that
consideration be given to avoiding environmental damage, the Lead Agency and other responsible agencies
must balance adverse environmental effects against other public objectives, including economic and social
goals (CEQA Guidelines Section 15021).
The City of Lake Elsinore City Council, as Lead Agency, has determined that environmental clearance for the
proposed project can be provided with a Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Initial Study and Notice of
Availability and Intent to Adopt prepared for the Mitigated Negative Declaration will be circulated for a period
of 30 days for public and agency review. Comments received on the document will be considered by the Lead
Agency before it acts on the proposed Project.
D. CONTENTS OF INITIAL STUDY
This Initial Study is organized to facilitate a basic understanding of the existing setting and environmental
implications of the proposed Project.
I. INTRODUCTION presents an introduction to the entire report. This section identifies City of Lake
Elsinore contact persons involved in the process, scope of environmental review, environmental procedures,
and incorporation by reference documents.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION describes the proposed Project. A description of discretionary approvals and
permits required for Project implementation is also included.
III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM contains the City’s Environmental Checklist Form. The
checklist form presents results of the environmental evaluation for the proposed Project and those areas that
would have either a potentially significant impact, a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated, a
less than significant impact, or no impact.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS provides the background analysis supporting each response provided
in the environmental checklist form. Each response checked in the checklist form is discussed and supported
with sufficient data and analysis. As appropriate, each response discussion describes and identifies specific
impacts anticipated with project implementation. In this section, mitigation measures are also set forth, as
appropriate, that would reduce potentially significant adverse impacts to levels of less than significance.
V. MANDATORY FINDINGS presents the background analysis supporting each response provided in the
environmental checklist form for the Mandatory Findings of Significance set forth in Section 21083(b) of
CEQA and Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines.
VI. PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED identifies those individuals consulted and
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 4 of 94
involved in the preparation of this Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration.
VII. REFERENCES/SOURCES lists bibliographical materials used in preparation of this document.
E. SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
For evaluation of environmental impacts, each question from the Environmental Checklist Form is stated and
responses are provided according to the analysis undertaken as part of the Initial Study. All responses will take
into account the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite, cumulative as well as Project-level,
indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. Project impacts and effects will be
evaluated and quantified, when appropriate. To each question, there are four possible responses, including:
1. No Impact: A “No Impact” response is adequately supported if the referenced sources show that the
impact simply does not apply to the proposed Project.
2. Less than Significant Impact: Development associated with project implementation will have the
potential to impact the environment. These impacts, however, will be less than the levels of thresholds that
are considered significant and no additional analysis is required.
3. Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: This applies where incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less than Significant Impact”.
The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures and explain how the measures reduce the effect
to a less than significant level.
4. Potentially Significant Impact: Future implementation will have impacts that are considered significant
and additional analysis and possibly an EIR are required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce
these impacts to less than significant levels.
F. TIERED DOCUMENTS, INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE, AND TECHNICAL STUDIES
Information, findings, and conclusions contained in this document are based on the incorporation by reference
of tiered documentation and technical studies that have been prepared for the proposed Project which are
discussed in the following section.
1. Tiered Documents
As permitted in Section 15152(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, information and discussions from other documents
can be included into this document. Tiering is defined as follows:
“Tiering refers to using the analysis of general matters contained in a broader EIR (such as the one prepared for
a general plan or policy statement) with later EIRs and negative declarations on narrower projects;
incorporating by reference the general discussions from the broader EIR; and concentrating the later EIR or
negative declaration solely on the issues specific to the later project.”
For this document, the “Lake Elsinore General Plan Final EIR” (prepared in 2011) and the serves as the
broader document, since it analyzes the entire City area, which includes the proposed project site. However, as
discussed, site-specific impacts, which the broader document (Lake Elsinore General Plan Final EIR) can not
adequately address, may occur for certain issue areas. This document, therefore, evaluates each environmental
issue alone and will rely upon the analysis contained within the Lake Elsinore General Plan Final EIR with
respect to remaining issue areas.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 5 of 94
Tiering also allows this document to comply with Section 15152(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, which
discourages redundant analyses, as follows:
“Agencies are encouraged to tier the environmental analyses which they prepare for separate but related
projects including the general plans, zoning changes, and development projects. This approach can eliminate
repetitive discussion of the same issues and focus the later EIR or negative declaration on the actual issues ripe
for decision at each level of environmental review. Tiering is appropriate when the sequence of analysis is
from an EIR prepared for a general plan, policy or program to an EIR or negative declaration for another plan,
policy, or program of lesser scope, or to a site-specific EIR or negative declaration.”
Further, Section 15152(d) of the CEQA Guidelines states:
“Where an EIR has been prepared and certified for a program, plan, policy, or ordinance consistent with the
requirements of this section, any lead agency for a later project pursuant to or consistent with the program,
plan, policy, or ordinance should limit the EIR or negative declaration on the later project to effects which:
(1) Were not examined as significant effects on the environment in the prior EIR; or
(2) Are susceptible to substantial reduction or avoidance by the choice of specific revisions in the project, by
the imposition of conditions or other means.”
2. Incorporation by Reference
Incorporation by reference is a procedure for reducing the size of EIRs and is most appropriate for including
long, descriptive, or technical materials that provide general background information, but do not contribute
directly to the specific analysis of the project itself. This procedure is particularly useful when an EIR or
Negative Declaration relies on a broadly-drafted EIR for its evaluation of cumulative impacts of related
projects (Las Virgenes Homeowners Federation v. County of Los Angeles [1986, 177 Ca.3d 300]). If an EIR
or Negative Declaration relies on information from a supporting study that is available to the public, the EIR or
Negative Declaration cannot be deemed unsupported by evidence or analysis (San Francisco Ecology Center v.
City and County of San Francisco [1975, 48 Ca.3d 584, 595]). This document incorporates by reference the
document from which it is tiered, the Lake Elsinore General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report,
published in 2011. This document will be referred to as the “General Plan EIR”.
When an EIR or Negative Declaration incorporates a document by reference, the incorporation must comply
with Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines as follows:
• The incorporated document must be available to the public or be a matter of public record (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15150[a]). The General Plan EIR shall be made available, along with this document, at
the City of Lake Elsinore, Community Development Department, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore,
CA 92530, ph. (951) 674-3124.
• This document must be available for inspection by the public at an office of the lead agency (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15150[b]) at the City of Lake Elsinore, Community Development Department, 130
South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530, ph. (951) 674-3124.
• This document must summarize the portion of the document being incorporated by reference or briefly
describe the information that cannot be summarized. Furthermore, this document must describe the
relationship between the incorporated information and the analysis in the General Plan EIR (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15150[c]). As discussed above, the General Plan EIR addresses the entire City of Lake
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 6 of 94
Elsinore and provides background and inventory information and data which apply to the proposed Project
site. Incorporated information and/or data will be cited in the appropriate sections.
• This document must include the State identification number of the incorporated document (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15150[d]). The State Clearinghouse Number for the General Plan EIR is 2005121019.
• The material to be incorporated in this document will include general background information (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15150[f]).
3. Technical Studies
• (Appendix A) Lake Elsinore Honda Project Air Quality Technical Report, prepared by HELIX
Environmental Planning, Inc., April 2018.
• (Appendix B) Lake Elsinore Honda Project General Biological Resources Assessment, prepared by
HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc., April 25, 2018.
• (Appendix C) Lake Elsinore Honda Project Cultural Resources Inventory, prepared by HELIX
Environmental Planning, Inc., April 2018.
• (Appendix D) Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Proposed Honda Auto Dealership, prepared by
Salem Engineering Group, Inc., April 28, 2018.
• (Appendix E) Lake Elsinore Climate Action Plan (CAP) Consistency Assessment for the Lake Elsinore
Honda Project (GHG), prepared by HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc., April 18, 2018.
• (Appendix F) Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of Prospective Zamora Automotive Site Collier
Avenue Lake Elsinore, California 92532, prepared by ATC Group Services LLC, April 26, 2017.
• (Appendix G) Honda Center Preliminary Hydrology Report, prepared by David Evans and Associates
Inc., April 18, 2018.
• (Appendix H) Honda Center Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan, prepared by David Evans
and Associates Inc., April 18, 2018.
• (Appendix I) Lake Elsinore Honda Project Acoustical Analysis Report, prepared by HELIX
Environmental Planning, Inc., April 2018.
• (Appendix J) Traffic Impact Analysis – Honda Dealership – Lake Elsinore, CA, prepared by David Evans
and Associates Inc., June 19, 2018.
• (Appendix K) Riverside County Map My County, June 21, 2018.
• (Appendix L) Project Plans, March 1, 2018.
• (Appendix M) EMWD Will Serve Letter, July 6, 2018.
• (Appendix N1) City AB 52 Notification Letter.
• (Appendix N2) Tribal AB 52 Response Letters.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 7 of 94
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING
The Project site is located on the northern side of Collier Avenue in Lake Elsinore, California and is comprised
of three parcels, totaling approximately 6.97 acres in size, and known as Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs)
377-080-053, 377-080-057, and 377-080-079. The Project site is located within Section 31, Township 5S,
Range 4W as shown on the Lake Elsinore, California 7.5 minute U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) topographic
map. Reference Figure 1, Regional Map; Figure 2, Vicinity Map; Figure 3, APN Map; and Figure 4, USGS
Topographic Map.
The Project site is currently vacant land, with the exception of a three-walled structure and two large billboard
signs; one of the billboards was demolished as part of a City drainage improvement project and is not planned
to be rebuilt. The walled structure consists of three sides constructed of concrete blocks. The purpose of the
structure could not be confirmed; however, it may have been used as a loading ramp associated with a former
railroad spur located nearby. A chain-link fence surrounds the northeastern, southeastern, and southwestern
sides of the property.
The property is bound to the northeast by I-15, to the southeast by 3rd Street, to the southwest by Collier
Avenue, and to the northwest by a currently vacant site that is in the process of constructing an extension of
Crane Street. Surrounding properties are composed of vacant land, existing light industrial, and a retail
commercial center currently under construction. Reference Figure 5, Aerial Photo.
B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Project, Lake Elsinore Honda, will be a new automobile sales and service facility on an
undeveloped parcel at the northeast corner of 3rd Street and Collier Avenue. The building will be 53,425
square feet, and it will be single story. Reference Figure 6, Site Plan.
Two new driveways are proposed on Collier Avenue. The northern driveway will provide vehicular access for
sales customers. The southern driveway will provide access for employee parking and deliveries.
The building architectural vocabulary is comprised of Honda’s iconic architectural standard including a blue
metal entry cylinder, a blue metal “Wave”, off-white colored EIFS and clear glass in aluminum window
framing. Reference Figure 7, Building Elevations.
Vehicle repair occurs within the fully enclosed air-conditioned building. Mechanical and air-conditioning
equipment is roof mounted and screened from view by building parapet walls which match the architectural
vocabulary.
Display and parking lot lighting will be energy efficient LED lighting with full horizontal light spill cut-off.
The dealership will be open 7 days a week as follows
• Monday through Friday: 8:30 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.;
• Saturday: 8:30 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.; and
• Sunday: 8:30 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.
The store will employ 90-110 full time employees. Morning and afternoons are busiest with customers
bringing their vehicles to the site for service appointments.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 8 of 94
The wet and dry utilities and offsite improvements will consist of water lines, sewer lines, dry utilities
(including gas, cable and telephone) and offsite improvements to adjacent streets.
Construction is expected to commence in September 2018 and will last until September 2019. Construction
duration and equipment used are shown in Table 1, Construction Schedule and Equipment.
Table 1
Construction Schedule and Equipment
Construction Phase Length
(Days) Equipment
Site Preparation 10 •3 rubber tired dozers
•4 tractor/loader/backhoes
Grading 40
•1 excavator
•1 grader
•1 rubber tired dozers
•2 scrapers
•3 tractor/loader/backhoes
Underground Utilities
Installation 40 •1 tractor/loader/backhoe
Building Construction 140
•2 cranes
•3 forklifts
•1 generator set
•3 tractor/loader/backhoes
•1 welder
Paving 20 •2 pavers
•2 paving equipment
•2 rollers
Architectural Coating 12 •1 air compressor
Source: AQ Analysis (Appendix A)
The quantity, duration, and the intensity of construction activity influence the amount of construction
emissions and their related pollutant concentrations that occur at any one time. As such, the emission forecasts
provided herein reflect a specific set of conservative assumptions based on the expected construction scenario
wherein a relatively large amount of construction is occurring in a relatively intensive manner. Because of this
conservative assumption, actual emissions could be less than those forecasted. If construction is delayed or
occurs over a longer time period, emissions could be reduced because of (1) a more modern and cleaner-
burning construction equipment fleet mix than incorporated in the CalEEMod, and/or (2) a less intensive
buildout schedule (i.e., fewer daily emissions occurring over a longer time interval). A complete listing of the
assumptions used in the analysis and model output is provided in Appendix A of Air Quality Technical Report.
LAKE ELSINORE HONDA
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-18; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37534 (2017-74); COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2018-02
Figure 1
Regional Map
Source: Google Maps, March 2018
SITE
Page 9 of 94
Figure 2
Vicinity Map
Source: Lake Elsinore Honda Project Plans (Appendix L)
LAKE ELSINORE HONDA
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-18; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37534 (2017-74); COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2018-02 Page 10 of 94
Figure 3
APN Map
Source: Map My County https://gis.countyofriverside.us/Html5Viewer/?viewer=MMC_Public, July 2018
LAKE ELSINORE HONDA
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-18; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37534 (2017-74); COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2018-02
Page 11 of 94
Figure 4
USGS Topographic Map
Source: Lake Elsinore Honda Cultural Resources Report (Appendix C)
LAKE ELSINORE HONDA
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-18; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37534 (2017-74); COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2018-02
Page 12 of 94
Figure 5
Aerial Photo
Source: Map My County https://gis.countyofriverside.us/Html5Viewer/?viewer=MMC_Public, JuLy 2018
Page 13 of 94 LAKE ELSINORE HONDA
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-18; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37534 (2017-74); COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2018-02
Figure 6
Site Plan
Source: Lake Elsinore Honda Project Plans (Appendix L)
LAKE ELSINORE HONDA
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-18; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37534 (2017-74); COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2018-02
Page 14 of 94
Figure 7
Building Elevations
Source: Lake Elsinore Honda Project Plans (Appendix L)
LAKE ELSINORE HONDA
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-18; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37534 (2017-74); COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2018-02
Page 15 of 94
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 16 of 94
This page left intentionally blank for pagination purposes.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 17 of 94
III.ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A.BACKGROUND
1.Project Title: Lake Elsinore Honda (Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No.
37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02).
2.Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Lake Elsinore, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA
92530
3.Contact Person and Phone Number: Justin Kirk, Principal Planner, 951-674-3124, ext. 284.
4.Project Location: Westerly of Interstate 15, northeasterly of Collier Avenue, southeasterly of Crane
Street, northwesterly of 3rd Street, City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside, State of California.
5.Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:
SRZ Yuma, LLC, 318 Auto Center Circle, Suite E, Stockton, CA 95212
6.General Plan Designation: General Commercial. Reference Figure 8, General Plan Land Use Map.
7.Zoning: C2 (General Commercial). Reference Figure 9, Zoning Map.
8.Description of Project: The proposed Project, Lake Elsinore Honda, will be a new automobile sales
and service facility on an undeveloped parcel. The building will be 53,425 square feet, and it will be single
story.
9.Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
Table 3, Surrounding Land Uses, below, lists the General Plan Land Use Designations, Zoning
Classifications, and existing land uses that are located on, and immediately adjacent to, the proposed Project
site.
Table 3
Surrounding Land Uses
Direction General Plan Land Use
Designation
Zoning Classification Existing Land Use
Project Site General Commercial C2 (General Commercial) Vacant
North I-15, General Commercial I-15, C2 (General Commercial)I-15, restaurant, park and
ride
South Business Professional CM (Commercial
Manufacturing)
Industrial uses
East I-15, General Commercial I-15, C2 (General Commercial)I-15, vacant
West General Commercial,
Business Professional
C2 (General Commercial), CM
(Commercial Manufacturing)
Vacant, industrial uses
Sources: City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Map, Zoning Map, and Google Maps.
10.Other Public Agencies Whose Approval may be Required:
•South Coast Air Quality Management District
•Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD)
•Riverside County Department of Environmental Health
•Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 18 of 94
This page left intentionally blank for pagination purposes.
Figure 8
General Plan Land Use Map
Source: http://www.lake-elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=10907, July 2018
LAKE ELSINORE HONDA
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-18; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37534 (2017-74); COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2018-02 Page 19 of 94
Source: http://www.lake-elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=15059, July 2018
Figure 9
Zoning Map
LAKE ELSINORE HONDA
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-18; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37534 (2017-74); COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2018-02 Page 20 of 94
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 21 of 94
B.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 Agricultural and Forestry
Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology / Water
Quality
Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise
Population / Housing Public Services Recreation
Transportation / Traffic Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities / Service
Systems
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 22 of 94
C. DETERMINATION
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and
a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or
agreed to by the Project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially
significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that
remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Justin Kirk, Principal Planner
7-17-18
Date
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 23 of 94
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I. 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?
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural
Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as
an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether
impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may
refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the
state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment project; and 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 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 uses?
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?
III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, 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
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 24 of 94
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
IV. 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 Game 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 Game or U.S. 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?
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the Project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
§15064.5 of the California Code of Regulations?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5 of the California Code of
Regulations?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 25 of 94
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
d) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
VI. 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 (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?
VII. 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?
VIII. 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
materials or acutely hazardous materials,
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 26 of 94
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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 area adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
IX. 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 could be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater
table (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?
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 27 of 94
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
X. 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?
XI. 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?
XII. 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 other
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
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 28 of 94
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
XIII. 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?
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection?
b) Police protection?
c) Schools?
d) Parks?
e) Other public services/facilities?
XV. RECREATION. Would the Project:
a) 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) Include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities
which might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
XVI. 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?
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 29 of 94
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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 or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in 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?
XVII. 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)?
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 for the purpose of this paragraph, the lead
agency shall consider the significance to a
California Native tribe?
XVIII. 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
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 30 of 94
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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 system 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?
XIX. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Does the Project:
a) 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) 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) Have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 31 of 94
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
This section provides an evaluation of the impact categories and questions contained in the Environmental
Checklist. A complete list of the reference sources applicable to the following source abbreviations is
contained in Section VII, References, of this document.
I. AESTHETICS.
a) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (Less than Significant
Impact)
The most notable aesthetic resource in the City of Lake Elsinore (City) is Lake Elsinore itself, a 3,000-acre
natural lake. The City’s aesthetic setting is characterized by urbanized development of various densities
occurring within varied topographical features and interspersed with undeveloped natural areas. Scenic
resources within and surrounding the City include the lake, portions of the Cleveland National Forest, rugged
hillside land, distant mountains and ridgelines, rocky outcroppings, streams, vacant land with native vegetation,
parkland, and buildings of historical and cultural significance such as the cultural center, bathhouse, and
military academy.
The Project site is currently vacant, with the exception of a three-walled structure and two large billboard signs
(one of the billboards was demolished as part of a City drainage improvement project and is not planned to be
rebuilt) and is bounded to the northeast by I-15, to the southeast by 3rd Street, to the southwest by Collier
Avenue, and to the northwest by a currently vacant site that is in the process of constructing an extension of
Crane Street. Surrounding properties are composed of vacant land, existing light industrial, and a retail
commercial center currently under construction.
The proposed Project is located approximatley1.1 miles (at its closest point) from Lake Elsinore (water body)
and does not propose any building heights in excess of those that are allowed by the City’s Zoning Code for the
C2 Zone (45 feet). The building architectural vocabulary is comprised of Honda’s iconic architectural standard
including a blue metal entry cylinder, a blue metal “Wave”, off-white colored EIFS and clear glass in
aluminum window framing. Reference Figure 7, Building Elevations. The building will be a maximum of
30’4” feet in height (tower element). Views of the scenic resources within and surrounding the City as describe
above, are the prominent scenic vistas in the area. However, the Project will not impede any of these views.
Thus, the proposed Project will not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Therefore, impacts are
less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR; Zoning Code; Google Maps; Project Description)
b) Would the Project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (Less than Significant Impact)
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) currently identifies both I-15 as eligible for listing as state
scenic highways, but they are not officially designated as such. The proposed Project is adjacent to I-15. The
Project site is currently vacant land, with the exception of a three-walled structure and two large billboard
signs; one of the billboards was demolished as part of a City drainage improvement project and is not planned
to be rebuilt. The Project-specific Cultural Resources Inventory indicates that there are no historic buildings
on the Project site. According to the Cultural Resources Inventory: “A structure is shown on topographic
maps beginning in 1953, but its date of construction is not known. The field survey identified a three-walled
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 32 of 94
structure with four wooden posts atop the central wall in the general location of the structure observed on the
topographic maps. The structure appears to be an industrial retaining wall of some sort, with soil pushed into
the open side of the structure that faces a southerly direction.” A chain-link fence surrounds the northeastern,
southeastern, and southwestern sides of the property.
The City’s Municipal Code (LEMC) includes a City Tree Preservation Ordinance (Ord. 1256) that protects the
City’s streetscape and trees. There are no trees on the Project site. The City of Lake Elsinore has also
determined that certain species of palm trees in the family Palmaceae are locally significant resources through
the City Significant Palm Tree Ordinance (Ord. 1160). No palms occur on the Project site.
There are no rock outcroppings on the Project site.
Thus, through compliance with local ordinances and the City’s design review process, any potential impacts to
scenic resources within a state scenic highway will be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Biological Resources Assessment (Appendix B); Cultural Resources Inventory (Appendix
C); General Plan EIR; LEMC)
c) Would the Project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings? (Less than Significant Impact)
The Project site is currently vacant, with the exception of a three-walled structure and two large billboard signs
(one of the billboards was demolished as part of a City drainage improvement project and is not planned to be
rebuilt) and is bounded to the northeast by I-15, to the southeast by 3rd Street, to the southwest by Collier
Avenue, and to the northwest by a currently vacant site that is in the process of constructing an extension of
Crane Street. Surrounding properties are composed of vacant land, existing light industrial, and a retail
commercial center currently under construction.
The building architectural vocabulary is comprised of Honda’s iconic architectural standard including a blue
metal entry cylinder, a blue metal “Wave”, off-white colored EIFS and clear glass in aluminum window
framing. Reference Figure 7, Building Elevations. The building will be a maximum of 30’4” feet in height
(tower element). Buildings in the area have similar height and massing. Project site design, building
elevations, and landscaping have been reviewed as part of the Project’s entitlement process and have been
determined to be consistent with the C2 zoning and compatible with surrounding and proposed uses. Thus, the
proposed Project will not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Cultural Resources Inventory (Appendix C); Project Description; Google Maps)
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area? (Less than Significant Impact)
According to the City’s General Plan, light and glare impacts to the Mount Palomar Observatory are of concern
to the City. Areas of light pollution impacts have been identified through a “ring analysis,” where primary
impacts to the Observatory are within a 30-mile radius, and secondary impacts are up to 45 miles. According
to the General Plan Figure 4.12, the Project site is within the 45-mile secondary impacts radius.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 33 of 94
The proposed Project would introduce light features to the vacant Project site. Accordingly, the new building
and associated components would include lighting features typical of auto dealership developments, such as
display lighting, security lighting and indoor store lighting. While the Project would introduce new sources of
light, all lighting fixtures would comply with LEMC Section 17.112.040 Lighting (for Nonresidential
Development). Section 17.112.040 requires all outdoor lighting fixtures in excess of 60 watts to be oriented
and shielded to prevent direct illumination above the horizontal plane passing through the luminaire and
prevent any glare or illumination on adjacent properties or streets. Further, this section of the LEMC
encourages the use of low pressure sodium vapor lighting due to the City’s proximity to the Mount Palomar
Observatory. The proposed Project will also introduce new sources of daytime glare due to the new building
surfaces and vehicles traveling to and from the site. However, the glare created by the Project’s proposed
development will be consistent with the levels of glare that emitted by the surrounding development. Thus, the
proposed Project will not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: LEMC; General Plan)
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES.
a) Would the Project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? (No Impact)
Agricultural uses constitute approximately 0.8 percent of the City’s total acreage and are designated by the
California Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) as Farmland of Local Importance (554 acres
within the City), Grazing Land (827 acres within the City), and Unique Farmland (25 acres within the City).
Remaining land is considered Urban/Built Up Land or Other Land, reflecting its developed uses or other
characteristics making it unsuitable for agriculture. None of the farmland designations applied to land within the
City or SOI is considered Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance by the State of
California.
According to the Riverside County Map My County, the Project site consists of Farmland of Local Importance.
Thus, the proposed Project will not convert any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR; Riverside County Map My County (Appendix K))
b) Would the Project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
(No Impact)
The proposed Project is not located within or adjacent to a Williamson Act contract as there are no Williamson Act
agricultural preserves located within the City. Additionally, the Project site is zoned as General Commercial
(C2) and surrounded by Commercial Manufacturing (CM) and other C2 zoning designations. Thus, the
proposed Project will not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract.
Therefore, no impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 34 of 94
(Sources: General Plan EIR; Zoning Map (Figure 9))
c) Would the Project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined by
Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))? (No Impact)
Public Resources Code Section 12220(g) identifies forest land as land that can support 10-percent native tree
cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or
more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and
other public benefits. The Project site and surrounding properties are not currently being defined, managed, or
used as forest land as identified in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g). No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Public Resources Code Section 12220(g))
d) Would the Project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest uses?
(No Impact)
As discussed in Section II.c, above, there is no forest land on the Project site. Therefore, there will be no loss
of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use as a result of the Project. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Public Resources Code Section 12220(g))
e) Would the Project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? (No Impact)
The Project site is currently vacant land, with the exception of a three-walled structure and two large billboard
signs; one of the billboards was demolished as part of a City drainage improvement project and is not planned
to be rebuilt. The walled structure consists of three sides constructed of concrete blocks. The purpose of the
structure could not be confirmed; however, it may have been used as a loading ramp associated with a former
railroad spur located nearby. A chain-link fence surrounds the northeastern, southeastern, and southwestern
sides of the property.
The property is bound to the northeast by I-15, to the southeast by 3rd Street, to the southwest by Collier
Avenue, and to the northwest by a currently vacant site that is in the process of constructing an extension of
Crane Street. Surrounding properties are composed of vacant land, existing light industrial, and a retail
commercial center currently under construction.
There are no agricultural uses adjacent to the Project site and there are no agriculturally designated properties
in proximity of the Project site.
Based on this information, the Project will not involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Project Description; Google Maps; Zoning Map (Figure 9))
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 35 of 94
III. AIR QUALITY
a) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (No
Impact)
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the regional planning agency for Los
Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial Counties, and addresses regional issues
relating to transportation, economy, community development, and environment. With regard to air quality
planning, SCAG has prepared the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
(RTP/SCS), a long-range transportation plan that uses growth forecasts to project trends over a 20-year period
to identify regional transportation strategies to address mobility needs. These growth forecasts form the basis
for the land use and transportation control portions of the South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). These documents are utilized in the preparation of the
air quality forecasts and consistency analysis included in the AQMP. Both the RTP/SCS and AQMP are
based, in part, on projections originating with County and City General Plans.
The two principal criteria for determining conformance to the AQMP are:
1. Whether the project would result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations;
cause or contribute to new violations; or delay timely attainment of air quality standards; and
2. Whether the project would exceed the assumptions in the AQMP.
With respect to the first criterion, the analyses in Item III.b, below, demonstrates that the Project would not
generate short-term or long-term emissions that could potentially cause an increase in the frequency or severity
of existing air quality violations; cause or contribute to new violations; or delay timely attainment of air quality
standards.
With respect to the second criterion, the proposed Project is developing an automotive dealership and is
consistent with the City’s General Plan land use designation, General Commercial. The General Commercial
land use designation is intended to provide for a wide range of retail and service activities including
department stores, restaurants, hotels, theaters, offices, and specialized services. Therefore, pursuant to
SCAQMD guidelines, the proposed Project is considered consistent with the region’s AQMP. As such,
proposed Project-related emissions are accounted for in the AQMP, which is crafted to bring the air quality
basin into attainment for all criteria pollutants. Accordingly, the proposed project would be consistent with the
projections in the AQMP. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Air Quality Technical Report (Appendix A))
b) Would the Project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation? (Less than Significant Impact)
Air pollutant emissions associated with the proposed Project would occur over the short term from construction
activities (e.g., fugitive dust from site preparation and grading, and emissions from equipment exhaust). Long-
term regional emissions would be associated with Project-related vehicular trips and would be due to energy
consumption (e.g., electricity usage) by the Project.
Construction Emissions
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 36 of 94
The construction analysis included modeling of the projected construction equipment that would be used
during each construction activity and quantities of earth and debris to be moved. The model calculates
emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), respirable particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10),
fine particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and the ozone
precursors reactive organic gasses (ROG) and nitrogen oxides (NO x ).
To account for the requirements of SCAQMD Rule 403, fugitive dust control measures including the use of an
on-site water truck to wet down active grading areas and roads at least twice daily are incorporated into the
Project design. Use of Super-Compliant architectural coatings, as defined by the SCAQMD, are also being
incorporated into the Project design. These are not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
The results of the calculations for Project construction are shown in Table III-1, Maximum Daily
Construction Emissions, below. Please refer to the Project Description for the equipment mix and duration of
phases. The data are presented as the maximum anticipated daily emissions for comparison with the
SCAQMD thresholds.
Table III-1
Maximum Daily Construction Emissions
Source: Air Quality Technical Report (Appendix A)
As shown in Table III-1, above, maximum daily ROG emissions occur during the coating phase; maximum
daily particulate matter (PM 2.5 and PM 10 ) emissions occur during site preparation; and all other maximum
daily emissions occur during the grading phase. Emissions of all criteria pollutants related to Project
construction would be below the SCAQMD significance thresholds. Therefore, direct impacts from criteria
pollutants generated during construction would be less than significant.
Operation Emissions
Table III-2, Maximum Daily Operational Emissions, below, presents the summary of operational emissions
for the Project. Operational sources of emissions include area, on-site energy use, and transportation. The data
are presented as the maximum anticipated daily emissions for comparison with the SCAQMD thresholds.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 37 of 94
Table III-2
Maximum Daily Operational Emissions
Source: Air Quality Technical Report (Appendix A)
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.
As shown in Table III-2, above, Project emissions of all criteria pollutants during operation would be below
the daily thresholds. Therefore, operation of the Project would not be considered a significant impact on air
quality. Impacts would be less than significant.
Thus, the proposed Project will not result in construction or operational emissions that exceed SCAQMD
thresholds for criteria pollutants, impacts related to the violation an air quality standard or substantial
contribution to an existing or projected air quality violation. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Air Quality Technical Report (Appendix A))
c) Would the Project 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)? (Less than Significant Impact)
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3), the SCAQMD’s approach for assessing cumulative
impacts is based on the AQMP forecasts of attainment of ambient air quality standards in accordance with the
requirements of the federal and State Clean Air Acts. If a project is not consistent with the AQMP, which is
intended to bring the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) into attainment for all criteria pollutants, that project can
be considered cumulatively considerable. Additionally, if the mass regional emissions calculated for a project
exceed the applicable SCAQMD daily significance thresholds that are designed to assist the region in attaining
the applicable state and national ambient air quality standards, that project can be considered cumulatively
considerable.
As demonstrated in Item III.a, above, the Project is consistent with the AQMP. Furthermore, as detailed in
Item III.b, above, operational emissions would fall below the SCAQMD regional significance thresholds.
Therefore, operational emissions would not be cumulatively considerable.
For two or more projects within close proximity, that is, defined as 1,640 feet (500 meters) or less from the
same sensitive receptor, a local cumulative analysis must be performed. The on-site emissions from the related
project must be added to the background concentration, which is then summed with the proposed Project
emissions for comparison to the SCAQMD LSTs or State and federal AAQS. If the related projects combine
with the proposed project to result in an exceedance of the ambient standards, the project is considered
cumulatively significant. A lot currently under the construction of a commercial use is located along the
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 38 of 94
Project’s northwestern boundary; however, this project would be completed before construction begins on the
proposed project. As detailed in Item III.b, above, construction emissions would fall below the SCAQMD
regional significance thresholds and would not be cumulatively considerable. Any impacts are considered less
than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Air Quality Technical Report (Appendix A))
d) Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Less than
Significant Impact)
Construction Emissions
Sensitive receptors include residences, schools, hospitals, and similar uses that are sensitive to adverse air
quality. The localized effects from the on-site portion of daily construction emissions were evaluated at
sensitive receptor locations potentially impacted by the project according to the SCAQMD’s LST method.
Consistent with the localized significance threshold (LST) guidelines, when quantifying mass emissions for
localized analysis, only emissions that occur on-site are considered. Emissions related to off-site delivery/haul
truck activity and construction worker trips are not considered in the evaluation of construction-related
localized impacts, as these do not contribute to emissions generated on a project site. The LSTs being applied
to the Project are based on SRA 25, receptors located within 500 meters, and a disturbed area not to exceed 2
acres. As shown in Table III-3, Maximum Localized Daily Construction Emissions, below, localized
emissions for all criteria pollutants would remain below their respective SCAQMD LSTs. Impacts are
considered less than significant.
Table III-3
Maximum Localized Daily Construction Emissions
Source: Air Quality Technical Report (Appendix A)
Toxic Air Contaminants
The greatest potential for Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC) emissions during construction would be related to
diesel particulate matter (DPM) associated with heavy equipment operations during earth-moving activities.
The SCAQMD does not consider diesel-related cancer risks from construction equipment to be an issue due to
the short-term nature of construction activities. Construction activities associated with the proposed project
would be sporadic, transitory, and short term in nature; lasting approximately one year. The assessment of
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 39 of 94
cancer risk is typically based on a 30-year exposure period. Because exposure to diesel exhaust would be well
below the 30-year exposure period, construction of the proposed Project is not anticipated to result in an
elevated cancer risk to exposed persons. As such, Project-related TAC emission impacts during construction
would not be significant.
Operational Activities
CO Hotspots
A CO hotspot is an area of localized CO pollution that is caused by severe vehicle congestion on major
roadways, typically near intersections. If a project increases average delay at signalized intersections operating
at Level of Service (LOS) E or F or causes an intersection that would operate at LOS D or better without the
project to operate at LOS E or F with the project, a quantitative screening is required.
The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) evaluated AM, PM and Saturday signal delay and LOS for six intersections;
three intersections along Collier Avenue, two intersections along Central Avenue, and the intersection of
Collier Avenue and Central Avenue. All intersections would continue to operate at LOS D or better with the
implementation of the Project (including planned, committed and funded transportation improvements).
Therefore, the LOS of the evaluated intersections would not decrease as a result of the Project, and a
quantitative screening is not required. There would be no potential for a CO hotspot, and sensitive receptors
would not be exposed to project-generated local CO emissions. Any impacts would be less than significant.
Toxic Air Contaminants
Construction activities would result in short-term project-generated emissions of diesel PM from the exhaust of
off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) identified DPM as a
TAC in 1998. The dose to which receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health risk.
Dose is a function of the concentration of a substance or substances in the environment and the duration of
exposure to the substance. Thus, the risks estimated for a maximally exposed individual (MEI) are higher if a
fixed exposure occurs over a longer time period. According to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard
Assessment, health risk assessments (HRAs), which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to TAC
emissions, should be based on a 30-year exposure period; however, such assessments should be limited to the
period/duration of activities associated with the project. There would be relatively few pieces of off-road,
heavy-duty diesel equipment used during construction, and the construction period would be relatively short,
especially when compared to 30 years. Combined with the highly dispersive properties of DPM, construction-
related emissions would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial emissions of TACs. Impacts from
construction emissions would be less than significant.
Based on the SCAQMD’s “Health Risk Assessment Guidance for Analyzing Cancer Risks from Mobile
Source Diesel Idling Emissions for CEQA Air Quality Analysis,” projects that should be analyzed for diesel
particulate emissions include truck stops, distribution centers, and transit centers, which could be sources of
diesel particulate matter from heavy-duty diesel trucks.
Based on CARB siting recommendations within the Air Quality and Land Use Handbook, a detailed health
risk assessment should be conducted for proposed sensitive receptors within 1,000 feet of a warehouse
distribution center, within 300 feet of a large gas station (defined as a facility with a throughput of 3.6 million
gallons per year or greater), 50 feet of a typical gas dispensing facilities or within 300 feet of a dry cleaning
facility that uses perchloroethylene (PCE), among other siting recommendations.
The Project would not develop land uses associated with sensitive air pollutant receptors and would not include
uses associated with the requirement for a detailed health risk assessment. Therefore, impacts associated with
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 40 of 94
TACs would be less than significant
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Air Quality Technical Report (Appendix A); TIA (Appendix J))
e) Would the Project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Less than
Significant Impact)
The State of California Health and Safety Code Sections 41700 and 41705, prohibit emissions from any source
whatsoever in such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or
annoyance to the public health or damage to property. The nearest sensitive receptor to the Project site is a
high school located approximately 0.35 miles south of the Project site. The Project could produce odors during
proposed construction activities resulting from construction equipment exhaust, application of asphalt, and/or
the application of architectural coatings; however, standard construction practices would minimize the odor
emissions and their associated impacts. The increase of construction odors would be minimal, as vehicle
exhaust is already prevalent in the area due to its proximity to I-15. Furthermore, any odors emitted during
construction would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature, and would cease upon the completion
of the respective phase of construction.
The CARB’s Air Quality and Land Use Handbook includes a list of the most common sources of odor
complaints received by local air districts. Typical sources of odor complaints include facilities such as sewage
treatment plants, landfills, recycling facilities, petroleum refineries, and livestock operations.
The proposed Project would include an automotive dealership and associated facilities, which would not be
anticipated to generate substantial odors. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Air Quality Technical Report (Appendix A))
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service? (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated)
The identification of Riparian/Riverine Areas is based on the potential for onsite habitat to support or
contribute to downstream habitat that supports Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas, as identified
in the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Section 6.1.2. Twenty-three plant species are
identified in the MSHCP as potentially occurring in Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool habitats. None of the
23 species occur on the property. The plant species associated with Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool areas
were confirmed to be absent from the Project site. A number of these species occur in habitats that do not
occur on the property (e.g., vernal pools) or have distributions well outside of the Project site. None of the 23
MSHCP Riparian/Riverine and Vernal pool plant species were observed on site and none are expected to occur
within the Project site. The Project will pay MSHCP Mitigation Fees. These are included as mitigation
measure MM BIO 1. With incorporation of mitigation measure MM BIO 1, any impact will be considered
less than significant.
The Least Bell’s Vireo (LBV), southwestern willow flycatcher (WIFL), and western yellow-billed cuckoo
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 41 of 94
(YBCU) are found in riparian vegetation such as: southern willow scrub, cottonwood forest, mule fat scrub,
sycamore alluvial woodland, and arroyo willow riparian forest that typically feature dense cover. The Project
site does not include any of these vegetation types.
No jurisdictional wetlands or waters occur on site; therefore, no impacts would occur.
The Project is not within a survey area for Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Areas (NEPSSA) species.
No surveys are required. Nevertheless, no suitable habitat for Narrow Endemic Plant Species occurs on the
site and no impacts would occur as a result of the Project.
If the Project site is located within the Mammal Species Survey Area (MSSA) for the MSHCP, focused
surveys for the three sensitive MSHCP small mammal species are required on project sites that include suitable
habitat with potential to support the species. The Project site does not occur in the MSHCP MSSA and the site
does not provide suitable habitat for sensitive MSHCP mammal species. Therefore, no impacts would occur to
sensitive small mammals.
The MSHCP requires a habitat assessment and survey if burrowing habitat occurs on site. The Project site was
determined to have low potential for Burrowing Owl (BUOW) due to the lack of perennial vegetation cover,
the heavily urbanized setting of the site (surrounded by development), restricted site size, disturbed character,
and high amount of ground squirrel activity. Additionally, the nearest California Natural Diversity Database
(CNDDB) record of BUOW is approximately 5 miles to the south west near the Skylark Airport. Although the
habitat on site is of low quality and presence of BUOW inhabiting the site is low, focused protocol BUOW
surveys should be conducted in accordance with the MSHCP. Pre-construction take avoidance surveys shall be
proposed in accordance with MSHCP requirements and is included as mitigation measure MM BIO 2.
Impacts will be reduced to a less than significant level with the incorporation of mitigation.
Development of the proposed Project could disturb or destroy active migratory bird nests including eggs and
young. Disturbance to or destruction of migratory bird eggs, young, or adults is in violation of the Migratory
Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and is, therefore, considered to be a potentially significant impact. Mitigation
measure MM BIO 3 shall be implementation. With incorporation of mitigation measure MM BIO 3, any
impact will be considered less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
MM BIO 1: MSHCP Fees. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant/developer shall pay the
Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) development mitigation fee
for commercial development in effect at the time the permits are issued.
MM BIO 2: Focused Survey, Pre-Construction Survey, and Avoidance. Prior to receiving a final grading
permit, the Project applicant shall conduct a focused survey for Burrowing Owl (BUOW) in accordance with
the MSHCP provisions. Additionally, within 30 days prior to initiating ground-disturbance activities, the
Project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to complete a pre-construction take avoidance survey in
accordance with the MSHCP. If the take avoidance survey is negative and BUOWs are confirmed to be
absent, then ground-disturbing activities shall be allowed to commence, and no further mitigation would be
required.
If the surveys are positive and BUOWs are confirmed to be present on site, the Project applicant shall consult
with the California Department of Wildlife (CDFW) and prepare and implement a Project-specific BUOW
mitigation plan. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the CDFW. To avoid take, any impacted
individuals shall be relocated outside of the impact area by a qualified biologist using passive or active
methodologies approved by CDFW. The project applicant shall further mitigate BUOW-occupied habitat in
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 42 of 94
accordance with the MSHCP.
MM BIO 3: Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Survey and Avoidance. Vegetation clearing should be conducted
outside the nesting season, which is generally defined as February 15 to August 31. If vegetation clearing must
take place during the nesting season, a qualified biologist shall perform a pre-construction survey for nesting
birds no more than seven days prior to vegetation impacts.
If active bird nests are confirmed to be present during the pre-construction survey, temporary avoidance of the
nests shall be required until a qualified biologist has verified that the young have fledged, or the nest has
otherwise become inactive.
(Sources: General Biological Resources Assessment (Appendix B))
b) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (No Impact)
The identification of Riparian/Riverine Areas is based on the potential for onsite habitat to support or
contribute to downstream habitat that supports Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas, as identified
in MSHCP Section 6.1.2. Twenty-three plant species are identified in the MSHCP as potentially occurring in
Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool habitats. None of the 23 species occur on the property. The plant species
associated with Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool areas were confirmed to be absent from the Project site. A
number of these species occur in habitats that do not occur on the property (e.g., vernal pools) or have
distributions well outside of the Project site. None of the 23 MSHCP Riparian/Riverine and Vernal pool plant
species were observed on site and none are expected to occur within the Project site.
The LBV, WIFL, and YBCU are found in riparian vegetation such as: southern willow scrub, cottonwood
forest, mule fat scrub, sycamore alluvial woodland, and arroyo willow riparian forest that typically feature
dense cover. The Project site does not include any of these vegetation types.
Therefore, the Project not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Biological Resources Assessment (Appendix B))
c) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (No Impact)
No jurisdictional wetlands or waters occur on site; therefore, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Biological Resources Assessment (Appendix B))
d) Would the Project 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
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 43 of 94
the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (No Impact)
The entirety of the Project site was mapped as disturbed land. According to the MSHCP disturbed lands are
grouped together with developed lands and are described as areas that have been disced, cleared, or otherwise
altered. Under the MSHCP, developed lands may include roadways, existing buildings, and structures;
whereas, disturbed lands typically include ornamental plantings for landscaping, escaped exotics, or ruderal
vegetation dominated by non-native, weedy species such as mustard (Brassica sp.), fennel (Foeniculum
vulgare), tocalote (Centaurea melitensis), and Russian thistle (Salsola tragus). Due to the lack of roadways,
lack of existing buildings, lack of impervious surfaces, and the predominance of weedy exotic plant species,
the site was mapped as disturbed land. The property is bound to the northeast by I-15, to the southeast by 3rd
Street, to the southwest by Collier Avenue, and to the northwest by a currently vacant site that is in the process
of constructing an extension of Crane Street. Surrounding properties are composed of vacant land, existing
light industrial, and a retail commercial center currently under construction.
The Project area setting, which once consisted of agricultural and vacant land, has been significantly
compromised by increased development. Due to this prior development in the local vicinity of the proposed
Project, no wildlife movement or crossing occurs on the Project site, and the Project area does not provide
topographic or vegetative features that function as a wildlife movement corridor, habitat linkage or nursery site.
Thus, the proposed Project does not substantially interfere 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. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Biological Resources Assessment (Appendix B))
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance? (No Impact)
The City’s Municipal Code includes a City Tree Preservation Ordinance (Ord. 1256) that protects the City’s
streetscape and trees. There are no trees on the Project site. The City of Lake Elsinore has also determined that
certain species of palm trees in the family Palmaceae are locally significant resources through the City
Significant Palm Tree Ordinance (Ord. 1160). No palms occur on the Project site. Therefore, the proposed
Project does not conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. No impacts will
occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Biological Resources Assessment (Appendix B); LEMC)
f) Would the Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation
plan? (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated)
The Project site is located within the Western Riverside County MSHCP Planning Area. The MSHCP is a
comprehensive multi-jurisdictional effort that includes western Riverside County and multiple cities, including
the study area. Rather than address sensitive species on an individual basis, the MSHCP focuses on the
conservation of 146 species, proposing a reserve system of approximately 500,000 acres and a mechanism to
fund and implement the reserve system. Most importantly, the MSHCP allows participating entities to issue take
permits for listed species so that individual applicants need not seek their own permits from the Unites States Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or CDFW. The MSHCP was adopted on June 17, 2003 by the Riverside
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 44 of 94
County Board of Supervisors. The Incidental Take Permit was issued by both the USFWS and CDFW on June 22,
2004.
The MSHCP consists of a Criteria Area that assists in facilitating the process by which individual properties are
evaluated for inclusion and subsequent conservation. In addition to Criteria Area requirements, the MSHCP requires
consistency with Sections 6.1.2 (Protection of Species within Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools), 6.1.3
(Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species), 6.1.4 (Urban Wildlands Interface), 6.3.2 (Additional Survey
Needs and Procedures), and Section 6.4 (Fuels Management). The MSHCP serves as a comprehensive, multi-
jurisdictional Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), pursuant to Section (a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act
(ESA), as well as the Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) under the State NCCP Act of 2001.
The MSHCP establishes “Criteria Area” boundaries in order to facilitate the process by which properties are
evaluated for inclusion in the MSHCP Conservation. The Criteria Area is an area significantly larger than what may
be needed for inclusion in the MSHCP Conservation Area, within which property will be evaluated using MSHCP
Conservation Criteria. The Criteria Area is an analytical tool which assists in determining which properties to
evaluate for acquisition and conservation under the MSHCP. The property is not within a criteria cell or cell
group and, therefore, also not within a subunit of the Elsinore Area Plan. The Project will be subject to the
MSHCP Fee, as required under mitigation measure MM BIO 1.
A General Biological Resources Assessment was conducted and prepared by Helix Environmental Planning,
April 28, 2018. The Project was evaluated for consistency with the following MSHCP issue areas:
• MSHCP Reserve Assembly requirements;
• Section 6.1.2 (Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools);
• Section 6.1.3 (Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species);
• Section 6.1.4 (Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface);
• Section 6.3.2 (Additional Survey Needs and Procedures); and
• Section 6.4 (Fuels Management).
The discussions below provide a summary demonstrating how the project is consistent with MSHCP
requirements for each of the above-listed issue areas.
MSHCP Reserve Assembly Requirements
The Project site is not located within a Cell or Cell Group and does not have target goals for conservation. The
Project site does not include land conservation requirements to contribute to the MSHCP reserve assembly. No
sensitive species were determined to occupy the site that would warrant conservation. Therefore, the Project
would not conflict with the MSHCP reserve assembly.
MSHCP Section 6.1.2 (Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools)
Section 6.1.2, Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools, states: The
purpose of the procedures described in this section is to ensure that the biological functions and values of these
areas throughout the MSHCP Plan Area are maintained such that Habitat values for species inside the MSHCP
Conservation Area are maintained. The Project site does not support Riparian/Riverine Areas. No vernal pools
occur on the property. Therefore, no impacts would occur to Riparian/Riverine Areas or Vernal Pools. The
Project is consistent with MSHCP Section 6.1.2.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 45 of 94
MSHCP Section 6.1.3 (Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species)
The Project is not within a survey area for NEPSSA species. No surveys are required. Nevertheless, no
suitable habitat for Narrow Endemic Plant Species occurs on the site and no impacts would occur as a result of
the project. The Project is consistent with MSHCP Section 6.1.3.
MSHCP Section 6.1.4 (Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface)
Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP addresses potential indirect impacts to MSHCP Conservation Area lands via the
Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines (UWIG). The Project site does not occur adjacent to an MSHCP
Conservation Area. The Project is not within or adjacent to a MSHCP criteria cell. The UWIG guidelines are
discussed to show how the Project will reduce/prevent potential impacts to off-site conservation areas.
Drainage
Although the Project does not directly drain into an MSHCP Conservation Area, storm water flows from the
site could ultimately reach a downstream Conservation Area. The Project will incorporate measures, including
those required through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements, to ensure
that the quantity and quality of runoff discharged to the MSHCP Conservation Area (tributaries to Lake
Elsinore) is not altered in an adverse way when compared with existing conditions. In particular, measures will
be put in place to avoid discharge of untreated surface runoff from the Project into the MSHCP Conservation
Area. As such, the Project proposes to construct two green-scape bio swales on the northwestern portion of the
property, which are designed to capture most all on site storm water flows and prevent the release of toxins,
chemicals, petroleum products, exotic plant materials, or other elements that might degrade or harm biological
resources or ecosystem processes within the MSHCP Conservation Area.
Toxics
The Project does not propose toxic impacts to sensitive species habitats; however, the post-Project site uses
will include use of chemicals or generation of bio-products such as oil from impervious surfaces and cars that
are potentially toxic or may adversely affect wildlife species, habitat, or water quality. Measures such as those
employed to address drainage issues (above) will be implemented to ensure no indirect impacts from toxic
substances occur to species or their habitat.
Lighting
The Project does not occur close to a conservation area; therefore, this does not apply.
Invasives
The Project shall not use invasive plants for erosion control, landscaping, wind rows, or other purposes. The
Project will comply with the MSHCP and avoid the use of invasive, non-native plants in accordance with
MSHCP Table 6.2.
Barriers
The Project site is not anticipated to directly abut MSHCP Conservation Area, therefore, this does not apply.
Grading/Land Development
The Project site is not anticipated to directly abut MSHCP Conservation Area, therefore, this does not apply.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 46 of 94
MSHCP Section 6.3.2 (Additional Survey Needs and Procedures)
Burrowing Owl
The MSHCP requires a habitat assessment and survey if burrowing habitat occurs on site. The Project site was
determined to have low potential for BUOW due to the lack of perennial vegetation cover, the heavily
urbanized setting of the site (surrounded by development), restricted site size, disturbed character, and high
amount of ground squirrel activity. Additionally, the nearest CNDDB record of BUOW is approximately 5
miles to the south west near the Skylark Airport. Although the habitat on site is of low quality and presence of
BUOW inhabiting the site is low, focused protocol BUOW surveys should be conducted in accordance with
the MSHCP. Pre-construction take avoidance surveys shall be proposed in accordance with MSHCP
requirements and is included as mitigation measure MM BIO 2. Impacts will be reduced to a less than
significant level with the incorporation of mitigation.
Least Bell’s Vireo/ southwestern willow flycatcher/ western yellow-billed cuckoo
The MSHCP requires that LBV surveys be conducted on project sites that include riparian habitat with
potential to support the species. The Project site does not support riparian habitat with potential to support the
species. Therefore, no impacts to LBV would occur as a result of the Project. Similarly, no suitable habitat for
SWFL and YBCU occur on site and no impacts would occur to these riparian associated species.
Small Mammals
If the Project site is located within the MSSA for the MSHCP, focused surveys for the three sensitive MSHCP
small mammal species are required on project sites that include suitable habitat with potential to support the
species. The Project site does not occur in the MSHCP MSSA and the site does not provide suitable habitat
for sensitive MSHCP mammal species. Therefore, no impacts would occur to sensitive small mammals.
The proposed Project is consistent with MSHCP Section 6.3.2.
MSHCP Section 6.4 (Fuels Management)
Due to the lack of surrounding open space vegetation and the fact the site is an “in-fill” project surrounded by
existing development, a fuel modification zone is not incorporated as part of the proposed Project.
Additionally, the proposed Project impact limits will not extend into undeveloped land adjacent to the Project
that has potential to support sensitive species. The proposed Project is consistent with MSHCP Section 6.4.
The proposed Project is consistent with all applicable sections of the MSHCP. Implementation of mitigation
measures MM BIO 1 and MM BIO 2, ensure consistency with the MSHCP. Thus, the proposed Project will
not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Therefore, impacts are less than
significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures:
MM BIO 1: MSHCP Fees. Defined in Item IV.a, above.
MM BIO 2: Focused Survey, Pre-Construction Survey, and Avoidance. Defined in Item IV.a, above.
(Sources: General Biological Resources Assessment (Appendix B))
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 47 of 94
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Please note that this Section primarily addresses historical and cultural resources not associated with tribal
cultural resources. For a comprehensive discussion on tribal cultural resources, please refer to Section XVII,
Tribal Cultural Resources, of this Initial Study.
a) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as
defined in §15064.5 of the California Code of Regulations? Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated)
A Project-specific Cultural Resources Inventory including a records search, Sacred Land File search, Native
American outreach, historic archival research, and a field survey was conducted for the Project area. The
Cultural Resources Inventory details the methods and results of the cultural resources survey and has been
prepared to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The records search conducted at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) at the University of California,
Riverside on March 7, 2018 indicated that 31 previous cultural resources studies have been conducted within
one mile of the Project area, none of which occurred within the Project site. The records search results also
indicated that a total of 20 cultural resources have been previously recorded within one mile of the Project area;
however, no sites have been recorded within the Project site.
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was contacted on March 7, 2018 for a Sacred Lands File
search and list of tribal contacts. The response, received on March 8, 2018, indicated that the Sacred Lands
File search was negative, however the area is sensitive for cultural resources.
The field investigations included intensive pedestrian survey of the study area by HELIX archaeologist Mary
Villalobos and Native American monitor Cameron Linton of Pechanga Band of Luiseño Mission Indians
(Pechanga) on March 16, 2018. The survey identified a three-walled structure made of cinder blocks and
wood posts of an unknown age. The 1953 USGS 7.5-minute Elsinore quadrangle map, based on aerial photos
taken in 1951, shows a structure in the southwest corner of the Project. However, it is not known if this
mapped structure represents the current three-walled structure, seen on aerial imagery from 1967, which is the
earliest available for the project site (NETR Online 2018). No historic or prehistoric artifactual material was
observed.
As a result of the Cultural Resources Inventory, no impacts to cultural resources are anticipated. However,
there is a potential for encountering subsurface historic features or deposits associated with the former
structure. Mitigation measures MM CUL 1 through MM CUL 7 shall be implemented. These mitigation
measures pertain to retaining an archaeologist/Native American Monitor, preparation of a Cultural Resources
Monitoring Plan, Sensitivity Training, Authority to Stop and Redirect Excavation, Artifacts of Native
American Origin, Inadvertent Discoveries of Subsurface Archaeological/Cultural Resources, and Final
Archaeological Report, respectively. With the incorporation of these mitigation measures, any impacts will be
reduced to a less than significant level.
In addition, the area is sensitive for Native American cultural resources, which could also be encountered
during grading and other ground-disturbing activities. This is discussed in greater detail in Section XVII,
Tribal Cultural Resources, of this Initial Study.
Mitigation Measures:
MM CUL 1: Retain archaeologist/Native American Monitor. At least 30 days prior to any grading,
excavation and/or other ground-disturbing activities on the Project site, the applicant shall retain a qualified
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 48 of 94
archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology and
listed on the Register of Professional Archaeologists (RPA) or the County of Riverside list of qualified
archaeologists to implement the monitoring program, including the monitoring all ground-disturbing activities
by an archaeologist and a Native American tribal monitor.
MM CUL 2: Cultural Resources Monitoring Plan. The Project Archaeologist, in consultation with the
Monitoring Tribe, the City, and the applicant, shall develop a Cultural Resources Monitoring Plan (CRMP) to
address the details, timing and responsibility of all archaeological and cultural activities that will occur on the
Project site.
Details in the Plan shall include:
a. Project grading and development scheduling;
b. The coordination of a monitoring schedule as agreed upon by the Monitoring Tribe, the Project
Archaeologist, the City, and the applicant; and
c. The protocols and stipulations that the Monitoring Tribe, the Project Archaeologist, the City, and the
applicant will follow in the event of inadvertent cultural resources discoveries, including any newly discovered
cultural resources.
MM CUL 3: Sensitivity Training. Prior to any grading, excavation and/or other ground-disturbing activities
on the Project site, the Project Archaeologist and the Monitoring Tribe shall conduct cultural resources
sensitivity training for all construction personnel. Construction personnel shall be informed of the types of
archaeological resources that may be encountered, and of the proper procedures to be enacted in the event of an
inadvertent discovery of archaeological resources or human remains. The Project construction manager shall
ensure that construction personnel are made available for and attend the training and shall retain documentation
demonstrating attendance.
MM CUL 4: Authority to Stop and Redirect Excavation. In accordance with the agreement required in MM
CUL 2, the archaeological monitor and designated tribal monitor shall have the authority to stop and redirect
excavation in order to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered within the Project
site.
MM CUL 5: Artifacts of Native American Origin. All artifacts discovered at the development site shall be
inventoried and analyzed by the archaeological monitor and Native American monitor. 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 Project Archaeologist/archaeological monitor and Native American monitor 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 applicant 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 Project Archaeologist, following consultation with the Monitoring Tribe, 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.
MM CUL 6: Inadvertent Discoveries of Subsurface Archaeological/Cultural Resources. If inadvertent
discoveries of subsurface archaeological/cultural resources are discovered during grading, the Project
archaeologist and the Tribal monitor, in consultation with the City, shall assess the significance of such
resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources. The determination as to the
significance or the mitigation for such resources will be based on the provisions of CEQA and shall take into
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 49 of 94
account the religious beliefs, customs, and practices of the Tribes.
MM CUL 7: Final Archaeological Report. The Project Archaeologist shall prepare a final archaeological
report within sixty (60) days of completion of the Project. The report shall follow Archaeological Resource
Management Report (ARMR) Guidelines and City requirements and shall include at a minimum: a discussion
of monitoring methods and techniques used; the results of the monitoring program, including any artifacts
recovered; an inventory of any resources recovered; updated DPR forms, if any; and any other site(s)
identified; final disposition of the resources; and any additional recommendations. A final copy shall be
submitted to the City, EIC, and the Monitoring Tribe.
(Sources: Cultural Resources Inventory (Appendix C))
b) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the California Code of Regulations? (Less than Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated)
Please reference the discussion in Item V.a, above. Mitigation measures MM CUL 1 through MM CUL 7
shall be implemented. These mitigation measures pertain to retaining an archaeologist/Native American
Monitor, preparation of a Cultural Resources Monitoring Plan, Sensitivity Training, Authority to Stop and
Redirect Excavation, Artifacts of Native American Origin, Inadvertent Discoveries of Subsurface
Archaeological/Cultural Resources, and Final Archaeological Report, respectively. With the incorporation of
these mitigation measures, any impacts will be reduced to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measures:
MM CUL 1: Retain archaeologist/Native American Monitor. Described in Item V.a above.
MM CUL 2: Cultural Resources Monitoring Plan. Described in Item V.a above.
MM CUL 3: Sensitivity Training. Described in Item V.a above.
MM CUL 4: Authority to Stop and Redirect Excavation. Described in Item V.a above.
MM CUL 5: Artifacts of Native American Origin. Described in Item V.a above.
MM CUL 6: Inadvertent Discoveries of Subsurface Archaeological/Cultural Resources. Described in Item
V.a above.
MM CUL 7: Final Archaeological Report. Described in Item V.a above.
(Sources: Cultural Resources Inventory (Appendix C))
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
(No Impact)
According to the Riverside County Map My County, the proposed Project is located within a paleontological
sensitivity area of low potential. Due to the previously developed and disturbed nature of the Project site, no
paleontological resources or site or unique geologic features no impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 50 of 94
(Sources: Riverside County Map My County (Appendix K))
d) Would the Project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries? (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated)
There are no cemeteries located within the proposed Project boundary. In the event human remains are
encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until
the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code
(PRC) Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are
determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the NAHC, which will determine and notify a Most Likely
Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may
inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection within 48 hours of notification by the
NAHC. The MLD may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and
items associated with Native American burials. Thus, with adherence to existing regulatory requirements and
implementation of mitigation measure MM CUL 8, below, the Project is not anticipated to disturb any human
remains. Therefore, impacts are less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures:
MM CUL 8: Human Remains. 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 NAHC within 24 hours. Subsequently, the NAHC 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
(Sources: Cultural Resources Inventory (Appendix C))
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS.
a) Would the Project 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. (Less than Significant Impact)
The City is located in the northern part of the Peninsular Ranges Province and includes parts of two structural
blocks, or structural subdivisions of the province. The active Elsinore fault zone diagonally crosses the
southwest corner of the Elsinore 7.5’ quadrangle and is a major element of the right-lateral strike-slip San
Andreas fault system. The Elsinore Fault Zone forms a complex series of pull-apart basins.
The nearest faults to the Project site are associated with the Elsinore Fault system located approximately 1.4
miles from the site. There are no known active fault traces in the Project vicinity. Based on mapping and
historical seismicity, the seismicity of the Peninsular Range has been generally considered high by the
scientific community. The Project area is not within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and will not
require a special site investigation by an Engineering Geologist.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 51 of 94
The site is not within a currently established State of California Earthquake Fault Zone for surface fault rupture
hazards. No active faults with the potential for surface fault rupture are known to pass directly beneath the site.
Thus, the potential for surface rupture due to faulting occurring beneath the site during the design life of the
proposed development is considered low. Additionally, all structures developed as a part of the Project will be
subject to seismic design criteria in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC), which will reduce
potential impacts related to the rupture of an earthquake fault. Adherence to the CBC is a standard condition
and is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA. Any impacts are considered less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR; Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation (Appendix D))
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (Less than Significant Impact)
The Geotechnical Engineering Investigation used the USGS web-based application US Seismic Design Maps
to estimate the peak ground acceleration adjusted for site class effects (PGAM). Because of the proximity to
the Project site and the maximum probable events for faults, it appears that a maximum probable event along
the fault zones could produce a peak horizontal acceleration of approximately 0.888g (2 percent probability of
being exceeded in 50 years). While listing PGAM is useful for comparison of potential effects of fault activity
in a region, other considerations are important in seismic design, including frequency and duration of motion
and soil conditions underlying the site. Faults in proximity of the proposed Project have the potential to cause
moderate to strong ground shaking. However, the proposed Project would be required to implement all
requirements of the current edition of the CBC, applicable to the Project, which provides criteria for the
seismic design of buildings. Adherence to the CBC is a standard condition and is not considered unique
mitigation under CEQA. Any impacts are considered less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR; Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation (Appendix D))
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? (Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated)
The proposed Project is located in an area of moderate and very high liquefaction potential. Soil liquefaction is a
state of soil particles suspension caused by a complete loss of strength when the effective stress drops to zero.
Liquefaction normally occurs under saturated conditions in soils such as sand in which the strength is purely
frictional. Primary factors that trigger liquefaction are: moderate to strong ground shaking (seismic source),
relatively clean, loose granular soils (primarily poorly graded sands and silty sands), and saturated soil
conditions (shallow groundwater). Due to increasing overburden pressure with depth, liquefaction of granular
soils is generally limited to the upper 50 feet of a soil profile. However, liquefaction has occurred in soils other
than clean sand.
The Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation described the soils encountered within the depth of 50 feet on the
Project site as consisting predominately of sandy silt with varying amounts of and gravel, silty sand/sandy silt
with varying amounts of clay, sandy silt with varying amounts of clay, clayey silt, and silty sand/sand. The
historically highest groundwater is estimated to be at a depth of 10 feet below ground surface according to County
of Riverside Geologic Hazards Map (2004) and regional groundwater well data. Low to very low cohesion
strength is associated with the sandy soil. A seismic hazard, which could cause damage to the proposed
development during seismic shaking, is the post-liquefaction settlement of the liquefied sands.
The potential for soil liquefaction during a seismic event was evaluated using LiqIT computer program
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 52 of 94
(version 4.7.5) developed by GeoLogismiki of Greece. For the analysis, a maximum earthquake magnitude of 7.9
Mw and a peak horizontal ground surface acceleration of 0.89g (with a 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50
years) and a groundwater depth of 10 feet were considered appropriate for the liquefaction analysis. The
liquefaction analysis indicated that the site soils had a moderate potential for liquefaction under seismic
conditions and the total liquefaction-induced settlement was calculated to be 2.03 inches. The differential
settlement is estimated to be 1.0 inch over a horizontal distance of 20 feet.
The Project would be required to implement all requirements of the current edition of the CBC, applicable to
the Project, which provides criteria for the seismic design of buildings. Adherence to the CBC is a standard
condition and is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
In addition, implementation of mitigation measure MM GEO 1, below, will require the Project comply with all
recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation, ensuring impacts related to
liquefaction will be reduced to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measures:
MM GEO 1: Compliance with Recommendations from the Geotechnical Evaluation. Prior to issuance of
grading permit, the proposed Project applicant/developer shall comply with all recommendations contained
within the Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation.
(Sources: Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation (Appendix D); Riverside County Map My County (Appendix
K))
iv) Landslides? (No impact)
The Project site is gently sloping to the southwest with elevations ranging between 1,278 feet to 1,269 feet
above mean sea level. The Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation found no known landslides at the site, nor was
it found that the site is in the path of any known or potential landslides. Thus, due to the relatively flat topography
of the Project site, the potential for a landslide is not a hazard to the proposed Project. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation (Appendix D))
b) Would the Project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (Less than Significant
Impact)
Construction activities have the potential to result in soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. However, erosion will
be addressed through the implementation of existing State and Federal requirements and minimized through
compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) general construction permit
which requires that a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) be prepared prior to construction
activities and implemented during construction activities. The preparation of a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will identify Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address soil erosion. Upon
compliance with these standard regulatory requirements, the proposed Project is not anticipated to result in
substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation (Appendix D))
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 53 of 94
c) Would the Project 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? (Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated)
Impacts related to landslides are addressed above in response to Item VI.a.iv; impacts related to liquefaction are
addressed above in response to Item VI.a.iii. This analysis addresses impacts related to unstable soils, as a result of
lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse.
Lateral Spreading: Lateral spreading is a phenomenon in which soils move laterally during seismic shaking and is
often associated with liquefaction. The amount of movement depends on the soil strength, duration and
intensity of seismic shaking, topography, and free face geometry. According to the Geotechnical Engineering
Evaluation, due to the relatively flat topography and low liquefaction potential within the Project site, the
likelihood of lateral spreading is low.
Subsidence: According to the Riverside County Map My County, the Project is located in an area susceptible to
subsidence. Seismic ground subsidence (not related to liquefaction induced settlements) occurs when strong
earthquake shaking results in the densification of loose to medium density sandy soils above groundwater.
Implementation of mitigation measure MM GEO 1, requiring the proposed Project to comply with all
recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation, will reduce impacts related to
subsidence to a less than significant level.
Collapse: According to the Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation, the upper soils within the Project site are
moisture-sensitive and moderately collapsible under saturated conditions. These soils, in their present condition,
possess moderate risk to construction in terms of possible post-construction movement of the foundations and
floor systems if no mitigation measures are employed. Accordingly, measures are considered necessary to
reduce anticipated expansion and collapse potential. Implementation of mitigation measure MM GEO 1,
requiring the proposed Project to comply with all recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Engineering
Evaluation, will reduce impacts related to collapse to a less than significant level.
In addition, to lessen the potential impacts of subsidence and collapsible soils at the site, the proposed Project
will also be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the CBC. Adherence to the CBC is a standard
condition and is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Mitigation Measures:
MM GEO 1: Compliance with Recommendations from the Geotechnical Evaluation (see Item VI.a.iii,
above).
(Sources: Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation (Appendix D); Riverside County Map My County (Appendix
K))
d) Would the Project 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? (Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated).
While there is currently no soil mapping that identifies specific areas within the City that are subject to
expansive soils, such soils are known to exist in the City. Expansive soils are composed of a significant amount of
clay particles which can expand (absorb water) or contract (release water). These shrink and swell
characteristics can result in structural stress and place other loads on these soils. To lessen the potential impacts of
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 54 of 94
expansive soils at the site, the proposed Project will be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the
CBC and the recommendations of the Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation through implementation of
mitigation measure MM GEO 1. Therefore, impacts related to unstable geological units or soils are less than
significant with mitigation incorporated.
Mitigation Measures:
MM GEO 1: Compliance with Recommendations from the Geotechnical Evaluation (see Item VI.a.iii,
above).
(Sources: General Plan EIR; Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation (Appendix D))
e) Would the Project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater? (No Impact)
The Project proposes to connect to the existing Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) sewer
system and will not require use of septic tanks. This threshold is not applicable to the Project. No impact will
occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Project Plans (Appendix L); EVWMD Will Serve Letter (Appendix M))
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
a) Would the Project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment? (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated)
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions for the Project were analyzed in the Lake Elsinore Climate Action Plan
(CAP) Consistency Assessment (CAP Consistency Assessment) to determine if the Project could have an impact
related to GHG emissions. These impacts are analyzed on a cumulative basis, utilizing Carbon Dioxide
Equivalent (CO 2 e), measured in metric tons (MT) or, MTCO 2 e. They are analyzed for both the construction
and operational phases of the Project. The SCAQMD Tier 3 significance threshold of 3,000 MTCO 2 e
emission threshold was utilized. The SCAQMD has published interim significance thresholds for greenhouse
gases where the AQMD is the lead agency, Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas
(GHG) Significance Thresholds. This document describes a five-tiered draft GHG threshold which includes a
3,000 metric tons of CO 2 e per year significance threshold for residential/commercial projects. Tier 3 consists
of screening values, which the lead agency can choose. The City has an adopted Climate Action Plan (CAP)
The City’s CAP screening values were utilized for the Project.
Construction Emissions
Construction activities are short-term and will cease have any GHG emissions upon completion. In contrast,
operational emissions are continuous year after year until operation of the use ceases. Because of this
difference, SCAQMD recommends amortizing construction emissions over a 30-year operational lifetime.
This normalizes construction emissions so that they can be grouped with operational emissions to generate a
precise project-based GHG inventory.
The construction analysis included modeling of the projected construction equipment that would be used
during each construction activity. Construction activities include site preparation, grading, underground
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 55 of 94
utilities, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. For modeling purposes, it was assumed
construction activity would begin in September 2018 and last approximately one year. As shown in Table
VII-1, Estimated Construction Emissions, below, total GHG emissions associated with construction are
estimated at 586 MT CO2e. Therefore, amortized over 30 years, the proposed construction activities would
contribute approximately 20 MT CO2e emissions per year.
Table VII-1
Estimated Construction Emissions
Source Emissions (MTCO 2 e)
Site Preparation 18
Grading 208
Underground Utilities 3
Building Construction 329
Paving 22
Architectural Coating 3
TOTAL 586
Amortized Construction Emissions 20
Source: CAP Consistency Assessment (Appendix E)
Operational Emissions
Operational sources of GHG emissions include: (1) energy use (electricity and natural gas); (2) area sources
(landscaping equipment); (3) vehicle use; (4) solid waste generation; and (5) water conveyance and treatment.
As shown in Table VII-2, Estimated Project Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions, below, with reductions
associated with implementation of the Project design feature/mitigation (associated with the CAP – see
discussion in VII.b., below), the Project would result in GHG emissions of 1,753 MT CO2e per year.
Table VII-2
Estimated Project Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Emissions Sources Emissions (MT CO2e)
2019
Area Sources <0.5
Energy Sources 460
Vehicular (Mobile) Sources 1,144
Solid Waste Sources 77
Water Sources 54
Operational Subtotal 1,734
Construction (Annualized over 30 years) 20
TOTAL EMISSIONS 1,753
Source: CAP Consistency Assessment (Appendix E)
Note: Totals may not add up exactly due to rounding.
Project GHG emissions of 1,753 MT CO2e per year are below the 3,000 CO2e per year threshold. Therefore,
Project impacts are considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: CAP Consistency Assessment (Appendix E))
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 56 of 94
b) Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated)
The City has an adopted Climate Action Plan (CAP) The City’s CAP screening values were utilized for the
Project. The Project was analyzed for consistency with the Project-Level CAP Consistency Worksheet (see
Attachment B of the CAP Consistency Analysis for the Worksheet).
If the project is consistent with the land use designation, population and employment projections, and
incorporates applicable CAP measures in the project design, then the project would be deemed consistent with
the General Plan and CAP. The Worksheet considers the following three (3) questions to determine if a
project is consistent with the General Plan growth potential and CAP:
1. Is the project consistent with the General Plan land use designation?
2. Is the project consistent with the General Plan population and employment projections for the site, upon
which the CAP modeling is based?
3. Does the project incorporate CAP measures as binding and enforceable components of the project?
Questions 1 & 2
The Project is consistent with the General Plan’s land use designation of General Commercial; which allows
for automobile dealership with showroom displays, sales offices, parts inventories, and automotive repair
services and a separate car wash. Because the Project is consistent with the land use designation, the project is
also consistent with the General Plan’s projected growth. Implementation of the project, an automotive
dealership, would not result in substantial population or employment increases. Therefore, the Project is
consistent with the General Plan growth potential upon which the CAP modeling is based.
Questions 3
A project may demonstrate consistency with the CAP through incorporation of pedestrian and bicycle
infrastructure; bicycle and fuel-efficient vehicle parking; tree planting and landscaping; cool roof requirements;
energy efficient building standards; energy efficient traffic street and traffic signal lights; indoor water
conservation; and construction and demolition waste diversion. According to the CAP Consistency
Assessment, the Project is consistent with the following CAP measures:
• T-1.2: Pedestrian Infrastructure
• T-1.4: Bicycle infrastructure
• T-1.5: Bicycle Parking
• T-2.1: Designated Parking for Fuel-Efficient Vehicles (*potentially inconsistent)
• E-1.1: Tree Planting
• E-1.2: Cool Roof Requirements
• E-1.3: Energy Efficient Building Standards
• E-3.2: Energy Efficient Street and Traffic Signal Lights
• E-4.1: Landscaping
• E-4.2: Indoor Water Conservation Requirements (*potentially inconsistent)
• S-1.4: Construction and Demolition Waste Diversion (*potentially inconsistent)
For those CAP measures that are potentially inconsistent with the CAP, mitigation measures MM GHG 1
through MM GHG 4 shall be implemented. With incorporation of mitigation measures MM GHG 1 through
MM GHG 4, Project impacts can be reduced to a less than significant level, and a determination scan be made
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 57 of 94
that the Project will not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
Mitigation Measures:
MM GHG 1. CAP-1 Electric Vehicle Spaces. The project shall designate at least ten percent of the total
employee and visitor four additional parking spaces for Clean Air Vehicles. Parking spaces for Clean Air
Vehicles may be any combination of low-emitting, fuel-efficient and carpool/vanpool vehicles. Based on
the current site plan, this measure would require 22 spaces out of the total of 221 spaces to be designated
for Clean Air Vehicles.
MM GHG 2. CAP-2 Energy Efficient Building Standards Tier 1 Electives. The Project shall demonstrate
consistency with Measure E-3.1 by selecting one of the following electives from the 2016 CALGreen Tier 1
Checklist (CBSC 2016):
• On-site renewable energy with documentation (A5.211.1 and A5.211.1.1);
• Green power (A5.211.3);
• Elevators with car lights and fan (A5.212.1.1 and A5.212.1.1.1);
• Escalators with controls (A5.212.1.1 and A5.212.1.4); or
• Steel framing (A5.213.1).
MM GHG 3. CAP-3 Indoor Water Conservation Tier 1 Electives. The Project shall demonstrate consistency
with Measure E-4.2 by selecting one of the following electives from the 2016 CALGreen Tier 1 Checklist
(CBSC 2016):
• Nonpotable water systems for indoor use (A5.303.2.3.4);
• Appliances and fixtures for commercial application (A5.303.3);
• Nonwater supplied urinals (A5.303.4.1);
• Dual plumbing (A5.303.5);
• Outdoor potable water use (A5.304.2);
• Restoration of areas disturbed by construction (A5.304.6);
• Previously developed sites with exception (A5.304.7);
• Graywater irrigation system (A5.304.8);
• Nonpotable water systems (A5.305.1); or
• Irrigation systems (A5.305.2).
MM GHG 4. CAP-4 Construction Waste Management Plan. The Project shall provide a Construction
Waste Management Plan which demonstrates how the project would recycle and/or salvage for reuse a
minimum of 65% of nonhazardous construction and demolition waste.
(Sources: CAP Consistency Assessment (Appendix E))
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
a) Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Less than Significant Impact)
Construction of the proposed Project may include the transportation and storage of hazardous materials, such as
fuels, cleaning solvents, or pesticides. The transportation of hazardous materials can result in accidental spills,
leaks, toxic releases, fire, or explosion. The proposed Project is not expected to create the need for an excess of
hazardous materials being used on-site during construction or operation. The only bulk hazardous materials
used on site was 5w-30 oil. Other oil types, transmission fluid, antifreeze, or other material was stored in
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 58 of 94
limited quantities.
A number of federal and state agencies prescribe strict regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous
materials. Hazardous material transport, storage and response to upsets or accidents are primarily subject to
federal regulation by the United States Department of Transportation (DOT) Office of Hazardous Materials
Safety in accordance with Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations. California regulations applicable to
Hazardous material transport, storage and response to upsets or accidents are codified in Title 13 (Motor
Vehicles), Title 8 (Cal/OSHA), Title 22 (Management of Hazardous Waste), Title 26 (Toxics) of the California Code
of Regulations (CCR), and the Chapter 6.95 of the Health and Safety Code (Hazardous Materials Release
Response Plans and Inventory).
As the proposed Project will be required to comply with all applicable federal and state laws related to the
transportation, use, storage and response to upsets or accidents that may involve hazardous materials would
reduce the likelihood and severity of upsets and accidents during transit and storage, it is not expected to result
in the use of large amounts of hazardous materials that would create a hazard to the public or environment.
This is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: CCR; Code of Federal Regulations; Health and Safety Code)
b) Would the Project 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? (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated)
As noted in response Item VIII.a above, the proposed Project may involve the use of hazardous materials but
shall comply with all applicable federal and state laws pertaining to the transport, use, disposal, handling, and
storage of hazardous materials, including but not limited to Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations and
Title 13, (motor vehicles) Title 8 (Cal/OSHA), Title 22 (Health and Safety Code), Title 26 (Toxics) of the
California Code of Regulations, and Chapter 6.95 of the Health and Safety Code (Hazardous Materials Release
Response Plans and Inventory), which describes strict regulations for the safe transportation and storage of
hazardous materials. Thus, the proposed Project will be required to comply with all applicable federal and
state laws related to the transportation, use and storage of hazardous materials and will not create a significant
hazard to the public or environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the environment. This is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I ESA) was prepared for the proposed Project site.
According to the Phase I ESA, asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) may be present on the Project site for
existing walls and mortar. The on-site presence of the suspect ACMs should not present a significant health
hazard to property occupants, as long as their respective conditions do not deteriorate substantially.
Nevertheless, federal and state laws require all ACMs that are likely to be disturbed or impacted by renovation
or demolition activities to be removed prior to initiating any renovation or demolition activities that are likely
to impact the ACMs. Mitigation measure MM HAZ 1 requires the preparation of an ACM survey prior to any
planned renovation or demolition and compliance with any remediation recommendations contained therein.
In addition, according to the Phase I ESA, based on the construction date of the walled structure (present since
1961), it is possible that lead-based paint (LBP) exists at the property. Mitigation measure MM HAZ 2
requires the preparation of an LBP survey prior to any planned renovation or demolition and compliance with
any remediation recommendations contained therein.
With the incorporation of mitigation measure MM HAZ 1 and MM HAZ 2, any impacts will be reduced to a
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 59 of 94
less than significant level. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
MM HAZ 1. Asbestos-Containing Materials (ACM). Prior to any planned renovation or demolition, the
Project applicant shall perform an ACM survey of all potentially suspect material identified on site. The
applicant shall comply will any and all applicable remediation recommendations contained in the ACM survey.
MM HAZ 2. Lead-Based Paint (LBP). Prior to any planned renovation or demolition, the Project applicant
shall perform an LBP survey of all potentially suspect material identified on site. The applicant shall comply
will any and all applicable remediation recommendations contained in the LBP survey.
(Sources: Phase I ESA (Appendix F); CCR; Code of Federal Regulations; Health and Safety Code)
c) Would the Project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (No
Impact)
The proposed Project is not located within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The closest
school is Ortega High School and Valley Adult School which is approximately 0.35 miles south of the
proposed Project site. Any other schools are located beyond 1 mile from the proposed Project site. Thus, the
proposed Project will not emit hazardous emissions or handling hazardous materials substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Google Maps)
d) Would the Project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment? (No Impact)
According to the Phase I ESA, the Project site is not included on the list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. As a result, the proposed Project would not create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment as it pertains to this criterion. No impact will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Phase I ESA (Appendix F))
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? (No Impact)
The proposed Project is not located within an airport land use plan nor is it located within two miles of a public
use airport and as such, will have no safety hazard impacts on people residing or working in the Project area.
No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 60 of 94
(Sources: General Plan Figure 2.7, Airport Influence Areas; Google Maps)
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? (No Impact)
The closest private airstrip located in proximity to the proposed Project site is located approximately 4.0 miles
north-northwest of Skylark Airport and 3.78 miles north-northwest of Skylark Airport Influence Area. Skylark
Airport is a private airport that is the hub for air sports in Lake Elsinore and accommodates organizations that
utilize the airport for plane use, glider flights, and skydiving. The proposed Project site is not within the
Skylark Airport Influence Area as depicted in Figure 2.7, Airport Influence Areas of the City’s General Plan;
therefore, it does not need to be evaluated for consistency with continued operations at the Skylark Airport.
Due to the Project distance from Skylark Airport, the proposed Project will not result in any impacts related to
private airstrips and safety hazards for people residing or working in the Project area. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR, Chapter 3.4, Transportation and Circulation; General Plan Figure 2.7, Airport
Influence Areas; Google Maps)
g) Would the Project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Less than Significant Impact)
The proposed Project will be required to comply with all applicable fire code requirements for construction and
access to the site and as such, will be reviewed by the City Fire Department to determine the specific fire
requirements applicable to ensure compliance with these requirements. This review will ensure that the Project
will provide adequate emergency access to and from the site. Further, the City Engineer and the City Fire
Department will review any modifications to existing roadways to ensure that adequate emergency access
and/or emergency response would be maintained. Thus, the proposed Project does not propose any changes
that will impact the City’s Emergency Preparedness Plan or the Riverside County Operational Area Multi-
Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan so will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Therefore, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR)
h) Would the Project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires, including where wildlands area adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands? (Less than Significant Impact)
According to the Riverside County Map My County, the proposed Project is not located within a High Fire
Hazard Classification Area and is not in a Fire Responsibility Area. Figure 3.10-2 – Wildfire Susceptibility, of
the General Plan EIR does not show the Project as being located in a fire hazard zone.
The Project site is currently vacant land, with the exception of a three-walled structure and one large billboard
signs; one of the billboards was demolished as part of a City drainage improvement project and is not planned
to be rebuilt. The walled structure consists of three sides constructed of concrete blocks. The purpose of the
structure could not be confirmed; however, it may have been used as a loading ramp associated with a former
railroad spur located nearby. A chain-link fence surrounds the northeastern, southeastern, and southwestern
sides of the property. The property is bound to the northeast by I-15, to the southeast by 3rd Street, to the
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 61 of 94
southwest by Collier Avenue, and to the northwest by a currently vacant site that is in the process of
constructing an extension of Crane Street. Surrounding properties are composed of vacant land, existing light
industrial, and a retail commercial center currently under construction.
Thus, the proposed Project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR Figure 3.10-2 – Wildfire Susceptibility; Riverside County Map My County
(Appendix K); Project Description)
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
a) Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (Less than
Significant Impact)
The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) sets water quality standards for all ground
and surface waters within the Project’s region. Water quality standards are defined under the Clean Water Act
to include both the beneficial uses of specific water bodies and the levels of water quality that must be met and
maintained to protect those uses (water quality objectives).
Activities associated with the construction of the proposed Project would include grading and site preparation,
which may have the potential to release pollutants (e.g., oil from construction equipment, cleaning solvents,
paint) and silt off-site which could impact water quality. However, the Project is required to prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) pursuant to the statewide General Construction Permit
(National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit No. CAS000002, Waste
Discharge Requirements, Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, adopted September 2, 2009 and effective as of July 2,
2010) issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for construction projects.
Development of the proposed Project would add impervious surfaces to the site through the building,
associated parking, loading areas, and drive aisles. By increasing the percentage of impervious surfaces on the
site, less water would percolate into the ground and more surface runoff would be generated. Paved areas and
streets would collect dust, soil and other impurities that would then be assimilated into surface runoff during
rainfall events. Operation of the Project has the potential to release pollutants resulting from replacing vacant
land with roadways, walkways, and parking lots. These improvements may potentially impact water quality.
The Project will follow the existing condition drainage pattern and will generally carry runoff to the west side
of the Project. Referring to Appendix B Hydrology Map, of the Preliminary Hydrology Report, drainage area
A is defined as the area on the East side of the Project, parallel to the I-15 freeway. Stormwater sheet flows
North into 2 proposed grated inlets and into 12” storm drains that outflow into the proposed Bioretention Basin
A. Drainage area B, which is on the West side of the Project, adjacent to Collier Avenue, drains West into the
proposed storm drain line that runs South-North through 5 grated inlets. Storm water is then directed to
Bioretention Basin B.
During a 2-year storm event, the proposed bioretention basins are used to treat storm water using Best
Management Practices (BMPs). The Project was determined to be infeasible to use infiltration BMPs. For that
reason, an underdrain is provided in the gravel layer of the basins, which is used to convey treated water to the
public storm drain system.
Specifically, treated storm water from Bioretention Basin A joins the treated storm water from Basin B in the
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 62 of 94
gravel layer using a solid 6-inch storm drain that connects the basins. Through the perforated underdrain,
storm water is conveyed to the outflow pipe, where flows ultimately join the public storm drain line on Collier
Avenue.
Through BMPs combined with compliance of existing regulations the proposed Project will not violate water
quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Preliminary Hydrology Report (Appendix G); WQMP (Appendix H))
b) Would the Project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge, such that there could be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table (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)?
(Less than Significant Impact)
According to General Plan EIR Figure 3.9-2 – Groundwater Management Zones, the proposed Project is
located within the Warm Springs Valley Groundwater Management Zone (GMZ). The Warm Springs Valley
GMZ does not have identified beneficial uses such as municipal and domestic supply or ground water
recharge. Therefore, the proposed Project is not expected to substantially deplete groundwater supplies.
As outlined in the WQMP, the proposed Project utilizes the minimum impervious area possible. However, the
proposed Project requires a large amount of impervious area to make the Project feasible. During a 2-year
storm event, the proposed bioretention basins are used to treat storm water using Best Management Practices
(BMPs). The Project was determined to be infeasible to use infiltration BMPs. For that reason, an underdrain
is provided in the gravel layer of the basins, which is used to convey treated water to the public storm drain
system.
Specifically, treated storm water from Bioretention Basin A joins the treated storm water from Basin B in the
gravel layer using a solid 6-inch storm drain that connects the basins. Through the perforated underdrain,
storm water is conveyed to the outflow pipe, where flows ultimately join the public storm drain line on Collier
Avenue.
Additionally, moderate infiltration rates were identified on-site. These conditions are conducive to groundwater
recharge. Thus, development of the Project site will not substantially interfere with groundwater recharge.
Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR; Preliminary Hydrology Report (Appendix G); WQMP (Appendix H))
c) Would the Project 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? (Less than Significant Impact)
The Project is subject to NPDES requirements including preparing and implementing a SWPPP for the
prevention of runoff during construction. Erosion, siltation and other possible pollutants associated with long-term
implementation of the Project is addressed as part of the project-specific Preliminary WQMP and grading permit
process.
The Project will follow the existing condition drainage pattern and will generally carry runoff to the west side
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 63 of 94
of the Project. Referring to Appendix B Hydrology Map, of the Preliminary Hydrology Report, drainage area
A is defined as the area on the East side of the Project, parallel to the I-15 freeway. Stormwater sheet flows
North into 2 proposed grated inlets and into 12” storm drains that outflow into the proposed Bioretention Basin
A. Drainage area B, which is on the West side of the Project, adjacent to Collier Avenue, drains West into the
proposed storm drain line that runs South-North through 5 grated inlets. Storm water is then directed to
Bioretention Basin B.
During a 2-year storm event, the proposed bioretention basins are used to treat storm water using BMPs. The
Project was determined to be infeasible to use infiltration BMPs. For that reason, an underdrain is provided in
the gravel layer of the basins, which is used to convey treated water to the public storm drain system.
Specifically, treated storm water from Bioretention Basin A joins the treated storm water from Basin B in the
gravel layer using a solid 6-inch storm drain that connects the basins. Through the perforated underdrain,
storm water is conveyed to the outflow pipe, where flows ultimately join the public storm drain line on Collier
Avenue.
Thus, through compliance with existing regulations and policies the proposed Project will not 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. Therefore, impacts will be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Preliminary Hydrology Report (Appendix G); WQMP (Appendix H))
d) Would the Project 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? (Less than
Significant Impact)
As described in Item IX.c above, the overall drainage pattern will remain unchanged as a result of the
development. The drainage area will have an increased impervious area from existing condition and will result
in slightly higher peak runoff values. The increase in peak runoff shall be mitigated to a level at or below
existing levels through the use of bio-retention as outlined in the WQMP.
The bioretention facilities will reduce the peak flow to a level below the existing for the 2-year-24 hour storm
events, and will mitigate peak runoff flows to a level at or below pre-development conditions. Thus, no
flooding on or off-site as a result of the proposed Project will occur. Therefore, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: WQMP (Appendix H))
e) Would the Project 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?
(Less than Significant Impact)
Please reference the discussion in IX.c and IX.d., above. Implementation of the proposed Project will 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. Any impacts are less than significant.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 64 of 94
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Preliminary Hydrology Report (Appendix G); WQMP (Appendix H))
f) Would the Project otherwise substantially degrade water quality? (Less than Significant Impact)
A project specific Preliminary WQMP was prepared which identifies bacteria, metals, trash, organic
compounds, oils and grease as pollutants of concern. As such, appropriate site design, source control and
treatment control BMPs have been incorporated into the Project design to address these pollutants of concern
in addition to other potential and expected pollutants generally associated with a commercial land use, such as
trash and debris, oil, etc. As the proposed Project will be reviewed by the City’s Public Works Department and
appropriate BMPs have been incorporated into the Project design as described in Item IX.a above, the Project
is not anticipated to substantially degraded water quality. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: WQMP (Appendix H))
g) Would the Project place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (No
Impact)
No housing is proposed. This question is not applicable to the Project. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Project Plans (Appendix L))
h) Would the Project place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or
redirect flood flows? (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated)
The proposed Project is located in within Zone X (dotted) and Zone AO flood elevation. The Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) defines Flood Zone X (dotted) as “areas of 0.2% annual-chance
flood, areas of 1% -annual-chance flood with average depths of less than one foot, or drainage areas than one
square mile, or areas protected by levees from 1% annual chance flood” and Zone AO as areas within the 100-
year flood (flood depths of one to three feet).
With implementation of mitigation measure MM HYDRO 1, all of the buildings will be constructed such that
they are elevated by a minimum of the depth designation, which, in this case is one foot, above the highest
adjacent existing ground per the established flood elevation published by FEMA.
In addition, through the use of the proposed bioretention basins, peak runoff flows shall be reduced to a level at
or below pre- development conditions and the increased buildings elevations, life and property will be protected
during 100-year storm events. Thus, the proposed Project will not place structures within a 100-year flood
hazard area which would impede or redirect flood flows. Therefore, impacts are less than significant with
mitigation incorporated.
Mitigation Measures:
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 65 of 94
MM HYDRO 1: Building Elevations. Prior to issuance of occupancy permit, all Project buildings shall be
constructed such that the structures are elevated by a minimum of the depth designation of one foot, above the
highest adjacent existing ground per the established flood elevation published by FEMA.
(Sources: Phase I ESA (Appendix F); Preliminary Hydrology Report (Appendix G))
i) Would the Project 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? (Less than Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated)
The Elsinore Area Plan of the Riverside General Plan shows that a portion of the City of Lake Elsinore is
located within the high inundation zone of the Railroad Canyon Dam, which is located northwesterly of the City
in the city of Canyon Lake. If a catastrophic failure were to occur at the dam, the 11,500 acre-feet of water would
flow into the San Jacinto River and Lake Elsinore, flooding that portion of the City generally located southwest
of Lakeshore Drive, southeast of Riverside Drive (SR-74), northeast of Grand Avenue and northwest of Corydon
Street. The extent of the dam inundation zone corresponds with the boundary of the 100-year floodplain for
both Lake Elsinore and San Jacinto River shown in Figure 3.9-1 – Hydrologic Resources. However, the
instantaneous failure of the dam is unlikely. Therefore, repairs could be made to a leaking or damaged dam to
avoid significant damage to life and/or property. Additionally, Division 3 of the California Water Code, places
supervision of non-federal dams to the responsibility of the State Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD). The
DSOD routinely inspects operating dams to ensure that they are adequately maintained, and to direct the dam
owner to correct any deficiencies. Although the proposed Project site is located within the vicinity of a dam
inundation area, the dam is routinely inspected and maintained.
The proposed Project is located in within Zone X (dotted) and Zone AO flood elevation. FEMA defines Flood
Zone X (dotted) as “areas of 0.2% annual-chance flood, areas of 1% -annual-chance flood with average depths
of less than one foot, or drainage areas than one square mile, or areas protected by levees from 1% annual
chance flood” and Zone AO as areas within the 100-year flood (flood depths of one to three feet). Through the
implementation of mitigation measure MM HYDRO 1, all proposed buildings shall be constructed such that
structures are elevated by a minimum of the depth designation, which, in this case is one foot, above the highest
adjacent existing ground per the established flood elevation published by FEMA.
In addition, through the use of the proposed bioretention basins, peak runoff flows shall be reduced to a level at
or below pre- development conditions and the increased buildings elevations, life and property will be protected
during 100- year storm events. Therefore, the proposed Project will have a less than significant impact with
mitigation incorporated in terms of exposing people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding.
Mitigation Measures:
MM HYDRO 1: Building Elevations. Described in Item IX.h above.
(Sources: Elsinore Area Plan; General Plan EIR Figure 3.9-1 – Hydrologic Resources; Preliminary
Hydrology Report (Appendix G))
j) Would the Project be subject to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? (No Impact)
The proposed Project is located over 1.15 mile, up north-northeast and up gradient from Lake Elsinore. There
is no possibility of a seiche from Lake Elsinore affecting the Project site given the Project’s approximate
distance from Lake Elsinore, and because Lake drains to the south, away from the Project site. As noted in
Section 6.a.iv (Geology and Soils), above, the Project site has not been identified as being in an area
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 66 of 94
susceptible to landslides, thus the potential for mudflow is relatively low, because the Project does not lie in a
landslide hazard zone and no natural rivers or streams are located in the Project vicinity. The Project site is not
subject to tsunami due to its elevation and distance (approximately 25 miles) from the Pacific Ocean. No
impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Google Maps)
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING
a) Would the Project physically divide an established community? (No Impact)
As shown on Table 2, Surrounding Land Uses, above, the proposed Project site is zoned as General
Commercial (C2) and surrounded by Commercial Manufacturing (CM) and other C2 zoning designations.
The Zoning Code divides the City into districts, or zones, and regulated land use activity in each district,
specifying the permitted uses of land and buildings, density, bulk, and other regulations. The proposed Project
is consistent with these and surrounding zoning and land use designations. Thus, the proposed Project will not
physically divide an established community. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR; Zoning Map (Figure 9))
b) Would the Project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local
coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect? (No Impact)
As shown on Table 2, Surrounding Land Uses, above, the proposed Project site is zoned as General
Commercial (C2) and surrounded by Commercial Manufacturing (CM) and other C2 zoning designations.
Additionally, the General Plan Land Use designation is General Commercial and is surrounded by other
General Commercial and Business Professional land uses. The proposed Project is consistent with these and
surrounding zoning and land use designations. The proposed Project is not within a Specific Plan or Historic
Preservation District, nor is it within a General Plan Policy Overlay Area. The Project is also not within an
Airport Compatibility Zone or an Airport Influence Area. Thus, the Project will not conflict with any
applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR; General Plan Land Use Map (Figure 8); Zoning Map (Figure 9))
c) Would the Project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan? (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated)
As discussed Item IV.f above, the proposed Project is consistent with all applicable sections of the MSHCP.
Implementation of mitigation measures MM BIO 1 and MM BIO 2, ensure consistency with the MSHCP.
Thus, the proposed Project will not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 67 of 94
Therefore, impacts are less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures:
MM BIO 1: MSHCP Fees. Defined in Item IV.a, above.
MM BIO 2: Focused Survey, Pre-Construction Survey, and Avoidance. Defined in Item IV.a, above.
(Sources: General Biological Resources Assessment (Appendix B))
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES
a) Would the Project 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? (Less than Significant Impact)
The County’s principal mineral resources include clay, limestone, iron ore, sand, and construction aggregate.
As of 2010, six mines were active in the Lake Elsinore area, producing clay, stone/rock, and sand and gravel.
Decomposed granite has also been mined in the Lake Elsinore area in recent years. According to Figure 3.12-1
of the General Plan EIR, the proposed Project site is located within the Mineral Resource Zone 3 Area (MRZ-
3), or areas containing mineral deposits, the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data.
According to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of Prospective Zamora Automotive Site Collier
Avenue, Lake Elsinore California, April 26, 2017 (Phase I ESA), the Project site has been primarily vacant
since 1901. A three-walled block enclosure has been depicted on the property since at least 1961. Two large
billboard signs have occupied the property since 1985; one of the billboards was demolished as part of a City
drainage improvement project and is not planned to be rebuilt.
No mineral extraction has been documented on the site. Given the size and location of the Project site in
relationship to surrounding urban uses, it is highly unlikely that any surface mining or mineral recovery
operation could feasibly take place in the Project area.
Additionally, the City’s General Plan delineates mining operations areas by an overlay land use for mining
purposes. The proposed Project is not within the Extractive Overlay of the General Plan Land Use Map.
Therefore, the proposed Project will have less than significant impacts in regard to the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR; General Plan Land Use Map (Figure 8); Phase I ESA (Appendix F))
b) Would the Project result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery
site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (No Impact)
As discussed in Item XI.a above, the City’s General Plan delineates mining operations areas by an overlay land use
for mining purposes. The proposed Project is not within the Extractive Overlay of the General Plan Land Use
Map. Thus, the proposed Project will not result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR; General Plan Land Use Map (Figure 8); Phase I ESA (Appendix F))
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 68 of 94
XII. NOISE
a) Would the Project result in exposure of persons to, or generation of noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or other applicable standards of
other agencies? (Less than Significant Impact)
Noise exposure within the Project would be significant if proposed exterior spaces exceed noise levels of 70
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). Noise generated by the Project would be significant if daytime
or nighttime noise levels at the property line of a Commercial Manufacturing zone exceed 70 dBA LEQ (A-
weighted decibels, Equivalent Continuous Level) if daytime noise levels at the property line of General
Commercial zone exceed 65 dBA LEQ, or if nighttime noise levels at the property line of a General
Commercial zone exceed 60 dBA LEQ.
Exposure to Excessive Noise
On-site noise impacts would be significant if exterior noise levels adjacent to interior use areas exceed 70
CNEL. Vehicular noise from I-15 would be the most prominent noise source at the project site. As shown in
Figure 4, Interstate 15 Noise Contours, of the Acoustical Analysis Report, noise levels in the northeastern
portion of the site would exceed the 70 CNEL “clearly compatible” threshold. This portion of the site,
however, is proposed as a parking area that would not include any noise-sensitive receptors or employees, and
no noise control is required. Two portions of the proposed automotive dealership, the carwash and the service
reception, are located in the northeastern portion of the site where noise levels would exceed 70 CNEL.
The noise level at the northeastern exterior wall of the car wash would be 74 CNEL, which is classified at
“normally compatible”; however, there is no interior use associated with the car wash. The noise level at the
exterior of the service reception would be 73 CNEL, which is also classified as “normally compatible.”
Because the service reception would be an interior use area, it would have to comply with the Zone B-
Normally Compatible requirements. Project design features include conventional construction with closed
windows and the provision of a fresh air supply or air conditioning system. Upon compliance with these
requirements, on-site noise impacts would be less than significant.
Noise Generation
Modeling for the Project’s operations includes the combined noise levels generated by the automobile
servicing floor, automated car wash, and hand detailing car wash. The 6-foot masonry wall currently located
along the southeastern border of the site was included in the model. Receivers in the model were located at six
off-site locations in the immediate vicinity of the Project site, as shown in Figure 5, Operational Noise
Contours of the Acoustical Analysis Report. The results of this modeling are shown in Table XII-1,
Operational Noise Levels, below.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 69 of 94
Table XII-1
Operational Noise Levels
Source: Acoustical Analysis Report (Appendix I)
Noise levels at all six receivers were below the applicable noise limit for the nearby Commercial
Manufacturing and General Commercial zones. As such, noise impacts from future Project operations would
be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Acoustical Analysis Report (Appendix I))
b) Would the Project result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration
or groundborne noise levels? (Less than Significant Impact)
Vibration generated by the Project would be significant if construction-related ground-borne vibration levels
exceed the “strongly perceptible” vibration annoyance potential criteria for human receptors, as specified by
Caltrans (2013), of 0.1 inches per second peak particle velocity (PPV), or 2.0 inches per second PPV for
damage to industrial structures.
An on-site source of vibration during project construction would be a vibratory roller (primarily used to
achieve soil compaction as part of the foundation and paving construction), which may be used within 60 feet
of the nearest off-site commercial use. A vibratory roller creates approximately 0.210 inches per second
(in/sec) PPV at a distance of 25 feet. A 0.210 in/sec PPV vibration level would equal 0.08 in/sec PPV at a
distance of 60 feet. This would be lower than the 0.1 in/sec PPV vibration annoyance potential criteria for
human receptors and the 2.0 in/sec PPV potential criteria for damage to industrial structures. Furthermore, the
vibratory roller would be short-term and temporary, and no vibration from operation of the project is
anticipated. Therefore, temporary impacts associated with the vibratory roller (and other potential equipment)
would be less than significant. No vibrations are anticipated with operations.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Acoustical Analysis Report (Appendix I))
c) Would the Project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project
vicinity above levels existing without the Project? (Less than Significant Impact)
For traffic-related noise, impacts are considered significant in areas where implementation of the Project would
result in an increase of the ambient noise level by 3 dBA or more.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 70 of 94
The Project is expected to generate 1,487 daily trips, including 100 primary trips during the AM peak hour,
130 primary trips during the PM peak hour, and 215 trips during the Saturday peak hours. A general rule of
thumb is that a doubling of vehicles would cause a doubling in sound energy (a 3 CNEL increase), which
would be considered a perceptible and significant increase. PM peak hour traffic volumes with and without the
added project traffic are shown in Table XII-2, Existing and Future Traffic Volumes, below.
Table XII-2
Existing and Future Traffic Volumes
Source: Acoustical Analysis Report (Appendix I)
Given the expected Project-related increase in traffic, the Project would not cause a doubling in traffic on
Central Avenue, Collier Avenue, or other roads in the vicinity of the Project site, and therefore would not result
in a 3 CNEL increase in ambient noise levels. Impacts from off-site traffic noise would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Acoustical Analysis Report (Appendix I))
d) Would the Project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in
the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project? (Less than Significant Impact)
Construction activity would be considered significant for nearby commercial properties if the maximum noise
level exceeds 85 dBA for non-scheduled, intermittent, short-term operation of mobile equipment; if the
maximum noise level exceeds 75 dBA for repetitively scheduled and relatively long-term operation of
stationary equipment; or if construction activity occurs between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. of the
next day, on a weekend, or on a holiday.
Construction of the Project would involve demolition of an existing on-site masonry wall, vegetation removal,
grading, installation of underground utilities, construction of new buildings, and paving of the site. The
magnitude of the impact would depend on the type of construction activity, equipment, duration of each
construction phase, distance between the noise source and receiver, and intervening structures. Construction
would generate elevated noise levels that may disrupt nearby commercial uses southwest of the Project.
Construction equipment would not all operate at the same time or location. Furthermore, construction
equipment would not be in constant use during the 8-hour operating day. A scraper and a dozer would likely
be used to grade the site. The simultaneous use of a scraper and dozer would be the loudest combination of
equipment and was therefore analyzed to provide a conservative analysis for construction noise impacts. The
nearest commercial property is located as close as 60 feet to areas of the Project site that would be graded.
Table XII-3, Construction Equipment Noise Levels, below, provides the 60-foot distance noise level for
expected construction equipment.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 71 of 94
Table XII-3
Construction Equipment Noise Levels
Source: Acoustical Analysis Report (Appendix I)
Based on these assumptions, the maximum noise level (LMAX) generated by the simultaneous use of a scraper
and a dozer at the point closest to the commercial uses across Collier Avenue would be 82.0 dBA LMAX. This
would not exceed the maximum allowable noise level of 85 dBA LMAX for nonscheduled, intermittent, short-
term operation of mobile equipment. Construction-related noise may be out of compliance at the properties
immediately adjacent to the southeastern and northwestern boundaries of the Project site; however, the pump
station to the southeast is assumed to be unoccupied and the commercial property under construction to the
northwest is assumed to not be in operation until after the completion of the proposed Project’s construction
activities. Therefore, temporary increases in noise level from construction activities would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Acoustical Analysis Report (Appendix I))
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? (No Impact)
Noise exposure within the Project would be significant if proposed exterior spaces exceed noise levels of 70
CNEL. The proposed Project is not located within an airport land use plan nor is it located within two miles of
a public use airport and is located well beyond the 70 CNEL noise contour for the airport. The Project will not
impact expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR)
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? (Less than Significant Impact)
Noise exposure within the Project would be significant if proposed exterior spaces exceed noise levels of 70
CNEL. The closest private airstrip located in proximity to the proposed Project site is located approximately
4.0 miles north-northwest of Skylark Airport and 3.78 miles north-northwest of Skylark Airport Influence
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 72 of 94
Area. The Skylark Airport is a private airport that is the hub for air sports in Lake Elsinore and accommodates
organizations that utilize the airport for plane use, glider flights, and skydiving. The runway surface at Skylark
Airport consists of gravel and sand; as such, this surface generally does not permit optimal conditions for
frequent and convenient airport operations. The proposed Project site is not within the Skylark Airport
Influence Area as depicted in Figure 2.7, Airport Influence Areas of the City’s General Plan (and is located
well beyond the 70 CNEL noise contour for the airport) and as such does not need to be evaluated for noise
impacts upon the Project. Thus, the proposed Project will not expose people residing or working in the Project
area to excessive noise levels. No impact will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR; General Plan Figure 2.7 – Airport Influence Areas; Google Maps)
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
a) Would the Project 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)? (Less than Significant Impact)
According to the Department of Finance (DOF) population estimates, the City of Lake Elsinore had a
population of 63,365 as of January 1, 2018. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) Adopted Growth Forecast
projects an estimated population of 111,400 by the year 2040. According to the SCAG RTP/SCS, Lake
Elsinore had an employment base of 11,200 in 2012 and is projected to increase to 31,700 by the year 2040.
The increases in population as a result of the Project are insignificant as they are within the growth
assumptions estimated by SCAG for the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan. In addition, the proposed Project
is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation and Zoning classification of General Commercial.
No new expanded infrastructure is proposed that could accommodate additional growth in the area that is not
already possible with existing infrastructure. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Department of Finance, Southern California Association of Governments Final 2016 RTP/SCS,
Demographics & Growth Forecasts Appendix)
b) Would the Project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction
of replacement housing elsewhere? (No Impact)
No housing is located on the proposed Project site. This question is not applicable to the Project. No impacts
will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Google Maps)
c) Would the Project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere? (No Impact)
No housing is located on the proposed Project site; therefore, no people reside n the proposed Project site.
This question is not applicable to the Project. No impacts will occur.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 73 of 94
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Google Maps)
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection? (Less than Significant Impact)
The City contracts for fire services from the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD) and the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire). The nearest fire station is Station #97 Rosetta Canyon),
located approximately 1.2 miles northeast of the Project site. The fire department currently serves the exiting
parcel; therefore, the construction of the proposed Project will not represent a significant increase in the
number of developments requiring service.
Additionally, Chapter 16.74 of the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) establishes a program for
the adoption and administration of development impact fees by the City for the benefit of the citizens whereby
as a condition to the issuance of a building permit or certificate of occupancy by the City the property owner or
land developer will be required to pay development impact fees or provide other consideration to the City for
the purpose of defraying the costs of public expenditures for capital improvements (and operational services to
the extent allowed by law) which will benefit such new development. Section 16.74.049 includes a “Fire
facilities fee” to mitigate the additional burdens created by new development for City fire facilities. This is a
standard requirement and not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Since the proposed Project does not propose new housing, any impacts will be considered incremental and can
be offset through the payment of the appropriate development impact fees. The proposed Project will also be
required to comply with all applicable fire code requirements for construction and access to the site and as
such, will be reviewed by the City Fire Department to determine the specific fire requirements applicable to
ensure compliance with these requirements. Thus, the proposed Project will not result in substantial adverse
physical impacts related to fire protection. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Google Maps; LEMC)
b) Police protection? (Less than Significant Impact)
Police protection services are provided by the Lake Elsinore Police Department (LEPD) under contract by the
Riverside County Sheriff's Department (RCSD). The Lake Elsinore Police Department/Sheriff's Station is
located at 333 West Limited Street, approximately 1.45 miles south-southeast of the proposed Project site.
Chapter 16.74 of the LEMC establishes a program for the adoption and administration of development impact
fees by the City for the purpose of defraying the costs of public expenditures for capital improvements (and
operational services to the extent allowed by law) which will benefit such new development. The Project will
participate in this development impact fee program to mitigate impacts to police protection resources. Any
potential impacts would be considered incremental and can be offset through the payment of the development
impact fee. This is a standard requirement and not considered unique mitigation under CEQA. Thus, the
proposed Project will not result in substantial adverse physical impacts related to police protection. Therefore,
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 74 of 94
impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR Figure 3.14-1 – Police and Fire Stations; Google Maps; LEMC)
c) Schools? (Less than Significant Impact)
The proposed Project site is located within the Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD). The Project
would be required to pay school impact fees as levied by the LEUSD, which would provide funding for school
facilities. Since the proposed Project does not propose new housing, any potential impacts would be considered
incremental and can be offset through the payment of the appropriate development impact fees. This is a
standard requirement and not considered unique mitigation under CEQA. Thus, the proposed Project will not
result in substantial adverse physical impacts related to schools. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: LEUSD)
d) Parks? (Less than Significant Impact)
The proposed Project does not propose residential uses; therefore, a direct increase in park uses is not expected
as a result of Project implementation. Indirect impacts to park facilities from commercial development would
be the occasional use of a park during a lunch or dinner break.
Section 16.34.060 in Chapter 16.34 (Required Improvements) of the LEMC requires that prior to the issuance
of a building permit, the applicant pay fees for the purposes set forth in that section. Paragraph D of Section
16.34.060 describes the City’s Park Capital Improvement Fund and describes that the City Council has the
option to request dedication for park purposes or in lieu thereof, request that the applicant pay a fee for the
purpose of purchasing the land and developing and maintaining the City park system.
As is consistent with all commercial projects, the proposed Project would be required to pay park fees to the
City for the purpose of establishing, improving and maintaining park land within the City. Since the proposed
Project does not propose new housing, any potential impacts would be considered incremental and can be
offset through the payment of the appropriate park fees. This is a standard requirement and not considered
unique mitigation under CEQA. Thus, the proposed Project will not result in substantial adverse physical
impacts related to parks. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR; LEMC)
e) Other public services/facilities? (Less than Significant Impact)
The City of Lake Elsinore is part of the Riverside County Library System. The nearest City of Lake Elsinore
library to the project site is the Lake Elsinore Branch Library at 600 West Graham Avenue, approximately 1.25
miles south-southeast of the Project site. Section 16.34.060 in Chapter 16.34 (Required Improvements) of the
LEMC requires that prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant pay fees for the purposes set forth
in that section. Paragraph B of Section 16.34.060 describes the City’s Library Mitigation Fee and states that an
in-lieu fee for future construction of library improvements shall be paid to the City to assure the necessary
library facilities are provided the community. Since the proposed Project does not propose new housing, any
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 75 of 94
impacts will be considered incremental and can be offset through the payment of the appropriate library
mitigation fees. This is a standard requirement and not considered unique mitigation under CEQA. Therefore,
impacts related to libraries are less than significant.
Chapter 16.74 of the LEMC establishes a program for the adoption and administration of development impact
fees by the City for the purpose of defraying the costs of public expenditures for capital improvements (and
operational services to the extent allowed by law) which will benefit such new development. Section
16.74.048 includes an “Animal shelter facilities fee” to mitigate the additional burdens created by new
development for animal facilities. I n addition, the proposed Project will be required to pay City Hall & Public
Works fees, Community Center Fees, and Marina Facilities Fees prior to the issuance of building permits. This
a standard requirement and not considered unique mitigation under CEQA. Therefore, any impacts related to
other public services and facilities are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR; Google Maps; LEMC)
XV. 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? (Less than Significant Impact)
The City of Lake Elsinore Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2008 – 2030 establishes a goal of providing five
acres of park space per 1,000 residents. The Project does not propose elements (e.g., residential development)
that would result in substantial increased demands for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational
facilities. Indirect impacts to park facilities from commercial development would be the occasional use of a
park during a lunch or dinner break. Based on a review of Google Maps, there are no parks located within a
half mile of the proposed Project site. Therefore, it is unlikely that the proposed Project would increase the use
of existing parks.
As described in Item XIV.d above, the proposed Project would be required to pay park fees to the City for the
purpose of establishing, improving and maintaining park land within the City. Since the proposed Project does
not propose new housing, any impacts will be considered incremental and can be offset through the payment of
the appropriate park fees. This is a standard requirement and not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Thus, the proposed Project will not 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.
Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Google Maps)
b) Would the Project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Less than
Significant Impact)
The proposed Project involves the construction of a new 53,425 square feet automobile sales and service
facility that does not include recreational facilities. As presented in Items XIV.d and XV.a above, the proposed
Project will be required to pay park fees to the City for the purpose of establishing, improving and maintaining
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 76 of 94
park land within the City. This is a standard requirement and not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Thus, the proposed Project does not include recreational facilities and does not require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.
Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR; Project Description)
XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
a) Would the Project 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? (Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated)
A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) dated June,19 2018 was prepared for the Project by David Evans and
Associates, Inc. to evaluate the proposed Project’s impacts on traffic. Based on the analysis in the TIA, the
proposed Project is projected to generate approximately 100 primary trips during the AM peak, 130 primary trips
during the PM peak, and 215 trips during the Saturday peak periods.
The TIA evaluated the following study scenarios consistent with the City of Lake Elsinore requirements for
evaluation of potential traffic impacts:
• Existing Conditions;
• Existing Plus Project Conditions;
• Project Conditions; and
• Cumulative (Background) Conditions.
Intersections
An Intersection peak hour Level of Service (LOS) analysis was conducted at the following six (6) study locations,
including the Project access driveways:
1. Collier Avenue / Central Avenue (SR-74)
2. Collier Avenue / Crane Street
3. Collier Avenue / Project Driveway “A”
4. Collier Avenue / Project Driveway “B”
5. I-15 SB Ramps / Central Ave (SR-74)
6. I-15 NB Ramps / Central Ave (SR-74)
Capacity Analysis Methodologies
Intersection capacity analyses were conducted using Synchro software, which implements the methods of the
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2010) used in the TIA. The intersection capacity analyses utilize existing
intersection geometrics and existing and forecasted traffic volumes in analyzing AM and PM peak hour
intersection operating conditions. The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) traffic analysis methodology
calculates intersection Level of Service (LOS) based on the control delay (in seconds per vehicle) of vehicles
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 77 of 94
utilizing intersections. However, the use of delay to determine LOS for intersections controlled by traffic
signals is different than intersections controlled by stop signs as described in the following sections.
Signalized Intersections
The analysis determines a level of service that quantitatively describes the operating characteristics of
signalized intersections. Level of service is defined by the control delay of all vehicles passing through the
intersection that is attributed to the traffic signal. Table XVI-1, HCM 2010 – LOS Criteria for Signalized
Intersections, below, provides the HCM 2010 LOS thresholds for signalized intersections.
Table XVI-1
HCM 2010 – LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections
LOS Control Delay per Vehicle (seconds/vehicle)
A ≤ 10
B > 10 and ≤ 20
C > 20 and ≤ 35
D > 35 and ≤ 55
E > 55 and ≤ 80
F > 80
Source: TIA (Appendix J)
Unsignalized Intersections
Table XVI-2, HCM 2010 – LOS Criteria for one way stop controlled (OWSC), two way stop controlled
(TWSC), and all way stop controlled (AWSC), below, provides the HCM 2010 LOS thresholds for OWSC,
TWSC, and AWSC intersections. The performance measure defining level of service is control delay similar
to signalized intersections, however, the delay at OWSC and TWSC intersections is computed for each
movement and identifies the most critical (or worst) movement to define LOS for the entire intersection. The
critical movement is typically the stop controlled left turn or through movement from the minor street. At
AWSC intersections, the average control delay of the entire intersection defines LOS since each movement can
proceed in a sequential manner.
Table XVI-2
HCM 2010 - LOS Criteria for OWSC, TWSC, and AWSC
LOS Control Delay per Vehicle (seconds/vehicle)
A ≤ 10
B > 10 and ≤15
C > 15 and ≤ 25
D > 25 and ≤ 35
E > 35 and ≤ 50
F > 50
Source: TIA (Appendix J)
Level of Significance
The City of Lake Elsinore has adopted a LOS "D" as the minimum acceptable level of service at intersections
within the City’s jurisdiction regardless of type of control and require mitigation if a development project
causes the LOS to degrade below this minimum or pay a fair-share of the mitigation if a development project
contributes to a degraded LOS under cumulative conditions. Caltrans’ Traffic Impact Guidelines identifies a
minimum target level of service is the transition between LOS C and D on State highway facilities. At
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 78 of 94
intersections, this minimum level of service is applied to signalized intersections and ramp terminals and is
considered the State standard. However, the State recognizes that this standard may not be achievable -
particularly in suburban and urban areas - and therefore recommends that the lead agency consult with Caltrans
to determine the appropriate target level of service. At a minimum, the existing level of service should be
maintained at a Caltrans intersection if it found to be operating below the target level of service without any
proposed development.
Existing Traffic Analysis
The existing intersection capacity analysis uses existing intersection geometrics and existing AM and PM peak
hour traffic counts to determine level of service. Table XVI-3, Intersection Capacity Analysis - Existing
Conditions, below, shows that all of the intersections are operating acceptably during the AM (7:00-9:00 AM),
PM (4:00-6:00 PM), and Saturday (1:00-3:00 PM) peak periods.
Table XVI-3
Intersection Capacity Analysis - Existing Conditions
Intersection
Weekday
AM Peak Hour
Weekday
PM Peak Hour
Saturday
Peak Hour
Delay1 LOS2 Delay1 LOS2 Delay1 LOS2
Collier Avenue @ Central Avenue 29.9 C 43.8 D 44.9 D
Collier Avenue @ Crane Street3 23.6 C 31.6 D 14.4 B
I-15 SB Ramps @Central Avenue 42.0 D 23.8 C 17.3 B
I-15 NB Ramps @Central Avenue 20.3 C 16.7 B 18.1 B
Source: TIA (Appendix J)
1 Delay in seconds per vehicle
2 LOS = Level of Service
3 Currently an unsignalized intersection
Existing Plus Project Conditions
The Existing plus Project Conditions scenario identifies the Project’s impacts if it were built today. This
section describes the estimated trip generation of the Project and the Existing Plus Project analysis.
Project Trip Generation
To identify potential traffic impacts, trip generation rates are applied to the proposed land uses to estimate
Project vehicle trips. Trip generation rates for the Automobile Sales (ITE Land Use Category 840) obtained
from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual, 10th Edition.
Table XVI-4, Project Trip Generation, below, summarizes the estimated trip generation for the Project site
during the weekday AM peak hour (7-9 AM), the weekday PM peak hour (4-6 PM), and the Saturday peak
hour (1:00-3:00 PM) for automobile sales land uses. The Project would generate 100 primary trips during the
AM peak, 130 primary trips during the PM peak, and 215 trips during the Saturday peak periods.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 79 of 94
Table XVI-4
Project Trip Generation
Use Daily
Weekday
AM Peak Hour
Weekday
PM Peak Hour
Saturday
Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total
Automobile Sales
Trip Generation Rates
(ITE 840) Per 1,000 Sq. Ft
GFA
27.94 1.37 0.50 1.87 0.97 1.46 2.43 2.01 2.01 4.02
Project Trip Generation
53,425 Sq. Ft GFA
1,487 73 27 100 52 78 130 107 107 215
Source: TIA (Appendix J)
GFA = Gross floor area.
Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
Project trips are distributed by direction and assigned to the local street network. The distribution of the
primary Project trips is illustrated in Figure 5, Primary Trip Distribution of the TIA. The Project trips assigned
to the existing street network are illustrated in Figure 6, Project Trips of the TIA.
Existing Plus Project Traffic Analysis
Table XVI-5, Intersection Capacity Analysis – Existing Plus Project Conditions, below, shows that under
Existing Plus Project Condition, the study intersections would continue to operate acceptably with existing and
currently under construction traffic control and lane geometrics.
Table XVI-5
Intersection Capacity Analysis – Existing Plus Project Conditions
Intersection Weekday
AM Peak
Hour
Weekday
PM Peak
Hour
Saturday
Peak Hour
Delay1 LOS2 Delay1 LOS2 Delay1 LOS2
Collier Avenue @ Central Avenue 30.2 C 45.7 D 51.2 D
Collier Avenue @ Crane Street/Project Driveway4
With Committed Intersection Improvements3
36.8
8.8
E
A
72.3
11.9
F
B
23.4
12.9
C
B
Collier Avenue at Project Driveway “A”4 11.6 B 10.6 B 10.5 B
I-15 SB Ramps @Central Avenue 42.6 D 24.5 C 18.1 B
I-15 NB Ramps @Central Avenue 20.7 C 18.9 B 18.5 B
Source: TIA (Appendix J)
1 Delay in seconds per vehicle
2 LOS = Level of Service
3 See discussion below on planned, committed and funded transportation improvements
4 Currently an unsignalized intersection
Planned, Committed and Funded Transportation Improvements
This section describes intersection and roadway improvements that are anticipated to be implemented by others
under either existing or future cumulative conditions. The improvements and their sources are described
below:
1) Collier Avenue at Crane Street/Private Driveway. The installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 80 of 94
Collier Avenue / Crane Street / Private Driveway is a conditioned improvement required of the Central Plaza
development (the property immediately to north of the proposed Project), which is currently under
construction. As such, the traffic signal is considered a quasi-funded and committed improvement and is
anticipated to be completed before opening day of the Central Plaza development.
The mitigation measure for the Central Plaza project for this intersection that includes:
a. Construction of the east leg a Private Driveway providing access to the Central Plaza development (Central
Plaza is responsible for constructing half of the private driveway and the proposed Project is responsible for the
other half).
b. Modify the lane configuration on all approaches to accommodate movements into and out of the new private
driveway including an exclusive left-turn lane and a shared through-right lane on the westbound and
northbound approaches; an exclusive left-turn lane, a through lane, and a shared through-right lane on the
southbound approach, and a single shared left-through-right lane on the westbound approach.
c. Install a traffic signal.
The improvements above are project specific improvements for the Central Plaza development under
construction concurrent to the construction of the development. Therefore, the analysis in TIA assumed this
improvement is implemented under the Existing Plus Project scenario.
2) Collier Avenue at Central Avenue. The Central Plaza development proposed improvements along its
frontage with Collier Avenue and the intersection of Collier Avenue/Central Avenue that include:
a. Widen the northbound Collier Avenue approach to Collier Avenue/Central Avenue intersection to provide
an additional northbound through lane, an additional right-turn lane, and modify the signal phasing to provide
a northbound and a westbound right-turn overlap.
3) Central Avenue at I-15 Southbound Ramps. The Central Plaza development proposed improvements along
its frontage with Central Avenue and the intersection of Central Avenue/ I-15 Southbound Ramps that include:
a. Widen Central Avenue along the development’s frontage between Collier Avenue and the I-15 Southbound
Ramps to add an eastbound travel lane and reconfigure the eastbound approach of the intersection to provide
three through lanes and an exclusive right turn lane.
These improvements are under construction concurrent to the construction of the Central Plaza development.
The analysis in the TIA identifies that the intersection does not incur impacts until Cumulative Conditions. The
improvements above are off-site improvements conditioned for the Central Plaza development. Therefore, the
analysis in this report assumes this improvement is implemented under the Future Cumulative Condition
scenario, which is discussed below.
As shown in Table XVI-5, above, existing Plus Project Condition, the study intersections would continue to
operate acceptably with existing and currently under construction traffic control and lane geometrics, as
presented above.
Existing Plus Project Conditions
The proposed Project is anticipated to open in the Year 2019. The Project Conditions scenario evaluates
impacts due to the Project plus ambient growth in traffic within the study area up to the Project Buildout Year
of 2019. Typically, ambient growth in traffic ranges from 1% to 2% annually-the ambient growth in traffic in
the TIA uses a 2% annual rate of growth applied to the traffic volumes projected under the Existing Plus
Project scenario (above).
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 81 of 94
Project Traffic Analysis
The intersection capacity analysis of Project Conditions utilized the existing and currently under construction
intersection geometrics described for the Existing Plus Project scenario and the section on planned, committed
and funded transportation improvements, as well as the projected AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes
shown in Figure 9 of the TIA. The results of the analysis are shown in Table XVI-6, Intersection Capacity
Analysis – Project Conditions, below.
Table XVI-6
Intersection Capacity Analysis – Project Conditions
Intersection Weekday
AM Peak
Hour
Weekday
PM Peak
Hour
Saturday
Peak Hour
Delay1 LOS2 Delay1 LOS2 Delay1 LOS2
Collier Avenue @ Central Avenue 30.8 C 47.7 D 54.0 D
Collier Avenue @ Crane Street/Project Driveway4
With Committed Intersection Improvements3
38.6
8.9
E
A
79.8
12.0
F
B
24.1
12.9
C
B
Collier Avenue at Project Driveway “A”4 11.7 B 10.7 B 10.5 B
I-15 SB Ramps @Central Avenue 45.0 D 25.5 C 18.5 B
I-15 NB Ramps @Central Avenue 21.5 C 17.3 B 18.3 B
Source: TIA (Appendix J)
1 Delay in seconds per vehicle
2 LOS = Level of Service
3 See discussion above on planned, committed and funded transportation improvements
4 Currently an unsignalized intersection
As shown in Table XVI-6, above, the study intersections would continue to operate acceptably with the
existing geometrics and currently under construction traffic control and intersection modifications.
Cumulative Conditions
The Cumulative Conditions scenario evaluates potential project impacts cumulatively with ambient traffic
growth, and growth in traffic from development that has been approved but not yet constructed. Traffic
estimated from cumulative development is added to the traffic projections developed for the Project Conditions
scenario (described above). The estimated AM and PM peak period trip generation for cumulative
development was obtained from the Central Plaza Traffic Impact Study. A total of 30 cumulative projects
were utilized for the TIA (please reference Table 5-1: Estimated Trip Generation for Cumulative Development,
from p. 18 of the TIA). Total trip generation from these 30 cumulative projects is 456,607 daily trips.
Cumulative Traffic Analysis
The intersection capacity analysis of Cumulative Conditions utilized the projected AM and PM peak hour
traffic volumes shown in Figure 11 of the TIA, and the intersection geometrics described above for the Existing
Plus Project scenario and the section on planned, committed and funded transportation improvements and
shown in Figure 12 of the TIA. The results of the analysis are shown in Table XVI-7, Intersection Capacity
Analysis – Cumulative Conditions, below.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 82 of 94
Table XVI-7
Intersection Capacity Analysis – Cumulative Conditions
Intersection Weekday
AM Peak
Hour
Weekday
PM Peak
Hour
Saturday
Peak Hour
Delay1 LOS2 Delay1 LOS2 Delay1 LOS2
Collier Avenue @ Central Avenue
With Committed Intersection Improvements3
79.0
44.5
E
D
104.2
41.8
F
D
55.6
27.6
D
C
Collier Avenue @ Crane Street/Project Driveway4
With Committed Intersection Improvements3
63.3
16.5
F
B
243.1
14.5
F
B
23.7
12.4
C
B
Collier Avenue at Project Driveway “A”4 12.0 B 12.1 B 10.5 B
I-15 SB Ramps @Central Avenue
With Committed Intersection Improvements3
53.5
44.8
D
D
59.7
39.0
E
D
19.2
21.8
B
C
I-15 NB Ramps @Central Avenue 43.2 D 53.8 D 18.5 B
Source: TIA (Appendix J)
1 Delay in seconds per vehicle
2 LOS = Level of Service
3 See discussion above on planned, committed and funded transportation improvements
4 Currently an unsignalized intersection
As shown in Table XVI-7, above, the study intersections would operate acceptably with either existing
geometrics, or with implementation of committed intersection improvements.
The proposed Project will have impact on one study intersection under Existing Plus Project and Opening Year
Plus Project Conditions. The study intersections would operate acceptably with either existing geometrics or
after implementation of committed intersection improvements. Therefore, there are no required off-site
mitigation measures.
The installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Collier Avenue / Crane Street / Private Driveway is a
conditioned improvement required of the Central Plaza development, which is currently under construction.
As such, the traffic signal is considered a quasi-funded and committed improvement and is anticipated to be
completed before opening day of the Central Plaza development.
A traffic signal is required at the intersection of Collier Avenue / Crane Street / Private Driveway for the
project to have no impact under Existing + Project, Project Opening Day and Cumulative scenarios.
Therefore, in the event the Central Plaza development does not implement the traffic signal at the Collier
Avenue / Crane Street / Private Driveway prior to the Project’s opening day, the Project may be required to
implement the traffic signal and be reimbursed through a fair-share agreement with the Central Plaza
development. The fair-share responsibility of the Project and the Central Plaza development is based on the
proportion of weekday PM peak hour trips using the intersection by each development. The Project fair-share
percentage is 61%. Therefore, mitigation measure MM TR1 shall be implemented, which requires payment of
this fair-share percentage should the Central Plaza development not implement the traffic signal at the Collier
Avenue / Crane Street / Private Driveway prior to the Project’s opening day. Fair-share payment is considered
adequate mitigation under CEQA.
The following Project design features shall be implemented:
1. Construct half of the ultimate Collier Avenue section along the project's frontage.
a. Driveways "A" and "B" are restricted to right turn in and right turn out only by construction of the
median in Collier Avenue.
b. Driveways accessing Collier Avenue and Crane Street/Private Driveway require standard pavement
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 83 of 94
markings and signage conforming to the standards in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices.
2. Provide driveway access to Private Driveway. The ultimate width of Private Driveway is being constructed
by the adjacent commercial development.
3. The landscaping plan should include planting restrictions in the areas shown to maintain clear sight lanes.
4. Provide on-site signs at driveway entries directing service customers to the service reception area.
Lastly, the Project will be required to pay the applicable Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) at the
time of building permit issuance. The TUMF pays the Project’s share of impacts to regional roadway facilities.
Payment of TUMF is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
According to Figure 3.4-25 of the General Plan EIR, a Class II bikeway is proposed along Collier Avenue. A
Class II bikeway provides a striped lance for one-way bike travel. This bikeway will be provided by the
Project. In addition, the proposed Project will include short- and long-term bicycle parking. Improvements
related to safety contained in Project design features will ensure that adequate sight distance is provided at each
Project access location which will support Project compatibility with bicycle traffic.
In addition, the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) provides public bus service to the City. RTA bus Routes 7
and 22 operate within the vicinity of the Project site. Additionally, the Central Plaza Project will include the
installation of a new bus stop along Collier Avenue approximately 500 feet south of Central Avenue. Thus, the
proposed Project will support the use of alternative transportation methods and will not conflict with adopted
policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the
performance or safety of such facilities with implementation of Project design features. Therefore, impacts are
less than significant.
Therefore, with the implementation of Project design features, payment of TUMF, incorporation of mitigation
measure MM TR 1, and the provision of sidewalks and bike parking, any Project impacts that could 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 would be reduced to a less than
significant level.
Mitigation Measures:
MM TR 1: Fair-Share Payment. In the event the Central Plaza development does not implement the traffic
signal at the Collier Avenue / Crane Street / Private Driveway prior to the Project’s opening day, the Project
may be required to implement the traffic signal and be reimbursed through a fair-share agreement with the
Central Plaza development. The fair-share responsibility of the Project and the Central Plaza development is
based on the proportion of weekday PM peak hour trips using the intersection by each development. The
Project fair-share percentage is 61%.
(Sources: TIA (Appendix J))
b) Would the Project conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not
limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by
the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (Less than
Significant Impact)
According to Table 2-1-CMP System of Highways and Roadways, in the 2011 Riverside County Congestion
Management Program (CMP), the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) has defined the CMP
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 84 of 94
roadway system in Lake Elsinore to be State Route 74 (SR-74) and Interstate 15 (I-15). All local jurisdictions
are responsible for determining the impacts of local development/land use decisions on the CMP roadway
system.
RCTC requires local agencies whose developments impact the CMP system by causing the LOS on a non-
exempt segment to fall to “F” to prepare deficiency plans. I-15 freeway ramps are currently operating at an
acceptable LOS (LOS D or better) and are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS for all future
analysis scenarios evaluated as part of this Project with the exception of the I-15 SB On-Ramp from Central
Avenue (SR-74) which is forecast to operate at a deficient LOS (LOS E or worse) at Cumulative Conditions.
After implementation of committed intersection improvements, described above, which are not associated with
the Project, these deficiencies will be rectified. Therefore, the proposed Project will have a less than
significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR; RCTC CMP; TIA (Appendix J))
c) Would the Project 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? (No Impact)
The Project is not located within an airport influence area and will not change air traffic patterns, increase air
traffic levels or change the location of air traffic patterns. No impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR)
d) Would the Project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? (Less than Significant
Impact)
The proposed Project does not propose any design features that would increase traffic hazards. The Project is
consistent with the on-site and surrounding zoning designations, and implementation of the Project will not
introduce incompatible uses to the Project Area. Implementation of Project design feature improvements
related to Collier Avenue, on-site circulation, sight distance and directional signage which will serve to reduce
any potential hazards. Thus, proposed Project will not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or
incompatible uses. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR; TIA (Appendix J); Zoning Map (Figure 9))
e) Would the Project result in inadequate emergency access? (Less than Significant Impact)
The proposed Project will include three access points:
(1) A right-in/right-out on Collier Avenue (Driveway “A”);
(2) A right-in/right-out on Collier Avenue (Driveway “B”); and
(3) An access location at the northerly portion of the Project to a private driveway/Crane Street.
The proposed Project is required to comply with the City’s development review process including review for
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 85 of 94
compliance with the all applicable fire code requirements for construction and access to the site. The Project
has been reviewed by the City Fire Department for compliance with the specific fire requirements applicable to
the Project. This will ensure that the proposed Project would provide adequate emergency access to and from
the site. Further, the City Engineer and the City Fire Department have determined that any modifications to
existing roadways provide adequate emergency access or emergency response would be maintained. Thus,
implementation of the proposed Project will not result in inadequate emergency access. Therefore, impacts are
less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: General Plan EIR)
f) Would the Project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit,
bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?
(Less than Significant Impact)
According to Figure 3.4-25 of the General Plan EIR, a Class II bikeway is proposed along Collier Avenue. A
Class II bikeway provides a striped lance for one-way bike travel. This bikeway will be provided by the
Project. In addition, the proposed Project will include short- and long-term bicycle parking. Improvements
related to safety contained in Project design features will ensure that adequate sight distance is provided at each
Project access location which will support Project compatibility with bicycle traffic.
In addition, the RTA provides public bus service to the City. RTA bus Routes 7 and 22 operate within the
vicinity of the Project site. Additionally, the Central Plaza Project will include the installation of a new bus
stop along Collier Avenue approximately 500 feet south of Central Avenue. Thus, the proposed Project will
support the use of alternative transportation methods and will not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or
safety of such facilities with implementation of Project design features. Therefore, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Project Description; General Plan EIR Figure 3.4-25 – Proposed Bikeways; TIA (Appendix J);
Central Plaza Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2016-01)
XVII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
a) 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: 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)? (Less than Significant
with Mitigation Incorporated)
A Project-specific Cultural Resources Inventory including a records search, Sacred Land File search, Native
American outreach, historic archival research, and a field survey was conducted for the Project area. The
Cultural Resources Inventory details the methods and results of the cultural resources survey and has been
prepared to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The records search conducted at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) at the University of California,
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 86 of 94
Riverside on March 7, 2018 indicated that 31 previous cultural resources studies have been conducted within
one mile of the Project area, none of which occurred within the Project site. The records search results also
indicated that a total of 20 cultural resources have been previously recorded within one mile of the Project area;
however, no sites have been recorded within the Project site.
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was contacted on March 7, 2018 for a Sacred Lands File
search and list of tribal contacts. The response, received on March 8, 2018, indicated that the Sacred Lands
File search was negative, however the area is sensitive for cultural resources.
The field investigations included intensive pedestrian survey of the study area by HELIX archaeologist Mary
Villalobos and Native American monitor Cameron Linton of Pechanga Band of Luiseño Mission Indians
(Pechanga) on March 16, 2018. The survey identified a three-walled structure made of cinder blocks and
wood posts of an unknown age. The 1953 USGS 7.5-minute Elsinore quadrangle map, based on aerial photos
taken in 1951, shows a structure in the southwest corner of the Project. However, it is not known if this
mapped structure represents the current three-walled structure, seen on aerial imagery from 1967, which is the
earliest available for the project site. No historic or prehistoric artifactual material was observed.
Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), signed into law in 2014, amended CEQA and established new requirements for
tribal notification and consultation. AB 52 applies to all projects for which a notice of preparation or notice of
intent to adopt a negative declaration/mitigated negative declaration is issued after July 1, 2015. AB 52 also
broadly defines a new resource category of tribal cultural resources and established a more robust process for
meaningful consultation that includes:
• Prescribed notification and response timelines;
• Consultation on alternatives, resource identification, significance determinations, impact
evaluation, and mitigation measures; and
• Documentation of all consultation efforts to support CEQA findings.
On May 1, 2018, the City provided written notification of the Project in accordance with AB 52 to the
following Native American tribes:
• Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians;
• Morongo Band of Mission Indians;
• Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians;
• Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians;
• Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians; and
• Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians.
Of the tribes notified, only the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians requested formal government-to-government
consultation under AB 52. The City and met the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians on May 17, 2018.
Consultation concluded on June 21, 2018. The Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians requested modified
language to the mitigation measure during consultation. These modifications are reflected in mitigation
measures MM CUL 1 through MM CUL 10, below.
With the incorporation of mitigation measures MM CUL 1 through MM CUL 10, the Project will not 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). Impacts will be less
than significant with the incorporation of mitigation.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 87 of 94
Mitigation Measures:
MM CUL 1: Retain archaeologist/Native American Monitor. At least 30 days prior to any grading,
excavation and/or other ground-disturbing activities on the Project site, the applicant shall retain a qualified
archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology and
listed on the Register of Professional Archaeologists (RPA) or the County of Riverside list of qualified
archaeologists to implement the monitoring program, including the monitoring all ground-disturbing activities
by an archaeologist and a Native American tribal monitor.
MM CUL 2: Cultural Resources Monitoring Plan. The Project Archaeologist, in consultation with the
Monitoring Tribe, the City, and the applicant, shall develop a Cultural Resources Monitoring Plan (CRMP) to
address the details, timing and responsibility of all archaeological and cultural activities that will occur on the
Project site.
Details in the Plan shall include:
a. Project grading and development scheduling;
b. The coordination of a monitoring schedule as agreed upon by the Monitoring Tribe, the Project
Archaeologist, the City, and the applicant; and
c. The protocols and stipulations that the Monitoring Tribe, the Project Archaeologist, the City, and the
applicant will follow in the event of inadvertent cultural resources discoveries, including any newly discovered
cultural resources.
MM CUL 3: Sensitivity Training. Prior to any grading, excavation and/or other ground-disturbing activities
on the Project site, the Project Archaeologist and the Monitoring Tribe shall conduct cultural resources
sensitivity training for all construction personnel. Construction personnel shall be informed of the types of
archaeological resources that may be encountered, and of the proper procedures to be enacted in the event of an
inadvertent discovery of archaeological resources or human remains. The Project construction manager shall
ensure that construction personnel are made available for and attend the training and shall retain documentation
demonstrating attendance.
MM CUL 4: Authority to Stop and Redirect Excavation. In accordance with the agreement required in MM
CUL 2, the archaeological monitor and designated tribal monitor shall have the authority to stop and redirect
excavation in order to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered within the Project
site.
MM CUL 5: Artifacts of Native American Origin. All artifacts discovered at the development site shall be
inventoried and analyzed by the archaeological monitor and Native American monitor. 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 Project Archaeologist/archaeological monitor and Native American monitor 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 applicant 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 Project Archaeologist, following consultation with the Monitoring Tribe, 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.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 88 of 94
MM CUL 6: Inadvertent Discoveries of Subsurface Archaeological/Cultural Resources. If inadvertent
discoveries of subsurface archaeological/cultural resources are discovered during grading, the Project
archaeologist and the Tribal monitor, in consultation with the City, shall assess the significance of such
resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources. The determination as to the
significance or the mitigation for such resources will be based on the provisions of CEQA and shall take into
account the religious beliefs, customs, and practices of the Tribes.
MM CUL 7: Final Archaeological Report. The Project Archaeologist shall prepare a final archaeological
report within sixty (60) days of completion of the Project. The report shall follow Archaeological Resource
Management Report (ARMR) Guidelines and City requirements and shall include at a minimum: a discussion
of monitoring methods and techniques used; the results of the monitoring program, including any artifacts
recovered; an inventory of any resources recovered; updated DPR forms, if any; and any other site(s)
identified; final disposition of the resources; and any additional recommendations. A final copy shall be
submitted to the City, EIC, and the Monitoring Tribe.
MM CUL 8: Human Remains. 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 NAHC within 24 hours. Subsequently, the NAHC 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
MM CUL 9: Monitoring Agreement. At least 30 days prior to grading, excavation and/or other ground-
disturbing activities the applicant shall contact the appropriate Tribe to notify the Tribe of excavation activities
and coordinate with the Tribe to develop a Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the
designation, responsibilities, and participation of Native American tribal monitors during excavation and other
ground disturbing activities and construction scheduling.
MM CUL 10: Avoidance of Sacred Sites. All sacred sites, should they be encountered within the Project
area, shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation, if feasible.
(Sources: Cultural Resources Inventory (Appendix C); City AB 52 Notification Letters (Appendix N1);
Tribal AB 52 Response Letters (Appendix N2))
b) 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 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 for the
purpose of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance to a California Native
tribe? (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated)
Please reference the discussion in Item XVII.a, above. With the incorporation of mitigation measures MM
CUL 1 through MM CUL 10, the Project will not 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,
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 89 of 94
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. Impacts will be less than significant with
the incorporation of mitigation.
Mitigation Measures:
MM CUL 1: Retain archaeologist/Native American Monitor. Described in Item XVII.a above.
MM CUL 2: Cultural Resources Monitoring Plan. Described in Item XVII.a above.
MM CUL 3: Sensitivity Training. Described in Item XVII.a above.
MM CUL 4: Authority to Stop and Redirect Excavation. Described in Item XVII.a above.
MM CUL 5: Artifacts of Native American Origin. Described in Item XVII.a above.
MM CUL 6: Inadvertent Discoveries of Subsurface Archaeological/Cultural Resources. Described in Item
XVII.a above.
MM CUL 7: Final Archaeological Report. Described in Item XVII.a above.
MM CUL 8: Human Remains. Described in Item XVII.a above.
MM CUL 9: Monitoring Agreement. Described in Item XVII.a above.
MM CUL 10: Avoidance of Sacred Sites. Described in Item XVII.a above.
(Sources: Cultural Resources Inventory (Appendix C); City AB 52 Notification Letters (Appendix N1);
Tribal AB 52 Response Letters (Appendix N2))
XVIII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
a) Would the Project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water
Quality Control Board? (Less than Significant Impact)
The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) sets water quality standards for all ground
and surface waters within the Project’s region. Wastewater conveyance and treatment for the proposed Project
will be provided by the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). The District’s Wastewater
Master Plan provides a long-range assessment of existing and future wastewater generation for its service area,
which includes the City, and a capital improvements plan describing proposed improvements programs
designed to address future wastewater collection system demands. In developing its Wastewater Master Plan,
EVMWD used a 2030 service area population, household and employment projections.
The development of the Project is not expected to create any exceedances in wastewater treatment standards.
While the Project will contribute an additional increment of wastewater flow to EVMWD’s wastewater
treatment facilities, the Project will also contribute connection fees to address infrastructure impacts and
monthly service charges to address operational impacts. Payment of these fees is not considered unique
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 90 of 94
mitigation under CEQA. Thus, the proposed Project is not anticipated to exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB). Therefore, impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: EVMWD; General Plan EIR)
b) Would the Project 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? (Less than Significant Impact)
Title 16 of the City’s Municipal Code (LEMC) requires the construction of wastewater facilities as needed to
serve future construction with such facilities of such size and design to adequately satisfy the sanitary sewer
requirements of the development. The Project is within the service boundary for the EVMWD. EVMWD
provided a letter indicating an ability to provide water and wastewater service to the Project on July 11, 2017.
Further, the Project will be required to pay all development impacts fees. Impact fees are not considered
unique mitigation under CEQA. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: EVWMD; EVMWD Will Serve Letter (Appendix M); General Plan EIR; LEMC)
c) Would the Project 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? (Less than Significant Impact)
The Project will follow the existing condition drainage pattern and will generally carry runoff to the west side
of the Project. Referring to Appendix B Hydrology Map, of the Preliminary Hydrology Report, drainage area
A is defined as the area on the East side of the Project, parallel to the I-15 freeway. Stormwater sheet flows
North into 2 proposed grated inlets and into 12” storm drains that outflow into the proposed Bioretention Basin
A. Drainage area B, which is on the West side of the Project, adjacent to Collier Avenue, drains West into the
proposed storm drain line that runs South-North through 5 grated inlets. Storm water is then directed to
Bioretention Basin B.
During a 2-year storm event, the proposed bioretention basins are used to treat storm water using Best
Management Practices. The Project was determined to be infeasible to use infiltration BMPs. For that reason,
an underdrain is provided in the gravel layer of the basins, which is used to convey treated water to the public
storm drain system.
Specifically, treated storm water from Bioretention Basin A joins the treated storm water from Basin B in the
gravel layer using a solid 6-inch storm drain that connects the basins. Through the perforated underdrain,
storm water is conveyed to the outflow pipe, where flows ultimately join the public storm drain line on Collier
Avenue.
For storm events greater than the 2-year, storm water overflows from Basin A to the surface of Basin B using a
driveway culvert. Once in Basin B, water is conveyed towards the overflow structure and directed towards the
outflow storm drain that connects to the public 48-inch reinforced concrete pipe in Collier Avenue.
In addition, storm drains located within the City limits are maintained by the City as well as by the Riverside
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD). Storm runoff within the City is
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 91 of 94
generally intercepted by a network of City facilities and then conveyed into regional facilities. All downstream
conveyance channels that will receive runoff from the Project are engineered and regularly maintained to
ensure flow capacity. The Project will be required to pay all required development impacts fees, including
Area Drainage Plan Fees. Payment of these fees is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA. Therefore,
impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: Preliminary Hydrology Report (Appendix G); WQMP (Appendix H))
d) Would the Project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project from existing
entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (Less than Significant
Impact)
As described in Item XVII.b above, EVMWD provided a letter on July 11, 2017, indicating an ability to provide
water service to the Project. EVMWD obtains its potable water supplies from imported water from
Metropolitan, local surface water from Canyon Lake, and local groundwater from the Elsinore Basin.
According to EVMWD’s Urban Water Management Plan, EVMWD has determined that it has current and
anticipated future supplies are sufficient to meet the projected dry-year and multiple dry-year demand. Thus,
there are sufficient water supplies as well as water shortage contingency plans to protect existing and future
water needs within the EVMWD service area. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: EVMWD; EVMWD Will Serve Letter (Appendix M); General Plan EIR)
e) Would the Project 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? (Less than Significant Impact)
As described in Item XVII.b above, EVMWD provided a letter on July 11, 2017, indicating an ability to
provide water and wastewater service to the Project. Furthermore, the Project will be required to pay
development impact fees. Impact fees are not considered unique mitigation under CEQA. Therefore, impacts
are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: EVWMD; EVMWD Will Serve Letter (Appendix M))
f) Would the Project be served by a landfill system with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate
the project’s solid waste disposal needs? (Less than Significant Impact)
Riverside County Waste Management facilitates solid waste disposal services for Riverside County, and the
City of Lake Elsinore contracts with CR&R for trash pickup. Solid waste generated within Lake Elsinore is
transported to El Sobrante Landfill, Badlands Landfill, or Lamb Canyon Landfill. El Sobrante Landfill is
expected to reach capacity by 2045. Badlands Landfill is expected to reach capacity by 2024 and Lamb Canyon
Landfill by 2021. Both Badlands and Lamb Canyon Landfills have the potential to expand their facilities and
capacity.
Chapter 14.12 of the LEMC requires that project construction divert a minimum of 50 percent of construction and
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 92 of 94
demolition debris. The Project is anticipated to divert 65 percent or more of nonhazardous construction and
demolition debris generated at the site. The amount of solid waste generated by the Project is anticipated to be
accommodated by these existing landfills and overall solid waste would be reduced by the provision of recycling
and green waste collection. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: CAP Consistency Assessment (Appendix E); General Plan EIR; LEMC)
g) Would the Project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid
waste? (Less than Significant Impact)
The California Integrated Waste Management Act under the Public Resource Code requires that local
jurisdictions divert at least 50 percent of all solid waste generated by January 1, 2000. As of 2006, the City
achieved a 50 percent waste diversion rate. In addition, Chapter 14.12 of the City Municipal Code requires
that project construction divert a minimum of 50 percent of construction and demolition debris. The Project is
anticipated to divert 65 percent or more of nonhazardous construction and demolition debris generated at the
site. Thus, the proposed Project will be required to comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: CAP Consistency Assessment (Appendix E); General Plan EIR; LEMC)
V. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following are Mandatory Findings of Significance in accordance with Section 21083 of CEQA and
Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines.
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? (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation
Incorporated)
As discussed throughout the Initial Study, the proposed Project area contains some sensitive biological
resources that could potentially be affected by the proposed Project. All potentially significant impacts to
biological resources would be avoided or reduced to a less than significant impact with the implementation of
mitigation measures MM BIO 1 through MM BIO 3 identified in this initial study as well as design features
and measures already incorporated into the Project.
The presence of any previously recorded or potential cultural resources was not found on the proposed Project
site. Further, the site has been previously disturbed, and it is highly unlikely that any cultural resources exist.
However, in order to provide protection in the unlikely event that cultural resources are unearthed during
Project construction, implementation of mitigation measures MM CUL 1 though MM CUL 10 will reduce
potential impacts to less than significant.
Thus, the proposed Project will not 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
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 93 of 94
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or an endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Therefore,
impacts are less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
(Sources: Above Initial Study)
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)? (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
As demonstrated by the analysis in this Initial Study, the proposed Project will not result in any significant
environmental impacts. The Project is consistent with local and regional plans, and the Project’s air quality
emissions do not exceed established thresholds of significance. The Project adheres to all other land use plans
and policies with jurisdiction in the Project area. With implementation of mitigation, the Project will not cause
a significant increase in traffic volumes within the Project area. Therefore, the proposed Project will not have
impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. Impacts will be less than significant with
mitigation incorporated.
(Sources: Above Initial Study)
c) Does the Project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly? (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
Effects on human beings were evaluated as part of this analysis of this initial study and found to be less than
significant with implementation of mitigation measures in biological resources, cultural/paleontological
resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gases, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology & water quality,
land use and planning, transportation/traffic, and tribal cultural resources. Based on the analysis and
conclusions in this initial study, the proposed Project will not cause substantial adverse effects directly or
indirectly to human beings. Therefore, potential direct and indirect impacts on human beings that result from the
proposed Project are considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
(Sources: Above Initial Study)
VI. PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED
This section identifies those persons who prepared or contributed to the preparation of this document. This
section is prepared in accordance with Section 15129, Organizations and Persons Consulted, of the CEQA
Guidelines.
Justin Kirk, Principal Planner, City of Lake Elsinore
Matthew Fagan Consulting Services, Inc.
• Matthew Fagan, Owner
• Angie Douvres, Associate
VII. REFERENCES/SOURCES
The following documents were used as information sources during preparation of this document. Except as
noted, they are available for public review at the City of Lake Elsinore, Community Development Department,
130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530, ph. (951) 674-3124.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-18; Tentative Parcel Map No. 37534 (2017-74); and Commercial Design Review No. 2018-02
Page 94 of 94
CCR
https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/index?__lrTS=20180713171207273&bhcp=1&transitionType=Default&cont
extData=(sc.Default)
Central Plaza Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2016-01 http://www.lake-elsinore.org/city-hall/city-
departments/community-development/planning/ceqa-documents-available-for-public-review/central-plaza-is-
mnd
Code of Federal Regulations
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collectionCfr.action?selectedYearFrom=2017&go=Go
Department of Finance http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/
Elsinore Area Plan
http://planning.rctlma.org/Portals/0/genplan/general_Plan_2017/areaplans/ELAP_041117.pdf?ver=2017-
10-06-094258-763
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) http://www.evmwd.com/
General Plan EIR http://www.lake-elsinore.org/city-hall/city-departments/community-
development/planning/lake-elsinore-general-plan/general-plan-certified-eir
General Plan http://www.lake-elsinore.org/city-hall/city-departments/community-development/planning/lake-
elsinore-general-plan
Google Maps https://www.google.com/maps
Health and Safety Codes https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codesTOCSelected.xhtml?tocCode=HSC
Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/LakeElsinore/
Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD) https://www.leusd.k12.ca.us
Public Resources Code Section 12220(g) https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/public-resources-code/prc-sect-
12220.html
RCTC CMP http://www.rctcdev.info/uploads/media_items/congestionmanagementprogram.original.pdf
Southern California Association of Governments Final 2016 RTP/SCS, Demographics & Growth Forecasts
Appendix) http://scagrtpscs.net/Documents/2016/final/f2016RTPSCS_DemographicsGrowthForecast.pdf
Due to the sign of the Exhibits they have not been printed. Please refer to http://www.lake-
elsinore.org/city-hall/community-development/planning/ceqa-documents-available-for-public-
review/lake-elsinore-honda-mnd-2018-01 for copies of the technical studies.
I 15
COLLIER AVE
3RD ST
CHANEY ST
DEXTER AVE
MINTHORN ST
CENTRAL AVE
POTTERY ST
D
I
A
N
A
L
N
2ND ST
POE ST
C
A
MIN
O D
E
L N
O
R
T
E
SUMNER AVE
DAVIS STP
A
L
M
D
R
H W Y 74
CAMBERN AVE
MOHR ST
PASADENA ST
MAIN ST
RIVERSIDE DR ALLAN ST
HEALD AVE
CRANE ST
FLINT ST
HUNCO W AY
10TH ST
RYAN AVE
H
I
L
L
A
V
E
EL TORO RD
COOLIDGE AVE
GED G E AVE
ENTERPRISE W AY
I 15
ALLAN ST
CRANE ST
3RD ST
I 15
COLLIER AVE
3RD ST
CHANEY ST
DEXTER AVE
MINTHORN ST
CENTRAL AVE
POTTERY ST
D
I
A
N
A
L
N
2ND ST
POE ST
C
A
MIN
O D
E
L N
O
R
T
E
SUMNER AVE
DAVIS STP
A
L
M
D
R
H W Y 74
CAMBERN AVE
MOHR ST
PASADENA ST
MAIN ST
RIVERSIDE DR ALLAN ST
HEALD AVE
CRANE ST
FLINT ST
HUNCO W AY
10TH ST
RYAN AVE
H
I
L
L
A
V
E
EL TORO RD
COOLIDGE AVE
GED G E AVE
ENTERPRISE W AY
I 15
ALLAN ST
CRANE ST
3RD ST
PLANNING APPLIC ATION 20 17-74VICINITY MAP
PROJECT SITE
´