Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinal Revised Initial Study TTM 33140 INITIAL STUDY FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2005-10 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 33140 Lead Agency: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore,CA 92530 Prepared By: MATTHEW FAGAN CONSULTING SERVICES 42011 Avenida Vista Ladera Temecula,CA 92591 Project Applicant: THE TAFT CORPORATION 6080 Busch Drive Malibu,CA 90265 Revised January 2007 I. INTRODUCTION A. PURPOSE This document is an Initial Study for evaluation of environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 33140 (TTM 33140). For purposes of this document, this application will be called the "proposed project". B. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT REQUIREMENTS As defined by Section 15063 of the State 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 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 that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable. • The proposal could cause direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings. According to Section 15070(a), a Negative Declaration is deemed appropriate if the proposal would not result in any significant effect on the environment. According to Section 15070(b), a Mitigated Negative Declaration is deemed appropriate if it is determined that though a proposal could result in a significant effect,mitigation measures are available to reduce these significant effects to less than significant levels. This Initial Study has determined that the proposed Specific Plan and applications will result in potentially significant environmental impacts and therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is deemed as the appropriate document to provide necessary environmental evaluations and clearance, and recommend mitigation measures required to reduce any potentially significant impact to a less than significance level. This Initial Study and Mitigation Negative Declaration are prepared in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et. seq.); Section 15070 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970,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 an agency with jurisdiction by law. 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. TTM 33140 1 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 City of Lake Elsinore decisionmakers, other responsible or interested agencies, and the general public of potential environmental effects of the proposed Specific Plan and applications. 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 public agencies must balance adverse environmental effects against other public objectives,including economic and social goals. The City of Lake Elsinore City Council, as the Lead Agency,has determined that environmental clearance for the proposed Specific Plan and applications 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 Specific Plan and applications. 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 Specific Plan and applications. 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 Specific Plan and applications. 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 Specific Plan and those issue areas that would have either a significant impact,potentially significant impact, or no impact. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS evaluates each response provided in the environmental checklist form. Each response checked in the checklist form is discussed and supported with sufficient data and analysis. As appropriate, each response discussion describes and identifies specific impacts anticipated with project implementation. In this section, mitigation measures are also recommended, as appropriate, to reduce adverse impacts to levels of less than significance. V. MANDATORY FINDINGS presents Mandatory Findings of Significance in accordance with Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines. VI. PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED identifies those persons consulted and involved in preparation of this Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration. VII. REFERENCES lists bibliographical materials used in preparation of this document. Copies of the technical studies are included in the Technical Appendix. TTM 33140 2 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: • No Impact: A "No Impact" response is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to the proposed Specific Plan and applications. • 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. • 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. • Potentially Significant Impact: Future implementation will have impacts that are considered significant and additional analysis and possibly an FIR are required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. This environmental document evaluates impacts resulting with the proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 33140. As will be discussed in the next chapter, the applicant is proposing construction of a single family residential tract. The tract will consist of 72 acres with a total of 104 units. There will be 35.9 acres of development and 36.1 acres retained in open space. Regarding mitigation measures, it is not the intent of this document to "overlap" or restate conditions of approval that are established for the proposed project. Additionally, those other standard requirements and regulations that any development must comply with, that are outside the City's jurisdiction, are also not considered mitigation measures and therefore,will not be identified in this document. F. TIERED DOCUMENTS,INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE,AND TECHNICAL STUDIES Information, findings, and conclusions contained in this document are based on incorporation by reference of tiered documentation, and technical studies that have been prepared for the proposed Specific Plan and applications,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." TTM 33140 3 For this document, the "Lake Elsinore General Plan Final EIK" (prepared in 1990) 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 Initial Study and Negative Declaration identify potentially significant impacts. This document therefore, evaluates each environmental issue alone and will rely upon analysis contained within the Lake Elsinore General Plan Final EIR with respect to remaining issue areas. 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 ViTenes Homeowners Federation P. 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, prepared in 1990. 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 92330,ph. (951) 674-3124. TTM 33140 4 • This document must be available for inspection by the public at an office of the lead agency (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[b]). This document is available at the City of Lake Elsinore, Community Development Department, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore CA 92330, (951) 674-3124. • This document must summarize the portion of the document being incorporated by reference or briefly describe 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 Elsinore and provides background and inventory information and data which apply to the 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 91122065. • The material to be incorporated in this document will include general background information (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[f]). 3. Technical Studies • "Acoustic Analysis Report",prepared by George H.Mamaghani, P.E.,November 2004. • "Geotechnical Report",prepared by AV Geo Technics,Inc.,April 5,2005. • "A Phase I Cultural Resources Investigation",prepared by McKenna et al.,February 18,2004. • "URBEMIS Air Quality Analysis — Tentative Tract Map 33140", prepared by Matthew Fagan Consulting Services. • "Biological Resources Report",prepared by Callyn D.Yorke,PH.D.,January 2004. • "Preliminary Jurisdictional Delineation Report",prepared by Bioreg Consulting,May,2006. • "Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP), Tentative Tract Map No. 33140 Located in the City of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California", prepared by Bioreg Consulting, October 2006. • "Drainage Concept Study",prepared by Massoud Ghiam,Registered Engineer,June 19,2005. • "Revised Traffic Impact Analysis for Lake Elsinore View Estates", prepared by Minagar & Associates,Inc.,December 30,2005. The technical studies are located in the Technical Appendices which are included on the CD at the back of this Initial Study. TTM 33140 5 II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING The proposed project site consists of 72 acres located between the end of Grandview Drive and SR-74, also known as the Ortega Highway. The location is shown on the location map contained in Figure 1. The project site is currently vacant. The property is bounded on the north by single-family dwellings, on the south and southwest by vacant land, and on the west by vacant land. Site photos are included in Attachment B. The Assessors Parcel Number for the project site is 386-100-034. B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is proposing construction of a new single family residential tract. The tract will consist of 72 acres with a total of 104 residential lots and a 36 acre remainder parcel. There will be 35.9 acres under development and 36.1 acres of open space. The proposed project will result in the development of 35.9 acres into a single family residential tract.The average lot size is 14,752 square feet,with a minimum lot size (per the City's requirements) of 7,200 square feet. Some of the lots will have-views of the Lake. There is an existing water tank site that is to remain, a booster pump will be added and the water tank site will be deeded to the water district. Slopes over 10 feet in height will be maintained by a Homeowners Association. The project includes the extension of Macy Street through an adjacent property northwest of the project site to provide the necessary secondary access point. The layout of Tentative Tract Map 33140 is provided in Figure 2. The subject site is located within the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan area and will be subject to the criteria contained within the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR (1990) which contains current and reliable data for an adequate analysis of the proposed project. Also, studies have been conducted for biological resources, cultural resources, traffic, noise and geology. The project site is designated Low Medium Density Residential (6 dwelling units per acre maximum) and Open Space Recreational on the City's General Plan Land Use Map and R-1 (Single Family Residential) on the City's Zoning Map. The proposed project is expected to require 680,732 cubic yards of cut and 401,503 cubic yards of fill, resulting in a net of 204,656 cubic yards of material that would need to be transported from the site. The export site is still to be determined but,in is anticipated to be no greater than 5 miles from the project site. When a precise location for this material has been identified,the Lead Agency will determine whether or not additional environmental review is necessary to evaluate any potential impacts. Water, sewer, electric,gas, and telephone services would be extended onto the site from existing main lines. Water and sewer would be provided by the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). Gas would be provided by The Gas Company; electricity would be provided by Southern California Edison; and telephone service would be provided by Verizon.The site is within the Elsinore Unified School District, The nearest fire station is No. 11, located at 17643 Brightman, west of the city in Lakeland Village. Law enforcement services are provided by the City's Police Department as part of the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. TTM 33140 6 Figure 1—Location Map 16 �, 74 ss 4t 74 Ij lake Mmeee 74 i s NOT TO SCALE I TTM 33140 7 Figure 2—Site Plan for Tentative Tract Map 33140 " I: 74 _ si- !!,: k_ a R r5 (k �T I I I r =5 � h+ TTM 33140 8 III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Project Title: Tentative Tract Map No. 33140 (TTM 33140) 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Lake Elsinore; 130 South Main Street; Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Kirt Coury,Associate Planner (951) 674-3124,ext 274 4. Project Location: The 72-acre project site is located on the end of Grandview Drive on the northern boundary of the property and the Ortega Highway on the eastern boundary of the property with an Assessors Parcel Number of 386-100-034. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:The Taft Corporation,6080 Busch Drive Malibu,CA 90265 6. General Plan Designation: Low Medium Density Residential (6 dwelling units per acre maximum) and Open Space Recreational 7. Zoning: R-1-7,200 (Single Family Residential,7,200 square foot minimum lot size) 8. Description of Project:The applicant is proposing construction of a new single family residential tract. The tract will consist of 72 acres with a total of 104 residential lots. There will be 35.9 acres of development and 36.1 acres retained in open space. The project also includes the extension of Macy Street into the project to provide a second access point. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The proposed project site consists of 72 acres located near the intersection of Grand Avenue and the SR-74 (Ortega Highway). The property is bounded on the north by single-family dwellings, on the south by vacant land, on the east by SR-74 (Ortega Highway), and on the west by vacant land. 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (404 Permit), Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (401 Water Quality Certification), California Department of Fish and Game (Streambed Alteration Agreement). TTM 33140 9 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 Resources ® Air Quality ® Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ® Geology/ Soils Hazards&Hazardous ❑ Materials ® Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use / Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ® Noise ❑ Population/ Housing ❑ Public Services ® Recreation ® Transportation /Traffic ❑ Utilities / Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance C. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ 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. Kirt Crni Daft TTM 33140 10 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Issues Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact I. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but not limited to, trees, rock outcrops, 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 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. 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) 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, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? TTM 33140 11 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Issues Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 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? TTM 33140 12 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Issues Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in ✓ §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to 515064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleonto- logical resource or site or unique geologic feature? 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? 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? TTM 33140 13 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Issues Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact 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. 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 reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of ✓ hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized ✓ areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? TTM 33140 14 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Issues Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner,which would result in flooding on- or off- site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood hazard Boundary of Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard `� delineation map? h) Place within 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 fa ilure of a levee or `, dam? j) Inundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow? TTM 33140 15 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Issues Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact IX. 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? X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a 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? XI. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? TTM 33140 16 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Issues Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact 0 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? XII. 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? XIII. 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 facilities? ✓ XIV. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse / physical effect on the environment? TTM 33140 17 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Issues Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard 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 V/ 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) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? ✓ b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could ✓ cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause ✓ significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources or ,/ are new or expanded entitlements needed? TTM 33140 18 Less Than Potentially Significant With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Issues Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact 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? Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly? TTM 33140 19 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS This section provides an evaluation of the impact categories and questions contained in the Environmental Checklist. I. AESTHETICS a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less Than Significant Impact The project will have a less than significant adverse effect on a scenic vista. The project site is located within a residential area of Lake Elsinore, adjacent to open space areas; however, there are existing single-family residences located to the north of the site, with open space and Ortega Highway to the south. The scenic vista in the area is the Lake as well as the mountain backdrop to the west. The bordering homes will not lose their views of Lake Elsinore. The lower portion of the mountain views to the west may be obscured in conjunction with the other residential developments in the area. However, the majority of the escarpment/mountain frontage as well as the areawide views will remain unaffected. In addition, the General Plan anticipated that the project site would include both residential and open space uses which are consistent with the proposed project. The current designations on the site are Low Medium Density Residential (6 dwelling units per acre maximum) and Open Space Recreational. The proposed project will ultimately construct residential development in accordance with the City zoning standards which regulate building design, mass, bulk, height, etc. It is not expected that the residential development will be so massive as to result in adverse effects to any scenic vista. Any future single-family residential development requires Design Review approval by the City, which ensures that future development will be designed as aesthetically attractive as possible and feasible and will not adversely affect any important scenic vista. These impacts are considered less than significant and no additional mitigation measures are required. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway? No Impact The project will not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway. There are no sensitive scenic resources either located onsite, within neighboring areas, or along roadways. In addition, the site is not located within a State Scenic Highway. No impacts are anticipated; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Less Than Significant Impact The project site is located adjacent to an established residential area of the City. The visual character of the vicinity will not be compromised since future residential single-family development will be consistent with both other residential and open space uses. Furthermore, the development will be buffered from existing development with landscaping,walls, and differences in elevation. Please reference Response 1 a. These impacts are considered less than significant and no additional mitigation measures are required. 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 Light and glare from new street lights, vehicles, and the future land uses will be generated and will contribute to the amount of light and glare experienced in the project vicinity. The site is located within an urbanized and urbanizing area which already experiences some levels of light and/or glare. Any future residential single-family development will require Design Review approval by the City,which will ensures TTM 33140 20 that future development will be designed to alleviate light and/or glare disturbances to the greatest extent possible and feasible. Lighting standards are established in the City's General Plan and require that the project control light and glare from such lighting so that it is directed to remain within the project site and not affect the adjacent residences. Finally, the City mandates that each project's lighting conform to the Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance. With the incorporation of these standard measures, no significant impacts are anticipated and no additional mitigation measures are required. MITIGATION MEASURES None required. II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES 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? No Impact The project site is not classified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. No impacts are anticipated;therefore,no mitigation measures are required. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact The project will not conflict with the existing zoning or an existing agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. The site is designated Low Medium Density Residential (6 dwelling units per acre maximum) and Open Space Recreational on the General Plan Land Use Map and R-1 (Single Family Residential) on the Zoning Map. No impacts are anticipated;therefore,no mitigation measures are required. c) 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 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. The project site is not being utilized for agricultural cultivation. No impacts are anticipated; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. MITIGATION MEASURES None required. III. AIR QUALITY a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The project will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. The proposed project is located in the City of Lake Elsinore and within the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The project is consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning designation of R-1 (Single Family Residential). This land use was factored into the applicable air quality plan of the SCAQMD. Based on the fact that the project is consistent with the cty's General Plan and Zoning, as well as the SCAQMD regional plan, any impacts are considered less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. TTM 33140 21 b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Air quality is a significant issue throughout most of Southern California. To assist in the analysis of air quality impacts, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) developed the URBEMIS2002 computer model. The URBEMIS2002 model was used to estimate daily emissions during grading, finish construction, and operation of the project. The current development schedule calls for building construction and site improvement to begin in 2006 and end in 2008. As a result,the figures shown below represent the highest daily emissions by phase. The following are the estimated daily emissions based upon the results of CARB's URBEMIS2002 computer model in pound per day(lb/day). The results of the air quality modeling are located in the technical appendix. Average Daily Construction Air Pollution Emissions (pounds/day) PM-10 PM-10 PM-10 Activity/Phase ROG NOx CO SOz Total Exhaust Dust Grading 112.51 600.31 946.12 0.87 34.79 29.93 4.86 Finish Work 429.53 599.96 836.09 0.00 21.10 21.02 0.08 SCAQMD Significance 75 100 550 150 150 - - Threshold Exceeds Threshold? Yes* Yes* Yes* No No - - Source: URBEMIS2002,Output in"Air Quality Analysis—Tentative Tract Map 33140" *Less than significant short-term,construction-related,exceedance of regional air quality impact thresholds. Based upon the proposed construction schedule,exceedances of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) significance thresholds are expected. However these exceedances will be intermittent and of short duration with the proposed mitigation measures. As a result, these impacts are considered to be less than significant. By far, the greatest project-related air quality concern in Southern California derives from the mobile source emissions that will be generated from the project site. Operational emissions from project-related traffic were calculated using a computerized procedure developed by the CARB for urban growth mobile source emissions. The model was used to calculate area source emissions and the resulting operational emissions for an assumed project build-out in the Year 2008. The results are shown in the table below. As indicated below, there are no significant operational air quality impacts associated with occupation of the proposed project. As discussed below, the project will not violate air quality standards or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation during the construction phases. Any potential impacts will be further reduced with the incorporation of the mitigation measures listed later in this Section. TTM 33140 22 Average Daily Project Mobile Source Air Pollution Emissions (pounds/day) Year 2008 ROG NOx CO SOa PM-10 Area Source Emissions 5.36 1.33 1.62 0.03 0.01 Operational Emissions 11.41 11.84 137.01 0.12 11.03 TOTAL 16.77 13.18 138.62 0.15 11.04 SCAQMD Significance Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No Source: URBEMIS2002,Output in"Air Quality Analysis—Tentative Tract Map 33140" c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Less Than Significant Impact The project will 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). All of Southern California is within a non-attainment region for certain pollutants. The project will create an incremental impact, but it will not significantly contribute to the non-attainment status of the region. These impacts are considered less than significant and no additional mitigation measures beyond those listed below are required. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact The project will expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations during the both the construction and operational phases of the development. Air quality impacts are analyzed relative to those persons with the greatest sensitivity to air pollution exposure. Sensitive population groups ("sensitive receptors") include young children, the elderly and the acutely and chronically ill (especially those with cardio- respiratory disease). Residential areas are considered to be sensitive to air pollution exposure because they may be occupied for extended periods, and residents may be outdoors where the exposure is highest. Schools are similarly considered to be sensitive receptors. Surrounding land uses include residential uses and vacant land. The number of sensitive receptors in the immediate project vicinity is limited to the western side of the project. Air quality standards during the construction phase of the development have been discussed in the previously in this Section of the Initial Environmental Study. All impacts have been identified and are considered less than significant after mitigation is incorporated. No significant, long- term impacts are anticipated to the adjacent sensitive receptors; therefore, no additional mitigation measures are required. TTM 33140 23 e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less Than Significant Impact The project will not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Please reference the discussion in III.b., above. These impacts will occur during the construction phase; will be of short duration and will not result in any significant impacts. No additional mitigation measures are required. MITIGATION MEASURES AQ-1 The City will require construction contractors to apply water to the disturbed portions of the project site at least three times per day. On days where wind speeds are sufficient to transport fugitive dust beyond the working area boundary, the City will require contractors to increase watering to the point that fugitive dust no longer leaves the property (typically a moisture content of 120/6),and/or the contractor will terminate grading and loading operations. AQ-2 The project will comply with regional rules such as SCAQMD Rules 402, 403 and 404, which would assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emissions. These dust suppression techniques are summarized below. a. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of three months will be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown or otherwise stabilized in a manner acceptable to the City. b. All onsite roads will be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically stabilized. c. All material transported offsite will be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. d. The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations will be minimized at all times. e. Where vehicles leave the construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the streets will be swept daily or washed down at the end of the work day to remove soil tracked onto the paved surface. AQ-3 All material stockpiles subject to wind erosion during construction activities, which will not be utilized within three days, will be covered with plastic, an alternative cover deemed equivalent to plastic,or sprayed with a nontoxic chemical stabilizer. AQ-4 All vehicles on the construction site will travel at speeds less than 15 miles per hour. This will be enforced by including this requirement in the construction contract between the City and the contracted construction company with penalty clauses for violation of this speed limit. AQ-5 The contractor will establish a car-pool program for construction employees which will include incentives with the goal of achieving a 1.5 persons per vehicle ridership for this construction project. AQ-6 All engines will be properly operated and maintained. Proper tune for all diesel-powered vehicles and equipment in the South Coast Air Basin requires that fuel injection timing be retarded 2 degrees from the manufacturer's recommendation and use high pressure injectors. AQ-7 All diesel-powered vehicles will be turned off when not in use for more than 30 minutes and gasoline-powered equipment will be turned off when not in use for more than 5 minutes. TTM 33140 24 AQ-8 The construction contractor will utilize electric or natural gas powered construction equipment in lieu of gasoline or diesel powered engines,where feasible and where economically competitive. AQ-9 The project will use power poles for electricity rather than temporary diesel or gasoline generators except in the event of emergency. AQ-10 The City shall require that a lunch shuttle or catering program be implemented during construction to reduce the number of lunch time trips from the site. AQ-11 The City shall require that low VOC coatings be used on all structures. AQ-12 The City shall require that low VOC asphalt be used on paved portions of the site. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 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? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated According to the "Biological Resources Reporf', prepared by Callyn D. Yorke, Ph.D. in January 2004, the project site consists of approximately seventy-two acres of mixed chaparral/Riversidean sage scrub and modified (rudereal) habitat on steep to moderate slopes. Approximately fifty mature live oaks (quercus agrifolia) were identified along the upper portions of the site beyond the proposed limits of development. There are between three and five live oaks along the main drainage channel, these will be removed as the project is constructed. Some of the lower portions of the site have been disturbed by the clearing of vegetation, dumping (particularly in the northeasterly portion of the site), and erosional activities. This area includes an overgrown orchard, trails,roads,and household debris dumps. During the field survey of the site made on January 21,2004,no sensitive plant and animal species were detected. The biological survey was conducted outside of the optimal season for most of the species listed in the CNDDB reports, so the evaluation focused on the likelihood of occurrence of sensitive species based on habitat features (i.e., elevation, slope, soils, moisture gradients, flora and fauna, etc.) found on the project site. The Report concluded that no rare,threatened or endangered plant species were found in or adjacent to the project area during the surveys. An additional discussion is located in Section IV.f. About '/z of the site,roughly in the southern and western portions of the property has been designated as open, undeveloped space; this area is largely undisturbed chaparral/sage scrub with scattered live oaks on the north facing slopes. As a result, the majority of the high quality habitat areas will not be affected by the development of Tentative Tract Map 33140. A subsequent evaluation of on-site plant communities by Bioreg Consulting,indicated that approximately half of the site contains high quality habitat areas and that most of these high quality habitat areas are being avoided. Based upon the Biological Resources Impact Map in Figure 3, the project will primarily effect the lower quality olive tree orchard, ruderal/disturbed, and sage scrub plant communities. By concentrating the development in the low quality habitat areas, many of the project's significant impacts have been avoided. TTM 33140 25 Figure 3—Vegetation and Impacted Areas lit" M O f i t ji A l • ,r,` t rr ; r , 1 r� + j, ;• I I F � .. TTM 33140 26 The site coverage of the existing plant communities, along with the relative quality of the habitat areas are provided in the following table. On-Site Plant Communities and Relative Habitat Values Vegetation Community Total Area Percent of Site Habitat Quality Rating Oak Woodland 3.6 Ac 4.9% High Quality Chaparral/Sage Scrub 33.9 Ac 46.2% High Quality Sage Scrub 17.5 Ac 23.9% Moderate to Low Quality Riverine/Riparian 0.2 Ac 0.3% Low Quality Olive Tree Orchard 7.8 Ac 10.6% Low Quality Ruderal/Disturbed 9.0 Ac 12.3% Low Quality Developed 1.3 Ac 1.8% N/A Source:"Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation(DBESP)"October 2006 There are no blue-line streams or vernal pools on the site, though several natural drainage ravines are found running northerly through the site. None of these channels contain perennial running or standing water. The on-site drainage channel flows only in response to local rainfall events. According to the Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) for Tentative Tract Map No. 33140,the channel primarily functions for the transport of runoff and not as a wetland biological resource. The vegetation along the drainage channel consists of upland plant species. This drainage channel is further discussed in Sections IV.c and IV.f. In addition, the project site is located with the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) area. The MSHCP provides detailed guidance on plant and animal species of concern. The Plan and its requirements are discussed in Section IV.f. The mitigation measures described below and the requirements of the MSHCP are expected to address any potential impacts. After incorporation of these mitigation measures,impacts are considered less than significant. 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? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The proposed project will have a less than significant 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 because no riparian areas are located on- site. As a result, the impacts are considered less than significant. In addition,please refer to the response to Item IV.a for additional information. No additional mitigation measures are required. 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? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The proposed project will not have an 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. A jurisdictional delineation was prepared for TTM 33140 27 the project. The report entitled "Preliminary Jurisdictional Delineation Report, Tentative Tract Map No. 33940 Located in the City of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County Calfornia" and prepared by Bioreg Consulting in May of 2006 identified one drainage of potential Federal and State jurisdictional water on the project site. According to the Preliminary Jurisdictional Analysis the drainage originates in an unnamed canyon west of project and crosses the project site before flowing into the existing debris basin located near end of Welford Place. It appears that this channel may have been previously constructed to facilitate development in the lower portion of the canyon (i.e. along Macy Street) and to direct flows into the detention basin. Approximately 400 feet of this channel area will be undergrounded to convey the existing off-site flows into the existing debris basin. The location of the channel is shown in Figure 4. Because the channel appears to be within the jurisdiction of the Federal and State resource agencies, any modifications to the channel will require permits from these agencies. The impacts to jurisdictional waters are identified below. Impacted Jurisdictional Areas By Agency Habitat Impacted AreaT Length of Impact (Acres) (Linear Feet) Corps of Engineers/Regional Water Quality Control Board Non-wetland Waters of the U.S. 0.11 400 California Department of Fish and Game Non-wetland Waters (Streambed) 0.19 400 Source:"Preliminary Jurisdictional Delineation",May 2006. To mitigate these impacts, it is expected that the jurisdictional waters will be mitigated through the acquisition of credits from the Santa Ana Watershed Association mitigation program, which provides significant enhancement to riparian habitats along the Santa Ana River through removal of giant reed (Arundo donax), or some other mechanism acceptable to the Federal and State resource permitting agencies. The impact-to-mitigation ratio should be 5 to 1. With the mitigation outlined in this Initial Study,any impacts to jurisdictional waters will be mitigated to a less than significance level. 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? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project will not 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. According to the "Biological Resources Report", prepared by Callyn D. Yorke, PH.D.,January 2004, there exists a corridor of dispersal between the project site and open land to the west, southwest, south, southeast, and east of the site. Abundant animal signs were found along the ridges of the site suggests that there is regular movement to and from the site by medium- sized to large mammals, and probably smaller mammals, though the sign of them was less obvious. Also, bird diversity in the area appears to be relatively high. Much of the surrounding land has been developed into housing tracts and this, along with the increased human presence in the surrounding watershed, may have already reduced populations of sensitive animals and plants. The developer plans to preserve most of the open land in the southern portion of the site,contributing to the preservation of wildlife habitat and wilderness corridors in the area. With the incorporation of the open space into the project design the impacts will be considered less than significant. No other impacts are anticipated; therefore, no additional mitigation measures are required. TTM 33140 28 Figure 4—Potential Jurisdictional Drainage Number' 1 ,� •T r r�N, i •y i S -;.. - ' �_�__ M:w�un{S Itcsidendal-� sow Source: Preliminary Jurisdictional Delineation,2006. NORTH4 (Approximate Scale: 1"= 300� TTM 33140 29 e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact The City of Lake Elsinore does not have any local policies or ordinances to protect biological resources of local concern; therefore, the proposed project will not have any adverse impact on locally protected biological resources. No impacts are anticipated; therefore, no additional mitigation measures are required. 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? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project is located within the area of the adopted Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan is a comprehensive, multi-jurisdictional Habitat Conservation Plan focusing on conservation of species and associated habitats in Western Riverside County.The MSHCP will serve as a HCP pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, as well as a Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) under the NCCP Act of 2001.The goal of the MSHCP is the conservation of over 500,000 acres and focuses on the conservation of 146 plant and animal species. According to the County,the project is not located with the area of the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Area. On June 22, 2004, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service approved the Section 10(a)(1)(B) permit and a Natural Community Conservation Planning permit was issued by the California Department of Fish and Game. These Permits provide take authorization for those species listed as threatened or endangered and identified in the permits as Covered Species Adequately Conserved. The City of Lake Elsinore is a participating entity and permittee of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. In accordance with the MSHCP, the proposed Project was also reviewed for consistency with the following supplemental policy areas. • Section 6.1.1 -Property Owner Initiated Habitat Evaluation and Acquisition Negotiation Strategy • 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 • Section 6.4— Fuels Management Guidelines The results of this consistency analysis are described below. The Riverside County Integrated Plan Conservation Summary Report Generator was used to determine the appropriate conservation requirements for the Project site. Criteria Area Cells The MSHCP establishes Criteria Area cells to facilitate the process by which properties are evaluated for inclusion within the MSHCP Conservation Reserve System. 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 may need to be acquired and conserved under the MSHCP. The process for evaluating the conservation needs for individual projects are described in Section 6.1.1, the Property Owner Initiated Habitat Evaluation and Acquisition Negotiation Strategy (HANS). According to the information provided by the Riverside County Integrated Plan Conservation Summary Report Generator, TTM 33140 30 the project site is not located within an acquisition Criteria Area as identified in the MSHCP and is not required to participate in the Habitat Acquisition and Negotiation Strategy (HANS). As a result, the proposed Project is consistent with these provisions of the MSHCP. Riverine/Riparian Protection Policies Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP requires that all projects within the Plan Area be assessed for potentially significant effects on riparian and riverine areas as part of the environmental review process. Riparian/Riverine Areas are lands which contain Habitat dominated by tress, shrubs,persistent emergents, or emergent mosses and lichens,which occur close to or which depend upon soil moisture from a nearby fresh water source; or areas with fresh water flow during all or a portion of the year. The biological resources study prepared for the Project identified several areas of Federal and State jurisdictional waters. As a result,a Jurisdictional Delineation Report was prepared. The report, entitled "Preliminary Jurisdictional Delineation Report, Tentative Tract Map No. 33140 Located in the City of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County California' prepared by Bioreg Consulting and dated May 2006, identified that areas of potential Federal and State jurisdiction were located on the project site. According to the Study only one of the drainages contained potential jurisdictional waters. The drainage, from the unnamed canyon west of project, crosses the project site and flows into the existing debris basin located near end of Welford Place (outside of the project boundary). The project will result in unavoidable impacts to riparian/riverine resources. The impacts to Corps of Engineers jurisdiction include approximately 0.11 acres of unvegetated streambed of the watercourse that flows into the existing off-site detention basin. Impacts to California Department of Fish and Game jurisdictional areas include approximately 0.19 acres of ephemeral drainage. Even if modifications were made to the proposed project to reduce the impacts to this channel, there would still be some impact associated with the extension of Macy Street which provides the necessary secondary (emergency) access to the proposed development. As such,it will not be possible to avoid all impacts to the channel area. Because the project will impact a riparian area, the preparation of report documenting the Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation report is required by Section 6.1.2 of the Western Riverside County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan. The report entitled, "Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) Tentative Tract Map No. 33140 Located in the City of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California' concluded that equivalent preservation could be achieved by mitigating any impacts to the low quality onsite channel area with improvements to a potentially high quality riparian area off-site at a ratio of 5 to 1. This mitigation, combined with the on-site preservation of most of the oak woodland habitats, achieves the goal of the MSHCP for equivalent or superior preservation. As a result, the Project is consistent with these provisions of the MSHCP. Vernal Pool Protection Policies Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP requires that all projects within the Plan Area be assessed for potentially significant effects on vernal pools as part of the environmental review process. Vernal pools are seasonal wetlands that occur in depression areas that have wetlands indicators for all three parameters (soils, vegetation and hydrology) during the wetter portion of the growing season but normally lack wetlands indicators of hydrology and/or vegetation during the drier portion of the growing season. Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP focuses on protection of vernal pool habitats based on their value in the conservation of a number of MSHCP covered species. The biological resources study prepared for the Project did not identify any vernal pools on the Project site. As a result,the Project is consistent with these provisions of the MSHCP. TTM 33140 31 Fairy Shrimp Protection Policies Associated with Vernal Pool habitat areas, potentially endangered Fairy Shrimp species are known to occur. The three sensitive species, the Riverside,Vernal Pool and Santa Rosa Fairy Shrimp, are known to occur within stock ponds, ephemeral pools,and other large depressional features. These requirements are also located Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. The biological resources study prepared by Callyn D. Yorke, Ph.D. for the Project did not identify any vernal pools and no impacts are expected to occur to any endangered fairy shrimp species. As a result, the Project is consistent with these provisions of the MSHCP. Narrow Endemic Plant Species Requirements. MSHCP Section 6.1.3 contains the requirements for the determination of Narrow Endemic Plant Species. According to the information provided by the Riverside County Integrated Plan Conservation Summary Report Generator, the project site is located within an area where Narrow Endemic Plant Species Studies are required according to Figure 6-1 of the MSHCP. Consequently, focused studies are required for California Orcutt grass (Orcuttia californica), Hammitt's clay-cress (Sibaropsis hammittiz), Many-stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis), San Miguel savory (Saturja chandlen), and Wright's trichocoronis (Trichocoronir w ightii Par. w ightia). Two of these species, the California Orcutt grass and Wright's trichocoronis, are associated with alkali and vernal pool areas,which are not found on the site. The other three species are more closely related to the chaparral plant community found over much of the hillside portions of the site. The MSHCP requires that 90% of the areas containing any Narrow Endemic Plant Species avoided. Because more than 90% of the chaparral areas are being avoided by this development, it was determined that special studies for these species were not needed. If during the future permitting activities any of the effected Federal or State resource agencies request that a focused survey be prepared, a study for the narrow endemic plant species will be conducted during the appropriate season. The requested survey shall be performed and completed prior to the approval of any clearing or grading permits on the project site. This requirement is appropriate because the anticipated habitats are either within the hillside areas,that are being substantially avoided,or within vernal pool areas that are not found on the site. If during any future surveys any of these narrow endemic plant species are identified, the City shall require modifications to the project (that could include a reduction in the number of lots and changes to the street system) to ensure that no more than 10% of the areas occupied by any of the identified narrow endemic plant species will be effected by project construction. With this requirement,the project is consistent with the requirements of the MSHCP. Urban/Wildland Interface Guidelines The MSHCP contains requirements to address anticipated urban/wildland interface issues associated with the conservation areas. Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP sets forth guidelines to address indirect edge effects associated with locating development adjacent to MSHCP Conservation Areas. These edge effects can adversely affect the biological resources within an MSHCP Conservation Area. The Guidelines provide direction on drainage, the application of toxic chemicals, lighting, noise, invasive plant species, barriers to animal movement,and grading issues. While the Project is not located adjacent to an identified habitat preserve or corridor area and these requirements would not normally apply, about half of the project site is being identified for conservation purposes. At this time, the applicant is considering providing the conservation area (identified as an "Ecological Preserve" on the tentative map) to the Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) or similar organization for permanent preservation. If the conserved area is provided to the RCA, or set aside for permanent preservation,then the Urban/Wildland Guidelines would apply to TTM 33140. The design of the project is in compliance with the drainage, barriers to animal movement, grading, noise, and lighting TTM 33140 32 guidelines. The proposed covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) will address the use of toxic chemicals and the need to limit human activity in the conserved area. The sole potentially inconsistent component is the need to eliminate non-native and invasive plants from the slope and HOA areas adjacent to the conserved area. To ensure compliance, a mitigation measure has been added to prohibit the placement of potentially invasive plant material (as identified by the MSHCP) in or adjacent to the conserved "Ecological Preserve" area. With this mitigation measure, the project is consistent with the MSHCP. Additional Survey Requirements Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP also requires additional surveys for selected species if the project is located within potential criteria habitat areas as shown in Figures 6-2, 6-3, and 6-4 of the MSHCP. According to the Conservation Report Generator, the Project site is not located within any Critical Area Species Survey Area. However,the MSHCP also identifies the need for additional updated vegetative mapping whenever specific species or habitat areas of interest are identified. If any future special surveys or studies identify any sensitive species populations or habitat areas of concern, the updated information will be provided to the RCA. As such,the project is consistent with the requirements of the MSHCP. Fuels Management Guidelines Section 6.4 of the MSHCP addresses the management and reduction of fire fuel loads in areas adjacent to identified conservation areas. Because the Project is not located adjacent to an identified habitat preserve or corridor area these requirements do not apply. As a result, the proposed Project is consistent with the Fuel Management Guidelines of the MSHCP. Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan The Project is not located within the Fee Area Boundary of the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). As a result,the proposed Project is not in conflict with the requirements of the HCP (and is not required to pay the mitigation fees prior to the issuance of a grading permit). Based upon the information provided, the proposed project implements and is consistent with the requirements of the MSHCP, the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan, and the mitigation measures identified in this Initial Study will mitigate any Project impacts. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated. MITIGATION MEASURES BI0-1 Prior to recordation of the final map, the remainder lot shown on the tentative tract map shall be designated as an open space lot on the Final Map. The required 100-foot Fuel Modification and Ecological Preserve Areas shall also be designated on the Final Map. BI0-2 Prior to the earliest of any of the following: either the recordation of the final map, the issuance of any grading permit, or the clearing of vegetation for development, a springtime biological survey for the Narrow Endemic Plant Species shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine presence/absence of these species during the appropriate season. Modifications to the project (including, but not limited to, reductions in the number of lots and changes in the street pattern) may be required depending on the results of these surveys. BIO-3 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit that could affect any jurisdictional water, the developer shall obtain a 404 Permit, with the appropriate 401 Certifications, and a Streambed Alternation Agreement,as required,to mitigate any impacts to Waters of the U.S. and the Waters of the State. Unless approved differently by the Federal and State resource agencies, the mitigation shall be TTM 33140 33 provided through the acquisition of credits from the Riverside-Corona Resource Conservation District Mitigation Bank at a ratio of 5 to 1. BI0-4 Prior to the approval of the first residential building permit, the developer shall submit landscape plans for all slopes and HOA maintained areas for approval to the Planning Department. The landscape plan shall not include any of the invasive plant species contained in Table 6-2 ("Plants that should be avoided adjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area") of the Western Riverside County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan on any slope area adjacent to the "Ecological Preserve" area. The landscape plan shall be approved by the City prior to the occupancy of the first unit. BI0-5 During the construction process, no disturbance or removal of vegetation, the parking of heavy equipment,the storage of building materials and equipment,the construction of new access roads, or use of chemicals shall be allowed within the "Ecological Preserve" area identified by the project biologist during the follow-up surveys. BI0-6 The Homeowners Association shall be responsible for the maintenance and protection of the ecological preserve unless the ecological preserve unless it is donated as part of the MSHCP reserve assembly process. The CC&Rs for Map 33410 shall include the following requirements for the "Ecological Preserve" area to ensure that the area is maintained as permanent open space. The Homeowners Association shall be responsible for the maintenance and protection of this area. The CC&Rs for Map 33410 shall include the following requirements for the "Ecological Preserve" area to ensure that the area is maintained as permanent open space. a. No herbicides or pesticides shall be used on or within 25 feet of the "Ecological Preserve" within the open space lot. b. Domestic animals shall not be permitted to range freely in the Ecological Preserve and horses shall not be allowed to browse on native vegetation within the Ecological Preserve. c. Fire clearances shall be kept to the minimum areas allowable by law. d. The area shall be posted for no hunting or specimen collecting, and prohibited for off-road vehicles within this area V. CULTURAL RESOURCES a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? Less Than Significant Impact The project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in �15064.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act. According to the "Cultural Resources Investigation" prepared by McKenna et al., February 2004, no evidence of historic or prehistoric cultural resources were found to exist on the project site. Records searches performed by University of California, Riverside offered the same results. No impacts are anticipated; however, since resources are known to exist in the general area, the mitigation measures listed in this Section will insure that any unanticipated impacts will be reduced to a less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? Less Than Significant Impact The project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5. Please reference Response V.a., above. No impacts are anticipated;however, since resources are known to exist in the general area, the mitigation measure listed in this Section will insure that any impacts will be reduced to a less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. TTM 33140 34 c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less Than Significant Impact The General Plan EIR does not identify any known unique paleontological resources on-site. According to the "Cultural Resources Investigation" prepared by McKenna et al., February 2004, no evidence of historic or prehistoric cultural resources were found to exist on the project site. No impacts are anticipated; however, since resources are known to exist in the general area, the mitigation measure listed in this Section will insure that any impacts will be reduced to a less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less Than Significant Impact The project will not disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Please reference Response V.a., above. No impacts are anticipated; however, since resources are known to exist in the general area,the mitigation measure listed in this Section will insure that any impacts will be reduced to a less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. MITIGATION MEASURES Given that significant impacts are not expected, mitigation measures are not required, however, the following is recommended: CUL-1 An archeological monitor shall be present during all earthmoving to insure protection of any accidentally discovered potentially significant resources. All cultural resources unearthed by project construction activities shall be evaluated by a qualified archeologist. Any unanticipated cultural resources that are discovered shall be evaluated and a final report prepared. The report shall include a list of the resources recovered, documentation of each site/locality, and interpretation of resources recovered. The lead agency shall designate repositories in the event the significant resources are recovered. CUL 2 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall enter into a Treatment Agreement with the Pechanga Band of Luisefio Indians. This Agreement will address the treatment and disposition of cultural resources and human remains that may be uncovered during construction as well as provisions for Tribal monitors. CUL-3 Tribal monitors shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation, and ground-breaking activities, including further surveys, to be compensated by the Project developer. The tribal monitors will have the authority to temporarily stop and redirect grading activities to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property, in conjunction with the archaeological monitor and the City(as Lead Agency). CUL-4 If human remains are encountered,all activity shall stop and the County Coroner must be notified immediately. All activity must cease until the County Coroner has determined the origin and disposition of said remains. The Coroner shall determine if the remains are prehistoric, and shall notify the State Native American Heritage Commission, if applicable. Further actions shall be determined by the Most Likely Descendent. CUL-5 The landowner agrees to relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including all Luisetio sacred items, burial goods, and all archaeological artifacts found on the Project site to the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians for proper treatment and disposition. TTM 33140 35 CUL-6 Any sacred sites that are discovered during project construction shall be avoided and preserved. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS 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.) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The proposed project will not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss,injury, or death involving 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. According to Exhibit 6 (Geologic Conditions) of the City of Lake Elsinore's General Plan Environmental Impact Report, the project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The potential for damage due to direct fault rupture is considered very remote. The site is located in an area of high regional seismicity from the Elsinore (Wildomar) fault zone, which is located approximately 0.8 miles away from the project site to the east. According to the "Geotechnical Keport", prepared by AV Geo Technics, Inc., April 2005, a small fault which was mapped by Greenwood (1992) as inferred under the young alluvium near or just outside the northern boundary of the project. No evidence of faulting was observed in any of the subsurface excavations and no faulted Granodiorite outcrops were observed on the project site. The total length of this unnamed fault is less than 6,000 feet and is not long enough for it to generate a credible earthquake alone. However, sympathetic movement on or differential settlement across this feature due to seismic striking cannot be ruled out. The mitigation measures listed in this Section will insure that any impacts will be reduced to a less than significant. Compliance with standard measures contained in the UBC and City Municipal Code regarding structures and construction and those recommended mitigation measures contained in this document ensures that impacts will remain less than significant. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The proposed project will expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss,injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking. The project site is located in an area of high regional seismicity and may experience horizontal ground acceleration during an earthquake along the Elsinore (Wildomar) fault zone, which is located approximately 0.8 miles away. The project site has been and will continue to be directly affected by seismic activity to some degree. Given that the project site is not within any seismic study area,it can be concluded the site will not be affected by ground shaking anymore than any other area in seismically active Southern California. Compliance with standard measures contained in the UBC and City Municipal Code regarding structures and construction and those recommended mitigation measures contained in this document ensures that impacts will remain less than significant. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The proposed project will not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including TTM 33140 36 liquefaction. According to the "Geotechnical Report", prepared by AV Geo Technics, Inc., April 2005, the subsurface material is classified as a dense mixture of sand, clay and silts, shallow bedrock and groundwater at a depth of below fifty feet. Based on these characteristics, the potential for soil liquefaction and other secondary seismic hazards are considered to be minor at the site. Compliance with standard measures contained in the UBC and City Municipal Code regarding structures and construction ensures that impacts will remain less than significant. iv) Landslides? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The proposed project is not expected expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,including the risk of loss,injury, or death from landslides. No landslides were mapped during the field reconnaissance and no ancient landslides are known to exist on the project site. However, the site is located within an area with steep slopes. In these settings the stability slopes is an important factor. The standard engineering practices related to slope and site stability are expected to ensure that no unstable slope conditions are created. As a result, no impacts are anticipated; therefore, no additional mitigation measures are required. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The proposed project will not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. According to the "Geotechnical Report', prepared by AV Geo Technics, Inc., April 2005, no evidence of significant erosion was observed on the site. By nature, on-site soil is cohesive and must not be considered to be susceptible to surface erosion. As with any development, soil erosion can result during construction, as grading and construction can loosen surface soils and make soils susceptible to effects of wind and water movement across the surface. Impacts,however, are not considered significant since erosion will be controlled onsite in accordance with City standards and those mitigation measures contained in this document. 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? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The project is 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. Reference Responses Nos. VI.a.(i.-iv.). According to the "Geotechnical Report", prepared by AV Geo Technics,Inc.,April 2005, the potential for soil liquefaction and other secondary seismic hazards are considered to be minor at the site. Compliance with standard measures contained in the UBC and City Municipal Code, and mitigation measures regarding foundations, footings, structures and construction ensures that significant impacts will not result. 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? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The project is not located on expansive soil as defined in the Uniform Building Code and will not create a substantial risk to life or property. Reference Responses Nos. VI.a.(i.-iv.) and VI.c. According to the "Geotechnical Report', prepared by AV Geo Technics, Inc., April 2005, the potential expansion characteristics of the near-surface soils are classified as very low expansive in accordance with UBC Standards No. 18-2, Expansion Index Test. Compliance with standard measures contained in the UBC and City Municipal Code regarding structures and construction and those recommended mitigation measures contained in this document ensures that impacts will remain less than significant. TTM 33140 37 e) Have soils capable 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 proposed project will not be serviced by septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems. No impacts are anticipated in this issue area;therefore,no mitigation measures are required. MITIGATION MEASURES GEO-1 Comply with the recommendations provided by the "Geotechnical Report" prepared by AV Geo Technics,Inc.,April 2005,for grading,as may be updated. • All grading shall be performed in accordance with the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications,Enclosure C,except as modified in the text of the"Geotechnical Report". • The geotechnical trench backfill is uncompacted and is unsuitable for support of structures. If any structure or other improvements, including paved access roads, are located over or immediately adjacent to the uncompacted fill, backfill shall be over-excavated and replaced with compacted engineered fill or that the structure be designed to span the trench. • Construction shall allow for all plumbing and utility services to be connected with flexible connections and/or provided with convenient shutoffs. Structures should be designed in accordance with at least minimum code standards for Seismic Zone 4 as described in the Los Angeles County Building Code. • Diversion and reduction of concentrated run-off shall be provided to minimize erosion of on-Site slopes and improvements. • Grading plans shall be in accordance with existing codes. It is recommended that the project engineer or their representative review the grading plans prior to construction and during the site grading phase. • The Community Development Department shall confirm that any necessary Federal and State resource agency permits have been obtained prior to the issuance of the grading permit. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project may create an additional possible hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials; however, due to the quantity and nature of these materials, these impacts will be considered less than significant. During construction and operational phases there is a potential for accidental release of petroleum products in sufficient quantity to pose a hazard to people and the environment. With a mitigation measure incorporated into the SWPPP prepared for the project and it can reduce such a hazard to a less than significant level. In addition, the project is located immediately adjacent to State Route 74 (also known as the Ortega Highway). The Ortega Highway is winding,narrow, and moderately steep in proximity to the project site. It is possible that an accident or spill may expose future residents to hazardous materials. However, the likelihood of this type of event is fairly rare and it is not considered to be significant. In addition, some hazardous materials will be stored on the premises; however, those used are commonly associated with single-family residential development. No impacts are anticipated beyond those commonly associated with single-family residential development. TTM 33140 38 b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less Than Significant Impact The project may create a hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment; however, due to the quantity and nature of these materials, these impacts will be considered less than significant. Reference Response No. VIIa. No impacts are anticipated beyond those commonly associated with single-family residential development. No additional mitigation measures are required. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less Than Significant Impact There are no schools within a quarter mile radius of the project site. There is no opportunity for any school to be potentially impacted. No impacts are anticipated; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 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? No Impact The project site is not located on any hazardous materials site as designated by Government Code Section 65962.5. There is no opportunity to create a significant hazard to the public or environment. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or 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 project site is not located within any airport land use plan. No impacts are anticipated; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 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 project site is not located near any private airstrip. No impacts are anticipated; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact The proposed project will not conflict with any emergency response or evacuation plans. The project will include access points off an improved roadway and include site access sufficient for fire apparatus turn radius and has no potential to cause interference with any emergency response or evacuation plan. No mitigation is required. h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The project site is located within a high fire zone with native vegetation to the west of the proposed residential development site. The Riverside County Fire Department has reviewed the proposed map for the risk potential risks associated with wildland fires can be reduced through the implementation of a fire prevention plan to address the hazards of wildland fires. Of particular concern are the west, south, and TTM 33140 39 eastern sides of the development which are adjacent to steep terrain containing natural vegetation. The fuel modification area, which is intended to serve as a setback area to the structures. In addition, requirements of the Fire Department shall be incorporated into the design of the project to ensure that the risk of exposing people or structures to wildland fires is reduced to a less than significant level. The standard Fire Department Fuel Modification Zone is a 100' wide area with reduced and/or irrigated vegetation. No additional mitigation measures are necessary. MITIGATION MEASURES HAZ-1 All spills or leakage of petroleum products during construction and operational activities shall be remediated in compliance with applicable state and local regulations regarding cleanup and disposal of the contaminant released. The contaminated waste will be collected and disposed of at an appropriately licensed disposal or treatment facility. This measure shall be incorporated into the SWPPP prepared for the project development. HAZ-2 Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, the Fire Department shall approve a fire protection plan showing the fuel modification areas and other measures necessary to address the hazards from wildland fires. The fire protection plan may incorporate fuel modification areas, irrigated landscaped areas, building setbacks, structural barriers, and other measures to minimize the potential safety hazards. The fuel medication area shall be delineated on the Final Map. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The proposed project will result in an incremental increase in urban pollutants, including oils and other substances. To ensure water quality standards and discharge requirements will not be violated the local program approved by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board requires the approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Specifically,the program mandated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board requires that applications for certain development entitlements submitted after January 1,2005,must include a Conceptual Water Quality Management Plans with their application. The program also required that all projects approved after January 1, 2005 receive approval of a Final Water Quality Management Plan prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit. The application for TTM 33140 was submitted to the City on December 14, 2004. As a result, the project was not required to prepare a Conceptual WQMP. However, to conform to the adopted local program requirements, the approval of a Final WQMP will be required prior to the issuance of any grading permit. The specific best management practices could include both mechanical and infiltrative treatment measures, as approved by the City, to address the water quality issues associated with urban runoff. The Final WQMP will be based upon the final engineered developed project. In addition,new Development is required to ensure that post-develop runoff volumes are identical to pre-development levels. To accomplish this, the project incorporates a detention basin into its design. The basin,located at the southeast corner of the site adjacent to State Route 74,will retain project storm flows and ensure that post-development flows are identical to pre-development site runoff. The details of the detention basin are included in the discussion for Section VIII.d. Construction of the basin and compliance with provisions of the NPDES program and compliance with the mitigation measures described below will ensure that significant hydrologic and water quality impacts will not result from this project. With the implementation of the requirements of the Urban Runoff Program and the construction of the detention basin, no impacts are anticipated and no additional mitigation measures are required. TTM 33140 40 b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Less Than Significant Impact The project will not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (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). The project site is not considered a significant groundwater recharge area. The proposed project will not include activities that will substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with regional groundwater recharge. Any impacts are considered less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. 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 flooding on- or off- site? Less Than Significant Impact The future drainage pattern will remain essentially the same even though drainage on the lower portions of the site will be undergrounded to extend the existing storm drain system that is already in place immediately to the east of this project. The undergrounding of the existing drainage in compliance with the mitigation described below is expected to prevent any future flooding on- or off-site. In addition, the off-site drainage (from the unnamed canyon) that passes through the northwestern portion of the proposed project will continue to flow into the existing detention basin. Any impacts are considered less than significant with the additional mitigation measures described below. 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? Less Than Significant Impact The 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, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site. On-site drainage flows will be conveyed into the public storm sewer system. According to the "Drainage Concept Study" prepared by Massoud Ghiam, the on-site detention basin has been designed to meet the requirements of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. According to the Drainage Study a 24-hour/10- year frequency storm event for this project would require 2.0 acre-feet storage volume. The proposed basin will accommodate approximately 2.5 acre-feet. This basin will reduce the flow for the one- hour/10-year event flows from 95 cubic feet per second to 62 cubic feet per second. The existing flow condition for this size runoff event is 87.7 cubic feet per second. The final hydrologic characteristics of the detention basin and the undergrounded channel will be based upon the applicable requirements of the County of Riverside and the Final WQMP if the facility is incorporated into the Project's stormwater treatment system. Any impacts are considered less than significant with the additional mitigation measures described below. 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? Less Than Significant Impact The 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. Please refer to the responses for Items VIII. a., c., and d. Any impacts are considered less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. TTM 33140 41 f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The project will not otherwise substantially degrade water quality. Compliance with NPDES Areawide Stornwater Program as discussed in Section VIII.a and the City's erosion control requirements implemented through the grading permit process will ensure that significant water quality impacts and violations of standards and requirements do not occur. With mitigation incorporated, impacts will be considered less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood hazard Boundary of Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? No Impact The project will not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood hazard Boundary of Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map. The project site is not located within the 100-year flood hazard area. No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation is required. h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures,which would impede or redirect flood flows? No Impact The project will not place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures,which would impede or redirect flood flows. No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. 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? No Impact The proposed project will not 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. The project site is not located in an area were these events could occur. No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation required. j) Inundation by seiche,tsunami, or mudflow? No Impact The project site is not located in an area that is subject to mudflows, seiches or tsunamis. No impacts are anticipated. No mitigation measures are required. MITIGATION MEASURES HYD-1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall receive approval from the City of Lake Elsinore of the Final Water Quality Management Plan. HYD-2 During final design, the developer's engineer shall ensure that the hydraulic grade line is appropriately calculated to ensure adequate pipe sizing. HYD-3 Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the developer's engineer shall ensure that the underground system has been appropriately increased to include bulking. There shall be no affect on the debris basin. HYD-4 Should any possibility of ponding occur on the upstream end of the underground system, the Developer shall acquire an easement from the affected property owner(s). HYD-5 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall provide evidence that an energy dissipater has designed to mitigate the impacts of any increase in velocity. TTM 33140 42 HYD-6 The developer's engineer shall follow Riverside County Flood Control and Conservations District's mitigation workshop as it relates to development impacts. HYD-7 The developer's engineer shall follow Riverside County standards of practice with respect to the diversion of flow. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING a) Physically divide an established community? No Impact The project site is adjacent to existing and proposed single-family residential development and open space. The project will incorporate into the surrounding neighborhood and open space. The proposed application will not construct land uses that will physically divide the community. No impacts are anticipated. No mitigation measures are required. 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? Less Than Significant Impact The project site is identified for a combination of residential and open space uses in the General Plan. The same land uses that were anticipated for the project site with the existing General Plan and Zoning designations will continue to be provided with the proposed application. The proposed application will not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation. In addition, City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update of its General Plan. According to the most recent version of the Draft General Plan,no the land use designation changes are proposed for this site. As a result,no impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Less Than Significant Impact The project will not conflict with the provisions of the adopted Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). A more detailed discussion on the Project's compliance and consistency with the MSHCP is found in Section IV.f. As a result,no impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. MITIGATION MEASURES None required. X. MINERAL RESOURCES a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact The project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state. The project site is not known to have any mineral resource that may be of value to the region or State. There is no opportunity to affect this type of mineral resource. No impacts are anticipated;therefore,no mitigation measures are required. TTM 33140 43 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? No Impact The 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. The project site is not designated as a locally important mineral resource recovery site by any plan. No impacts are anticipated;therefore,no mitigation measures are required. MITIGATION MEASURES None required. XI. NOISE a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The proposed project will result in the exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan and local noise ordinance. According to the "Acoustic Analysis Reporf',prepared by George H.Mamaghani,P.E.,November 2004,the lots that will be the most subjected to noise levels in excess of the City's acceptable noise standards (60 dBA exterior and 45 dBA.interior) are located adjacent to State Route 74. The most effected locations will be lots 21 through 35 as shown on the May 2005 tentative tract map. Sound walls will be necessary to reduce ambient noise levels to acceptable levels for the locations. However, it is expected that most future residents in this area will continue notice the sound of trucks on State Route 74 when they are outside due to the steepness of the roadway, the local topography, and the fact that the highway is located southwest, west, and east of the proposed development. However, these noise levels are not expected to exceed the requirements of the General Plan. To ensure that no impacts occur, a revised study shall be prepared based upon the final design of the approved subdivision and the update traffic volumes on State Route 74. In addition,project construction will generate noise that may effect the current area residents. The compliance with the requirements of the City Noise Ordinance and the supplemental requirements will minimize any adverse effects. These measures are expected to reduce future noise impacts to a less than significant level. No additional mitigation measures are anticipated. b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less Than Significant Impact Residential development neighbors the project site to the northwest and north and therefore, there are persons that may be exposed to groundborne vibration or noise. This impact would occur during the site grading phase of the project. It should be noted that this impact will be considered less than significant because impacts associated with the grading operations are of short duration and not a long term impact. In addition, people working near the heavy equipment will be exposed to high noise levels for short periods of time. This level, however, is below the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) noise exposure limit of 90 dBA for 8 hours per day. The City and its private contractor are required to comply with OSHA requirements for employee protection during construction. Impacts are considered less than significant;therefore,no additional mitigation measures are required. TTM 33140 44 c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project will result in increases in ambient noise levels above levels existing without the project; however, these impacts are considered less than significant. Any future noise generated by the project will be overshadowed by the roadway noise generated primarily from SR-74 (Ortega Highway). Impacts, while incremental are considered less than significant; therefore, no additional mitigation measures are required. d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less Than Significant Impact The project will result in a temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project; however, these disturbances created by short-term construction activities will be considered less than significant. Noise generated by construction equipment can reach high levels. However, mitigation will be required to ensure that construction noise will not result in any significant disturbances. After mitigation is incorporated,impacts will be reduced to a less than significant level. No additional mitigation is required. 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 The project site is not located within the influence area for any airport. Skylark Airport is located approximately 5 miles to the southeast of the site. Skylark Airport is use primarily by skydiving aircraft. No impacts are anticipated. No additional mitigation measures are required. 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? No Impact Skylark Field is located approximately 5 miles to the southeast of the site. Skylark Airport is use primarily by skydiving aircraft. Given the type of aircraft and the distance to the project, no impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. MITIGATION MEASURES NOI-1 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, an updated noise study shall be prepared and submitted to the City to reflect the final approved subdivision design and updated traffic volumes on State Route 74. The noise study shall identify the location and height of any necessary sound walls to reduce both exterior and interior noise levels. The sound walls shall be constructed prior to occupancy of the residential structures adjacent to the State Route 74. NOI-2 During project construction, the contractor shall comply with the provisions of the City Noise Ordinance and the following supplemental requirements: • All mechanical equipment shall use sound-control devices that are no less effective than those provided on the original equipment. No equipment shall have an unmuffled exhaust. • Appropriate additional noise mitigation measures shall be implemented including, but not limited to, locating stationary construction equipment away from the existing residences, turning off idling equipment, and notifying adjacent residents in advance of construction work. TTM 33140 45 XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING 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)? Less Than Significant Impact The project will not 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). The existing General Plan designations for the project site anticipated that single-family residential uses would ultimately be constructed on portions of the project site. The proposed construction will result in an additional increment of areawide population growth consistent with the adopted General Plan. As a result, any impacts are considered less than significant and no additional mitigation measures are required. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact The project will not displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The site is currently vacant so the project will not displace any onsite housing. No impacts are anticipated;therefore,no mitigation measures are required. c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact The project will not displace substantial numbers of people,necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Please refer to the response for Item XII.b. No impacts are anticipated;therefore,no mitigation measures are required. MITIGATION MEASURES None required. XIII. 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 Riverside County Fire Department provides fire protection and safety services to the City. The nearest fire station is No. 11,located at 17643 Brightman,west of the city in Lakeland Village. Ambulance and paramedic services are provided by Goodhew Ambulance Service. The project will not result in activities that create significant impacts. The project shall participate in the Development Impact Fee Program as adopted by the City of Lake Elsinore to mitigate impacts to fire protection resources.This will provide funding for capitol improvements such as land, equipment purchases, and fire station equipment. Impacts will be considered incremental;however,they are less than significant. Other than the mandatory DIF,no additional mitigation is required. TTM 33140 46 b) Police protection? Less Than Significant Impact Police protection services are provided by the City's Police Department as part of the Riverside County Sheriffs Department. The nearest sheriffs station is located at 333 Limited Street in Lake Elsinore. Traffic enforcement is provided for Riverside County in this area by the California Highway Patrol with additional support from the local County Sheriffs Department. The project shall participate in the Development Impact Fee Program as adopted by the City of Lake Elsinore to mitigate impacts to police protection resources. Impacts will be considered incremental; however, they are less than significant. Other than the mandatory DIF,no additional mitigation is required c) Schools? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project is residential in nature and will directly increase student enrollment at schools within the Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD). To offset any potential impacts, the project is required to pay appropriate school fees, per building square footage, in accordance with the LEUSD requirements. These fees are payable prior to building permit issuance. Impacts will be reduced to a less than significant level after the payment of school mitigation fees. No other mitigation measures are required. d) Parks? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project will increase population and associated burden on parks in the area. This would be due to development of 104 single-family residences in the City of Lake Elsinore. Park fees are required as part of the City DIF. In addition, Quimby Fees, which will be used for parkland will be required to be paid prior to the recordation of the final map. Impacts will be reduced to a less than significant level after the payment of school mitigation and Quimby fees. No other mitigation measures are required. e) Other public facilities? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed application may increase population and associated burden on other governmental services such as the library. To offset any impact, any future development is required to pay appropriate library fees. MITIGATION MEASURES PS-1 Prior to issuance of building permit, the developer shall pay the required school impact mitigation fees established by the Lake Elsinore Unified School District. PS-2 The developer shall pay all the Development Impact Fees as required by the City of Lake Elsinore. XIV. 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 with Mitigation Incorporated The proposed project will result in an increase population,which would result in an associated burden on parks in the area; however, this increase will be considered less than significant after mitigation measures are incorporated. The discussion and mitigation measures are discussed in Section XIII.d. No additional mitigation measures are required. TTM 33140 47 b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact The proposed project does not include or require any recreational facilities. As a result, the recreational needs of the future residents will be addressed by park and recreation facilities located elsewhere within the community. These types of areawide impacts are addressed through the Quimby Act requirements (for park land) and Park Development Impact Fess (for the improvement of park facilities. With the payment of these impact fees,no adverse physical effects are expected. MITIGATION MEASURES PR-1 Prior to the issuance of any building permit,the developer shall satisfy the park land requirements of the Quimby Act and shall pay the appropriate park and recreation Development Impact Fee. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated A Traffic Study (Study) entitled "Revised Traffic Impact Study for Lake Elsinore View Estates"was prepared by Minagar & Associates, Inc., dated December 30, 2005. The Study evaluated the six potentially effected intersections around the proposed project. The intersections that were studied are as follows: • Grand Avenue and Ortega Highway(SR 74) • Grand Avenue and Macy Street • Grand Avenue and Riverside Drive • Riverside Drive and Lakeshore Drive • Grand Avenue and Machado Street • Grand Avenue at the Butterfield Elementary School Driveway All of these intersections, except Riverside Drive and Lakeshore Drive, are currently stop sign controlled. Highway. According to the Study, three intersections already warrant the installation of a traffic signal. The three intersections are Grand Avenue and Ortega Highway, Grand Avenue and Macy Street, and Grand Avenue and Riverside Drive. These three intersections,and the intersection of Riverside Drive and Lakeshore Drive, all currently operate at Levels of Service "E" or "F" during either the morning or evening peak hours. Caltrans is in the process of designing a traffic signal for the intersection of Grand Avenue and Ortega. The City has already indicated that the developer of this project will be required to signalize and improve the intersection of Grand Avenue and Macy Street. The City of Lake Elsinore is in the process of designing essential geometry improvements to the intersection of Grand Avenue and Riverside Drive. According to the Traffic Study, the project is expected to generate 1,005 daily vehicle trips. During the AM peak hour, 79 vehicle trips (20 coming to the project and 59 leaving the project) would result. During the PM peak hour, 106 vehicle trips (67 coming to the project and 39 leaving the project) are expected. To evaluate the effects of the project on the circulation system, the Study evaluated roadway conditions after the ongoing improvements are completed. The results of this part of the Study indicated that all the evaluated intersections are expected to operate at Level of Service (LOS) "D" or better after the project. TTM 33140 48 This condition is consistent with the requirements of the General Plan and represents an improvement over the current conditions. Without the project improvements to the intersection of Grand Avenue and Macy Street,the project would have a significant and unmitigated impact on the surrounding area. In addition to the signal and intersection improvements at Grand Avenue and Macy Street,the project will also be required to pay its fair share toward the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program. This will be paid to the City prior to the issuance of residential building permits. b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project will exceed, when analyzed cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. Please reference to the discussion in Item XV.a. above. No affected roadways are designated as a Congestion Management Program roadway. There is no relevance to this issue. 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? No Impact The proposed project will not 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. None exist on-site or are proximate to this site. No impacts are foreseen;therefore,no mitigation measures are required. d) 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 project will not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). Access and roadway improvements will be designed to comply with design criteria contained in the Caltrans Design Manual and other City requirements and standards. Sight distance at the project driveways should be reviewed at the time of final grading, landscape and street improvement plans. No impacts are anticipated; therefore, no mitigation is required. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The project has the potential to result in inadequate emergency access. Its proximity to the Ortega Highway and a wildland fire hazard create a potentially significant hazardous condition. To address this issue, additional access points to the project are necessary. As a result, prior to the issuance of the 35th residential building permit, extension of Macy Street will need to be completed. With these improvements,the Fire Department is supportive of the project. No significant hazards are expected; and no additional mitigation measures are required. f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? No Impact The project will not result in inadequate parking capacity. On-site parking spaces will be required in accordance with the City's Zoning Code requirements for single-family residences. No impacts are anticipated;therefore,no mitigation is required. TTM 33140 49 g) Conflict with adopted policies,plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,bicycle racks)? No Impact The project will not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. According to the "Traffic Impact Analysie% prepared by Minagar & Associates, February 2005, the Riverside Transit Agency has one bus route that passes near the project site. A bus route will not likely be implemented any closer to the site due to Ortega Highway being a boundary on one side and the fact that an existing residential neighborhood exists as another boundary to the site. No significant impacts are expected with mitigation. No impacts are expected;therefore,no mitigation is required. MITIGATION MEASURES TR-1 The developer shall construct the extension of Macy Street from the end of the current paving on Macy Street (southwest of the intersection with Lakeridge Road) prior to the issuance of the 35th residential building permit to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. TR-2. The developer shall design and construct intersection improvements and install a traffic signal at the intersection of Grand Avenue and Macy Street. The design of these improvements shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A portion of these improvements may be reimbursable by the City based upon the determination by the City Engineer. TR-3 Prior to issuance of any building permit, the developer shall pay the appropriate Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Less Than Significant Impact The project will result in urban pollutants typical of any development,including oils and other substances. However, water quality standards and discharge requirements will not be violated if the following is satisfied. Given that the project site exceeds five acres, the project is required to acquire a Notice of Intent from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Board,in accordance with the City's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The NPDES permit is required for any discharge of wastes to surface waters, resulting from dewatering during construction, stormwater runoff from construction, and construction sites. The permit includes a list of Best Management Practices which outlines measures to be undertaken by the developer to guard against accidental contamination of ground waters and surface waters. Compliance with the foregoing ensures significant water quality impacts will not result. 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? Less Than Significant Impact The project will not 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 The Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) will be providing water and wastewater service to the project. The project as designed is consistent with their master plan. Impacts will be considered incremental; however, they are less than significant. Other than mandatory fees and installation of onsite utility infrastructure,no additional mitigation is required. TTM 33140 50 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? Less Than Significant Impact The project will not 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. Reference the discussion in Section VIII (Hydrology and Water Quality). Impacts will be reduced to a less than significant level with the incorporation of mitigation measures contained in Section VIII. No additional mitigation measures are required. d) 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 The project will have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed. Reference Response No. XVI.b.. Impacts will be considered incremental; however, they are less than significant. Other than mandatory fees and installation of onsite utility infrastructure,no additional mitigation is required. 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? Less Than Significant Impact The project will 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 Reference Response No.XVI.b. Impacts will be considered incremental; however, they are less than significant. Other than mandatory fees and installation of onsite utility infrastructure,no additional mitigation is required. f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project will be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. The proposed project will generate demand for solid waste service system capacity and has a potential to contribute to potentially significant cumulative demand impacts on the solid waste system. Solid waste disposal capacity has been increased under the County to provide adequate disposal capacity for cumulative demand over the planning horizon (minimum of five years). The project area's solid waste is collected and disposed of at the El Sobrante Sanitary Landfill located at 10910 Dawson Canyon Road east of Interstate 15 in the Gavilan Hills. According to the State of California's Solid Waste Information System, the landfill is active and permitted with a projected closure date of January 1, 2030. As of June 2001 the site was permitted to a capacity of 184,930,000 cubic yards and a permitted throughput of 10,000 tons per day. The proposed project is not expected to generate solid wastes other than typical municipal solid waste generated by commercial uses. Combined with the City's mandatory source reduction and recycling program, the proposed project is not anticipated to cause any adverse impact to either the solid waste collection or landfill disposal system. Impacts will be considered incremental; however, they are less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less Than Significant Impact The project will comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. The project does not propose activities that will significantly impact solid waste services or facilities.Any future TTM 33140 51 development however,must comply with construction and debris removal and recycling requirements and shall contract with the City's waste hauler/franchisee for all bins and their removal in accordance with City Ordinance. Impacts will be considered incremental;however, they are less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. MITIGATION MEASURES None required. V. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following are Mandatory Findings of Significance in accordance with 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 Based on evaluations and discussions contained in the Initial Study, the proposed application has a limited potential to incrementally degrade the quality of the environment. The proposed application will not significantly affect the environment with mitigation measures identified in this 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 The proposed application will not have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable with mitigation measures. No cumulative environmental impacts have been identified in association with the proposed project that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant impact level. Potentially significant cumulative effects are reduced to a less than significant impact level for air quality; biological resources; quality; geology/soils; hazards and hazardous materials; hydrology/water quality; noise; transportation/traffic; and utilities/services systems. Given that project impacts are less than significant, cumulative impacts are not foreseen. c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed application does not have the potential to significantly adversely affect humans, either directly or indirectly with mitigation measures. A number of project impacts were identified as having a potential to significantly impact humans, either directly or indirectly. Air quality; geology/soils; hazards and hazardous materials; and noise impacts all pose a potential for adverse impacts to humans, but mitigation measures have been established to control these impacts to a less than significant impact level. With implementation of the identified measures, the proposed project is not expected to cause significant adverse impacts to humans. All significant impacts are avoidable and the City will ensure that measures imposed to protect humans are implemented. TTM 33140 52 VI. PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED This section identifies those persons who prepared or contributed to preparation of this document. This section is prepared in accordance with Section 15129 of the CEQA Guidelines. A. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE • Bob Brady,City Manager • Rolfe Preisendanz,Community Development Director • Chuck Mackey,City Traffic Engineer B. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT • Minagar&Associates (Traffic) • Massoud Ghiam,Registered Engineer(Hydrology) • Callyn D.Yorke,PH.D (Biological) • McKenna et al. (Cultural) • AV Geo Technics,Inc. (Geotechnical) • George H.Mamaghani, P.E. (Acoustics) • Julia Strong Qurisdictional Delineation,DBESP Analysis) C. OTHER DEPARTMENTS/AGENCIES • Jorge Rodriguez,Fire Captain,Riverside County Fire Department • Cher Quinones,Engineering Coordinator,EVMWD VII. REFERENCES 1. "Lake Elsinore General Plan Final EIR", City of Lake Elsinore,prepared in 1990. 2. Lake Elsinore Unified School District Web-site: http://www2.leusd.kl2.ca.us/web/facihtiesdevelol2erinfo.htm 3. "Acoustic Analysis Report",prepared by George H.Mamaghani,P.E.,November 2004. 4. "URBEMIS Air Quality Analysis — Tentative Tract Map 33140", prepared by Matthew Fagan Consulting Services. 5. "Geotechnical Report",prepared by AV Geo Technics,Inc.,April 2005. 6. "Cultural Resources Investigation",prepared by McKenna et al.,February 2004. 7. `Biological Resources Report",prepared by Callyn D.Yorke,PH.D.,January 2004. 8. "Drainage Concept Study",prepared by Massoud Ghiam,Registered Engineer,June 2005. 9. "Revised Traffic Impact Analysis",prepared by Minagar&Associates,Inc.,December 2005. 10. "Preliminary Jurisdictional Delineation Report",prepared by Bioreg Consulting,May,2006. 11. "Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) Tentative Tract Map No. 33140 Located in the City of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California, prepared by Bioreg Consulting,October,2006. TTM 33140 53 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION—City of Lake Elsinore The following Mitigated Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 33140 Project Applicant: The Taft Corporation,6080 Busch Drive,Malibu,CA 90265 Project Location: The 72-acre project site is located near the ends of Grandview Drive and Macy Street, east of the Ortega Highway in the City of Lake Elsinore,County of Riverside(APN 386-100-034). Project Description: The applicant is proposing to construct 104 new single family residential tract homes and retain approximately 36 acres as open space. The project includes the extension of Macy Street to provide secondary access for the project. The project site is designated Low Medium Density Residential(6 dwelling units per acre maximum)and Open Space Recreational on the City's General Plan and R-1 (Single Family Residential)on the Zoning Map. FINDING This is to advise that the City of Lake Elsinore, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environmental and is proposing this Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the following findings: The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. The Initial Study identifies potentially significant effects but: (1) Proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. (3) Mitigation measures are required to ensure all potentially significant impacts are reduced to a less than significance level. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. If adopted, the Mitigated Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding are included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Lake Elsinore, Planning Division, 130 South Main Street,Lake Elsinore(951)674-3124. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration during the review period. Date: orberefinination Kirl �<tiur , ASS _ lane TTM 33140 54 ATTACHMENT A CEQA PROCESS DOCUMENTS TTM 33140 55 -- ���, 1 -• ;�1p� Notice of Intent to Adopt Mitigated Negative Duclaratiort PlanirnE Dwinon �;��Iwmj �p wet/r 5eeuon 150 7?(f the Puhhr Rero irces Cock) 130 S.Ittsiti 4oeet I.Akc Ll*.,—.CA 01M (9?11 t,74.3124 iy511471-1419 fav Tiled With M Office of Planning and krseatch ® CoYntV LIC&t.,f Kivrnulr Cunt% i44Ys Tcnrh Srrrrt,Ruin 121 2724 f_iatrtiNC I)nvr Secrnmrntn,CA 95914 Knv'r.nir.l.'♦ 92507 Proirrt'I ulr. Dcsign Review— I rntnnvr Toro 11ap No 33144r/ Msnraed NepArc Dedantinn%IND No 2LI07 Ill Project Location(NIWIAc). I he prnposed project site cnnctsn tit i,at.ics located at the end ut Cituwdvicw Drive on the niirearnr end of the pmperm And thr nnrrii Hiljtwat on the southcen enrl of the propeM and is cunrndc vat.wil- The propctty a bowitled vu llte north by stnvlc-Famih•il-riluirn.uu llte South bs-vacant Inritl,tin dir ewa by Ortega Highwsiv and on the west by vacant lan(l Project Locauun(City): _ter of ir4e 1-htnrrm Ptoject Location(Conntv)- Riverside County' Dcstription of Proiccc IV aPPlrt:ull is proposing consttucnnn tit it urw SIiI& family' resfdcnad taws. 11, uact wal consist of 72 ittir+ with a total of IUS rr,tdruuat IoLs. That will hit its usidef development and 16 1 in in of open 1pacc ThC prplri r trtr n de.ir•kAted R-1 (Single 1'atntlt Residential)on the Ctrv'c C:rtirrid Plua acid 7-orting Map I hp lirnl wA pioleet will WWII in rhr rlrvrltr)nuenl of 35)aetes mto n single futtily residential trw t I hr uvelv't lot tine it 1-I.W5 :tlunrr fart.widi a nunuhurrl 1?it'i7r of 1. llti.lies the Citv's rcgwrcmcnt I hrir rs m cWttng w•itrr null siie that is to reir»un. n lwiii%trt ittnup will be added and it Ira tlrtLr;kled to the -Attf illn'irr 1wrll�Y tots wil be lafiiki April uudcs the i I.O.A.to mlllntAin thr iltiliet of the project Thcrr will Fir Z7Inu with views of the I Ar The subject sett ti Ir.entrrt svlthnr 111e late of Lake Elsinore Lirnrrwl plan tied and will be sublcct tit rlrr r nicu.,contained within the(.in its I.akc Elitnore C:rnrnd 1161 EIR(1990) wltreh coarnim i nests :md teliable data for an attnluuir injAvsn of the proposed prolert nlvu, intttir,have Bran conducted fur biological Vri,iunr.,,Lullutal mfc,ureti,trflthr.nrrt'a'wid yxolup.M llic ptoposed pfO,Ct1 is CNPecrcd tv te4uite 00,72'cubic yatdi tit rill ntstl Ifi1.303 cubic yards of fig, rriolnnr tit it act of 2W456 Cubic yards of ffl rnmenal that wtrliltl turd lu be tfan3porwd from the 511e• Iltc tafiOtt fete a tall to to drrrmnued liu:.ul mvst cases,isusually u,4un j mJcs of thr pm,Pct site Name of Lead Agrnty: (it% of Lake Clstnorc.Cormmitnin•Deteluvownt NP.utment.111•ril's"T lhvis1011 Ixud A},ency Contact Person, Kin A.Couty,Associate Ptarincr Te6phone Number. M;1)1.71 1121 is 274 Address whcrc ducuuscut u►ay be obtained: (try-tit I ill,1-hurau. 13ii Scsurh edam.Siren I.,Le Usinore.CA 0'1>ill 1Nnhhr. Review Period: Bcgim- MMix h l0,2W6 Ends; April tit,2<0,10 Anyone inte"ted in Ibis instter is invited to constintim uu the doeurmni by Writs-mnpsitree or contact Kin A.t iinv,Annuciate Planner(�151)674.1124:X44 At the City of tAkr F.liautne,City Hall locsled At 1.14)S.Main Sum LakC Elsint?—CA 4225.10. ,r tined z . TOW CrJMM lien Ih•sdiruulcnt DIMrtor key Pt C' ru lAtit MEMORANDUM From: City of Lake Elsinore To- Distribution Subject: Notice of Availability of a proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration by the City of Lake Clsinore for Design Review Tentative Tract Map No. 33140 / Mitigated Negative Declaration MND No. 2005-10 The City of I Ake blsinore (City) has prepared an Initial Study for ffiv subivel project which recommends that a Mitigated Naydtivw Declaration be issued and the City hAs authorized the release of the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for public review and comment for the above project. Because you have been identified as an interestod party, a copy of the Initial Study and ralatwd processing materials are attached for your iwvirw and comment. The period of review will be from March 10, 2006 to April 10, 2008 Written comments on the Initial Study and proposed Negative Decldiatiun should be submitted to Mr. Kirt A. Cuury at the above address no later than April 10, 2006. At a date to be determined, the City piupubeb to hold a Planning Commission meeting to discuss and possibly recommend ApprovAI of the above project- Prior to approving the project, the City will adopt the Midgated Negative Declaration, if apprupriiiAw. Thu technical and environmental issues related to this project will be discussed at this meeting. If you submit comments, you will be notified of the meeting date. Please cnntWt Mr Coury if you havo questions regarding the City's review process for considering the Mitigated Negative Declaratiun. Mr. Klrt A. oury, Associate Planntu City of Lake Elsinore DISTRIBUTION State ClearinghorrsP, 15 copies Calitnrnia Department of Fish and Game Chino Hills Office Attornuys fuf the Pechanga ©and of I uiseno Indians Lake Elsinorr. & San Jacinto Watorsheds Authority Riverside County Recorder/Copy Seutiun Riverside Cuuiity Planning Department Riverside County I ransportation Commission Riverside County Transportation Department Western Riverside Council of Governments Elsinore Valley Mimicipal Water District Flsinore-Murrieta-Anza Conservation District City of Murrieta, Planning Riverside County Water conservation and Flood Control District City of Canyon Lake. Planning South Cowl Air Quality Management District Lake Elsinore I Initied School District Planning Division. SCE Southern California Gas San Bernardino Museum Lakc Elsinore Library Canyon Lake Library Mission 7 rail I ibrary Riverside County: Supervisor Bob Buster Riverside County Regional ConservAtion Agency U S Fish and Wildlife Servico Santa Ana River Regional Water Quality Control Board Departrnwnt cf Transportation, District la U S. Army corps of Engineers Pochanga Band of Luiseho Indians Riverside Cuunty Habitat Conservation Agency I-orm A Nofice of Completion & Environmental Document Transmittal SCN N To Be Assigned Vkul to state Cleannat wc,IV Box 3104,aaorarnento.CA 95812-3044 9161445-0613 Project Title: pFsi a Rcvirw-Tr4Ilalive Tract Map No.331401 WiSated Ncgativc Declaration MND No.2005 10 Lead AgenCcV City of lake Flsinnre Contact Plasm: Kitt A.Corm Street Address 130 S.Maitt Socel Phone (vs 1)b-7s 3l14 - r:ilY IAlc Eleanore Zip: 925311 C:otmty: Rivtttide — — — — — — — — — - - - - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Project Location: Count-, R3vcr3idc City/Nearest Conrunwkity: Lake Elsinfwr tend of the Minds of C)ranavieW AV R Cruss Suem. Mao SL Zip Code: 92530 l otal Acres: 71 1.4e Ewlorc A:xecsor c Parcel No 326.100-034 SA—Ann I S Twp. 6S Range: 5W Box (Atudsonsle wiwa 2 Milcs Sutr Huv 4 74 Watcm-aYs: NIA Aunts NSA Raduvvs NIA Schools. WA Document Type: CEGA: n `OP ❑ bupplemenUSubakitteatM NEPA: ❑ NOI Other L luini D111.uutent * Early Cons (Pnor SCH No.) ❑ EA L] Final flrcvmcnt ❑ Ncg Dcc ® Other MND ❑ Draft EIS ❑ Otlirr 0 Draft EIR ❑ FONSI • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Local Action Type: n General Plan Update ❑ Speclfu Plan ❑ ttezotie ❑ ^"' "t""� H General Man Amendment Master Plan ❑ Prezone U Rrt VOUPtlleui ❑ General Plan Elenlant Planned Unit Deuelopmeat ❑ Use Pelmlt Lf 01miAl Pal inil 11 Commumth Pkui Site Plan ® Land Division(SuMivialnn.etc} U t 1hrr — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Dpvalopmant Type: ® Resdenaal: (.ides 105 A4,-,w 72 U WAter Facilities' Type _ Af(iF) ❑ olliee Jqp. .1cecs 6aiproiwu ❑ Transpnrxtirm- JLpr n Commercial: Sgft Acura brwoires ❑ Mming, .411►►rr�! D Lidustnal: Sefi, Acres Eiirplevw ❑ Power TVpe If vis ❑ LducaUond _❑ Waste Irea6twN: I1 P' ❑ Rc ioriiwud ^n Hazardous Wade: Type LI o&T. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Fundinq(approx) Federal S State S TnrAl 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Proiact Issues Dlccuceed In Document: ® Aeatl+etidVl�l Flood P1ainfRooding ❑ Sch olskIniversitim ® Water()tmlity ® Agrtcultural Land � Forest 1.2ndlFire Huard ❑ septic systrnis Wrlci Sulgdylowuudwato ® All V WltV GeolmiuseisallC ® Sewtr( vtrjty ® WcllnnJ/Rilwtinu ® ArcheologlcaUtitstorical Minerals ® Soil ErosiowcornpauutmAhatling ® Wildlife ❑ Cotw"Lone Neiih ® 4olirl WaWi. ® Chuzi hidoung ® DrauLviVAbsorption PopulauonA3ousing Balance ® Tovir livardratc ® Lmduse ❑ ILonomc7Jobe x Public sennceslFwilities ® TTnMr:ftirc idiairm ® Cinuutativc Effccu ❑ FI Wl ❑ RCt.7eati0lllPiflCS ® Ve�rralirn ❑ othcr Present I and Use/Zoning/General Plan Designation: R-1 (Single Family Residential) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Project Description: The applicant is proposiriy cmistruction of a new single family residential tract.The tract ON consist or 105 residential lots on 72 acres, 36.1 acres of tiw project site will be left as open space.The project Site is datignated R-1 (Single Family Residential)oti the rily'c General Plan and Zoning Map. The average lot site is 14,752 square feet,with a minimum lot size of 7,200,per the City's requirement.There is an existing water Rrtircci 1.11.99 tank site that is to reindin. Twelve lots will be landscaped under the H.U.A.to maintain the elopes of the project. Thr►re will be 27 lots with views of the Lake_ The subject site is localed within the City of Lake Elsinore Ceneral Plan area and will be subject to the tritAria contained within the City of Ldkr Flsinore General Plan CIR(1900) which contains current and reliable data for an adequate analysis of the propused pluject. Also, studies have been conducted for biological resources, cultural resources,traffle, nolce and goology. The proposed project Is expected to require 6R0,737 cuhic yards of cut and 401,503 cubic yards of till, resultinq in a net 01 204,bbb cubic yards of fill material that watrld;)".d to he transported from the site. The export site is still to be determined but,in most cases, is usually withiti 5 miles of the project site. Water. sewer, electric, qas,and telephone services would hP PxtendPd onto the site from existing main Riles. Water and sewer would be provided by the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District(EVMWD). Cas would be provided by 1 he Gas Company;electricity would tin provitlrrl by Snuthem California Edison; and telephone service would be provided by Verizon. The site is within the Elsinore Unified School District and required school fees arc currently$3.03 per habltablo square fout. The nearest Fire station to the project is El Cariso Station 51,located at 92353 Ilwy 74 Ortega, in Lake Elsinore. Police support will be available through the Mutrirlr polite nehartment at 211442 Beckman Court, in the City of Murrieta and through the Sheriff's Station lnuatwl At 399 1 imited Street in Lake Elsinore. Reviewing Agencies Checkh3t Form A.Continued KEY 9=NIL1unenl sort by leml xpeuu X=tlnatment smt 1n SCH X Resources Agency d=sumenedmsmbuLion Bunting k.Waterways - Coastal Commission Coastal Conservancy Colorado River BOW Environmental Protection Agency X Conservation Air Resources Hoard X Fish&Game — _ Cakin nia Waste Managemelu Board F.Neatry&fire Protection SWRCB:Clean Water Grants Office of Historic Preservation SWRCB.Delta Unit X t'a*s&Recreation SWRCB:Water Qualm' ReclamacionBoanf tiWKCB:Water Rights S,F Miy raise -nation&DcNclopmcnt Commission \ Regional WQCB!! 9 (Canta Ana Region ) X Water Resources(DWK) Youth 3 Adult Corrections Business,Transportation& HUuiiltg (^nrrections Aeronautics Independent Commission &Offices _ Califutnia Highway Patrol Energy Commission X CALTRANS District 0, X Native Aniesk-An Htaitage f ommtccion Department of Transportation Pluuung Puhlic utilities Coninussion Housing Itt Community nev Anpmrni Santa Monica.Mountains Conservanc% Food&Agriculture State Lands Coinniission liesith&Welfare Tahoe Regional Planning Agt,k:y Health Service& State A Consumer Servires Other _ Oeneidl SaAiQes OLA(Schools) • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Pudllc Review Pwiod(to bo filled in by Irad orpsioy) Jtarung Date M=h 1%206 Ending Date April 10.2006 Signature �� Date March V.2006 Load Ageriey(Complete If applicable): For SCH Use Only: Consuhing Finn: Uty of Lake Elsinore [IrAit SCH Addivm. I10 S Main Street Date Rc%im Starts City/8tatelzip: Lake Elsinore.CA 92SV) Date to Agencies Contact: Kin A.(bun' Date to SCH _ Pltune (951 ) 674-3124 Clearance Date _ Nwcs: Applicant: The Taft Corporation Address: 6080 Busch Lrive Citr"+talcl'lip- Malibu.CA 70265 Phone 010 ) 437-9190 Rcvixd J•J1-99 ATTACHMENT B SITE PHOTOGRAPHS TTM 33140 56 1. View from end of Grand View Drive (the main project entrance), facing southwest J ._# - 2. View of houses at the end of Macy Street, facing northeast TTM 33140 57 ss 4. View ofinteriorofproperty, facingsouthwest _ o a � _ TTM 33140 59 7. View of interior of property, facing south towards Ortega Hwy 8. View of existing tank on property, facing southwest / 60 ,�� ._ ,i •�•. ?fir _ :1 11. View of property • from Grand Avenue 12. View of existing tank on property, facing north from Ortega Hwy 13. View from Ortega Hwy, facing west (Note the existing water tank at the extreme left of picture) J � t 14. View from Ortega Hwy, facing north TTM 33140 63 RMEW r' 15. View of the end of Megan Court, facing south x w SPA.. ✓� r�"�.¢ Tly '`�4'�L tl I.C.~ `Y - ,- 16. Off-site detention basin, facing northeast (Note: the channel enters the detention basin at the lower right of this picture.) TTM 33140 64 \ T �" •+ \' h. + M., � M ::.�Y• x » K,i I":(p iAt, - _ ? ,.ram r�� �` �3 OA all Or Ou - lip"+� '� SP � �� - � 'r AG ✓i 17 C < > T 5� b � -_ ->, '- a ir.�#-�- `�•. k'Y x "r4 l ,J � ,� :�-.��.-,ice. � • � ;},4 {z 61f,,.