HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem No. 18 - Planning Application - Lakeshore Drive Condos
Page 1 of 6
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
To:Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From:Jason Simpson, City Manager
Prepared by:Damaris Abraham, Interim Assistant Community Development Director
Date:March 28, 2023
Subject:Planning Application No. 2021-38 (Lakeshore Drive Condos) – A
Request for Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 38271 to Subdivide an
Approximately 10.29-Acre Site into One Lot for Condominium Purposes
and Residential Design Review to Construct 140 Two-Story Attached
Condominium Residences within the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan
Applicant: Brett Crowder, Lake Elsinore Lakeshore, LLC
Recommendation
1. Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE LAKESHORE VILLAGE SPECIFIC
PLAN MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (MND NO. 2003-03) FOR PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. 2021-38 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38271 AND RESIDENTIAL
DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2021-05);
2. Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2021-38
(TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38271 AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2021-05)
IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES
HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN;
3. Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38271 TO SUBDIVIDE AN
APPROXIMATELY 10.29-ACRE SITE INTO ONE LOT AND 140 RESIDENTIAL UNITS FOR
CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES IN THE ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL AND
COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL FLEX DESIGNATIONS OF THE LAKESHORE VILLAGE
SPECIFIC PLAN (APNS: 379-230-001, 379-230-002); and
PA 2021-38 (Lakeshore Drive Condos)
Page 2 of 6
4. Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2021-05 PROVIDING
BUILDING DESIGNS AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS FOR 140 TWO-STORY
ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM RESIDENTIAL UNITS LOCATED IN THE ATTACHED
RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL FLEX DESIGNATIONS OF THE
LAKESHORE VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN (APNS: 379-230-001, 379-230-002).
Background
On March 7, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider Planning
Application No. 2021-38 and voted 4-0 to recommend City Council approval of the project. No
public comments were received and only the applicant attended the hearing. During the meeting,
one Commissioner asked how potential construction noise impacts on neighbors would be
addressed. The applicant stated that perimeter block walls to buffer noise would be constructed
prior to start of construction. Another Commissioner asked about the placement of air conditioning
units and emergency access interference. The project engineer stated that the equipment could
be relocated to the courtyard areas in final design plans to comply with building and fire code
provisions.
Project Location
The project site is located on the southwest side of Lakeshore Drive at the intersection of
Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street. (APNs: 379-230-001, 379-230-002).
Environmental Setting
EXISTING USE ZONING GENERAL PLAN
Project Site Vacant Attached Residential (AR)Lakeshore Village SP
North Vacant C1 – Neighborhood Commercial Neighborhood Commercial
South MF Residential R2 – Medium Density Residential Medium Density Residential
East SF Residential Detached Residential (DR)Lakeshore Village SP
West (front)Vacant CP – Commercial Park General Commercial
West (rear)Mobilehome Lots MC – Mobilehome Community High Density Residential
Project Description
Planning Application No. 2021-38 (Lakeshore Drive Condos) consists of requests for Tentative
Tract Map No. 38271 to subdivide an approximately 10.29-acre site into one approximately 9.71-
acre lot for condominium purposes and Residential Design Review No. 2021-05 to construct 140
two-story attached condominium residences and associated improvements within the Lakeshore
Village Specific Plan. The proposed buildings feature four floor plans ranging in size from 1,807
sq. ft. to 2,008 sq. ft. and three architectural styles (French Country, Santa Barbara and Modern
Farmhouse). The project also involves construction of off-site infrastructure including street
frontage improvements along Lakeshore Drive and installation of traffic signals at the intersection
of Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street.
PA 2021-38 (Lakeshore Drive Condos)
Page 3 of 6
Below is a description of the project design aspects and features, including site design, floor plans,
architectural design and conceptual wall and fence plans.
Site Design
The buildings will be arranged in a clustered manner with regular spacing along a 26'-0" wide,
two-lane private loop street. Each building will be served by a 20'-0" wide shared driveway serving
up to four units per cluster. The site will feature two common open space areas with amenities
including a playground structure (“tot lot”), a swimming pool, a recreation building and seating
areas. Guest parking will be provided near the common open space areas. Private open space
areas will be provided adjacent to the residences between buildings and in required yards along
rear and side property lines.
Access to the development will be provided by a two-way gated entrance at the intersection of
Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street where new traffic signals will be installed as part of the
project. Common open areas as well as the project frontage will be landscaped with fully irrigated,
drought-resistant plantings.
Floor Plans
Each building will be roughly “U”-shaped in plan and feature two condominium units sharing a
common wall. Each unit will contain a two-car garage with a recessed storage area for trash bins,
interior laundry facilities, common living areas, and a private patio. Four floor plans are proposed
as specified below:
Plan 1: Two-story, 1,995 square-foot unit with 3 bedrooms, 2.5 bathrooms, 2-car garage
Plan 2: Two-story, 1,807 square-foot unit with 3 bedrooms, 2.5 bathrooms, 2-car garage
Plan 3: Two-story, 1,892 square-foot unit with 4 bedrooms, 3 bathrooms, 2-car garage
Plan 4: Two-story, 2,008 square-foot unit with 4 bedrooms, 3 bathrooms, 2-car garage
Plan 1 accounts for 34 units (24%), Plan 2 accounts for 35 units (25%), Plan 3 accounts for 27
units (20%), and Plan 4 accounts for 44 units (32%). Therefore, a sufficient mix and variation of
plans will be provided throughout the development as depicted in the site plan.
Architectural Design
Three distinct architectural styles are proposed and are generally characterized as follows:
•French Country elevations feature a dark composite tile gabled roof, tan or white stucco
siding, accent wood siding, metallic railing, window shutters, and stone wainscoting.
•Santa Barbara elevations feature a red composite tile varied gable and hipped roof, tan or
white stucco siding, metallic railing, window shutters, accent tiles, and stone wainscoting.
•Modern Farmhouse elevations feature a dark composite tile gabled roof, tan or white
stucco siding, accent siding, metallic railing, window shutters and stone wainscoting.
PA 2021-38 (Lakeshore Drive Condos)
Page 4 of 6
French Country accounts for 22 buildings (31%) and both Santa Barbara and Modern Farmhouse
each account for 24 buildings (34%). Therefore, the architectural styles will be evenly distributed
throughout the development.
In addition, enhanced architectural treatments will be provided on all elevations including those
that are visible from common areas and the public right-of-way.
Conceptual Wall and Fence Plan
Proposed walls and fencing consist of 6'-0" tall split-faced CMU block wall with pilasters along the
site perimeter and the boundaries of common open space. Vinyl fencing with maximum 6'-0"
height will be provided at edge of private open space areas. Block wall returns will be provided
along areas facing the private street.
Landscaping
The proposed landscaping plan has been designed to complement the different architectural
styles and to conform to the water efficiency standards under Chapter 19.08 of the LEMC. Final
landscaping and irrigation plans are to be approved by the Planning Division.
Analysis
The project site is in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan (LVSP) and has land use designations
of Attached Residential (AR) and Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF). The intent of the AR
designation is to accommodate attached rental residences in multi-family structures with a
maximum density of 18 units per net acre; the intent of the CRF designation is to accommodate
one and two neighborhood commercial businesses or flex residential use with a maximum density
of 18 units per acre consistent with the AR designation. The application proposes to construct
140 two-story attached residential units on an approximately 9.71-acre parcel at an approximate
density of 14.4 units per net acre. Therefore, the proposed multi-family residential development
is consistent with the land use goals and policies of the LVSP. The project is also consistent with
the General Plan because the LSVP was found to be consistent with the General Plan at adoption.
Staff has reviewed the submitted development plans for compliance with the AR development
standards and regulations of Section 6.1 of the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan.
PA 2021-38 (Lakeshore Drive Condos)
Page 5 of 6
The proposed development conforms to applicable standards as shown in the below table.
LVSP Development Standards Required Proposed
Lot Area Minimum (sq. ft.)8,400 423,176
Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit (sq. ft.)1,815 3,023
Street Frontage Lot Width (ft.)70 416
Setbacks:
Front – Main Structures 20 avg., 15 min.20'-0"
Side – Main Structures 10, 15 from public ROW 10'-0"
Rear – Main Structures 10 10'-0"
Front for Parking 10 > 10'-0"
Lot Coverage (%)60 40.3%
Building Height 35'-0" max.27'-0" max.
Dwelling Unit Size Minimum (sq. ft.)800-900 (for 3-4 bedrooms)1,807 sq. ft. min.
Open Space (sq. ft.)
Common Open Space 250 per unit, or 35,000 36,666 sq. ft.
Private Open Space 80 per unit 138 sq. ft. min.
Parking/Unit 2.33 spaces per unit, or 327 2.49 spaces per unit, or 348
Architecture and Site Design
The architectural design of the proposed buildings conforms to the design guidelines of the LSVP
and the Residential Development Standards (Chapter 17.44) of the LEMC. The three elevation
styles will create a distinctive street scene within the project site and serve to avoid repetition.
Tentative Tract Map Analysis
Tentative Tract Map No. 38271 includes a subdivision of an approximately 10.29-acre site into
one approximately 9.71-acre lot for condominium purposes. The proposed subdivision meets the
minimum lot area requirement and street frontage width of the LVSP. The tentative map also
complies with Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Map) of the LEMC and the Subdivision Map Act. The
project will be required to form a Homeowner’s Association (HOA) for reciprocal access
easements, shared parking spaces as well as for the maintenance of common areas.
Environmental Determination
Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15162, the project
would not have a significant effect on the environment and no new environmental documentation
is necessary because all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in a
previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND No. 2003-03) prepared for the
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an Addendum
providing minor additions and changes to MND No. 2003-03 has been prepared for the project.
All potentially significant effects have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to MND No. 2003-03
and none of the conditions described in Section 15162 have occurred. MND No. 2003-03 was
adopted by the City Council on October 28, 2003.
PA 2021-38 (Lakeshore Drive Condos)
Page 6 of 6
The project is consistent with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The project is not located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell area and
therefore is not subject to Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process (LEAP) and Joint Project Review
(JPR) requirements. The project complies with all other requirements of the MSHCP.
Public Outreach
In October 2022, the applicant mailed advance notice of the development proposal to neighboring
property owners within 300 feet of the project site.
Public Notice
Notice of the hearing for this application has been published in the Press-Enterprise newspaper
and mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. As of the writing of this
report, no written comments concerning this application have been received by staff.
Fiscal Impact
The time and costs related to processing this extension of time request have been covered by the
application fee paid by the applicant. No General Fund budgets have been allocated or used in
the processing of this application.
Attachments
Attachment 1 – CEQA Resolution
Attachment 2 – MSHCP Resolution
Attachment 3 – TTM Resolution
Attachment 4 – RDR Resolution
Attachment 5 – Conditions of Approval
Attachment 6 – Vicinity Map
Attachment 7 – Aerial Map
Attachment 8 – TTM 38271
Attachment 9 – Design Review Package
Attachment 10 – MND Addendum
Attachment 11 – Public Notice Materials
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE LAKESHORE VILLAGE
SPECIFIC PLAN MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (MND NO. 2003-03) FOR
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2021-38 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38271 AND
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2021-05)
Whereas, Brett Crowder, Lake Elsinore Lakeshore, LLC, has filed an application with the
City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2021-38 (Tentative
Tract Map No. 2021-02 (TTM 38271) and Residential Design Review No. 2021-05) to subdivide
an approximately 10.29-acre site into one lot for condominium purposes and to construct 140 two-
story attached condominium residences and associated improvements within the Attached
Residential (AR) and Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF) land use designations of the Lakeshore
Village Specific Plan. The proposed buildings feature four floor plans ranging in size from 1,807
sq. ft. to 2,008 sq. ft. and three architectural styles (French Country, Santa Barbara and Modern
Farmhouse). The project site is located on the southwest side of Lakeshore Drive at the
intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street. (APNs: 379-230-001, 379-230-002); and,
Whereas, the project is subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.: “CEQA”) and the State Implementation Guidelines
for CEQA (14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15000, et seq.: “CEQA Guidelines”)
because the project involves an activity which may cause either a direct physical change in the
environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and
involves the issuance of a lease, permit license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or
more public agencies (Public Resources Code Section 21065); and,
Whereas, pursuant to CEQA, the City prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND
No. 2003-03) to address the potential environmental impacts resulting from implementation of
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan (LVSP); and,
Whereas, on October 28, 2003, the City Council (Council) adopted MND No. 2003-03 and
a corresponding Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP); and,
Whereas, the potential environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the
Specific Plan, including build-out of the project site in a manner consistent with the goals and
policies of the LVSP, were evaluated in the previously adopted MND; and,
Whereas, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, the City conducted an Initial
Study to determine if the project would have a significant effect on the environment. The Initial
Study revealed that the project would have potentially significant environmental impacts, but those
potentially significant impacts could be mitigated to less than significant levels; and,
Whereas, based upon the results of the Initial Study (Environmental Review No. 2022-
01), and based upon the standards set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, it was
determined that it was appropriate to prepare an addendum to MND No. 2003-03 for the project;
and,
Whereas, an addendum to MND No. 2003-03 (Addendum) has been prepared to provide
an evaluation of potential project-specific environmental effects that could result from the project
in relation to the effects disclosed by MND No. 2003-03, and the Addendum concludes that the
Margins are set at .05 on all sides. Please do not expand the margins as the left side may be too wide to punch for binding without punching
part of the text. Use 11 pt Arial font, full justification and spacing is to be exactly 11 pt. To change this spacing, go to Format/ Paragraph/ Line Spacing –
Exactly - 11pt. Please note that some titles of the report are bold and some are in regular print. If your report is 2 or more pages, a header must be inserted,
in the upper left hand corner, on subsequent pages. The header must contain a shortened version of the title of the report, the meeting date and page
number:
Ex: Washington Firehouse
May 16, 2001
Page 2
The report should be saved on the F Drive under Agendas and the appropriate meeting date. This template is available at f:/Wsforms/agenda
report with descriptions.doc
CC Reso. No. 2023-____
Page 2 of 4
2
6
7
0
0
project would not result in new significant effects or increase the severity of any previously
identified significant effects; and,
Whereas, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(a), the Addendum includes
necessary changes and additions to the MND necessary to assess project-specific environmental
impacts; and,
Whereas, the Planning Commission (Commission) has been delegated with the
responsibility of making recommendations to the Council for adopting addendums to mitigated
negative declarations; and,
Whereas, the Addendum was considered by the Commission on March 7, 2023, at a duly
noticed public hearing during which the Commission considered evidence presented by the
Community Development Department and other interested parties on the adequacy of the
Addendum and by resolution recommended Council adoption of the Addendum; and,
Whereas, on March 28, 2023, at a duly noticed public hearing, the Council has considered
the recommendation of the Commission as well as evidence presented by the Community
Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into
these findings by this reference.
Section 2: The Council, based upon a thorough review of the proposed Addendum to
MND No. 2003-03 and the evidence received to date, does determine as follows:
1. That in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, the proposed project does not
present substantial changes or reveal new information that would require subsequent or
supplemental EIR analysis. However, some changes or additions to the information
contained in the adopted MND is necessary in order to adequately evaluate the potential of
environmental impacts resulting from the project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15164, an Addendum to MND No. 2003-03 has been prepared to provide an evaluation of
potential project-specific environmental effects in comparison to those effects described in
MND No. 2003-03 and concluded that the significant effects that would result from the
project have been addressed in the previously adopted MND.
2. That the Addendum was prepared in compliance with the requirements of CEQA and the
CEQA Guidelines.
3. That, based upon the evidence submitted and as demonstrated by the analysis included in
the Addendum, none of the conditions described in Sections 15162 or 15163 of the CEQA
Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental Environmental
Impact Report or Negative Declaration have occurred; specifically:
a. There have not been any substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under
which the proposed project is undertaken that require major revisions of the CEQA
documents due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
CC Reso. No. 2023-____
Page 3 of 4
2
6
7
0
0
b. There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could
not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time MND No.
2003-03 was adopted, that shows any of the following:
i. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in MND No.
2003-03;
ii. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than
shown in MND No. 2003-03;
iii. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those
analyzed in MND No. 2003-03 would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the
mitigation measures or alternatives.
Section 3: The Council has evaluated all comments, written and oral, received from
persons who have reviewed the Addendum. The Council hereby finds and determines that all
public comments have been addressed.
Section 4: The Council hereby finds that the Addendum is adequate and has been
completed in accordance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and City procedures concerning
implementation of CEQA.
Section 5: Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, the Council hereby
adopts the Addendum.
Section 6: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Section 7: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and enter it into
the book of original Resolutions.
Passed and Adopted on this 28th day of March, 2023.
Natasha Johnson
Mayor
Attest:
___________________________________
Candice Alvarez, MMC
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE )
I, Candice Alvarez, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, do hereby certify that
Resolution No. 2023-____ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California,
at the regular meeting of March 28, 2023, and that the same was adopted by the following vote:
CC Reso. No. 2023-____
Page 4 of 4
2
6
7
0
0
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Candice Alvarez, MMC
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2021-
38 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38271 AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW
NO. 2021-05) IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN
Whereas, Brett Crowder, Lake Elsinore Lakeshore, LLC, has filed an application with the
City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2021-38 (Tentative
Tract Map No. 2021-02 (TTM 38271) and Residential Design Review No. 2021-05) to subdivide
an approximately 10.29-acre site into one lot for condominium purposes and to construct 140 two-
story attached condominium residences and associated improvements within the Attached
Residential (AR) and Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF) land use designations of the Lakeshore
Village Specific Plan. The proposed buildings feature four floor plans ranging in size from 1,807
sq. ft. to 2,008 sq. ft. and three architectural styles (French Country, Santa Barbara and Modern
Farmhouse). The project site is located on the southwest side of Lakeshore Drive at the
intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street. (APNs: 379-230-001, 379-230-002); and,
Whereas, Section 6.0 of the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP)
requires that all discretionary projects within a MSHCP Criteria Cell undergo the Lake Elsinore
Acquisition Process (LEAP) and the Joint Project Review (JPR) to analyze the scope of the
proposed development and establish a building envelope that is consistent with the MSHCP
criteria; and,
Whereas, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP further requires that the City adopt consistency
findings demonstrating that the proposed discretionary entitlement complies with the MSHCP
Criteria Cell, and the MSHCP goals and objectives; and,
Whereas, pursuant to Chapter 16.24 (Subdivisions) and Section 17.415.050.E (Major
Design Review) and of the LEMC, the Planning Commission (Commission) has been delegated
with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council (Council) pertaining to the
review of tentative maps and design review applications,
Whereas, on March 7, 2023, at a duly noticed Public Hearing, the Commission considered
evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with
respect to this item and by resolution recommended that the Council adopt Findings of
Consistency with the MSHCP; and,
Whereas, on March 28, 2023, at a duly noticed Public Hearing, the Council has
considered the recommendation of the Commission as well as evidence presented by the
Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into
these findings by this reference.
CC Reso. No. 2023-____
Page 2 of 4
2
6
7
0
3
Section 2: The Council has considered the project and its consistency with the MSHCP
prior to adopting Findings of Consistency with the MSHCP.
Section 3: That in accordance with the MSHCP, the Council makes the following findings
for MSHCP consistency:
1. The development proposal is a project under the City’s MSHCP Resolution, and
the City must make an MSHCP Consistency finding before approval.
The project site is not located within a MSHCP Criteria Cell. However, the property
is within the Elsinore Plan Area and must be reviewed for consistency with the
MSHCP “Plan Wide Requirements,” including Section 6.1.2 Riparian/Riverine
Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines.
2. The project is subject to the City’s LEAP and the Western Riverside County
Regional Conservation Authority’s (RCA) Joint Project Review processes.
As stated above, the project site is not located within a Criteria Cell and therefore
is not subject to LEAP and JPR procedures.
3. The project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools
Guidelines.
According to the General Biological Assessment prepared by Hernandez
Environmental Services dated March 2022, no riparian/riverine areas or vernal
pools were identified through a site survey. Therefore, the project is consistent with
the requirements for the Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine
Areas and Vernal Pools in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP, and no additional surveys
or mitigation are required.
4. The project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species
Guidelines.
The project site is located outside the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey
Areas as shown on Figure 6-1 of the MSHCP. Therefore, the project is consistent
with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines as set forth in
Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP and no additional surveys or mitigation are required.
5. The project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures.
The project site is not located within the Western Riverside County MSHCP
Additional survey areas for amphibians, mammals, burrowing owl, or any special
linkage areas. In addition, the project site is not located within the Western
Riverside County MSHCP Criteria Area Plant Species Survey Area (CAPSSA)
pursuant to Section 6.3.2 of the Western Riverside County MSHCP.
6. The project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.
CC Reso. No. 2023-____
Page 3 of 4
2
6
7
0
3
The project site is not located within or adjacent to a Western Riverside County
MSHCP Conservation Area; therefore, the project site is not required to address
Section 6.1.4 of the Western Riverside County MSHCP.
7. The project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements.
There are no resources located on the project site requiring mapping as set forth
in MSHCP Section 6.3.1. Therefore, the project is consistent with the Vegetation
Mapping requirements.
8. The project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.
As stated above, the project site is completely surrounded by developed area.
Therefore, the Fuels Management Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.4 of the
MSHCP are not applicable to the project.
9. The project will be conditioned to pay the City’s MSHCP Local Development
Mitigation Fee.
A condition of approval has been added requiring payment of the City’s MSHCP
Local Development Mitigation Fee at the time of building permit issuance for the
project.
10. The project is consistent with the MSHCP.
The project site is not within or adjacent to any MSHCP Criteria Cell or
conservation areas, and, as described above, the project complies is consistent
with the MSHCP.
Section 4: Based upon the evidence presented, both written and testimonial, and the
above findings, the Council hereby finds that the project is consistent with the MSHCP.
Section 5: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Section 6: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and enter it into
the book of original Resolutions.
Passed and Adopted on this 28th day of March, 2023.
Natasha Johnson
Mayor
CC Reso. No. 2023-____
Page 4 of 4
2
6
7
0
3
Attest:
___________________________________
Candice Alvarez, MMC
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE )
I, Candice Alvarez, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, do hereby certify that
Resolution No. 2023-____ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California,
at the regular meeting of March 28, 2023, and that the same was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Candice Alvarez, MMC
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38271 TO SUBDIVIDE
AN APPROXIMATELY 10.29-ACRE SITE INTO ONE LOT AND 140 RESIDENTIAL
UNITS FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES IN THE ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL AND
COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL FLEX DESIGNATIONS OF THE LAKESHORE
VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN (APNS: 379-230-001, 379-230-002)
Whereas, Brett Crowder, Lake Elsinore Lakeshore, LLC, has filed an application with the
City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2021-38 (Tentative
Tract Map No. 2021-02 (TTM 38271) and Residential Design Review No. 2021-05) to subdivide
an approximately 10.29-acre site into one lot for condominium purposes and to construct 140 two-
story attached condominium residences and associated improvements within the Attached
Residential (AR) and Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF) land use designations of the Lakeshore
Village Specific Plan. The proposed buildings feature four floor plans ranging in size from 1,807
sq. ft. to 2,008 sq. ft. and three architectural styles (French Country, Santa Barbara and Modern
Farmhouse). The project site is located on the southwest side of Lakeshore Drive at the
intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street. (APNs: 379-230-001, 379-230-002); and,
Whereas, pursuant to Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Map) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
(LEMC), the Planning Commission (Commission) has been delegated with the responsibility of
making recommendations to the City Council (Council) pertaining to the review of tentative maps;
and,
Whereas, on March 7, 2023, at a duly noticed Public Hearing, the Commission considered
evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with
respect to this item and by resolution recommended City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map
No. 38271; and,
Whereas, on March 28, 2023, at a duly noticed Public Hearing, the Council has
considered the recommendation of the Commission as well as evidence presented by the
Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into
these findings by this reference.
Section 2: The Council has reviewed and analyzed the proposed project pursuant to the
California Planning and Land Use laws (Cal. Gov. Code §§ 65000 et seq.), the Lake Elsinore
General Plan (GP), the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan (LVSP), and the LEMC, and finds and
determines that the proposed project is consistent with the requirements of California Planning
and Land Use laws, the goals and policies of the GP, the LVSP and the LEMC.
Section 3: The Council finds and determines that no new environmental documentation
is necessary because all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an
earlier Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). All potentially significant impacts have been
avoided or mitigated pursuant to the earlier MND and none of the conditions described in Section
15162 exist. MND No. 2003-03 was adopted in 2003 for the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan and
CC Reso. No. 2023-____
Page 2 of 4
2
6
7
0
2
evaluated environmental impacts that would result from development of the project area. No
substantial changes that require major revisions to the MND exist and no new information of
substantial importance that require revisions to the earlier MND exist.
Section 4: That in accordance with California Planning and Land Use Law and the LEMC,
the Council makes the following findings for approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 38271:
1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is
consistent with the General Plan. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the
objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan
(Government Code Section 66473.5).
The project site is located in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan (LVSP) and has a land
use designation of Attached Residential (AR) and Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF).
The intent of the AR designation is to accommodate attached rental residences in multi-
family structures with a maximum density of 18 units per net acre; the intent of the CRF
designation is to accommodate one and two neighborhood commercial businesses or flex
residential use with a maximum density of 18 units per acre consistent with the AR
designation. The application proposes to construct and subdivide 140 two-story attached
residential condominium units on an approximately 9.71- acre parcel at an approximate
density of 14.4 units per net acre. Therefore, the project is consistent with the LVSP.
Furthermore, because the LVSP was found to be consistent with the General Plan prior
to its adoption, the project is also consistent with the General Plan.
2. The site of the proposed subdivision of land is physically suitable for the proposed density
of development in accordance with the General Plan.
The site of the proposed subdivision of land is physically suitable for the proposed density
of development in accordance with the LSVP and General Plan because the physical
conditions of the site, including soils and drainage, can adequately support the proposed
development as designed. No physical hazards, such as a flood areas or fault zones, exist
on site. Connection to existing sewage and water facilities, as well as other utilities
including telephone, gas and electricity services, is feasible. As a condition of the tentative
tract map, the City will require dedication of land to widen Lakeshore Drive along with
street frontage improvements. The proposed development conforms to the applicable
development standards provided in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan. The site
surroundings include residential and neighborhood commercial development that is
compatible with the proposed residential use of the project site, and there are no
reasonably foreseeable incompatible uses to be located within the vicinity.
3. That the design of the proposed division of land or the proposed improvements are likely
to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat;
The proposed division of land and proposed improvements are unlikely to cause
substantial environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the
project site is void of significant biological resources according to site surveys conducted
by a qualified biologist. The site is located within an urbanized area and does not contain
any features, such as surface waters, riparian habitat or mature trees that could serve
important or critical ecological functions. Furthermore, the site has been routinely disced
for weed control purposes and is in a disturbed, non-natural state.
CC Reso. No. 2023-____
Page 3 of 4
2
6
7
0
2
4. That the design of the proposed division of land or the type of improvements will conflict
with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property
within the proposed division of land. The City Council may approve a division of land if it
finds that alternative easements for access or for use will be provided, and that they will
be subsequently equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This section shall
apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of
competent jurisdiction.
The subdivision will not conflict with public access because the site of the proposed
subdivision does not contain publicly acquired access easements. Furthermore, there is
no planned right-of-way within the site as shown in the circulation element of the General
Plan. As a condition of the tentative tract map, the City will require dedication of land for
Lakeshore Drive along with construction street frontage improvements to ensure
conformity with the General Plan.
5. The design of the proposed division of land or type of improvements is not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
The tentative map has been adequately conditioned by all applicable departments and
agencies and will not result in any significant environmental impacts. The proposed
project, subject to conditions of approval, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity because
adequate health and sanitation facilities will be provided throughout the subdivision.
6. The effects that this project are likely to have upon the housing needs of the region, the
public service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and environmental
resources have been considered and balanced.
The project will provide a net increase of 140 newly constructed housing units within city
limits. The project does not involve the demolition of existing housing units. Adequate
levels of public service and capacity, including fire protection, police protection, schools,
and parks, are available to the proposed subdivision site. The subdivider will also pay
development impact fees to offset the costs associated with providing governmental
services to the population increase resulting from the project. Upon implementation of
adopted mitigation measures in the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan, the project will not have significant effects on the
environment.
7. The design of the subdivision provides future passive or natural heating or cooling
opportunities within the subdivision.
The proposal involves the subdivision of an approximately 10.29-acre flat site into one lot
for condominium purposes and the construction of 140 two-story attached condominium
residences which will feature operable windows on all elevations to provide natural cooling
opportunities. All buildings will be provided southern exposure to provide natural heating
opportunities. No changes to the shape or configuration of the existing parcels are
proposed. The residential units being proposed in conjunction with the subdivision will be
designed to meet California building energy efficiency standards and to provide rooftop
solar panels on each building to offset energy demand. Other design features, such as
shade trees, will be planted onsite to provide natural cooling.
CC Reso. No. 2023-____
Page 4 of 4
2
6
7
0
2
Section 5: Based upon all of the evidence presented, the above findings, and the
conditions of approval imposed upon the project, the Council hereby approves Tentative Tract
Map No. 38271.
Section 6: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Section 7: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and enter it into
the book of original Resolutions.
Passed and Adopted on this 28th day of March, 2023.
Natasha Johnson
Mayor
Attest:
___________________________________
Candice Alvarez, MMC
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE )
I, Candice Alvarez, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, do hereby certify that
Resolution No. 2023-____ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California,
at the regular meeting of March 28, 2023, and that the same was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Candice Alvarez, MMC
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2021-05
PROVIDING BUILDING DESIGNS AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS FOR 140
TWO-STORY ATTACHED CONDOMINIUM RESIDENTIAL UNITS LOCATED IN
THE ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL FLEX
DESIGNATIONS OF THE LAKESHORE VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN (APNS: 379-
230-001, 379-230-002)
Whereas, Brett Crowder, Lake Elsinore Lakeshore, LLC, has filed an application with the
City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2021-38 (Tentative
Tract Map No. 2021-02 and Residential Design Review No. 2021-05) to subdivide an
approximately 10.29-acre site into one lot for condominium purposes and to construct 140 two-
story attached condominium residences and associated improvements within the Attached
Residential (AR) and Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF) land use designations of the Lakeshore
Village Specific Plan. The proposed buildings feature four floor plans ranging in size from 1,807
sq. ft. to 2,008 sq. ft. and three architectural styles (French Country, Santa Barbara and Modern
Farmhouse). The project site is located on the southwest side of Lakeshore Drive at the
intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street. (APNs: 379-230-001, 379-230-002); and,
Whereas, pursuant to Section 17.415.050 (Major Design Review) of the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code (LEMC) the Planning Commission (Commission) has been delegated with the
responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council (Council) pertaining to the review
of design review applications; and,
Whereas, on March 7, 2023, at a duly noticed Public Hearing, the Commission considered
evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with
respect to this item and by resolution recommended City Council approval of Planning Application
No. 2021-38 (Residential Design Review No. 2021-05); and,
Whereas, on March 28, 2023, at a duly noticed Public Hearing, the Council has
considered the recommendation of the Commission as well as evidence presented by the
Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into
these findings by this reference.
Section 2: The Council has reviewed and analyzed the proposed project pursuant to the
California Planning and Land Use laws (Cal. Gov. Code §§ 65000 et seq.), the Lake Elsinore
General Plan (GP), the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan (LVSP), and the LEMC, and finds and
determines that the proposed project is consistent with the requirements of California Planning
and Land Use laws, the goals and policies of the GP, the LVSP and the LEMC.
Section 3: The Council finds and determines that no new environmental documentation
is necessary because all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an
earlier Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). All potentially significant impacts have been
avoided or mitigated pursuant to the earlier MND and none of the conditions described in Section
CC Reso. No. 2023-____
Page 2 of 3
15162 exist. MND No. 2003-03 was adopted in 2003 for the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan and
evaluated environmental impacts that would result from development of the project area. No
substantial changes that require major revisions to the MND exist and no new information of
substantial importance that require revisions to the earlier MND exist.
Section 4: That in accordance with Section 17.415.050.G of the LEMC, the Council
makes the following findings regarding Planning Application No. 2021-38 (Residential Design
Review No. 2021-05):
1. The project, as approved, will comply with the goals and objectives of the General Plan and
the zoning district in which the project is located.
The project site is located in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan (LVSP) and has a land use
designation of Attached Residential (AR) and Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF). The
intent of the AR designation is to accommodate attached rental residences in multi-family
structures with a maximum density of 18 units per net acre; the intent of the CRF designation
is to accommodate one and two neighborhood commercial businesses or flex residential
use with a maximum density of 18 units per acre consistent with the AR designation. The
application proposes to construct and subdivide 140 two-story attached residential
condominium units on an approximately 9.71- acre parcel at an approximate density of 14.4
units per net acre. Therefore, the project is consistent with the LVSP. Furthermore, because
the LVSP was found to be consistent with the General Plan prior to its adoption, the project
is also consistent with the General Plan.
2. The project complies with the design directives contained in the Lakeshore Village Specific
Plan and all applicable provisions of the LEMC.
The project is appropriate to the site and surrounding developments. The three architectural
styles proposed will create a distinctive street scene within the project site. Sufficient
setbacks and onsite landscaping have been provided thereby creating interest and varying
vistas. In addition, safe and efficient on-site circulation would be achieved.
3. Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Section 17.415.050.G.3 of the LEMC, including
guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the
approval of the project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the
objectives of Section 17.415.050.
Pursuant to Section 17.415.050.E of the LEMC, the project was considered by the Planning
Commission at a duly noticed public hearing held on March 7, 2023. The project, as
reviewed and conditioned by all applicable City divisions, departments, and agencies, will
provide a high-quality residential development within the surrounding community.
Section 5: Based upon the evidence presented and the above findings, the Council hereby
approves Planning Application No. 2021-38 (Residential Design Review No. 2021-05).
Section 6: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Section 7: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the
book of original Resolutions.
CC Reso. No. 2023-____
Page 3 of 3
Passed and Adopted on this 28th day of March, 2023.
Natasha Johnson
Mayor
Attest:
___________________________________
Candice Alvarez, MMC
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE )
I, Candice Alvarez, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, do hereby
certify that Resolution No. 2023-____ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake
Elsinore, California, at the regular meeting of March 28, 2023, and that the same was
adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Candice Alvarez, MMC
City Clerk
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 1 of 19
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PROJECT: PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05
PROJECT NAME:Lakeshore Drive Condos
PROJECT LOCATION:APNs: 379-230-001; 379-230-002
APPROVAL DATE:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
EXPIRATION DATE:
GENERAL
1. Planning Application No. 2021-38 (Tentative Tract Map No. 2021-02 and Residential
Design Review No. 2021-05) proposes Tentative Tract Map No. 38271 to subdivide an
approximately 10.29-acre site into one lot for condominium purposes, in conjunction with
the design and construction of 140 two-story attached condominium residences and
associated improvements within the Attached Residential (AR) and
Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF) land use designations of the Lakeshore Village
Specific Plan. The project site is located on the southwest side of Lakeshore Drive at the
intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street (APNs: 379-230-001, 379-230-
002).
2. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold
harmless the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, Agents, and its Consultants
(Indemnitees) from any claim, action, or proceeding against the Indemnitees to attack, set
aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or
legislative body concerning approval, implementation and construction of TTM 2021-02
and RDR 2021-05, which action is bought within the time period provided for in California
Government Code Sections 65009 and/or 66499.37, and Public Resources Code Section
21167, including the approval, extension or modification of TTM 2021-02 and RDR 2021-
05 or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the
decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached
thereto. The Applicant's indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to,
damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit,
claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys' fees, penalties and other costs,
liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. The
City will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the
City. If the project is challenged in court, the City and the applicant shall enter into formal
defense and indemnity agreement, consistent with this condition.
3. Within 30 days of project approval, the applicant shall sign and complete an
"Acknowledgment of Conditions" and shall return the executed original to the Community
Development Department for inclusion in the case records.
4. The applicant shall submit a check for $2,814.00 made payable to the County of Riverside
for the filing of a Notice of Determination. The check shall be submitted to the Planning
Division for processing within 48 hours of the project’s approval.
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 2 of 19
PLANNING DIVISION
5. Tentative Tract Map No. 38271 will expire two years from the date of approval unless
within that period of time a Final Map has been filed with the County Recorder, or an
extension of time is granted by the City Council in accordance with the State of California
Subdivision Map Act and applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
(LEMC).
6. Tentative Tract Map No. 38271 shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map
Act, and applicable requirements contained in the LEMC, unless modified by these
Conditions of Approval.
7. Residential Design Review No. 2021-05 shall lapse and become void two years following
the date on which the design review became effective, unless one of the following: (1)
prior to the expiration of two years, a building permit related to the design review is issued
and construction commenced and diligently pursued toward completion; or (2) prior to the
expiration of two years, the applicant has applied for and has been granted an extension
of the design review approval pursuant to subsections (1) and (2) of Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code (LEMC) Section 17.415.050.I.1. Notwithstanding conditions to the
contrary, a design review granted pursuant to LEMC Section 17.415.050.I.2 shall run with
the land for this two-year period, subject to any approved extensions, and shall continue
to be valid upon a change of ownership of the site, which was the subject of the design
review application.
8. The applicant shall provide all project-related on-site and off-site improvements as required
by these Conditions of Approval.
9. All Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced on page one of building plans prior to their
acceptance by the Building and Safety Division, Community Development Department. All
Conditions of Approval shall be met prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
10. All future development proposals shall be reviewed by the City on a project-by-project basis.
If determined necessary by the Community Development Director or designee, additional
environmental analysis will be required.
11. Any proposed minor revisions to approved plans shall be reviewed and approved by the
Community Development Director or designee. Any proposed substantial revisions to the
approved plans shall be reviewed according to the provisions of the Municipal Code in a
similar manner as a new application.
12. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double
wall condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort work with the
adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all
contiguous property owners at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing
walls/fences along the project perimeter.
13. For multiple-family development, laundry facilities shall be provided as required by the
Lake Elsinore Municipal Code.
14. For multiple-family development, provide exterior lockable storage space as required by
the California Green Building Code.
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 3 of 19
15. If any of the conditions of approval set forth herein fail to occur, or if they are, by their
terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted, deny or further condition issuance of all
future building permits, deny revoke, or further condition all certificates of occupancy
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; record a notice of violation on the
property title; institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said
conditions or seek damages for their violation.
16. The applicant shall plant a tree screen abutting the adjacent detached residential areas
pursuant to Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Section 3.2.3. Location of the required tree
screen planting and irrigation shall be shown and specified on the final landscaping plans.
Prior to Recordation of Final Map(s)
17. All lots shall comply with minimum standards set forth in the Attached Residential (AR)
land use designation of the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan.
18. A precise survey with closures for boundaries and all lots shall be provided per the LEMC.
19. Street names within the subdivision shall be reviewed and approved by the Community
Development Director or designee.
20. All of the project improvements shall be designed by the applicant's Civil Engineer to the
specifications of the City of Lake Elsinore.
21. The applicant shall initiate and complete the formation of a Homeowner’s Association
(HOA) which shall be approved by the City. All Association documents shall be submitted
for review and approval by City Planning, Engineering and the City Attorney and upon City
approval shall be recorded. Such documents shall include the Articles of Incorporation for
the Association and Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs).
a. At a minimum, all recreation and park areas (except public parks), all natural
slopes and open space, all graded slopes abutting public street rights-of-way which
are not part of residential lots, up slopes from public rights-of-way within private
lots and all private streets, and all drainage basins shall be maintained by the
Homeowner’s Association (HOA).
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits/Building Permits
22. The following architectural details shall be provided:
•All front fence returns shall be decorative masonry walls. Wood fences will not be
allowed along the front elevation. Wood, vinyl or steel (wrought iron or aluminum)
gates are allowed in order to allow access to rear yards.
•The applicant shall provide four-sided articulation. Architectural enhancements
and treatments shall be provided on all residential elevations (front, rear and side)
visible from streets and other public views.
•All fireplaces shall be natural gas fireplaces only. No wood burning fireplaces shall
be allowed.
23. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall obtain all necessary
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 4 of 19
State and Federal permits, approvals, or other entitlements, including obtaining the
necessary authorizations from the regulatory agencies for proposed impacts to
jurisdictional waters. Authorizations may include a Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife, and a Section 401 Water Quality Certification/Waste
Discharge Requirement from the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
24. Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall prepare a Final Wall and Fence
Plan addressing the following:
•Show that a masonry or decorative block wall will be constructed along the entire
tract boundary.
•Show materials, colors, and heights of rear, side and front walls/fences for
proposed lots.
•Show the location of all wood, vinyl or steel (wrought iron or aluminum) gates
placed within the front return walls.
•Show that side walls for corner lots shall be decorative masonry block walls.
•Show that those materials provided along the front elevations (i.e. brick, stone,
etc.) will wrap around the side elevation and be flush with the front return walls.
25. Signs are not part of this project approval. All signage shall be subject to Planning
Division or Planning Commission review and approval prior to installation.
26. Provisions of the City's Noise Ordinance (LEMC Chapter 17.176) shall be satisfied
during all site preparation and construction activity. The applicant shall place a
weatherproof 3'x3' sign at the entrance to the project site identifying the approved days
and hours of construction activity. Site preparation activity and construction shall not
commence before 7:00 AM and shall cease no later than 5:00 PM, Monday through
Friday. Only finish work and similar interior construction may be conducted on Saturdays
and may commence no earlier than 8:00 am and shall cease no later than 4:00 p.m.
Construction activity shall not take place on Sunday, or any Legal Holidays. The sign
shall identify the name and phone number of the development manager to address any
complaints.
27. Prior to issuance of a model home permit, building plans for the Model Home Complex
shall comply with all American Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, including provision of
a handicapped-accessible bathroom.
28. Construction phasing shall be implemented in accordance a Phasing Plan, subject to a
review and approval by the Engineering and Building Departments, which avoids
construction traffic from entering occupied neighborhoods within the tract.
29. A cash bond in the amount of $1,000 shall be required for the Model Home Complex. This
bond is to guarantee removal of the temporary fencing material, parking lot, etc. that have
been placed onsite for the Model Home Complex. The bond will be released after removal
of the materials and the site is adequately restored, subject to the approval of the
Community Development Director or designee.
30. A cash bond in the amount of $1,000 shall be required for any garage conversion of the
model(s). Bonds will be released after removal of all temporary materials and the site is
adequately restored, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director or
designee.
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 5 of 19
31. A cash bond in the amount of $1,000 shall be required for any construction trailers used
during construction. Bonds will be released after removal of trailers, subject to the approval
of the Community Development Director or designee.
32. The applicant shall pay school fees to the Lake Elsinore Unified School District prior to
issuance of each building permit.
33. The project shall connect to water and sewer and meet all requirements of the Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). The applicant shall submit water and sewer
plans to the EVMWD and shall incorporate all district conditions and standards.
34. All mechanical and electrical equipment associated with the residences shall be ground
mounted. All outdoor ground or wall mounted utility equipment shall be consolidated in a
central location and architecturally screened behind fence returns, subject to the approval
of the Community Development Director, prior to issuance of building permit.
35. All front yards and side yards on corner lots shall be properly landscaped with automatic
(manual or electric) irrigation systems to provide 100 percent planting coverage using a
combination of drip and conventional irrigation methods. Construction Landscape &
Irrigation drawings shall be submitted to the Community Development Department with
appropriate fees, for review and approval by the Community Development Director or
designee.
•The applicant shall replace any street trees harmed during construction, in
conformance with the City's Street Tree List, at a maximum of 30 feet apart and at
least 24-inch box in size.
•Perimeter walls shall be protected by shrubs and other plantings that discourage
graffiti.
•The applicant shall ensure a clear line of sight at ingress/egress points by providing
plantings within 15 feet of ingress/egress points whose height does not exceed two
(2) feet and whose canopy does not fall below six feet.
•The landscape plan shall provide for California native drought-tolerant ground
cover, shrubs, and trees. Special attention shall be given to use of Xeriscape or
drought resistant plantings with combination drip irrigation system to prevent
excessive watering.
•No front-yard shall be landscaped with grass turf.
•All landscape improvements shall be bonded with a ten percent (10%) Faithful
Performance Bond of the approved estimated labor and materials cost for all
planting. The bond shall remain in effect for one year from Certificate of
Occupancy.
•All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed within an affected portion of any
phase at the time a certificate of occupancy is requested for any building.
•All Model Homes shall be Xeriscaped and signage provided identifying Xeriscape
landscaping. Xeriscape is a method of landscape design that minimizes water use
by:
i. Eliminating high and medium water-use plant material as identified by
Water Use Classifications of Landscape Species (WUCOLS) (such as turf)
and incorporates low to very low water-efficient (“drought-tolerant” /
climate-appropriate) plants;
ii.Requires an efficient irrigation system that includes:
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 6 of 19
1. ET-Based (“Smart irrigation”) controller(s) with weather-sensing,
automatic shut-off and seasonal adjustment capabilities;
2. Efficient irrigation water application through use of:
a. Low-volume point-source irrigation (such as drip irrigation
and bubblers) for all shrub planter areas (maximum of 3:1
slope) with a minimum irrigation efficiency of 0.90 ; and/or
b. Rotor-type nozzles for areas greater than ten (10) feet wide,
for slopes 3:1 and greater, AND with a minimum irrigation
efficiency of 0.71.
3. Improvement of soil structure for better water retention; and
4. Application of mulch to hinder evaporation.
•The Final landscape plan shall be consistent with any approved site and/or plot
plan.
•The Final landscape plan shall include planting and irrigation details.
•All exposed slopes in excess of three feet in height within the subject tract and
within private lots shall have a permanent irrigation system and erosion control
vegetation installed, as approved by the Planning Division, prior to issuance of
certificate of occupancy.
•All landscaping and irrigation shall comply with the water-efficient landscaping
requirements set forth in LEMC Chapter 19.08 (Water Efficient Landscape
Requirements), as adopted and any amendments thereto.
BUILDING DIVISION
General Conditions
36. Final Building and Safety Conditions. Final Building and Safety Conditions will be
addressed when building construction plans are submitted to Building and Safety for
review. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code
(CBC), and related codes which are enforced at the time of building plan submittal.
37. Compliance with Code. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of
the 2022 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes: 2022
California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, 2022 California Energy Codes,
2022 California Green Building Standards, California Title 24 Disabled Access
Regulations, and Lake Elsinore Municipal Code.
38. Disabled Access. Applicant shall provide details of all applicable disabled access
provisions and building setbacks on plans to include:
a. All ground floor units to be adaptable.
b. Disabled access from the public way to the entrance of the building.
c. Van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry.
d. Path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement.
e. Path of travel from public right-of-way to all public areas on site, such as clubhouse,
trach enclosure tot lots and picnic areas.
39. Street Addressing. Applicant must obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings by
requesting street addressing and submitting a site plan for commercial or multi-family
residential projects or a recorded final map for single- family residential projects. It takes
10 days to issue address and notify other agencies. Please contact Sonia Salazar at
ssalazar@lake-elsinore.org or 951-674-3124 X 277.
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 7 of 19
40. Clearance from LEUSD. A receipt or clearance letter from the Lake Elsinore School
District shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department evidencing the payment
or exemption from School Mitigation Fees.
41. Obtain Approvals Prior to Construction. Applicant must obtain all building plans and permit
approvals prior to commencement of any construction work.
42. Obtaining Separate Approvals and Permits. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light
standards, and any block walls will require separate approvals and permits.
43. Sewer and Water Plan Approvals. On-site sewer and water plans will require separate
approvals and permits. Septic systems will need to be approved from Riverside County
Environmental Health Department before permit issuance.
44. House Electrical Meter. Applicant shall provide a house electrical meter to provide power
for the operation of exterior lighting, irrigation pedestals and fire alarm systems for each
building on the site. Developments with single user buildings shall clearly show on the
plans how the operation of exterior lighting and fire alarm systems when a house meter is
not specifically proposed.
At Plan Review Submittal
45. Submitting Plans and Calculations. Applicant must submit to Building and Safety four (4)
complete sets of plans and two (2) sets of supporting calculations for review and approval
including:
a. An electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing
schematic, and mechanical plan applicable to scope of work.
b. A Sound Transmission Control Study in accordance with the provisions of the
Section 5.507, of the 2022 edition of the California Green Code.
c. A precise grading plan to verify accessibility for the persons with disabilities.
d. Truss calculations that have been stamped by the engineer of record of the
building and the truss manufacturer engineer.
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s)
46. Onsite Water and Sewer Plans. Onsite water and sewer plans, submitted separately from
the building plans, shall be submitted to Building and Safety for review and approval.
47. Demolition Permits. A demolition permit shall be obtained if there is an existing structure
to be removed as part of the project. Asbestos report and lead base paint reports are
required before demo permit will be issued.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s)
48. Plans Require Stamp of Registered Professional. Applicant shall provide appropriate
stamp of a registered professional with original signature on the plans. Provide C.D. of
approved plans to the Building Division.
Prior to Beginning of Construction
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 8 of 19
49. Pre-Construction Meeting. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building
inspector prior to the start of the building construction.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
General
50. All new submittals for plan check or permit shall be made using the City’s online Citizen
Service Portal (CSSP).
51. All plans (Street, Storm Drain, Grading) shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer
using the City’s standard title block.
52. All required soils, geology, seismic, and hydrology and hydraulic reports shall be prepared
by a registered Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer, as applicable.
53. All slopes and landscaping within the public right-of-way shall be maintained by the
property owner, owner’s association, firms contracted by the property owner’s association,
or another maintenance entity approved by the City Council.
54. All open space and slopes except for public parks and schools and flood control district
facilities, outside the public right-of-way shall be owned and maintained by the property
owner or property owner’s association.
55. Any portion of a drainage system that conveys runoff from open space shall be installed
within a drainage easement.
56. Water quality facilities that are constructed across lots shall be installed within a dedicated
drainage easement.
57. Any grading that affects “waters of the United States”, wetlands or jurisdictional
streambeds, shall require approval and necessary permits from respective Federal and/or
State Agencies.
58. In accordance with the City’s Franchise Agreement for waste disposal & recycling, the
applicant shall be required to contract with CR&R, Inc. for removal and disposal of all
waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated both during cleaning,
demolition, clear and grubbing or all other phases of construction and during occupancy.
59. Applicant shall submit a detailed hydrology and hydraulic study for review for the sufficient
containment and conveyance of the storm water to a safe and adequate point as approved
by the City Engineer.
60. The site will accommodate all construction activity, building activity, vehicles, etc. No
staging on public streets, or private property belonging to others shall be conducted
without the written permission of the property owner.
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 9 of 19
61. Minimum good housekeeping and erosion and sediment control Best Management
Practices (BMPs) as identified by the City shall be implemented.
62. Applicant shall install permanent benchmarks to Riverside County Standards and at
locations to be determined by the City Engineer.
Fees
63. Applicant shall pay all applicable permit application and Engineering assessed fees,
including without limitation plan check and construction inspection fees, at the prevalent
rate at time of payment in full.
64. Applicant shall pay all applicable Mitigation and Development Impact Fees at the prevalent
rate at time of payment in full. Fees are subject to change. Mitigation and Development
Impact Fees include without limitation:
•Master Plan of Drainage Fee – Due prior to Final Map approval or grading permit
issuance, whichever is first.
•Traffic Infrastructure Fee (TIF) – Due prior to building permit issuance.
•Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) – Due prior to occupancy.
65. Applicant is responsible for a 9.75% fair share contribution toward signalization of
Gunnerson Street and State Route 74 intersection as identified in the Traffic Impact
Analysis by EPD Solutions, Inc. dated January 24, 2023. Fair share cost is due prior to
issuance of first occupancy.
Final Tract Map
66. Applicant shall submit for plan check review and approval for final Tract Map.
67. Street names within the subdivision shall be established and approved by the Community
Development Director or Designee.
68. Applicant shall make an offer of dedication for all public streets and easements required
by these conditions or shown on the Tentative Map. All land so offered shall be granted to
the City, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without cost to the City.
69. Applicant shall dedicate right-of-way for Lakeshore Drive adjacent to the property for a
total right-of-way of 60 feet from centerline to the project property line. Lakeshore Drive is
classified as an Urban Arterial Highway in the City’s General Plan, where full-width is 120
feet and curb-to-curb width is 96 feet.
70. Underground water rights shall be dedicated to the City pursuant to the provisions of
Section 16.52.030 in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), and consistent with the
City’s agreement with the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.
71. Prior to scheduling City Council approval of the final Tract Map, the applicant shall, in
accordance with Government Code, have constructed all improvements or have
improvement plans submitted and approved, agreements executed, and securities
posted. Securities posted include but are not limited to the off-site improvements.
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 10 of 19
72. Monumentation shall be in accordance with LEMC Section 16.32 and Subdivision Map
Act.
73. Security and inspection fee for monumentation shall be paid and two contiguous
monuments shall be inspected prior to scheduling City Council approval of final map.
74. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be submitted to the City for review
approval. Recordation shall be with final Tract Map.
Storm Water Management / Pollution Prevention / NPDES
Design
75. The project is responsible for complying with the Santa Ana Region National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permits as warranted based on the nature of
development and/or activity.
76. A Final Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be prepared using the Santa Ana
Region 8 approved template and guidance and submitted for review and approval to the
City. The Final WQMP shall be approved by the City prior to scheduling City Council for
final map approval, grading plan approval and issuance of any permit for construction,
whichever is first.
77. The Final WQMP shall document the following:
•Detailed site and project description.
•Potential stormwater pollutants.
•Post-development drainage characteristics.
•Low Impact Development (LID) BMP selection and analysis.
•Structural and non-structural source control BMPs.
•Treatment Control BMPs.
•Site design and drainage plan (BMP Exhibit).
•Documentation of how vector issues are addressed in the BMP design, operation
and maintenance.
•GIS Decimal Minute Longitude and Latitude coordinates for all LID and Treatment
Control BMP locations.
•Hydraulic Conditions of Concern (HCOC) – demonstrate that discharge flow rates,
velocities, duration and volume for the post construction condition from a 2-year,
24-hour rainfall event will not cause adverse impacts on downstream erosion and
receiving waters, or measures are implemented to mitigate significant adverse
impacts downstream public facilities and water bodies. Evaluation documentation
shall include pre- and post-development hydrograph volumes, time of
concentration and peak discharge velocities, construction of sediment budgets,
and a sediment transport analysis. If HCOC applies, the project shall implement
measures to limit disturbance of natural water bodies and drainage impacts from
urban runoff (Note the facilities may need to be larger due to flood mitigation for
the 10-year, 6- and 24-hour rain events).
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 11 of 19
•Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan and Agreement (using City approved
form and/or CC&Rs) as well as documentation of formation of funding district for
long term maintenance costs.
78. Parking lot landscaping areas shall be designed to provide for treatment, retention or
infiltration of runoff.
79. Project hardscape areas shall be designed and constructed to provide for drainage into
adjacent landscape.
80. Project trash enclosure shall be covered, bermed, and designed to divert drainage from
adjoining paved areas and regularly maintained.
81. If CEQA identifies resources requiring Clean Water Act Section 401 Permitting, the
applicant shall obtain certification through the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control
Board and provide a copy to the Engineering Department.
82. All storm drain inlet facilities shall be appropriately marked “Only Rain in the Storm Drain”
using the City authorized marker.
83. The project shall use either volume-based and/or flow-based criteria for sizing BMPs in
accordance with NPDES Permit Provision XII.D.4.
84. The project site shall implement full trash capture methods/devices approved by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board. This shall include installation of connector pipe
screens on all onsite and offsite catch basins to which the project discharges.
Construction
85. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) (as required by the NPDES General
Construction Permit) and compliance with the Green Building Code for sediment and
erosion control are required for this project.
86. Prior to grading or building permit for construction or demolition and/or weed abatement
activity, projects subject to coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit shall
demonstrate that compliance with the permit has been obtained by providing a copy of the
Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy
of the notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number or
other proof of filing to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A copy of the SWPPP shall be
kept at the project site, updated, and be available for review upon request.
87. Erosion & Sediment Control – Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit for
construction or demolition, the applicant shall submit for review and approval by the City
Engineer, an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan as a separate sheet of the grading plan
submittal to demonstrate compliance with the City’s NPDES Program and state water
quality regulations for grading and construction activities. A copy of the plan shall be
incorporated into the SWPPP, kept updated as needed to address changing
circumstances of the project site, be kept at the project site, and available for review upon
request.
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 12 of 19
Post-Construction
88. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and/or occupancy, the applicant shall
demonstrate compliance with applicable NPDES permits for construction,
industrial/commercial, MS4, etc. to include:
•Demonstrate that the project has compiled with all non-structural BMPs described
in the project’s WQMP.
•Provide signed, notarized certification from the Engineer of Work that the structural
BMPs identified in the project’s WQMP are installed in conformance with approved
plans and specifications and operational.
•Submit a copy of the fully executed, recorded City approved Operations and
Maintenance (O&M) Plan and Agreement for all structural BMPs or a copy of the
recorded City approved CC&R.
•The Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan and Agreement and/or CC&R’s shall:
(1) describe the long-term operation and maintenance requirements for BMPs
identified in the BMP Exhibit; (2) identify the entity that will be responsible for long-
term operation and maintenance of the referenced BMPs; (3) describe the
mechanism for funding the long-term operation and maintenance of the referenced
BMPs; and (4) provide for annual certification for water quality facilities by a
Registered Civil Engineer. The City format shall be used.
•Provide documentation of annexation into a CFD for funding facilities to be
maintained by the City.
•Demonstrate that copies of the project’s approved WQMP (with recorded O&M
Plan or CC&R’s attached) are available for each of the initial occupants.
•Agree to pay for a Special Investigation from the City of Lake Elsinore for a date
twelve (12) months after the issuance of a Certificate of Use and/or Occupancy for
the project to verify compliance with the approved WQMP and O&M Plan. A
signed/sealed certification from the Engineer of Work dated 12 months after the
Certificate of Occupancy will be considered in lieu of a Special Investigation by the
City.
•Provide the City with a digital .pdf copy of the Final WQMP.
Utilities
89. All arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) out
of the roadway shall be the responsibility of the applicant, property owner, and/or his
agent. Overhead utilities (34.5 kV or lower) shall be undergrounded (LEMC Section
16.64).
90. Underground water rights shall be dedicated to the City pursuant to the provisions of
LEMC Section 16.52.030, and consistent with the City’s agreement with the Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District. Dedication shall be made on final Tract Map.
91. Applicant shall apply for, obtain and submit to the City Engineering Department a letter
from Southern California Edison (SCE) indicating that the construction activity will not
interfere with existing SCE facilities. Non-Interference Letter (NIL) shall be provided prior
to issuance of Grading Permit.
92. Submit a “Will Serve” letter to the City Engineering Department from the applicable water
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 13 of 19
agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project and
specify the technical data for the water service at the location, such as water pressure,
volume, etc. Will Serve letters shall be provided prior to issuance of Grading Permit.
Improvements
93. Applicant shall implement traffic mitigation measures identified in the Traffic Impact
Analysis by EPD Solutions, Inc. dated January 24, 2023, as specified in Section 6.
94. Project will be responsible for the following improvements:
•Construction of ultimate half-width street improvements adjacent to the project
frontage on Lakeshore Drive (120-foot right-of-way). Improvements shall include
widened section of new AC pavement and base material, curb and gutter,
sidewalks, parkway landscaping, and streetlights. Lakeshore Drive shall be
restriped and widening shall include transition paving and striping to match existing
conditions.
•Installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Gunnerson Street/Project
Driveway and Lakeshore Drive including modification of signing and striping.
•Modification of existing and installation of new signing striping for required
improvements, The project shall be responsible for any additional paving and/or
striping removal causing by the striping plan.
•Project shall install crosswalks at the intersection of Gunnerson Street/Project
Driveway and Lakeshore Drive to provide connectivity for pedestrians.
95. Sight distance into and out and throughout the project location shall comply with City or
Caltrans standards. Project shall ensure facilities are installed outside the line of sight of
drivers.
96. If existing improvements are to be modified, existing improvement plans on file shall be
revised accordingly and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building
permit.
97. Project will be responsible to design and install streetlights on Lakeshore Drive adjacent
to Lakeshore Drive. Streetlight system shall be designed as LS-2B system. Streetlight
plans shall include but are not limited to details such as location, pole and luminaire type,
and pull box design. Streetlight plans may be included as part of the Street Improvement
plan set.
98. 10-year storm runoff shall be contained within the curb and the 100-year storm runoff shall
be contained within the street right-of-way. When either of these criteria are exceeded,
drainage facilities shall be provided.
99. All drainage facilities in this project shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control
District Standards.
100. A drainage study shall be provided. The study shall identify the following: identify storm
water runoff from and upstream of the site; show existing and proposed off-site and on-
site drainage facilities; and include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of the
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 14 of 19
facilities. The drainage system shall be designed to ensure that runoff from a 10-year
storm of 6 hours and 24 hours duration under developed condition is equal or less than
the runoff under existing conditions of the same storm frequency. Both 6-hour and 24-hour
storm duration shall be analyzed to determine the detention requirements to accomplish
the desired results.
101. All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be
collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer. All off-site drainage,
if different from historic flow, shall be conveyed to a public facility.
102. Roof drains shall not be allowed to outlet directly through coring in the street curb. Roofs
should drain to a landscaped area.
103. The site shall be planned and developed to keep surface water from entering buildings
(California Green Building Standards Code 4.106.3).
104. All existing storm drain inlet facilities adjacent to the subject properties shall be retrofitted
with a storm drain filter; all new storm drain inlet facilities constructed by this project shall
include a storm drain filter.
105. A registered Civil Engineer shall prepare the improvement (for public and private), signing
and striping, and traffic signal plans required for this project. Improvements shall be
designed and constructed to City Standards and Codes (LEMC 12.04 and 16.34).
Permitting/Construction
106. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained prior to any work on City right-of-way. The
developer shall submit the permit application, required fees, and executed agreements,
security and other required documentation prior to issuance.
107. An Encroachment Permit from Riverside County shall be obtained prior to any work within
Riverside County right-of-way or connections to Riverside County Flood Control facilities.
Permit shall be obtained prior to issuance of City permits.
108. All compaction reports, grade certification, monument certification (with tie notes
delineated on 8 ½ X 11” Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering Department before
final inspection of public works improvements will be scheduled and approved.
Prior to Grading Permit
109. A grading plan signed and stamped by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted for
City review and approval for all addition and/or movement of soil (grading) on site. The
plan shall include separate sheets for erosion control, haul route and traffic control. The
grading submittal shall include all supporting documentation and be prepared using City
standard title block, standard drawings and design manual.
110. All grading plan contours shall extend to minimum of 50 feet beyond property lines to
indicate existing drainage pattern.
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 15 of 19
111. The grading plan shall show that no structures, landscaping, or equipment are located
near the project entrances that could reduce sight distance.
112. If the grading plan identifies alterations in the existing drainage patterns as they exit the
site, a Hydrology and Hydraulic Report for review and approval by City Engineer shall be
required prior to issuance of grading permits. All grading that modifies the existing flow
patterns and/or topography shall be in compliance with Federal, State and Local law and
be approved by the City Engineer.
113. A seismic study shall be performed on the site to identify any hidden earthquake faults,
liquefaction and/or subsidence zones present on-site. A certified letter from a registered
geologist or geotechnical engineer shall be submitted confirming the absence of this
hazard prior to grading permit. The location of faults, active or inactive shall be shown on
the plan sets.
114. Applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements and/or permits for off-site grading
and the applicant shall accept drainage from the adjacent property owners.
115. Applicant shall mitigate to prevent any flooding and/or erosion downstream caused by
development of the site and/or diversion of drainage.
116. All natural drainage traversing the site (historic flow) shall be conveyed through the site in
a manner consistent with the historic flow or to one or a combination of the following: to a
public facility; accepted by adjacent property owners by a letter of drainage acceptance;
or conveyed to a drainage easement as approved by the City Engineer.
Permitting/Construction
117. Applicant shall execute and submit grading and erosion control agreement, post grading
security and pay permit fees as a condition of grading permit issuance.
118. Any grading that affects “waters of the United States”, wetlands or jurisdictional
streambeds require approval and necessary permits from respective Federal and/or State
Agencies.
119. No grading shall be performed without first having obtained a Grading Permit. A grading
permit does not include the construction of retaining walls or other structures for which a
Building Permit is required.
120. A preconstruction meeting with the City Engineering Inspector (Engineering Department)
is required prior to commencement of any grading activity.
121. Hauling in excess of 5,000 cubic yards shall be approved by the City Council (LEMC
15.72.065). Prior to commencement of grading operations, applicant shall provide to the
City a map of all proposed haul routes to be used for movement of export material. All
such routes shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. Haul route
shall be submitted prior to issuance of a grading permit.
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 16 of 19
122. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer. Slopes steeper
than 2 to 1 shall be evaluated for stability and proper erosion control and approved by the
City.
123. Review and approval of the project sediment and erosion control plan shall be completed.
As warranted, a copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and be
available for review upon request.
124. Approval of the project Final Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post
construction shall be received prior to issuance of a grading permit.
125. Applicant shall obtain applicable environmental clearance from the Planning Department
and submit applicable clearance document to the Engineering Department. This approval
shall specify that the project complies with all required environmental mitigation triggered
by the proposed grading activity.
Prior to Building Permit
126. Provide soils, geology and seismic report, including recommendations for parameters for
seismic design of buildings, and walls prior to building permit.
127. All public improvement, traffic signal, signing and striping plans shall be completed and
approved by the City Engineer.
128. Any dedications and easements no identified on the final Tract Map shall be recorded with
the recorded copy provided to the City prior to issuance of the building permit.
129. The Final Tract Map shall be recorded.
Prior to Occupancy / Final Approval / Project Closeout
130. All public improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the approved plans or as
condition of this development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to issuance of
first occupancy.
131. Proof of acceptance of maintenance responsibility of slopes, open spaces, landscape
areas, and drainage facilities shall be provided.
132. Applicant shall provide a digital copy of the recorded Covenants, Conditions, and
Restrictions (CC&Rs) to the Engineering Department prior to first occupancy.
133. In the event of the damage to City roads from hauling or other construction related activity,
applicant shall pay full cost of restoring public roads to the baseline condition.
134. All final studies and reports, final soil report showing compliance with recommendations,
compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certification (with tie notes delineated
on 8 ½ X 11” Mylar) shall be submitted in .tif format on a USB flash drive or electronically
to the Engineering Department before final inspection will be scheduled.
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 17 of 19
135. All required public right-of-way dedications, easements, vacations and easement
agreement(s) shall be recorded with a recorded copy provided to the City prior to first
occupancy.
136. Applicant shall pay all outstanding applicable processing and development fees prior to
occupancy and/or final approval.
137. Applicant shall submit documentation pursuant to City’s Security Release handout.
138. Applicant shall submit as-built all Engineering Department approved project plan sets.
After City approval of paper copy, applicant is responsible for revising the original mylar
plans. Once the original mylars have been approved, the developer shall provide the City
with a digital copy of the “as-built” plans in .tif format.
139. Applicant shall provide AutoCAD and GIS Shape files of all Street and Storm Drain plans.
All data must be in projected coordinate system: NAD 83 State Plane California Zone VI
U.S. Fleet. All parts and elements of the designed system shall be represented discretely.
Include in the attribute table basic data for each feature, such as diameter and length, as
applicable, and for pipes include material (PVC, RCP, etc.) and slope.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE FIRE MARSHAL
140. The applicant/operator shall comply with all requirements of the Riverside County Fire
Department Lake Elsinore Office of the Fire Marshal. Questions should be directed to the
Riverside County Fire Department, Lake Elsinore Office of the Fire Marshal at 130 S. Main
St., Lake Elsinore, CA 92530. Phone: (951) 671-3124 Ext. 225.
141. If the project is to be constructed in phases, each phase of development must
independently meet all applicable fire department requirements.
142. Hazardous Fire Area: this project is near a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone of
Riverside County as shown on a map on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
As the State of California revises the High Fire Area maps, this project could be included
in the VHFHSZ. Any building constructed within this zone must comply with the special
construction provisions contained in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, California Fire
Code, California Residential Code, and the California Building Code
143. The developer shall provide fire hydrants in accordance with the following.
a. Prior to placing any combustibles on site, provide an approved water source for
firefighting purposes.
b. Prior to building permit issuance, submit plans to the water district for a water
system capable of delivering fire flow as required by the California Fire Code and
Fire Department standards. Fire hydrants shall be spaced in accordance with
the California Fire Code.
144. Gates must meet Fire Department standards at the time of building permit application.
Current standards require that gates have a Knox rapid entry system, an infrared gate
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 18 of 19
opener, and be set back up to 35 feet allow emergency vehicles to safely stop away
from traffic flow.
145. Fire sprinkler systems: all residential occupancies must have a fire sprinkler system in
accordance with the California Residential Code, California Fire Code, and local
ordinances. Attached garages must also have a fire sprinkler system.
146. All buildings 5,000 square feet and larger, regardless of occupancy classification, must
have a fire sprinkler system in accordance with Lake Elsinore Municipal Code.
147. Fire Department standards require two points of access and egress for this project. Due
to site constraints, two separate and remote points of access and egress are not
feasible. As a mitigation in lieu of secondary access, the developer will provide the
following:
a. The entry to the development will have at least 20-foot-wide roads for both entry
and exit. Gates will not reduce the minimum 20-foot-wide clear road width.
b. A Knox Rapid Entry System will open both the entry and exit gates from outside
the development.
c. An infrared gate opening device will open both the entry and exit gates from
outside the development.
d. Emergency vehicles will be able to freely utilize the exit gate to enter the
development in case of an emergency as needed without any obstructions.
e. All plans with information related to these mitigations, including building plans,
landscape plans, fence and wall plans, and site plans must clearly indicate these
mitigations.
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Annex into CFD 2015-1 (Safety) Law Enforcement, Fire and Paramedic Services CFD
148. Prior to approval of the Final Map, Residential Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, or
building permit (as applicable), the applicant shall annex into Community Facilities District
No. 2015-1 (Safety) the Law Enforcement, Fire and Paramedic Services Mello-Roos
Community Facilities District to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on
public safety operations and maintenance issues in the City. Alternatively, the applicant
may propose alternative financing mechanisms to fund the annual negative fiscal impacts
of the project with respect to Public Safety services. Applicant shall make a non-refundable
deposit of $15,000, or at the current rate in place at the time of annexation toward the cost
of annexation, formation or other mitigation process, as applicable.
Annex into the City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District No. 2015-2 (Maintenance
Services)
149. Prior to approval of the Final Map, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, or building
permit (as applicable), the applicant shall annex into the Community Facilities District No.
2015-2 (Maintenance Services) or current Community Facilities District in place at the time
of annexation to fund the on-going operation and maintenance of the public right-of-way
landscaped areas and neighborhood parks to be maintained by the City and for street
lights in the public right-of-way for which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance
fee to Southern California Edison, including parkways, street maintenance, open space
and public storm drains constructed within the development and federal NPDES
Conditions of Approval PC:
PA 2021-38/TTM 2021-02/RDR 2021-05 CC:
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 19 of 19
requirements to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project. Alternatively, the
applicant may propose alternative financing mechanisms to fund the annual negative fiscal
impacts of the project with respect to Maintenance Services. Applicant shall make a non-
refundable deposit of $15,000 or at the current rate in place at the time of annexation
toward the cost of annexation, formation or other mitigation process, as applicable.
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
150. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation
Monitoring & Reporting Program for the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND No. 2003-
03) prepared for the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan.
I hereby state that I acknowledge receipt of the approved Conditions of Approval for the above
named project and do hereby agree to accept and abide by all Conditions of Approval as approved
by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore on _________. I also acknowledge that all
Conditions shall be met as indicated.
Date:
Applicant’s Signature:
Print Name:
Address:
Phone Number:
LASH AVE
LAKESHORE DR
JOY AVE MACHADO STALLIS STSEDONA STRIVERSIDE DRGUNNERSON STSMITH AVE
HAGUE STFRASER DRPARKVIEW DRCLEMENT STLEON STESCAVERA ST
WOODCREST DR WISE STHUNT AVE
BADALONA ST
WALNUT DRWILSON STARNOLD AVE
BROWN STMERANO STBROADWAY ST MORBERG STTORREY STPINYON ST
ESTANCIA STPARKVIEW PLBAZA STALLIS STLASH AVE
LAKESHORE DR
JOY AVE MACHADO STALLIS STSEDONA STRIVERSIDE DRGUNNERSON STSMITH AVE
HAGUE STFRASER DRPARKVIEW DRCLEMENT STLEON STESCAVERA ST
WOODCREST DR WISE STHUNT AVE
BADALONA ST
WALNUT DRWILSON STARNOLD AVE
BROWN STMERANO STBROADWAY ST MORBERG STTORREY STPINYON ST
ESTANCIA STPARKVIEW PLBAZA STALLIS STPlanning Application No. 2021-38APN: 379-230-001 and 002VICINITY MAP
PROJECT SITE
´
LAKESHORE DR
ALLIS STSEDONA STLASH AVE
LEON STMACHADO STWISE STESCAVERA ST
BADALONA ST
WOODCREST DR
PARKVIEW DR MERANO STGUNNERSON STTORREY STMONTEREY ST
SEVILLE STPINYON ST
ESTANCIA STVISCAYA STMORBERG STPARKVIEW PLVERONA STBAZA STALLIS STLAKESHORE DR
ALLIS STSEDONA STLASH AVE
LEON STMACHADO STWISE STESCAVERA ST
BADALONA ST
WOODCREST DR
PARKVIEW DR MERANO STGUNNERSON STTORREY STMONTEREY ST
SEVILLE STPINYON ST
ESTANCIA STVISCAYA STMORBERG STPARKVIEW PLVERONA STBAZA STALLIS STPlanning Application No. 2021-38APN: 379-230-001 and 002AERIAL MAP
PROJECT SITE
´
LAKESHORE DRIVE01030206070508101109121415131618191720222321242627252830312932343533361281291271301201211191221121131111141041051031069697959873757480777978848183827269717068656766646163626057595856535554126131125132118123117124110115109116102107101108949993100373840394142444345464847495052511391401341338788858689909192136135138137RECCENTERCOMMONOPENSPACE
ALLIS ST.LOT 1GUNNERSON STREET7604(EXISTING)HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIALEXISTING ZONING: MC-MOBILE HOME COMMUNITY(VACANT)GENERAL COMMERCIALEXISTING ZONING: CP-COMMERCIAL PARK(EXISTING)DETACHED RESIDENTIALEXISTING ZONING: DR(EXISTING)MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIALEXISTING ZONING: R1-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL
(EXISTING)NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIALEXISTING ZONING: CN(VACANT)
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
EXISTING ZONING: C1-NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL
(VACANT)
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
EXISTING ZONING: C1-NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL
LOT A
7634WILSON MIKAMICORPORATIONPREPARED BY:OWNER:SHEETOF1DESCRIPTIONDATEREVISIONAPPROVEDTENTATIVE TRACT NO. 3827110 ACRE PROPERTY - LAKESHORE DRIVESUBDIVIDER:FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES949.632.3122LAKE ELSINORE LAKESHORE, LLC 1020 Second St., Suite CEncinitas, CA 920241CIVILExp.LAKE ELSINORE LAKESHORE, LLC 1020 Second St., Suite CEncinitas, CA 92024WATER & SEWERELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPALWATER DISTRICT (EVMWD)31315 CHANEY STREETLAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530ELECTRICSOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON32815 FREESIA WAYTEMECULA, CA 92592GASSOUTHERN CALIFORNIAGAS COMPANY25620 JEFFERSON AVE.MURRIETA, CA 92562TELEPHONE / CABLE TELEVISIONVERIZON / GTE - (800) 483-1000AT&T - (800) 310-2355TIME WARNER - (888) 354-9622ASSESSOR PARCELS NUMBERS:379-230-001 and 379-230-002PROJECT LOCATIONVICINITY MAPSTORMWATERCITY OF LAKE ELSINOREAND RIVERSIDE COUNTYFLOOD CONTROL ANDWATER CONSERVATIONDISTRICT1995 MARKET ST.RIVERSIDE, CA 92501WASTE MANAGEMENTCR&R1706 GOETZ RD.PERRIS, CA 92570PROPOSED PHASING:SINGLE PHASE CONSTRUCTIONA. OFFSITE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN LAKESHORE DRIVEB. ROUGH GRADINGC. ONSITE & OFFSITE UTILITIESD. PRECISE GRADINGF. BUILDING CONSTRUCTIONF. SITEWORK & LANDSCAPINGSUBDIVISION LOT SUMMARY:LOT 1:CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT LOTEXISTING RIGHT OF WAYPRIVATE STREET RECIPROCAL ACCESSUTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTSCOMMON AREA OPEN SPACENET SITE AREADATE OF FILING: 5/16/22PROPOSED MAINTENANCE PLAN:FUTURE HOME OWNERS'S ASSOCIATION OR PROPERTY MANAGEMENTCOMPANY HIRED BY OWNER TO MAINTAIN THE FOLLOWING:PRIVATE STREETSONSITE FACILITIESONSITE AND COMMON LANDSCAPE AREALANDSCAPING WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY FRONTING THE PROPERTYPUBLIC AND PRIVATE WALLS AND FENCESFLOW CONTROL AND DRAINAGE STRUCTURESWATER QUALITY BASINS AND WATER QUALITY FEATURES RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION448,235 SFAREA (SF)10.29 ACAREA (AC)SITE AREA 12,516 SF 0.29 AC 12,543 SF 0.29 AC423,176 SF 9.71 AC139,964 SF 3.21 AC 37,474 SF 0.86 AC245,738 SF 5.64 AC
CORPORATIONWILSON MIKAMI10/19/2021 1st SUBMITTAL03/15/2022 2nd SUBMITTAL05/16/2022 3rd SUBMITTAL07/18/2022 4th SUBMITTAL08/22/2022 5th SUBMITTALLAKE ELSINORE, CAWMC PROJECT NO. 10397.0010 ACRE PROPERTY - LAKESHORE DRIVESHEET INDEXSHEET INDEXCivil PlansC.1 Conceptual Site PlanC.2Preliminary Grading and Drainage PlanC.3Maintenance PlanT1Tentative Tract Map 37280Architectural PlansCS.01Cover SheetCS.02Sheet IndexSP1 - 4Planning SheetsL1-7Landscape SheetsA0.1-A6.1Architectural SheetsLAKE ELSINORE LAKESHORE, LLC1020 Second St., Suite CEncinitas, CA 92024949.632.3122
F.E.RECCENTERCOMMONOPENSPACE010302060705081011091214151316181917202223212426272528303129323435333612812912713012012111912211211311111410410510310696979598737574807779788481838272697170686567666461636260575958565355541261311251321181231171241101151091161021071011089499931003738403941424443454648474950525113914013413387888586899091921361351381377604WATER & SEWERELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPALWATER DISTRICT (EVMWD)31315 CHANEY STREETLAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530ELECTRICSOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON32815 FREESIA WAYTEMECULA, CA 92592GASSOUTHERN CALIFORNIAGAS COMPANY25620 JEFFERSON AVE.MURRIETA, CA 92562TELEPHONE / CABLE TELEVISIONVERIZON / GTE - (800) 483-1000AT&T - (800) 310-2355TIME WARNER - (888) 354-9622ASSESSOR PARCELS NUMBERS:379-230-001 and 379-230-002CORPORATIONWILSON MIKAMILAKE ELSINORE, CAWMC PROJECT NO. 10397.00LAKE ELSINORE LAKESHORE, LLC1020 Second St., Suite CEncinitas, CA 92024949.632.312210 ACRE PROPERTY - LAKESHORE DRIVECONCEPTUAL SITE PLANC.1LAKESHORE DR.PROJECT LOCATIONVICINITY MAPSite SummaryGross Site Area10.29 ACGross Site Area (excluding Public ROW) 9.71 ACDwelling Units (Attached Duplex)140 DUGross Residential Density (18 du/acre max)14.4 DU/ACNet Site Area**9.71 ACNet Residential Density14.4 DU/AC**Net Site Area includes Common Open Space andPrivate Streets per below:Common Open Space 0.86 ACPrivate Streets/Easements3.21 AC(EXISTING)HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIALEXISTING ZONING: MC-MOBILE HOME COMMUNITYWOODCREST DR.GUNNERSONST.ALLIS ST.(VACANT)GENERAL COMMERCIALEXISTING ZONING: CP-COMMERCIAL PARKSTORMWATERRIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOODCONTROL AND WATERCONSERVATION DISTRICT1995 MARKET ST.RIVERSIDE, CA 92501WASTE MANAGEMENTCR&R1706 GOETZ RD.PERRIS, CA 92570Residential Parking SummaryParking ProvidedSpaces/UnitSpaceGarage Spaces280Driveway Spaces12Open Guest Spaces56Total parking spaces2.49 min.348General Plan Designation:Lake View District, Lakeshore Village Specific PlanExisting Zoning Designation:Attached Residential (AR)(EXISTING)DETACHED RESIDENTIALEXISTING ZONING: DR(EXISTING)MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIALEXISTING ZONING: R-1 MEDIUM RESIDENTIALFLOORSUNIT TYPENUMBER OFBUILDING SUMMARY (AREA)BATHROOMSPLAN 1PLAN 2TOTAL221401,9951,807332.52.5LANDSCAPE SUMMARY9.71 AC3.90 ACRESIDENTIAL BUILDINGSTOTALDESCRIPTIONSITE AREA169,756 SFCOMMON AREA LANDSCAPE808 SF0.84 ACFRONTYARDS AND BACK YARDS) 2.48 ACPRIVATE STREET/COURTS HARDSCAPE2.48 AC108,029 SFRECREATION CENTER BUILDING0.02 AC36,666 SF107,719 SF423,176 SF3435PLAN 3PLAN 4221,8922,00844332744LANDSCAPE AREA (INCLUDES HARDSCAPE , UNITSNUMBER OFAREA (SF)TOTAL UNITBEDROOMMAXIMUM40.1%0.2%25.5%34.2%100%%OF NET AREA(EXISTING)NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIALEXISTING ZONING: CN(VACANT)
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
EXISTING ZONING:
C1-NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL
(VACANT)
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
EXISTING ZONING:
C1-NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIALREVISIONS IN RESPONSE TO COMMENTS RECEIVED ON 08/12/22
F.E.RECCENTERCOMMONOPENSPACE01030206070508101109121415131618191720222321242627252830312932343533361281291271301201211191221121131111141041051031069697959873757480777978848183827269717068656766646163626057595856535554126131125132118123117124110115109116102107101108949993100373840394142444345464847495052511391401341338788858689909192136135138137LOT 17604LOT A (EXISTING)HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIALEXISTING ZONING: MC-MOBILE HOME COMMUNITY(VACANT)GENERAL COMMERCIALEXISTING ZONING: CP-COMMERCIAL PARK(EXISTING)DETACHED RESIDENTIALEXISTING ZONING: DR(EXISTING)MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIALEXISTING ZONING: R1-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL
(EXISTING)NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIALEXISTING ZONING: CN(VACANT)
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
EXISTING ZONING: C1-NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL
(VACANT)
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
EXISTING ZONING: C1-NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIALCORPORATIONWILSON MIKAMILAKE ELSINORE, CAWMC PROJECT NO. 10397.00LAKE ELSINORE LAKESHORE, LLC1020 Second St., Suite CEncinitas, CA 92024949.632.312210 ACRE PROPERTY - LAKESHORE DRIVEGRADING & DRAINAGEC.2LAKESHORE DR.
WOODCREST DR.GUNNERSONST.ALLIS ST.76
F.E.RECCENTERCOMMONOPENSPACE010302060705081011091214151316181917202223212426272528303129323435333612812912713012012111912211211311111410410510310696979598737574807779788481838272697170686567666461636260575958565355541261311251321181231171241101151091161021071011089499931003738403941424443454648474950525113914013413387888586899091921361351381377604(EXISTING)HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIALEXISTING ZONING: MC-MOBILE HOME COMMUNITY(VACANT)GENERAL COMMERCIALEXISTING ZONING: CP-COMMERCIAL PARK(EXISTING)DETACHED RESIDENTIALEXISTING ZONING: DR(EXISTING)MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIALEXISTING ZONING: R1-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL
(EXISTING)NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIALEXISTING ZONING: CN(VACANT)
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
EXISTING ZONING: C1-NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL
(VACANT)
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
EXISTING ZONING: C1-NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIALCORPORATIONWILSON MIKAMILAKE ELSINORE, CAWMC PROJECT NO. 10397.00LAKE ELSINORE LAKESHORE, LLC1020 Second St., Suite CEncinitas, CA 92024949.632.312210 ACRE PROPERTY - LAKESHORE DRIVEMAINTENANCE PLANC.3LAKESHORE DR.
WOODCREST DR.GUNNERSONST.ALLIS ST.LEGENDMAINTENANCERESPONSIBILITY76
LAKESHORE DRIVE01030206070508101109121415131618191720222321242627252830312932343533361281291271301201211191221121131111141041051031069697959873757480777978848183827269717068656766646163626057595856535554126131125132118123117124110115109116102107101108949993100373840394142444345464847495052511391401341338788858689909192136135138137RECCENTERCOMMONOPENSPACE
ALLIS ST.LOT 1GUNNERSON STREET7604(EXISTING)HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIALEXISTING ZONING: MC-MOBILE HOME COMMUNITY(VACANT)GENERAL COMMERCIALEXISTING ZONING: CP-COMMERCIAL PARK(EXISTING)DETACHED RESIDENTIALEXISTING ZONING: DR(EXISTING)MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIALEXISTING ZONING: R1-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL
(EXISTING)NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIALEXISTING ZONING: CN(VACANT)
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
EXISTING ZONING: C1-NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL
(VACANT)
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
EXISTING ZONING: C1-NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL
LOT A
7634WILSON MIKAMICORPORATIONPREPARED BY:OWNER:SHEETOF1DESCRIPTIONDATEREVISIONAPPROVEDTENTATIVE TRACT NO. 3827110 ACRE PROPERTY - LAKESHORE DRIVESUBDIVIDER:FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES949.632.3122LAKE ELSINORE LAKESHORE, LLC 1020 Second St., Suite CEncinitas, CA 920241CIVILExp.LAKE ELSINORE LAKESHORE, LLC 1020 Second St., Suite CEncinitas, CA 92024WATER & SEWERELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPALWATER DISTRICT (EVMWD)31315 CHANEY STREETLAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530ELECTRICSOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON32815 FREESIA WAYTEMECULA, CA 92592GASSOUTHERN CALIFORNIAGAS COMPANY25620 JEFFERSON AVE.MURRIETA, CA 92562TELEPHONE / CABLE TELEVISIONVERIZON / GTE - (800) 483-1000AT&T - (800) 310-2355TIME WARNER - (888) 354-9622ASSESSOR PARCELS NUMBERS:379-230-001 and 379-230-002PROJECT LOCATIONVICINITY MAPSTORMWATERCITY OF LAKE ELSINOREAND RIVERSIDE COUNTYFLOOD CONTROL ANDWATER CONSERVATIONDISTRICT1995 MARKET ST.RIVERSIDE, CA 92501WASTE MANAGEMENTCR&R1706 GOETZ RD.PERRIS, CA 92570PROPOSED PHASING:SINGLE PHASE CONSTRUCTIONA. OFFSITE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN LAKESHORE DRIVEB. ROUGH GRADINGC. ONSITE & OFFSITE UTILITIESD. PRECISE GRADINGF. BUILDING CONSTRUCTIONF. SITEWORK & LANDSCAPINGSUBDIVISION LOT SUMMARY:LOT 1:CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT LOTEXISTING RIGHT OF WAYPRIVATE STREET RECIPROCAL ACCESSUTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTSCOMMON AREA OPEN SPACENET SITE AREADATE OF FILING: 5/16/22PROPOSED MAINTENANCE PLAN:FUTURE HOME OWNERS'S ASSOCIATION OR PROPERTY MANAGEMENTCOMPANY HIRED BY OWNER TO MAINTAIN THE FOLLOWING:PRIVATE STREETSONSITE FACILITIESONSITE AND COMMON LANDSCAPE AREALANDSCAPING WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY FRONTING THE PROPERTYPUBLIC AND PRIVATE WALLS AND FENCESFLOW CONTROL AND DRAINAGE STRUCTURESWATER QUALITY BASINS AND WATER QUALITY FEATURES RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION448,235 SFAREA (SF)10.29 ACAREA (AC)SITE AREA 12,516 SF 0.29 AC 12,543 SF 0.29 AC423,176 SF 9.71 AC139,964 SF 3.21 AC 37,474 SF 0.86 AC245,738 SF 5.64 AC
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 COVER SHEET | CS.01
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 SHEET INDEX | CS.02
Cover Sheet
Sheet Index
Planning: Illustrative Site Plan
Planning: Typical Prototype Enlargements
Planning: Open Space Exhibit
Planning: Parking & Circulation Exhibit
Landscape: Overall Conceptual Landscape Plan
Landscape: Park & Recreation Center Enlargements
Landscape: Prototype Enlargements
Landscape: Entry Enlargements
Landscape: Fence & Wall Exhibit
Landscape: Trash Exhibit
Landscape: Parking Landscaping Exhibit
Architecture: Plan 1 - 1st and 2nd Floors
Architecture: Plan 2 - 1st and 2nd Floors
CS.01
CS.02
SP1
SP2
SP3
SP4
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
A0.1
A0.2
A0.3
A0.4
A1.0
A1.1
A1.2
A1.3
A2.1
A2.2
A2.3
A3.1
A3.2
A3.3
A4.1
A4.2
A5.0
A5.1
A5.2
A6.1
Architecture: Plan 3 - 1st and 2nd Floors
Architecture: Plan 4 - 1st and 2nd Floors
Architecture: Plan 1 Front Elevation Styles
Architecture: Plan 1 Elevations French Country
Architecture: Plan 1 Elevations Modern Farmhouse
Architecture: Plan 1 Elevations Santa Barbara
Architecture: Plan 2 & 3 Elevations French Country
Architecture: Plan 2 & 3 Elevations Modern Farmhouse
Architecture: Plan 2 & 3 Elevations Santa Barbara
Architecture: Plan 4 & 2 Elevations French Country
Architecture: Plan 4 & 2 Elevations Modern Farmhouse
Architecture: Plan 4 & 2 Elevations Santa Barbara
Architecture: Plan 1 & 4 Enhanced Elevations French Country
Architecture: Plan 1 & 4 Enhanced Elevations Modern Farmhouse
Architecture: Plan 2 & 3 Enhanced Elevations Modern Farmhouse
Architecture: Plan 2 & 3 Enhanced Elevations French Country
Architecture: Plan 2 & 3 Enhanced Elevations Santa Barbara
Architecture: Plan 2 & 4 Enhanced Elevations Santa Barbara
Sheet Index
SHEET TITLE SHEET TITLESHEET #SHEET #
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN | SP1
60300
1”= 30’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 TYPICAL PROTOTYPE ENLARGEMENTS | SP2
1680
1/8”= 1’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT | SP3PLAN 3PLAN 2PLAN 3
PLAN 2
PLAN 3
PLAN 1
PLAN 3
PLAN 2
PLAN 3
PLAN 1
PLAN 3
PLAN 2
PLAN 3
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
PLAN 3
PLAN 2
PLAN 3
PLAN 1
PLAN 3
PLAN 2
PLAN 3
PLAN 1
PLAN 3
PLAN 2
PLAN 3
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
PLAN 3
PLAN 2
PLAN 3
PLAN 1
PLAN 3
PLAN 2
PLAN 3
PLAN 1
PLAN 3
PLAN 2
PLAN 3
PLAN 1
PLAN 3
PLAN 2
PLAN 3
PLAN 1
PLAN 3
PLAN 2
PLAN 3
PLAN 1
PLAN 3
PLAN 2
PLAN 3
PLAN 1PLAN 4PLAN 1PLAN 4PLAN 2PLAN 4PLAN 1PLAN 4PLAN 2PLAN 4PLAN 1PLAN 4PLAN 2PLAN 4PLAN 1PLAN 4PLAN 2PLAN 4PLAN 1PLAN 4
PLAN 2 PLAN 4PLAN 1PLAN 4
PLAN 2
GUNNERSON ST.
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
PLAN 4
PLAN 1
PLAN 4
PLAN 2
30'-0"
ROW
DEDICATION 30'-0"40'-0"
10' REAR
SETBACK 10' SIDESETBACK10' REAR
SETBACK
20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"
10'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"
8'-0"10' SIDESETBACK20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"10'-0"12'-0"
20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"20'-0"
20'
FRONT
SETBACK
PROPERTY LINE (P.L.)
PROPERTY LINE (P.L.)PROPERTY LINE (P.L.)12'-0"8'-0"12'-0"8'-0"8'-0"12'-0"8'-0"
8'-0"
8'-0"
12'-0"8'-0"8'-0"12'-0"8'-0"
8'-0"
8'-0"
8'-0"
8'-0"
8'-0"
8'-0"
8'-0"
8'-0"
8'-0"
8'-0"26'-0"26'-0"26'-0"26'-0"26'-0"26'-0"26'-0"
26'-0"
26'-0"20'-0"20'-0"8'-0"8'-0"8'-0"8'-0"
01
03
04
02
0607
0508
1011
0912
1415
1316
1819
1720
2223
2124
2627
2528
3031
2932
3435
3336
128129
127130
120121
119122
112113
111114
104105
103106
9697
9598
7673
7574
8077
7978
8481
8382
7269
7170
6865
6766
6461
6362
6057
5958
5653
5554
126131
125132
118123
117124
110115
109116
102107
101108
9499
93100
3738
4039
4142
4443
4546
4847
4950
5251
137138
139140
87
88
85
86
89
90
91
92
134
133
136
135
20'-0"LAKESHORE DR.(EXISTING) RESIDENTIAL
(EXISTING) RESIDENTIAL
(EXISTING)MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIALPROPOSED ROW DEDICATIONPROPOSED ROW DEDICATIONPROPERTY LINE (P.L.)PROPERTY LINE (P.L.)20'-0"
20'-0"
20'-0"
24'-0"
20'-0"
24'-9"BUILDING 55PLAN 3PLAN 2COMPACT
COMPACT
COMPACT
COMPACT
COMPACT
COMPACT
COMPACT
COMPACT COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTF.E.OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT | SP3
0 60
1"=30'-0"SCALE
30
NORTH
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES |21-102
DATE 06 | 24 | 22
LAKE ELSINORE - 10 ACRES
COMMON OPEN SPACE
·REQUIRED: (250 SF/UNIT X 140 UNITS) = 35,000 SF
·PROVIDED: 35,192 SF.
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE (W/ 8' MIN. AREA)
·REQUIRED: 80 SF/UNIT
·PROVIDED: 245 SF (AVG.)/UNIT
(SEE INDIVIDUAL UNIT SF. ON RIGHT)10'-0"26'-6"26'-6"10'-0"10'-0"26'-6"26'-6"10'-0"10'-0"26'-6"26'-6"10'-0"10'-0"26'-6"26'-6"10'-0"10'-0"28'-8"28'-6"10'-0"10'-0"26'-6"26'-6"10'-0"10'-0"26'-6"26'-6"10'-0"10'-0"28'-8"28'-6"10'-0"10'-0"34'-6"
12'-0"
12'-0"29'-9"48'-2"12'-0"39'-6"30'-5"28'-2"
11'-4"42'-3"26'-8"11'-7"11'-3"
11'-5"26'-10"11'-3"12'-2"11'-5"10'-0"11'-4"
33'-10"48'-3"17'-1"17'-1"11'-6"12'-0"15'-1"11'-6"12'-0"17'-1"17'-1"11'-6"12'-0"15'-1"15'-1"11'-6"12'-0"15'-1"15'-1"11'-6"12'-0"15'-1"15'-1"11'-6"12'-0"15'-1"17'-1"17'-1"11'-6"12'-0"15'-1"11'-6"12'-0"15'-1"
10'-7"
12'-2"11'-2"29'-8"49'-1"
12'-2"
11'-7"15'-5"15'-5"10'-7"
10'-7"26'-6"26'-6"10'-6"
10'-6"26'-6"26'-6"10'-6"
10'-5"26'-6"26'-3"12'-2"
11'-7"15'-5"15'-5"10'-0"26'-9"48'-9"
11'-7"11'-5"10'-6"32'-6"28'-6"28'-6"10'-0"10'-0"26'-6"26'-6"10'-0"10'-0"26'-6"26'-6"10'-0"10'-0"26'-6"26'-6"10'-0"10'-0"26'-6"26'-6"10'-0"10'-0"26'-6"26'-6"10'-0"10'-0"12'-2"
11'-7"15'-5"15'-5"17'-5"17'-5"11'-7"12'-2"15'-5"15'-5"11'-7"12'-2"15'-5"15'-5"11'-7"12'-2"15'-5"15'-5"11'-7"12'-2"15'-5"15'-5"11'-7"12'-2"15'-5"15'-5"11'-7"12'-2"17'-5"17'-5"11'-7"12'-2"17'-5"17'-5"11'-7"12'-2"INDIVIDUAL LOT
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
·LOT #01 = 479 SF
·LOT #02 = 434 SF
·LOT #03 = 434 SF
·LOT #04 = 771 SF
·LOT #05 = 265 SF
·LOT #06 = 188 SF
·LOT #07 = 178 SF
·LOT #08 = 265 SF
·LOT #09 = 285 SF
·LOT #10 = 211 SF
·LOT #11 = 201 SF
·LOT #12 = 285 SF
·LOT #13 = 265 SF
·LOT #14 = 188 SF
·LOT #15 = 178 SF
·LOT #16 = 265 SF
·LOT #17 = 265 SF
·LOT #18 = 188 SF
·LOT #19 = 178 SF
·LOT #20 = 265 SF
INDIVIDUAL LOT
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
·LOT #21 = 285 SF
·LOT #22 = 211 SF
·LOT #23 = 201 SF
·LOT #24 = 285 SF
·LOT #25 = 265 SF
·LOT #26 = 188 SF
·LOT #27 = 178 SF
·LOT #28 = 265 SF
·LOT #29 = 265 SF
·LOT #30 = 188 SF
·LOT #31 = 178 SF
·LOT #32 = 265 SF
·LOT #33 = 285 SF
·LOT #34 = 211 SF
·LOT #35 = 201 SF
·LOT #36 = 285 SF
·LOT #37 = 398 SF
·LOT #38 = 708 SF
·LOT #39 = 265 SF
·LOT #40 = 188 SF
INDIVIDUAL LOT
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
·LOT #41 = 178 SF
·LOT #42 = 265 SF
·LOT #43 = 265 SF
·LOT #44 = 188 SF
·LOT #45 = 178 SF
·LOT #46 = 265 SF
·LOT #47 = 265 SF
·LOT #48 = 188 SF
·LOT #49 = 178 SF
·LOT #50 = 265 SF
·LOT #51 = 764 SF
·LOT #52 = 462 SF
·LOT #53 = 285 SF
·LOT #54 = 201 SF
·LOT #55 = 211 SF
·LOT #56 = 285 SF
·LOT #57 = 285 SF
·LOT #58 = 201 SF
·LOT #59 = 211 SF
·LOT #60 = 285 SF
INDIVIDUAL LOT
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
·LOT #61 = 285 SF
·LOT #62 = 201 SF
·LOT #63 = 211 SF
·LOT #64 = 285 SF
·LOT #65 = 285 SF
·LOT #66 = 201 SF
·LOT #67 = 211 SF
·LOT #68 = 285 SF
·LOT #69 = 285 SF
·LOT #70 = 201 SF
·LOT #71 = 211 SF
·LOT #72 = 285 SF
·LOT #73 = 285 SF
·LOT #74 = 201 SF
·LOT #75 = 211 SF
·LOT #76 = 285 SF
·LOT #77 = 285 SF
·LOT #78 = 201 SF
·LOT #79 = 211 SF
·LOT #80 = 285 SF
INDIVIDUAL LOT
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
·LOT #81 = 285 SF
·LOT #82 = 201 SF
·LOT #83 = 211 SF
·LOT #84 = 285 SF
·LOT #85 = 803 SF
·LOT #86 = 489 SF
·LOT #87 = 1,261 SF
·LOT #88 = 958 SF
·LOT #89 = 180 SF
·LOT #90 = 145 SF
·LOT #91 = 145 SF
·LOT #92 = 180 SF
·LOT #93 = 188 SF
·LOT #94 = 138 SF
·LOT #95 = 138 SF
·LOT #96 = 188 SF
·LOT #97 = 178 SF
·LOT #98 = 138 SF
·LOT #99 = 138 SF
·LOT #100 = 178 SF
INDIVIDUAL LOT
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
·LOT #101 = 188 SF
·LOT #102 = 138 SF
·LOT #103 = 138 SF
·LOT #104 = 188 SF
·LOT #105 = 178 SF
·LOT #106 = 138 SF
·LOT #107 = 138 SF
·LOT #108 = 178 SF
·LOT #109 = 188 SF
·LOT #110 = 138 SF
·LOT #111 = 138 SF
·LOT #112 = 188 SF
·LOT #113 = 178 SF
·LOT #114 = 138 SF
·LOT #115 = 138 SF
·LOT #116 = 178 SF
·LOT #117 = 188 SF
·LOT #118 = 138 SF
·LOT #119 = 138 SF
·LOT #120 = 188 SF
INDIVIDUAL LOT
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
·LOT #121 = 178 SF
·LOT #122 = 138 SF
·LOT #123 = 138 SF
·LOT #124 = 178 SF
·LOT #125 = 188 SF
·LOT #126 = 138 SF
·LOT #127 = 138 SF
·LOT #128 = 188 SF
·LOT #129 = 178 SF
·LOT #130 = 138 SF
·LOT #131 = 138 SF
·LOT #132 = 178 SF
·LOT #133 = 188 SF
·LOT #134 = 138 SF
·LOT #135 = 138 SF
·LOT #136 = 188 SF
·LOT #137 = 138 SF
·LOT #138 = 178 SF
·LOT #139 = 138 SF
·LOT #140 = 178 SF
15'-5"15'-5"11'-7"12'-2"15'-5"15'-5"11'-7"12'-2"15'-5"15'-5"11'-7"12'-2"15'-5"15'-5"11'-7"12'-2"15'-5"15'-5"11'-7"12'-2"15'-5"12'-2"12'-0"11'-6"11'-6"15'-5"12'-2"12'-0"12'-0"11'-8"11'-8"15'-5"15'-5"11'-7"12'-2"15'-5"15'-5"11'-7"12'-2"15'-5"15'-5"11'-7"12'-2"15'-5"15'-5"11'-7"12'-2"15'-5"15'-5"11'-7"12'-2"12'-0"12'-0"11'-8"11'-8"12'-0"12'-0"11'-8"11'-8"12'-0"12'-0"11'-8"11'-8"12'-0"12'-0"11'-8"11'-8"28'-6"28'-6"10'-0"10'-0"28'-6"28'-6"10'-0"10'-0"15'-5"11'-7"15'-5"11'-7"12'-0"11'-8"11'-8"11'-8"12'-0"11'-5"15'-5"15'-5"11'-5"12'-0"11'-8"
60300
1”= 30’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 PARKING & CIRCULATION EXHIBIT | SP4
60300
1”= 30’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 OVERALL CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN | L1
60300
1”= 30’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 PARK & REC CENTER ENLARGEMENTS | L2
1680
1/8”= 1’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 PROTOTYPE ENLARGEMENTS | L3
1680
1/8”= 1’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ENTRY ENLARGEMENTS | L4
1680
1/8”= 1’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 FENCE & WALL EXHIBITS | L501SAN-BAR02FR-CNTRY03FRM-HSE04SAN-BAR05FR-CNTRY06FRM-HSE07SAN-BAR08FR-CNTRY09SAN-BAR10FRM-HSE11FR-CNTRY12SAN-BAR13FRM-HSE14FR-CNTRY15SAN-BAR16FRM-HSE17SAN-BAR18FRM-HSE19
FR-CNTRY
20
SAN-BAR
21
FRM-HSE
22
FR-CNTRY
23
SAN-BAR
24
FR-CNTRY
25
FRM-HSE
26
SAN-BAR 27FR-CNTRY28SAN-BAR29FRM-HSE30FR-CNTRY31SAN-BAR32FRM-HSE33FR-CNTRY34SAN-BAR35FRM-HSE36FR-CNTRY37SAN-BAR38FRM-HSE39FR-CNTRY40SAN-BAR41FRM-HSE42FR-CNTRY43SAN-BAR44FRM-HSE45SAN-BAR46FR-CNTRY47SAN-BAR48FRM-HSE49FR-CNTRY50FRM-HSE51FR-CNTRY52SAN-BAR53FRM-HSE54SAN-BAR55FRM-HSE56FR-CNTRY57SAN-BAR58FR-CNTRY59SAN-BAR60FRM-HSE61SAN-BAR62FRM-HSE63SAN-BAR64FR-CNTRY65FRM-HSE66FR-CNTRY67FRM-HSE68SAN-BAR69
FRM-HSE
70
FR-CNTRY
F.E.FENCE AND WALL LEGEND
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
EXISTING PERIMETER BLOCK WALL TO REMAIN
INTERIOR WALL. 6' HIGH CMU WALL. WALL TO BE 1-SIDED SPLIT FACE BLOCK WALL WITH PRECISION BLOCK CAP. BLOCK TO BE
6X8X16 ANGELUS . COLOR TO BE CANYONBLUFF. CAP TO BE ANGELUS PRECISION CAP (8X2X16), COLOR: CANYONBLUFF
LOT FENCING. 6' HIGH PRIVACY STYLE VINYL FENCE - (DETAIL # V-001)- COLOR TO BE TAN - AVAILABLE THROUGH FENCEWORKS
INC. (1-800-350-5620). INSTALL PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS
CMU BLOCK PILASTER
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES |21-102
DATE 06 | 24 | 22
LAKE ELSINORE - 10 ACRES
FENCE & WALL EXHIBIT | L5
0 60
1"=30'-0"SCALE
30
NORTH
ANGELUS ONE-SIDED SIDE SPLIT-FACE. COLOR TO BE SANDSTONE.
(SPLIT-FACE TO FACE STREET - PRECISION ON HOMEOWNER'S SIDE).
ANGELUS CONCRETE SPLIT-FACE CAP. COLOR SANDSTONE
WALL CAP = 8x4x16. PILASTER CAP = 4" X 18" SQ
16" SQUARE BLOCK PILASTER. COLOR TO BE BURNISHED NATURAL GRAY.
ELEVATION 8"C.M.U. BLOCK WALL
1
2
3 6'-0"6'-6"1
1
3
2
VINYL SIDEYARD FENCE
2 X 6 VINYL TOP AND BOTTOM RAILING WITH GALVESTON STYLE
FINISH GRADE
1 X 7 VINYL FENCING PLANKS
WITH GALVESTON STYLE
4 X 4 VINYL POST WITH GALVESTON STYLE
COMPACT SUBGRADE BELOW FOOTING PER
STRUCTURAL SOILS REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
2 X 6 VINYL MID RAIL WITH GALVESTON STYLE
DOMED CONCRETE FOOTING - SIZE AND
REINFORCEMENT PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER
ELEVATION
SECTION
1
2
3
4
5
7
1
2
3
6
7
7
7
1
3
2
7
3
4
5
20'-0"20'-0"66'4'5" O.C.
TYP.
CL
6'4'5" O.C.
TYP.
CL
2
1
3
4
1
7
ENTRY VEHICULAR GATE 3/8" = 1'-0"
ELEVATION
3X4 T.S. GATE FRAME1
1X1 T.S. PICKETS2
1/4" SOLID STEEL PANEL3
2X4 T.S. CROSS RAILS4
THIN BRICK VENEER PILASTER. BRICK TO MATCH REC BUILDING5
TWO-SIDED SPLIT FACE BLOCK WALL - MATCH PERIMETER6
PRECAST CONCRETE PILASTER/WALL CAP7
KNOX BOX - FINAL LOCATION PER FIRE MARSHAL'S APPROVAL8
8
METAL COLOR =
SW 6991 (BLACK MAGIC)
BRICK COLOR =
EL DORADO - TUNDRA CHALK DUST
EXISTING MASONRY PERIMETER
BLOCK WALL (SPLIT FACE & PRECISION COMBO)
TO REMAIN
EXISTING MASONRY PERIMETER
BLOCK WALL TO REMAIN
EXISTING MASONRY PERIMETER
BLOCK WALL TO REMAIN
NEW MASONRY PERIMETER
BLOCK WALL
NEW MASONRY
PERIMETER
BLOCK WALL
NEW MASONRY
PERIMETER
BLOCK WALL TO
MATCH ADJACENT
NEIGHBOR'S WALL
THAT FACES
LAKESHORE DRIVE
EXISTING NEIGHBOR'S
BLOCK WALL THAT FACES
LAKESHORE DRIVE WITH
8" HIGH SPLIT FACE BLOCK
& 4" SPLIT FACE CAP.
COLOR TO BE SIMILARLY
TO ANGELUS SANDSTONE
EXISTING MASONRY PERIMETER
BLOCK WALL (SPLIT FACE & PRECISION COMBO)
TO REMAIN
60300
1”= 30’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 TRASH PICK UP EXHIBIT | L6
60300
1”= 30’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 PARKING LANDSCAPING EXHIBIT | L7
60300
1”= 30’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 PLAN 1 - 1ST AND 2ND FLOORS | A.01
DWRefrigeratorRange WasherDryerDN
1817161514131211109876
AADDJJAA CCEENNTT
PP LLAANN 33 OORR 44
PPOORRCCHH SSEETTBBAACCKK22'' -- 00""SSIIDDEEWWAALLKK44'' -- 00""AALLLLEEYYGG AA RR AA GG EE
2200'' --11"" xx 22 00 '' --11 "" CCLLRR ..
KK IITT CC HH EE NN
1144'' --55"" xx 11 44 '' --33 ""
DD II NN IINN GG
1111'' --11"" xx 1100'' --00""
1199'' --11"" xx 1111 '' --11 00 ""
LL IIVV IINN GG
T
24682868
PP OO RR CC HH
PP WW DD RR ..FFRROONNTT SSEETTBBAACCKK44'' -- 00""PPRR IIVVAATT EE
YY AA RR DD
CCAANNTTEELLIIEEVVEERR
22'' -- 66""
CCAANNTTEELLIIEEVVEERR
22'' -- 00""
SSIIDDEE SSEETTBBBBAACCKK
44'' -- 00""
MMAATTCCHH LLIINN EE MM AA TT CC HH LLIINNEE
4050 SL.6050 XOX 4050 SL.4050 SL.2050 SH.8080 SLIDING DR.
16080 ROLL-UP
GR DR
30803322'' -- 66""3399'' -- 77""T
MM SS TT RR..
DDEE CCKK
TECH
BB EE DD 33
11 11 '' --00 "" xx 11 11 '' --00 ""
CC LL ..
LL AA UU NN DD RR YY
MM SS TT RR .. WW ..II ..CC ..
BB EE DD 22
1111'' --00"" xx 11 11 '' --11 00 ""
CC LL ..
BB AA TT HH
MM SS TT RR .. BB EE DD
22 00 '' --22 "" xx 11 44 '' --22 ""
MM SS TT RR .. BBAA TTHH
RROO OO FF
AADDJJAA CCEE NNTT
PP LLAANN 33 OORR 44
YY AARR DD
BB EELLOO WW
MM AA TT CC HH LLIINNEE MMAA TTCCHH LLIINN EE
6050 SL.3650 SL. 3650 SL.
3050 SH.2650 SH.2650 SH.2650 SH.2650 SH.3650 SL.2650 SH.3650 SL.
2468
36x68 FRDR2468 246828682468
2468
266826682668
2468
2468
DATE:
LL AA KK EE SS HH OO RR EE DD RR II VV EE --11 00 AA CC RR EE SS
LL AA KK EE EE LL SS II NN OO RR EE || CC AA
11 SS TT AA NN DD 22 NN DD FF LL OO OO RR SS6 | 24 | 2022 AA 00 ..11
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102 PP LL AA NN 11
1/4" = 1'-0"1 1ST FLOOR F.F.
1/4" = 1'-0"2 2ND FLOOR F.F.
PPLLAANN 11
11999955 SSFF
SQUARE FOOTAGE
Name Area
Porch 30 SF
Second Floor 1290 SF
First Floor 705 SF
Garage 430 SF
Grand total 2455 SF
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 PLAN 2 - 1ST AND 2ND FLOORS | A0.2
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 PLAN 3 - 1ST AND 2ND FLOORS | A0.3
Range
REF.
WasherDryer
Media
AA DD JJAA CCEE NNTT
PP LLAANN 22
2868
2468
2468
6068 CL.2668LL II VV IINN GG
1122'' --00"" xx 1133'' --66""
KK IITT CC HH EE NN
11 11 '' --66 "" xx 11 33 '' --66 ""
11 00 '' --11 11 "" xx 88 '' --00 ""
DD IINN IINN GG
PP NN TT RR YY ..
BB AA TT HH
BB EE DD 11
11 11 '' --11 "" xx 11 11 '' --00 ""
GG AA RR AA GG EE
2200'' --11"" xx 22 00 '' --11 "" CCLLRR ..
CC LL ..
PP OO RR CC HH
PPRR IIVVAATT EE
YY AA RR DD
SSEETTBBAACCKK
44'' -- 00""3322'' -- 66""3388'' -- 66""MMIINN.. YYAARRDD RREEAARR SSEETTBBAACCKK1100'' -- 00""SSIIDDEE SSEETTBBAACCKK
44'' -- 00""
CCAANNTTEELLIIEEVVEERR
22'' -- 00""
MMAA TTCCHHLLIINNEE
MMAATTCCHH LLIINN EE
3080
6050 SL.2050 SH.5050 SL.6050 XOX
4650 SL.3650 SL.Media
VANITY
MM SS TT RR .. CC LL..
MM SS TT RR .. BB EE DD
1122'' --1100"" xx 11 33 '' --66 ""
MM SS TT RR.. BB AA TT HH CC LL ..
BB EE DD 33
11 11 '' --11 "" xx 11 11 '' --00 ""
BB EE DD 44
11 22 '' --22 "" xx 11 11 '' --00 ""
CC LL ..
BB AA TT HH 33
LL AA UU NN DD RR YY
RROO OO FF
AA DD JJAA CCEE NNTT
PP LLAANN 22
RR OO OO FF
24682468
2468
2868
2668
266824685068 CL.26682468
2468
YY AARR DD
BB EELLOO WW
MMAATTCCHH LLIINN EE
MM AATTCC HH LLIINN EE5050 SL.4650 SL.2650 SH. 2650 SH.1850 SH.2650 SH.4650 SL.4050 SL.5050 SL.5050 SL.2650 SH.6050 SL.2650 SH.
DATE:
LL AA KK EE SS HH OO RR EE DD RR II VV EE --11 00 AA CC RR EE SS
LL AA KK EE EE LL SS II NN OO RR EE || CC AA
11 SS TT AA NN DD 22 NN DD FF LL OO OO RR SS5 | 11 | 2022 AA 00 ..33
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102 PP LL AA NN 33
1/4" = 1'-0"1 1ST FLOOR F.F.
1/4" = 1'-0"2 2ND FLOOR F.F.
PPLLAANN 33
11889922 SSFF
SQUARE FOOTAGE
Name Area
First Floor 768 SF
Second Floor 1123 SF
Garage 420 SF
Porch 37 SF
Grand total 2349 SF
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 PLAN 4 - 1ST AND 2ND FLOORS | A0.4RangeREF.DWWasherDryer
DN
181716151413121110987654321
Media
AADDJJAACC EENN TT
PPLLAA NN 11 OO RR 22
BB EE DD 11
11 11 '' --11 "" xx 11 33 '' --1100""
CC LL ..
GG AA RR AA GG EE
22 00 '' --11 "" xx 22 00 '' --11"" CC LLRR..
KK IITT CC HH EE NN
11 11'' --11 "" xx 11 55'' --77""
DD II NN II NN GG
88'' --22"" xx 11 33 '' --66 ""
LL IIVV IINN GG
11 22'' --33 "" xx 11 33'' --66""3388'' -- 66""MMIINN.. YYAARRDD RREEAARR SSEETTBBAACCKK1100'' -- 00""SSEETTBBAACCKK
44'' -- 00""
16080 ROLL-UP
GR DR
3080
2468
26686068 CL.
2868
2468
6050 XOX 5050 SL.5050 SL.2050 SH.6050 SL.4650 SL.MM AATTCC HH LLIINN EE
MMAA TTCCHHLLIINNEE
3322'' -- 66""
Media
VANITY
RR OO OOFF
AADDJJAACC EENN TT
PPLLAA NN 11 OO RR 22
BB EE DD 33
11 11'' --11 "" xx 11 44'' --66""
BB EE DD 44
11 22'' --22 "" xx 11 11'' --00""
CC LL ..
BB AA TT HH 33
LL AA UU NN DD RR YY
CC LL ..
MM SS TT RR .. BB EE DD
22 44'' --22 "" xx 11 33'' --66""
MM SS TT RR.. BB AA TT HH
MM SS TT RR .. CC LL ..
MM SS TT RR .. RR EE TT RR EE AA TT
RROO OO FF
24682468
24682468 26682868
266826685068 CL.2468
2468
5050 SL.4650 SL.2650 SH.1850 SH.2650 SH.5050 SL.5050 SL.2650 SH.6050 SL.2650 SH.
MMAA TTCCHHLLIINNEE
MMAATTCCHH LLIINN EE
DATE:
LL AA KK EE SS HH OO RR EE DD RR II VV EE --11 00 AA CC RR EE SS
LL AA KK EE EE LL SS II NN OO RR EE || CC AA
11 SS TT AA NN DD 22 NN DD FF LL OO OO RR SS5 | 11 | 2022 AA 00 ..44
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102 PP LL AA NN 44
1/4" = 1'-0"1 1ST FLOOR F.F.
1/4" = 1'-0"2 2ND FLOOR F.F.
PPLLAANN 44
22000088 SSFF
SQUARE FOOTAGE
Name Area
First Floor 828 SF
Second Floor 1180 SF
Garage 420 SF
Porch 37 SF
Grand total 2465 SF
LL EE VV EE LL 11 LL EE VV EELL 22
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 FRONT ELEVATION STYLES | A1.0
PLAN 1
F.G.F.G.
F.G.
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ELEVATIONS FRENCH COUNTRY | A1.1
PLAN 1
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ELEVATIONS MODERN FARMHOUSE | A1.2
PLAN 1
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ELEVATIONS SATNA BARBARA | A1.3
PLAN 1
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ELEVATIONS FRENCH COUNTRY | A2.1
PLAN 2 & 3
F.G.F.G.
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ELEVATIONS MODERN FARMHOUSE | A2.2
PLAN 2 & 3
F.G.F.G.
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ELEVATIONS SANTA BARBARA | A2.3
PLAN 2 & 3
F.G.F.G.
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ELEVATIONS FRENCH COUNTRY | A3.1
PLAN 4 & 2
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ELEVATIONS MODERN FARMHOUSE | A3.2
PLAN 4 & 2
F.G.F.G.
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ELEVATIONS SANTA BARBARA | A3.3
PLAN 4 & 2
F.G.F.G.
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ELEVATIONS FRENCH COUNTRY | A4.1
PLAN 1 & 4 ENHANCED
F.G.F.G.
F.G.
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ELEVATIONS MODERN FARMHOUSE | A4.2
PLAN 1 & 4 ENHANCED
F.G.F.G.
F.G.
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ELEVATIONS MODERN FARMHOUSE | A5.0
PLAN 2 & 3 ENHANCED
F.G.F.G.
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ELEVATIONS FRENCH COUNTRY | A5.1
PLAN 2 & 3 ENHANCED
F.G.F.G.
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ELEVATIONS SANTA BARBARA | A5.2
PLAN 2 & 3 ENHANCED
F.G.F.G.
URBANARENA
LAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRES
LAKE ELSINORE | CA
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102
DATE 8 | 23 | 22 ELEVATIONS SANTA BARBARA | A6.1
PLAN 2 & 4 ENHANCED
F.G.F.G.
LAKESHORE DRIVE CONDOS PROJECT
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2021-38
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 2021-02
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2021-05
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW NO. 2022-01
CEQA ADDENDUM
Prepared By: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
Applicant:
COASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES
1020 2nd Street
Encinitas, CA 92024
Environmental Consultant:
2355 Main Street, Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92614
February 2023
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 1 of 149
I. INTRODUCTION
A. PURPOSE
This environmental checklist provides the basis for an Addendum to the previously adopted Final
MND. It serves as the appropriate level of environmental review of the proposed project, as required
pursuant to the provisions of CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA
Guidelines. This checklist confirms that the project is within the scope of the Lakeshore Village
Specific Plan as analyzed in the Final MND. Thus, the Final MND, in conjunction with this CEQA
checklist, serve as the environmental review for the proposed Lakeshore Drive Condos Project.
The Final Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) 2003-03 for the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan No.
2003-02, General Plan Amendment No. 2003-02, and Zone Change No. 2003-03 was adopted by the
City of Lake Elsinore (City) on October 7, 2003 as a tool for providing development standards, design
theme, and administrative procedures to implement coordinated development of the Specific Plan area.
The project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of Lake View District Medium Density
Residential (7 to 18 units per net acre) and Lakeshore Village Specific Plan designations of Attached
Residential (AR) and Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF), which allow two- to three-story residential
buildings.
Development within the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan area is subject to mitigation measures
identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND, the development regulations in the
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan, and the City’s municipal code. Pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 21167.2, the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND must be conclusively presumed to be
valid with regard to its use for later activities unless any of the circumstances requiring supplemental
review exist 1.
This Addendum augments the analysis in the Final MND as provided in State California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15162 and 15164 and provides the basis for the City’s
determination that no supplemental or subsequent EIR is required to evaluate the proposed project.
Environmental analysis and mitigation measures from the Final MND has been incorporated into this
Addendum, and applicability of each has been described.
In addition, the City of Lake Elsinore certified a Final Recirculated Program EIR for its General Plan
Update (SCH No. 2005121019) on December 13, 2011 through its adoption of Resolution No. 2011-
070. The Final Recirculated Program EIR included evaluation of buildout of the entire City, including
the project site, pursuant to the existing Lakeshore Village Specific Plan designations of AR and CRF
for the site, which allow two- to three-story residential buildings up to a density of 18 units per net acre.
As detailed throughout this CEQA Checklist, there are no project specific significant effects, which are
particular to the project or site.
B. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
Pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City’s review checklist will determine if
approval of the requested discretionary actions and subsequent development could cause a change in
the conclusions of an adopted CEQA document and disclose any change in circumstances or new
information of substantial importance that would substantially change the conclusions of the Final
MND. This environmental checklist provides the City with information to document potential impacts
1 See Pub. Resources Code, § 21167.2; Laurel Heights Improvement Ass’n v. Regents of the University of California (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1112,
1130 (“[a]fter certification, the interests of finality are favored”); Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group v. City of San Jose (2003) 114 Cal.
App. 4th 689, 705-706.)
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 2 of 149
of the proposed project.
Section 15164(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines states that an Addendum to an adopted negative
declaration may be prepared “if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the
conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative
declaration have occurred.” Pursuant to Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines, when an EIR has
been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR or negative declaration
shall be prepared for the project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence,
that one or more of the following conditions are met:
1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous
EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in
the severity of previously identified significant effects;
2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken
which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
effects; or
3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been
known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as
complete, shows any of the following:
a) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or
negative declaration.
b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than identified in
the previous EIR.
c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be
feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the
project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.
d) Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the
previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment,
but the project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.
This CEQA Addendum has determined that the potential impacts are consistent with those
previously identified that can be reduced to below the level of significance through the
implementation of the previously adopted conditions of approval and mitigation measures for the
approved Specific Plan; and therefore, is deemed the appropriate document to provide the
necessary environmental clearance.
This CEQA Addendum was prepared in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act
of 1970 , as amended (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.); the State Guidelines for
Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA Guidelines”), as amended
(California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Section 15000, et seq.); applicable
requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore; and the regulations, requirements, and procedures of any
other responsible public agency or agency with jurisdiction by law.
The City of Lake Elsinore is designated the Lead Agency, in accordance with Section 15050 of the
CEQA Guidelines. The Lead Agency is the public agency which has the principal responsibility for
carrying out or approving a project which may have significant effects upon the environment. The City
as the Lead Agency determined that, as documented in this Addendum to the previously adopted Final
MND, no supplemental or subsequent EIR or negative declaration is required for the proposed project.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 3 of 149
C. INTENDED USES OF THIS CEQA ADDENDUM
This CEQA Addendum analyzes the proposed Lakeshore Drive Condos Project to determine its
eligibility to be exempt from further CEQA review pursuant to its consistency with the adopted Specific
Plan and related CEQA documentation. Development projects that are undertaken pursuant to a specific
plan for which CEQA documentation was previously prepared are exempt from further CEQA review
if the projects are in conformity with that specific plan and the conditions described in CEQA
Guidelines section 15162.
The City of Lake Elsinore adopted the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan and Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND) No. 2003-03 (Resolution No. 2003-52) on October 28, 2003. Individual
development projects that implement the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan are eligible for review
through preparation of an Addendum to an adopted negative declaration (per CEQA Guidelines Section
15164) if none of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for preparation
of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
The proposed project would develop an approximately 10.29-acre vacant and undeveloped site along
Lakeshore Drive within the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan area. The project would construct 140 two-
story duplex townhome residences that would be consistent with the Attached Residential (AR) and
Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF) Specific Plan designation of the project site. As detailed in Section
3.1.3, the proposed project is consistent with the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan.
Based on the proposed project description and knowledge of the project site, and findings of the
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND, the City has concluded that the proposed project would
not result in any new or increased impacts not previously disclosed in the Lakeshore Village Specific
Plan Final MND. For these reasons, the City has concluded that the project qualifies for an addendum
to the previous CEQA review set forth in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164.
D. CONTENTS OF THIS CEQA ADDENDUM
This CEQA Addendum is organized to facilitate a basic understanding of the existing setting and
environmental implications of the proposed project.
I. INTRODUCTION presents an introduction to the entire report. This section identifies City of Lake
Elsinore contact persons involved in the process, scope of environmental review, environmental
procedures, and incorporation by reference documents.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION describes the proposed project. A description of discretionary
approvals and permits required for project implementation is also included.
III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM contains the City’s Environmental Checklist Form.
The checklist form presents results of the environmental evaluation for the proposed project and those
areas that would have either a potentially significant impact, a less than significant impact with
mitigation incorporated, a less than significant impact, or no impact.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS provides the background analysis supporting each response
provided in the environmental checklist form. Each response checked in the checklist form is discussed
and supported with sufficient data and analysis. As appropriate, each response discussion describes and
identifies specific impacts anticipated with project implementation. In this section, mitigation measures
are also set forth, as appropriate, that would reduce potentially significant adverse impacts to levels of
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 4 of 149
less than significance.
V. MANDATORY FINDINGS presents the background analysis supporting each response provided
in the environmental checklist form for the Mandatory Findings of Significance set forth in Section
21083(b) of CEQA and Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines.
VI. PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED identifies those individuals consulted and
involved in the preparation of this CEQA Addendum.
VII. REFERENCES lists bibliographical materials used in preparation of this document.
E. SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
For evaluation of environmental impacts, each question from the Environmental Checklist Form is
stated and responses are provided according to the analysis undertaken as part of the CEQA Addendum.
All responses will take into account the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
impacts. Project impacts and effects will be evaluated and quantified, when appropriate. To each
question, there are four possible responses, including:
1. No New Impact/No Impact: A designation of no impact is given when the proposed project
would not result in changes to potential impacts to the environment as compared to the original
project.
2. Minor Technical Changes or Additions/Less Than Significant Impact: An Addendum to
previous CEQA documentation is required if only minor technical changes or additions are
necessary and none of the criteria for a subsequent EIR or MND is met.
3. New Information Identifying New Mitigation: 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 briefly
explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.
4. New Information Showing Greater or New Impacts: There is substantial evidence that new
information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known
with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the MND was certified, shows 1) the
project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Final MND; or 2)
significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the
Final MND.
F. TIERED DOCUMENTS, INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE, AND TECHNICAL STUDIES
Information, findings, and conclusions contained in this document are based on the incorporation by
reference of tiered documentation and technical studies that have been prepared for the proposed project
which are discussed in the following section.
1. Tiered Documents
As permitted in CEQA Guidelines Section 15152(a), the analysis of general matters contained in a
broader EIR (such as 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
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 5 of 149
EIR; and concentrating the later EIR or negative declaration solely on the issues specific to the later
project.
Tiering is defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15385 as follows:
“Tiering” refers to the coverage of general matters in broader EIRs (such as on general plans or
policy statements) with subsequent narrower EIRs or ultimately site-specific EIRs incorporating
by reference the general discussions and concentrating solely on the issues specific to the EIR
subsequently prepared. Tiering is appropriate when the sequence of EIRs is:
(a) From a general plan, policy, or program EIR to a program, plan, or policy EIR of lesser scope
or to a site-specific EIR;
(b) From an EIR on a specific action at an early stage to a subsequent EIR or a supplement to an
EIR at a later stage. Tiering in such cases is appropriate when it helps the Lead Agency to focus
on the issues which are ripe for decision and exclude from consideration issues already decided
or not yet ripe.
Tiering also allows this document to comply with Section 15152(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, which
discourages repetitive analyses, as follows:
“Agencies are encouraged to tier the environmental analyses which they prepare for separate but
related projects including general plans, zoning changes, and development projects. This approach
can eliminate repetitive discussions 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.”
For this document, the City of Lake Elsinore Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND) (No. 2003-03, Resolution No.2003-52) is tiered from. The Final MND incudes
evaluation of each of the CEQA topic areas, identifies conditions of approval that are required for
development of the Specific Plan area, and includes a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(MMRP) that identifies required mitigation for development of the project site.
Also, the “City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Update Final Recirculated Program Environmental
Impact Report” certified December 13, 2011 (SCH #2005121019) 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 (City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Update Final
Recirculated Program Environmental Impact Report) cannot adequately address, may occur for certain
issue areas. This document, therefore, evaluates each environmental issue alone and will rely upon the
analysis contained within the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND and the Lake Elsinore
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 6 of 149
General Plan Final EIR.
2. Incorporation by Reference
A CEQA document may incorporate by reference all or portions of another document which is a matter
of public record or is generally available to the public. Where all or part of another document is
incorporated by reference, the incorporated language shall be considered to be set forth in full as part
of the text of the EIR or Negative Declaration. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[a])
Incorporation by reference is a procedure for reducing the size of CEQA document and is most
appropriate for including long, descriptive, or technical materials that provide general background
information, but do not contribute directly to the specific analysis of the project itself. This procedure
is particularly useful when an EIR or Negative Declaration relies on a broadly-drafted EIR for its
evaluation of cumulative impacts of related projects (Las Virgenes Homeowners Federation v. County
of Los Angeles [1986, 177 Ca.3d 300]). If an EIR or Negative Declaration relies on information from a
supporting study that is available to the public, the EIR or Negative Declaration cannot be deemed
unsupported by evidence or analysis (San Francisco Ecology Center v. City and County of San
Francisco [1975, 48 Ca.3d 584, 595]). When an EIR or Negative Declaration incorporates a document
by reference, the incorporation must comply with CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 as follows:
• Where part of another document is incorporated by reference, such other document shall be made
available to the public for inspection at a public place or public building. The EIR or Negative
Declaration shall state where the incorporated documents will be available for inspection. At a
minimum, the incorporated document shall be made available to the public in an office of the Lead
Agency. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[b])
• The incorporated part of the referenced document shall be briefly summarized where possible or
briefly described if the data or information cannot be summarized. The relationship between the
incorporated part of the referenced document and the EIR shall be described. (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15150[c])
• This document must include the State identification number of the incorporated document (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15150[d]).
3. Documents Incorporated by Reference/Technical Studies
a. The following documents are hereby incorporated by reference:
• City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Update Final Recirculated Program Environmental Impact
Report (“General Plan EIR”) (SCH #2005121019), certified December 13, 2011. The General
Plan EIR, from which this document is tiered, 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.
• City of Lake Elsinore Lakeshore Village Specific Plan that was adopted by the City on October
28, 2003. The Specific Plan is intended to provide for the orderly and efficient development of
the area. It provides the type, location, intensity and character of development, along with the
infrastructure to support the planned land uses. The project’s compliance with the incorporated
Specific Plan will be cited in the appropriate sections.
• City of Lake Elsinore Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND (Final MND) (No. 2003-
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 7 of 149
03, Resolution No.2003-52), was adopted by the City on October 28, 2003. The Final MND
identifies conditions of approval that are required for development of the Specific Plan area
and includes a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) that identifies required
mitigation for development of the Specific Plan area.
b. Various technical reports have been prepared to assess specific issues that may result from the
construction and operation of the proposed project. As relevant, information from these technical
reports has been incorporated into this CEQA Addendum. The following technical reports are included
as appendices to this CEQA Addendum:
(List of Technical Studies used in the preparation of this CEQA Addendum.)
Appendix A: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, prepared by Vista
Environmental, 2022.
Appendix B: General Biological Assessment, prepared by Hernandez Environmental Services, 2022.
Appendix C: Cultural Resources Study, prepared by Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc., 2022.
Appendix D: Geotechnical Investigation, 2017 and Geotechnical Update, 2021, prepared by Sladden
Engineering, Inc.
Appendix E: Paleontological Assessment, prepared by Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc., 2022.
Appendix F: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by Sladden Engineering, Inc., 2021.
Appendix G: Preliminary Hydrology Report, prepared by Wilson Mikami Corporation, 2022.
Appendix H: Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan, prepared by Wilson Mikami
Corporation, 2022.
Appendix I: Noise Impact Analysis, prepared by Vista Environmental, 2022.
Appendix J: Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by EPD Solutions, Inc, 2022.
Appendix K: Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis Memo, prepared by EPD Solutions,
Inc, 2022.
c. The above-listed documents and technical studies are available for review at:
City of Lake Elsinore
Planning Division
130 S. Main Street
Lake Elsinore, California 92530
Hours: Mon-Thurs: 8 a.m. - 5 p.m.
Friday: 8 a.m. - 4 p.m.
Closed Holidays
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 8 of 149
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING
Project Location
The 10.29-acre project site is located at 16540 Lakeshore Drive, which is at the southwest side of the
intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street in the northwestern portion of the City of Lake
Elsinore. The project site is located to the west of Interstate 15 (I-15). Local access to the site is provided
by Lakeshore Drive and SR-74.
The project site consists of two parcels with the following Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs): 379-230-
001 and 379-230-002. The site is located in Section 3.5, Township 5 South, Range 5 West as shown on the
Alberhill and Lake Elsinore, California 7.5-minute U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) topographic maps.
The site is bound by Lakeshore Drive to the northeast, a mobile home park, preschool and retail commercial
uses to the northwest, retail commercial and two-story single-family residences to the southeast, and two-
story townhome residences to the southwest.
Existing Project Site
The elevation of the site is approximately 1,304 to 1,320 feet above mean sea-level and the topography of
the site is relatively flat with a slight slope northwest to southeast. The project site is currently vacant and
undeveloped. The site is dominated by non-native ruderal vegetation. A man-made, unvegetated basin
containing a storm drain outlet is located within the northern portion of the site. The basin is an isolated
feature that is cleared and maintained regularly.
Existing General Plan and Specific Plan Designations
The project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of Lake View District Medium Density
Residential and Lakeshore Village Specific Plan designations of Attached Residential (AR) and
Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF). The Lake View District Medium Density Residential allows for a
variety of residential types and prescribes a density range of 7 to 18 units per net acre. The Specific Plan
states that the AR designation is to provide for two to three-story residential buildings, and that the CRF
designation is to provide for either one- and two-story commercial structures or two- to three-story
residential buildings consistent with the AR designation.
Surrounding Land Uses, General Plan and Zoning Designations
The project site is located within a developed and urbanizing area. The project site is bound by Lakeshore
Drive, which is an arterial roadway, a variety of residential development types, and retail commercial land
uses, as detailed below:
North: Area to the north of the project site includes Lakeshore Drive followed by vacant parcels,
commercial uses, residential uses, and church uses.
West: Area to the west of the project site includes mobile home and attached townhome residential uses,
a preschool, and retail commercial uses.
South: Area to the south of the project site includes single-family and attached townhome residential
uses.
East: Area to the east of the project site includes single-family residential and retail commercial uses.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 9 of 149
This page intentionally left blank.
Figure 1Lakeshore Drive Residential
City of Lake Elsinore
Regional Location
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 11 of 149
This page intentionally left blank.
Local Vicinity
Figure 2Lakeshore Drive Residential
City of Lake Elsinore
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 13 of 149
This page intentionally left blank.
Aerial View of the Project Site and Vicinity
Figure 3Lakeshore Drive Residential
City of Lake Elsinore
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 15 of 149
This page intentionally left blank.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 16 of 149
The land uses surrounding the project site are described in Table 1 along with the General Plan Land Use
and zoning designations.
Table 1: Surrounding Existing Land Use and Zoning Designations
Existing Land Use General Plan Designation Zoning Designation
North
Vacant parcels, commercial
uses, residential uses, and
church uses
General Commercial and
Neighborhood Commercial
(C1) Neighborhood
Commercial and (CP)
Commercial Park
West
Mobile home and attached
townhome residential uses, a
preschool, and retail
commercial uses
High Density Residential
General Commercial and
Medium Density Residential
(MC) Mobile Home
Community, (R2) Medium
Density Residential, (CP)
Commercial Park
South Single-family and attached
townhome residential uses
Lakeshore Village Specific
Plan and Medium Density
Residential
Lakeshore Village Specific
Plan and (R2) Medium
Density Residential
East Single-family residential
and retail commercial uses
Lakeshore Village Specific
Plan and General
Commercial
Lakeshore Village Specific
Plan and (C1)
Neighborhood Commercial
B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Development Summary
The project includes a Tentative Tract Map (TTM) for condominium purposes with a single lot tract map.
The proposed project would develop the project site with 140 two-story duplex condominium residences,
parking, recreation areas, and the associated amenities and infrastructure. The proposed site plan provided
as Figure 4, Conceptual Site Plan.
The residences would range in size from approximately 1,807 square feet (SF) to approximately 2,008 SF
and include four different two-story floor plan options as detailed below in Table 2. Minor adjustments may
occur as the project is processed through the City. Consistent with Chapter 12, Section 1202 of the Uniform
Building Code, the project would install a standard forced air conditioning and heating system with a
filtered outside air intake vent within each residence.
Table 2: Proposed Residence Plan Options
Plan 1 Plan 2 Plan 3 Plan 4
1,995 SF
3 Bedrooms
2.5 Bathrooms
2 Car Garage
1,807 SF
3 Bedrooms
2.5 Bathrooms
2 Car Garage
1,891 SF
4 Bedrooms
3 Bathrooms
2 Car Garage
2,008 SF
4 Bedrooms
3 Bathrooms
2 Car Garage
34 Plan 1 Units 35 Plan 2 Units 27 Plan 3 Units 44 Plan 4 Units
Recreation and Open Space
The project includes development of a 0.86-acre recreation area and a recreation center on the site. The
0.86-acre open space recreation area would include playground equipment, swing set, barbeques, overhead
trellis, turf areas, seating, sidewalks. The recreation center would include restrooms, drinking fountains,
pool and spa, shade structure, lounge chairs, table, and chairs. Figure 5, Open Space, Recreation, and
Landscape Conceptual Plan, illustrates the recreation area landscaping and amenities and Figure 6 shows
the proposed park and recreation center.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 17 of 149
Walls, Fences, and Gates
The project proposes that the existing 6-foot-high concrete masonry unit (cmu) wall to remain along the
three sides of the site, and that a new 6-foot-high cmu wall be constructed along the project site boundary
with Lakeshore Drive. Pedestrian and vehicular entry gates would be 6-foot-high metal rolling security
gates at the project driveway at Lakeshore Drive, as shown in Figure 7, Conceptual Entry Plan. Residences
and private exterior spaces would be separated by rear and side yard 5-foot-6-inch-high vinyl fences, as
shown in Figure 8, Conceptual Gate and Wall Plan.
Circulation
As depicted in Figure 7, Conceptual Entry Plan and Figure 8, Conceptual Gate and Wall Plan, the project
would develop a gated driveway to the site from Lakeshore Drive. A 56-foot-wide main driveway with a
landscaped median would be located at Lakeshore Drive, at the center of the site frontage. The proposed
26-footwide onsite roadway would circle the site and provide access to each garage and parking space. The
project would include sidewalks throughout the project site.
The project also includes off-site circulation improvements. The proposed project would install a traffic
signal at the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street-Project Driveway. Lakeshore Drive
would be improved along the project frontage to provide dedication for 3-lanes, consistent with the urban
arterial roadway designation, and would have a right turn lane into the project site, a lane going straight on
Lakeshore Drive, and a left-turn lane onto Gunnerson Street, as shown in Figure 9, Lakeshore Drive and
Gunnerson Street Stripping.
Parking
The proposed project would provide garage, driveway, and open guest parking. Each residence would have
a two-car garage. The project would also provide 12 driveway spaces and 56 open guest spaces for
residences and visitors. In total the project would provide 348 spaces, which equates to 2.49 parking spaces
per units.
Landscaping
Landscaping proposed as part of the project would consist of ornamental trees, vines, shrubs, and
groundcovers throughout the common areas of the development, such as along roadways, common walls,
site boundary, and the open space/recreation areas. Trees would be installed along the proposed sidewalks
throughout the project site and along Lakeshore Drive. The roadway entrance to the project site would have
a landscaped median and decorative landscaping at the entrance to the residential neighborhood. Figure 5,
Open Space, Recreation, and Landscape Conceptual Plan, illustrates the proposed landscaping. The
landscape plan would be consistent with the Water Efficient Landscape Requirements (Municipal Code
Chapter 19.08).
Architectural Design
The proposed two-story residential duplex structures would be designed with Modern Farmhouse, Santa
Barbara, and French Country architectural elements, multi-level rooflines, and an earth tone color scheme.
The residences would incorporate stucco finishes, tiled roofs, front porches, and decorative windows and
doors in the exterior design. The tallest roofline of the two-story residences would be approximately 27-
feet in height. Figures 9 through 11, which illustrate the proposed exterior elevations.
Solar Panels
Consistent with the CA Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24 Part 6), the project would include
photovoltaic (PV) solar panels on the rooftop of each residence to offset its energy demand.
Lighting
Outdoor lighting included as part of project would be typical of residential uses and would consist of wall-
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 18 of 149
mounted lighting as well as pole-mounted lights along the proposed internal roadways. Nighttime lighting
would be used as accent/security lighting in the open space/recreation areas. The project’s outdoor lighting
would be directed downward and shielded to minimize off-site spill. The location of all exterior lighting
would comply with lighting standards established in the City’s Municipal Code.
Infrastructure Improvements
Roadway
The project includes off-site improvements to install a traffic signal at the intersection of Lakeshore Drive
and Gunnerson Street-Project Driveway and provide half-width roadway improvements to Lakeshore
Drive. The project includes widening Lakeshore Drive to three lanes, adding left turn lanes on Lakeshore
Drive to enter the project and to enter Gunnerson Street and constructing a 6-foot-wide sidewalk along the
project frontage, consistent with the urban arterial roadway Circulation Element designation. Streetlights
and parkway landscaping would also be installed along Lakeshore Drive fronting the project site.
Water and Sewer
The proposed project would install onsite 8-inch water lines that would serve each of the proposed
residences and would connect to the existing 12-inch water line within Lakeshore Drive. The project would
also install 8-inch sewer lines that would and serve each of the proposed residences and convey wastewater
to the existing EVMWD 15-inch sewer line in Lakeshore Drive.
Drainage
The project includes installation of two bio filtration units and an underground storm water detention basin
that would be located under the proposed recreation center. The proposed project would install an onsite
drainage system that could convey runoff to the bio filtration units and an underground storm water
detention basin. From the detention basin, runoff would flow to the existing 60-inch storm drain line that is
located within Lakeshore Drive.
CONSTRUCTION
Construction activities include excavation, grading, and re-compaction of soils; utility and infrastructure
installation; building construction; roadway pavement; and architectural coatings. Excavation and grading
would occur to an approximate depth of 3 feet below existing grade or 2 feet below the bottom of the
footings, whichever is deeper. Grading of the project site would require 13,160 cubic yards of cut and 8,130
cubic yards of fill, with approximately 3,714 cubic yards of shrinkage which would require the export of
approximately 3,714 cubic yards of dirt. The export of dirt would require a total of 464 haul truck trips
(average 15.5 haul truck trips per day over 30 workdays for the grading phase). Construction activities are
anticipated to last 18 months and would occur within the hours allowable by the City of Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code Section 17.176.080, which prohibits construction activities between the hours of 7:00 p.m.
and 7:00 a.m. or at any time on weekends or on holidays.
Table 3: Construction Schedule
Construction Phase
Working
Days
Site Preparation 10
Grading 30
Building Construction 300
Paving 45
Architectural Coating 45
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 19 of 149
Also, to comply with Municipal Code Section 17.176.080(F)(2), the proposed construction process includes
constructing the proposed six-foot high cmu wall on the northwest side, adjacent to the preschool, prior to
the start of grading and construction activities. In addition, the proposed construction would provide a 100-
foot setback between stationary construction equipment and offsite sensitive receptors. Should any
stationary construction equipment need to be used within 100 feet of any off-site sensitive receptors, a
temporary sound barrier would be installed between the stationary equipment and nearby sensitive
receptors.
DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS AND PERMITS
The following discretionary approvals and permits are anticipated to be necessary for implementation of
the proposed project:
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
• Tentative Tract Map
• Design Review Approval
• Grading Permits
• Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and Storm Water Storm Water Pollutant and
Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Lakeshore Drive ResidentialCity of Lake ElsinoreFigure 4Conceptual Site PlanURBANARENALAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRESLAKE ELSINORE | CACOASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102DATE 6 | 27 | 22ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN | SP1603001”= 30’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 21 of 148
This page intentionally left blank.
Lakeshore Drive ResidentialCity of Lake ElsinoreFigure 5Proposed Open Space, Recreation, and Landscape Conceptual PlanURBANARENALAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRESLAKE ELSINORE | CACOASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102DATE 6 | 27 | 22OVERALL CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN | L1603001”= 30’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 23 of 148
This page intentionally left blank.
Lakeshore Drive ResidentialCity of Lake ElsinoreFigure 6Proposed Park and Recreation CenterURBANARENALAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRESLAKE ELSINORE | CACOASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102DATE 6 | 27 | 22PARK & REC CENTER ENLARGEMENTS | L216801/8”= 1’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 25 of 148
This page intentionally left blank.
Lakeshore Drive ResidentialCity of Lake ElsinoreFigure 7Conceptual Entry PlanURBANARENALAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRESLAKE ELSINORE | CACOASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102DATE 6 | 27 | 22ENTRY ENLARGEMENTS | L416801/8”= 1’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 27 of 148
This page intentionally left blank.
Lakeshore Drive ResidentialCity of Lake ElsinoreFigure 8Conceptual Gate & Wall PlanURBANARENALAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRESLAKE ELSINORE | CACOASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102DATE 6 | 27 | 22FENCE & WALL EXHIBITS | L5603001”= 30’ - 0” SCALE NORTH
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 29 of 148
This page intentionally left blank.
Lakeshore Drive ResidentialCity of Lake ElsinoreFigure 9Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street Stripping
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 31 of 148
This page intentionally left blank.
Lakeshore Drive ResidentialCity of Lake ElsinoreFigure 10Plan 1 Front Elevation StylesURBANARENALAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRESLAKE ELSINORE | CACOASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102DATE 6 | 27 | 22FRONT ELEVATION STYLES | A1.0PLAN 1F.G.F.G.F.G.URBANARENALAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRESLAKE ELSINORE | CACOASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102DATE 6 | 27 | 22FRONT ELEVATION STYLES | A1.0PLAN 1F.G.F.G.F.G.25'-6"25'-7"
25'-7"
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 33 of 148
This page intentionally left blank.
Lakeshore Drive ResidentialCity of Lake ElsinoreFigure 11Plan 2 & 3 and Plan 4 & 2 Elevations Santa BarbaraURBANARENALAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRESLAKE ELSINORE | CACOASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102DATE 6 | 27 | 22ELEVATIONS SANTA BARBARA | A3.3PLAN 4 & 2F.G.F.G.URBANARENALAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRESLAKE ELSINORE | CACOASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102DATE 6 | 27 | 22ELEVATIONS SANTA BARBARA | A2.3PLAN 2 & 3F.G.F.G.Santa BarbaraSanta Barbara24'-8"24'-10"
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 35 of 148
This page intentionally left blank.
Lakeshore Drive ResidentialCity of Lake ElsinoreFigure 12Plan 4 & 2 Elevations French Country and Modern FarmhouseURBANARENALAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRESLAKE ELSINORE | CACOASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102DATE 6 | 27 | 22ELEVATIONS MODERN FARMHOUSE | A3.2PLAN 4 & 2F.G.F.G.URBANARENALAKESHORE DRIVE - 10 ACRESLAKE ELSINORE | CACOASTAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES | 21-102DATE 6 | 27 | 22ELEVATIONS FRENCH COUNTRY | A3.1PLAN 4 & 2French CountryModern Farmhouse25'-8"
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 37 of 148
This page intentionally left blank.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 38 of 149
III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. BACKGROUND 1. Project Title: Lakeshore Drive Condos Project 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Lake Elsinore, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore,
CA 92530 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Kevin Beery, Associate Planner, (951) 674-3124, ext. 805 4. Project Location: See project location and setting in Section II.A, Project Location and Setting,
above. 5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Brett Crowder, Coastal Commercial Properties, 1020 2nd
Street, Encinitas, CA 92024 6. General Plan Designation: Lake View District Medium Density Residential 7. Zoning: Lakeshore Village Specific Plan designations of Attached Residential (AR) and
Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF) 8. Description of Project: See project description in Section II.B, Project Description, above. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: See project location and setting in Section II.A, Project
Location and Setting, above. 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required: The project would be required to comply
with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water
Discharges Associated with Construction of Land Disturbance Activities (State Water Resources Control
Board [SWRCB] Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, NPDES No. CA2000002), in addition to related City
requirements for storm water and erosion control; South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) Permit to Operate. 11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project
area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a
plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to
tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
Assembly Bill (AB) 52 (Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014) establishes a formal consultation process for
California tribes as part of the CEQA process and equates significant impacts on “tribal cultural resources”
with significant environmental impacts (Public Resources Code [PRC] § 21084.2). AB 52 requires that
lead agencies undertaking CEQA review evaluate, just as they do for other historical and archeological
resources, a project’s potential impact to a tribal cultural resource. In addition, AB 52 requires that lead
agencies, upon request of a California Native American tribe, begin consultation prior to the release of a
negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or EIR for a project. AB 52 does not apply to a Notice
of Exemption or Addendum. The Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measure for
cultural resources includes measures to address the potential for uncovering tribal cultural resources
(TCRs) or other tribal-affiliated resources during construction of the project. Please see Section XVIII of
the Environmental Checklist for more detail.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 39 of 149
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 greater significant effect than identified in the previous MND, as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agricultural and Forestry
Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population/Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities/Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of
Significance
C. DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation No substantial changes are proposed in the project and there are no substantial changes in the
circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the
previous approved ND or MND or certified EIR due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
effects. Also, there is no "new information of substantial importance" as that term is used in
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3). Therefore, the previously adopted ND or MND or
previously certified EIR adequately discusses the potential impacts of the project without
modification. This CEQA Addendum concludes that none of the conditions or circumstances that would
require preparation of a subsequent or supplemental MND or EIR pursuant to Public Resources
Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 exists in connection with the design
of the Project. The project is consistent with the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan. No substantial
changes have been proposed to the project described in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan or
MND that require major revisions to Final MND or require preparation of an EIR. No new
significant environmental effects or substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant environmental effects would occur. This CEQA Addendum also indicates that there
have not been any substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which
development of the project site, including the project, would be undertaken that would require
major revisions to the Final MND or require preparation of an EIR. This CEQA Addendum also
concludes that no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could
not have been known at the time that the Final MND was certified, shows that the project would
cause or substantially worsen significant environmental impacts discussed in the Final MND. Substantial changes are proposed in the project or there are substantial changes in the
circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the
previous ND, MND or EIR due to the involvement of significant new environmental effects or
a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Or, there is "new
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 40 of 149
information of substantial importance," as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section
15162(a)(3). However, all new potentially significant environmental effects or substantial
increases in the severity of previously identified significant effects are clearly reduced to below
a level of significance through the incorporation of mitigation measures agreed to by the project
applicant. Therefore, a Subsequent MND is required. Substantial changes are proposed in the project or there are substantial changes in the
circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the
previous environmental document due to the involvement of significant new environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Or,
there is "new information of substantial importance," as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines
Section 15162(a)(3). However, only minor changes or additions or changes would be necessary
to make the previous MND adequate for the project in the changed situation. Therefore, a
Supplemental MND is required. Substantial changes are proposed in the project or there are substantial changes in the
circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the
previous environmental document due to the involvement of significant new environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Or,
there is "new information of substantial importance," as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines
Section 15162(a)(3) such as one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous MND.
Therefore, a Subsequent MND or an EIR is required.
(Kevin Beery, Associate Planner, City of Lake Elsinore)
Date
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 41 of 149
Substantial
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Resulting in
New
Significant
Effects
New
Information
Showing
Greater
Significant
Effects than
Previous MND
New
Information
Identifying
New
Mitigation
or
Alternative
to Reduce
Significant
Effect is
Declined
Minor Technical Changes or Additions
No New
Impact
I. AESTHETICS. Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on
a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings,
and historic buildings within a state
scenic highway?
c) In non-urbanized areas,
substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality public
views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage point).
If the project is in an urbanized
area, would the project conflict
with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic
quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural
Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as
an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether
impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies
may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment project; and
forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air
Resources Board.
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to
non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract?
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 42 of 149
Substantial
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Resulting in
New
Significant
Effects
New
Information
Showing
Greater
Significant
Effects than
Previous MND
New
Information
Identifying
New
Mitigation
or
Alternative
to Reduce
Significant
Effect is
Declined
Minor Technical Changes or Additions
No New
Impact
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land (as
defined by Public Resources Code
section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined
by Government Code section
51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-
forest uses?
e) Involve other changes in the
existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland to non-
agricultural use?
III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, significance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable
air quality plan?
b) 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?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as
those leading to odors) adversely
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
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 43 of 149
Substantial
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Resulting in
New
Significant
Effects
New
Information
Showing
Greater
Significant
Effects than
Previous MND
New
Information
Identifying
New
Mitigation
or
Alternative
to Reduce
Significant
Effect is
Declined
Minor Technical Changes or Additions
No New
Impact
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
state or federally protected
wetlands (including, but not limited
to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a historical
resource pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines §15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines §15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains,
including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
VI. ENERGY. Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 44 of 149
Substantial
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Resulting in
New
Significant
Effects
New
Information
Showing
Greater
Significant
Effects than
Previous MND
New
Information
Identifying
New
Mitigation
or
Alternative
to Reduce
Significant
Effect is
Declined
Minor Technical Changes or Additions
No New
Impact
environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy
resources, during project
construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or
local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause
potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss,
injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map,
issued by the State Geologist for
the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known
fault? Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or
the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil
that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on-
or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction
or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial direct or
indirect risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks
or alternative wastewater disposal
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 45 of 149
Substantial
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Resulting in
New
Significant
Effects
New
Information
Showing
Greater
Significant
Effects than
Previous MND
New
Information
Identifying
New
Mitigation
or
Alternative
to Reduce
Significant
Effect is
Declined
Minor Technical Changes or Additions
No New
Impact
systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of
wastewater?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a
unique paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic feature?
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that
may have a significant impact on
the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan,
policy or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions
of greenhouse gases?
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into
the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous materials or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is
included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant
to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an
airport land use plan or, where such
a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 46 of 149
Substantial
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Resulting in
New
Significant
Effects
New
Information
Showing
Greater
Significant
Effects than
Previous MND
New
Information
Identifying
New
Mitigation
or
Alternative
to Reduce
Significant
Effect is
Declined
Minor Technical Changes or Additions
No New
Impact
project area?
f) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards
or waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade
surface or ground water quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge, such
that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river or
through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site;
ii) Substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in
flooding on- or offsite;
iii) 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; or
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release of pollutants due
to project inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 47 of 149
Substantial
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Resulting in
New
Significant
Effects
New
Information
Showing
Greater
Significant
Effects than
Previous MND
New
Information
Identifying
New
Mitigation
or
Alternative
to Reduce
Significant
Effect is
Declined
Minor Technical Changes or Additions
No New
Impact
control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established
community?
b) Cause a significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with any
land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental
effect?
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally-important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other
land use plan?
XIII. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial
temporary or permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity
of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan
or noise ordinance, or other
applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c) For a project located within the
vicinity of a private airstrip or 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?
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned
population growth in an area, either
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 48 of 149
Substantial
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Resulting in
New
Significant
Effects
New
Information
Showing
Greater
Significant
Effects than
Previous MND
New
Information
Identifying
New
Mitigation
or
Alternative
to Reduce
Significant
Effect is
Declined
Minor Technical Changes or Additions
No New
Impact
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 people or housing,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
XV. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of
the public services:
a) Fire protection?
b) Police protection?
c) Schools?
d) Parks?
e) Other public services/facilities?
XVI. 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?
XVII. TRANSPORTATION. Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program plan,
ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
b) Would the project conflict or be
inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due
to a geometric design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 49 of 149
Substantial
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Resulting in
New
Significant
Effects
New
Information
Showing
Greater
Significant
Effects than
Previous MND
New
Information
Identifying
New
Mitigation
or
Alternative
to Reduce
Significant
Effect is
Declined
Minor Technical Changes or Additions
No New
Impact
intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency
access?
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a
site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of
the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and
that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k).
b) A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of
Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1,
the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation
or construction of new or expanded
water, wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage, electric
power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which
could cause significant
environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry
and multiple dry years?
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider,
which serves or may serve the
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 50 of 149
Substantial
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Resulting in
New
Significant
Effects
New
Information
Showing
Greater
Significant
Effects than
Previous MND
New
Information
Identifying
New
Mitigation
or
Alternative
to Reduce
Significant
Effect is
Declined
Minor Technical Changes or Additions
No New
Impact
project that it has adequate capacity
to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of
State or local standards, or in
excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair
the attainment of solid waste
reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and
local management and reduction
statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
XX. WILDFIRE. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire?
c) Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that
may exacerbate fire risk or that
may result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including
downslope or downstream flooding
or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or
drainage changes?
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential
to substantially degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 51 of 149
Substantial
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Resulting in
New
Significant
Effects
New
Information
Showing
Greater
Significant
Effects than
Previous MND
New
Information
Identifying
New
Mitigation
or
Alternative
to Reduce
Significant
Effect is
Declined
Minor Technical Changes or Additions
No New
Impact
wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially 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?
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 52 of 149
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
This section provides a summary of the Specific Plan impacts identified in the Final MND, compares them
to the proposed project, and identifies if any new impact would result. A complete list of the reference
sources applicable to the following source abbreviations is contained in Section VII, References, of this
document.
I. AESTHETICS
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND describes that Specific Plan area is located within an urbanized area of Downtown Lake
Elsinore, around the lake, and that the Specific Plan would construct residential and commercial
development in accordance with the Specific Plan and City zoning standards which regulate building
design, mass, bulk, height, etc. The Final MND determined that development within the Specific Plan area
would not be so massive as to result in adverse effects to any scenic vista and that development requires
Design Review approval by the City, which ensures that future development would be designed as
aesthetically attractive as possible and feasible and will not adversely affect any important scenic vista.
The Final MND also determined that there are no sensitive scenic resources or state scenic highways within
the project area or neighboring areas, and that impacts to this issue would not occur. The Final MND
describes that the visual character of the project vicinity would not be compromised since Specific Plan
development would "blend" with other existing and future neighboring development, and that development
requires Design Review approval by the City, which ensures that the proposed project will be designed as
aesthetically attractive as possible and feasible.
In addition, the Final MND determined that light and glare from the Specific Plan development is not
considered significant. The Final MND describes that the site is located within an urbanized area and
already experiences levels of light and/or glare. Consequently, the perception of new and additional light
disturbances is lessened. Any future development requires Design Review approval by the City, which
ensures that future development would be designed to alleviate light and/or glare disturbances.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
None.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (No New Impact.)
Scenic vistas consist of expansive, panoramic views of important, unique, or highly valued visual features
that are seen from public viewing areas. This definition combines visual quality with information about
view exposure to describe the level of interest or concern that viewers may have for the quality of a
particular view or visual setting. A scenic vista can be impacted in 2 ways: a development project can have
visual impacts by either directly diminishing the scenic quality of the vista or by blocking the view corridors
or “vista” of the scenic resource. Important factors in determining whether the proposed project would
block scenic vistas include the project’s proposed height, mass, and location relative to surrounding land
uses and travel corridors.
The most notable aesthetic resource in the City of Lake Elsinore is Lake Elsinore itself, a 3,000-acre natural
lake. The City’s aesthetic setting is characterized by urbanized development of various densities occurring
within varied topographical features and interspersed with undeveloped natural areas around the lake.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 53 of 149
Scenic vistas within and surrounding the City include the lake and Cleveland National Forest mountains
and ridgelines.
The project site is not within the scenic vista of the lake or the mountains. The site is located 0.70 mile from
the lake and 1.40 miles from the closest mountain hillside. In addition, the site is surrounded by existing
development. Therefore, the site is not located within a scenic vista, and the proposed project would not
encroach into a scenic vista.
Consistent with the existing development on the east/southeast and south/southwest sides of the site, the
proposed project would develop the site with residential structures that would be two-stories (a maximum
of 27-feet) in height and consistent with the Specific Plan regulations related to size and location of
structures (as detailed in response I.c, below). The proposed project would blend in with the adjacent
existing residences and would not encroach into a scenic vista. Thus, no new impacts related to scenic vistas
would occur with implementation of the proposed project.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings,
and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (No New Impact.)
The State Scenic Highway System includes a list of highways that are either currently designated or eligible
for designation as scenic highways. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) identifies SR-
74 as eligible for listing as state scenic highways, but it is not officially designated. The project site is
located 0.30 mile from SR-74. Lakeshore Drive intersects with SR-74 0.30 mile east of the site. However,
the site is not within the view corridor of SR-74 due to the existing intervening development. Also, the
project site is vacant and undeveloped and does not include any scenic resources. The project includes
landscaping and decorative wall treatments along Lakeshore Drive to improve views of the site. Therefore,
the project would not result in new impacts related to scenic resources within a state scenic highway.
(Sources: City of Lake Elsinore General Plan and General Plan EIR, Section 3.3, Aesthetics, 2011;
California State Scenic Highway System Map, Accessed:
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aaca
a)
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality public
views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly
accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? (No New Impact.)
The project site is located within an urbanized area that is adjacent to roadways, residential, and recreational
uses. The development area of the project site is undeveloped and vacant, except for the existing boundary
wall. The existing character of the development portion of the site is neither unique nor of special aesthetic
value or quality.
The project would develop this area to provide 140 new residences with recreation areas and open space
areas, which would be consistent with the residential uses that are adjacent to the site. The project would
also landscape the front of the site along Lakeshore Drive to enhance the existing visual character and
quality of public views of the site from the arterial roadway.
General Plan. The project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of Lake View District Medium
Density Residential that provides for residential uses at a density of between 7 and 18 dwelling units per
acre. The proposed project includes 140 duplex residences within a 9.71-acre portion of the site (not
including the public ROW) resulting in 14.4 units per acre. Thus, the project would be within the allowable
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 54 of 149
density of the Lake View District Medium Density Residential land use. In addition, the project would be
consistent with the General Plan policies related to scenic quality, as shown in Table AES-1. Therefore,
conflicts with General Plan regulations governing scenic quality would not occur.
Table AES-1: Project Consistency with General Plan Scenic Goals and Policies
General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Policy 11.1 For new developments and redevelopment,
encourage the maintenance and incorporation of
existing mature trees and other substantial vegetation on
the site, whether naturally-occurring or planted, into the
landscape design.
Consistent. The proposed project does not contain
existing mature trees and other substantial vegetation on
the site. However, the project includes installation of
new ornamental trees and other landscaping throughout
the project site, as shown in Figure 5, Open Space,
Recreation, and Landscape Conceptual Plan.
Therefore, the project would be consistent with Policy
11.1.
Policy 11.2 Maintain and improve the quality of existing
landscaping in parkways, parks, civic facilities, rights-
of-ways, and other public open areas.
Consistent. The proposed project includes installation
of new landscaping throughout the project site, within
the open space recreation area, and along Lakeshore
Drive, as shown in Figure 5, Open Space, Recreation,
and Landscape Conceptual Plan. Therefore, the project
would be consistent with Policy 11.2.
Policy 11.3 Where appropriate, encourage new planting
of native and/or non-invasive ornamental plants to
enhance the scenic setting of public and private lands.
Consistent. The proposed project includes installation
of non-invasive ornamental plants to enhance the scenic
setting of public and private lands as shown in Figure 5,
Open Space, Recreation, and Landscape Conceptual
Plan. Therefore, the project would be consistent with
Policy 11.3.
Goal 5 Support a revitalized Riverside Drive and
Lakeshore Drive that are consistent with the mixed-use
corridor’s urban design character.
Consistent. The proposed project includes half width
improvements to Lakeshore Drive and installation of
new ornamental trees and other landscaping along
Lakeshore Drive. Therefore, the project would be
consistent with Goal 5.
(Sources: City of Lake Elsinore General Plan and General Plan EIR, Section 3.3, Aesthetics, 2011)
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan. The project site has Lakeshore Village Specific Plan designations of
Attached Residential (AR) and Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF). The Specific Plan states that the AR
designation is to provide for two to three-story residential buildings, and that the CRF designation is to
provide for either one- and two-story commercial structures or two- to three-story residential buildings
consistent with the AR designation.
As shown Table AES-2, the proposed project meets the Specific Plan development standards. Therefore, a
conflict with the Specific Plan development standards would not occur. Overall, the project would not
conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality, and the proposed project
would not degrade the visual character of the project site and surrounding area. No new impacts would
occur.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 55 of 149
Table AES-2: Consistency with Lakeshore Village Residential Development Standards
Development Criteria Specific Plan Requirement Proposed Project
Lot Area Minimum (sq. ft.) 8,400 423,203
Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit (sq. ft) 1,815 3,022
Setbacks (ft)
• Front - Main Structures 20 average, 15 minimum 20
• Side - Main Structures 10, 15 from public R0W 10
• Rear - Main Structures 10 10
• Front for Parking 10 10
• Accessory Structure - Front 10 10
• Accessory Structure - Side 5 5
• Accessory Structure Rear 5 5
• Projections into Required Yards Architectural features, any yard
2
Lot Coverage (%) 60 60
Building Height (ft.) 35 27
Accessory Structure Height (fl.) 15 15
Dwelling Unit Size Minimum (sq. ft.)
Two Bedroom or Larger Unit 700 plus 100 for each additional
bedroom over two
1,807 sq. ft
Common Open Space 250 per unit 268 per unit
Private Open Space Units over 600 so. fl., 80 per unit
(8' min. dimension)
192 sq ft.
Parking/Unit
Two or more Bedroom Units 2.33 spaces (1 covered plus 1.33
open space)
2.49 spaces
(Source: City of Lake Elsinore Lakeshore Village Specific Plan)
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area? (No New Impact.)
The project site is vacant and generally undeveloped, and light is not generated on the site. However, the
project site is located along Lakeside Drive, which is an arterial roadway, adjacent to residential and
commercial uses, and located across the street from, residential and commercial uses. Existing sources of
light in the vicinity of the project site includes security lighting, landscape lighting, and roadway lighting,
and lighting from building interiors that pass-through windows.
The proposed project would include the provision of nighttime lighting for security purposes around all of
the residences, recreation areas, and at the project driveway entrance at Lakeside Drive, which would
contribute additional sources to the overall ambient nighttime lighting conditions. However, all outdoor
lighting would be hooded, appropriately angled away from adjacent land uses. The lighting increase in light
that would be generated by the project would not adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
Overall, no new lighting impacts would occur.
Reflective light (glare) can be caused by sunlight or artificial light reflecting from finished surfaces such as
window glass or other reflective materials. Generally, darker or mirrored glass would have a higher visible
light reflectance than clear glass. Buildings constructed of highly reflective materials from which the sun
reflects at a low angle can cause adverse glare. The proposed project would not use highly reflective
surfaces, or glass sided buildings. Although the residences would contain windows, the windows would be
separated by stucco and architectural elements, which would limit the potential of glare. In addition, as
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 56 of 149
described previously, onsite lighting would be angled down and shielded, which would avoid the potential
on onsite lighting to generate glare. Therefore, the project would not generate substantial sources of glare,
and no new impacts would occur.
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
(Sources: City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code)
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding aesthetics. There have not been 1) changes
related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect to the
circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions of the
Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the
severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial importance
relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have
been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND determined that the project site is not classified as either Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland
or Farmland of Statewide Importance by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency. The Final MND also describes that the project site is not under a Williamson Act
contract and the project site is not utilized for agricultural cultivation. The Final MND determined that no
impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources would occur from implementation of the Lakeshore
Village Specific Plan.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
None.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed 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? (No New Impact.)
The California Department of Conservation Important Farmland mapping identifies the project site and
surrounding areas as Farmland of Local Importance. No areas of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance is located on or adjacent to the project site. Therefore, impacts related
to Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance would not occur.
(Sources: California Department of Conservation Important Farmland Mapping, Accessed:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/)
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 57 of 149
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (No New
Impact.)
The project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of Lake View District Medium Density
Residential and Lakeshore Village Specific Plan designations of Attached Residential (AR) and
Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF). The project site is surrounded by areas zoned for residential and
commercial uses. No agricultural zoning is located in the vicinity of the project site and no parcels in the
project vicinity have Williamson Act contracts. Therefore, implementation of the project would not conflict
with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. Thus, no new impact would occur.
(Sources: City of Lake Elsinore Zoning map, accessed: http://www.lake-
elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=24603; California Department of Conservation Important Farmland
Mapping, Accessed: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/)
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))? (No New Impact.)
The project site is developed and located in an area that is void of forest land or timberland. In addition, the
project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of Lake View District Medium Density Residential
and Lakeshore Village Specific Plan designations of Attached Residential (AR) and
Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF). Also, the site is surrounded by areas zoned for residential and
commercial uses. Therefore, the project would not conflict with existing forest land, timberland, or zoning
for forest or timberland uses. Thus, no new impact would occur.
(Sources: City of Lake Elsinore Zoning map, Accessed: http://www.lake-
elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=24603)
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest uses? (No New Impact.)
As described in the previous response, the project area is void of any forest land and is not zoned for forest
uses. Thus, the project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest
uses. No new impact would occur.
(Sources: City of Lake Elsinore Zoning map, Accessed: http://www.lake-
elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=24603)
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could
result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? (No New Impact.)
As described in the previous responses, the project area does not include and is not near any land zoned for
farmland or forest land. The project would redevelop the vacant site for residential uses. As the project site
is not used for agriculture and is within an area developed with and planned for urban uses, the development
of the site with residences would not result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. Thus, no new
impact would occur.
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 58 of 149
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding agriculture and forestry resources. There
have not been 1) changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial
changes with respect to the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that
require major revisions of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects
or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new
information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives
that were not known and could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
(Sources: City of Lake Elsinore Zoning map, accessed: http://www.lake-
elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=24603; California Department of Conservation Important Farmland
Mapping, Accessed: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/)
III. AIR QUALITY
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND determined that the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan would not result in any significant air
quality impact or conflict with any air quality plan as the development would not exceed air quality
thresholds. The MND determined that the residential and non-residential development within the Specific
Plan area are not uses that typically generate substantial pollutant concentrations and therefore, there is no
opportunity for any exposure. To ensure that the Specific Plan would not result in any significant impacts,
the Final MND included Mitigation Measure AQ-1 that requires each development project to reviews its
potential effects on air quality.
Regarding odors, the Final MND determined that residential and non-residential developments proposed
for the Specific Plan area are not uses that typically create objectionable odors and that surrounding areas
are developed with similar residential and commercial uses, and therefore, no new impacts related to odors
would occur.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
Final MND Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Prior to its approval, the City shall review any future tentative
tract map and/or site plan to determine whether said tract map and/or site plan will result in any
potential air quality impact, based on Air Quality District performance and threshold standards. If a
potential air quality impact results, the applicant shall comply with City and Air Quality District
measures to alleviate said impact.
Project Applicability: This measure is applicable to the proposed Project, has been completed, and is
attached as Appendix A.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
This section is based on the Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis (Appendix A). The
project’s construction and operational emissions were calculated using the California Emissions Estimator
Model (CalEEMod), Version 2020.4.0. CalEEMod is a statewide land use emissions computer model
designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 59 of 149
professionals to quantify criteria pollutant and GHG emissions associated with construction and operations
from a variety of land use projects. The results and conclusions of the report and calculations relative to
pollutant emissions are summarized herein.
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (No New Impact.)
The City is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) under the jurisdiction of SCAQMD.
SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) are responsible for
formulating and implementing the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the SCAB. The AQMP is a
series of plans adopted for the purpose of reaching short- and long-term goals for those pollutants the SCAB
is designated as a ‘nonattainment’ area because the SCAQMD does not meet federal and/or state Ambient
Air Quality Standards (AAQS) for certain pollutants. The land use and transportation control portions of
the AQMP are based on the regional growth forecasts included in SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan
(RTP)/Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), which is a long-range transportation plan that uses growth
forecasts to project trends over a 20-year period to identify regional transportation strategies to address
mobility needs. Both the RTP/SCS and AQMP are based, in part, on projections originating with County
and City General Plans. The two principal criteria for conformance to the AQMP are (1) whether a project
would result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations, cause or contribute
to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards; and (2) whether a project would
exceed the assumptions in the AQMP.
The project site has General Plan land use designation of Lake View District Medium Density Residential
and Lakeshore Village Specific Plan designations of Attached Residential (AR) and
Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF) that provides for residential densities up to 18 dwelling units per acre.
The proposed project includes 140 duplex residences within a 9.71-acre portion of the site (not including
the public ROW) resulting in 14.4 units per acre. Thus, the project would not exceed the allowable density
of the Specific Plan land use. As a result, the development density of the proposed project would not exceed
the assumptions in the AQMP and would not conflict with SCAQMD’s attainment plans.
Also, as further described in Section XIV, Population and Housing, the 140 new residences would result
in a 0.7 percent increase in residential units within the City. This limited level of growth would not exceed
growth projections and would be consistent with the assumptions in the AQMP. In addition, emissions
generated by construction and operation of the proposed project would not exceed thresholds. As described
in the analysis below, the project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air
quality violations or cause a new violation. Therefore, no new impacts related to conflict with the AQMP
would result from the proposed project.
(Sources: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis Appendix A)
b) 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? (No
New Impact.)
The SCAB has a non-attainment status for not meeting federal ozone standards, federal carbon monoxide
standards, and state and federal particulate matter standards. Any development in the SCAB, including the
proposed project, could cumulatively contribute to these pollutant violations. The methodologies from the
SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook are used in evaluating project impacts. SCAQMD has established
daily mass thresholds for regional pollutant emissions, which are listed in Table AQ-1. The SCAQMD’s
CEQA Air Quality Handbook methodology describes that any project that results in daily emissions that
exceed any of these thresholds would have both an individually (project-level) and cumulatively significant
air quality impact. If estimated emissions are less than the thresholds or reduced to below the thresholds
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 60 of 149
with implementation of mitigation, impacts would be considered less than significant.
Table AQ-1: SCAQMD Regional Daily Emissions Thresholds0F 2
Pollutant Construction
(lbs/day)
Operations
(lbs/day)
NOx 100 55
VOC 75 55
PM10 150 150
PM2.5 55 55
SOx 150 150
CO 550 550
Lead 3 3
Construction
Construction activities associated with the proposed project would generate pollutant emissions from the
following: (1) grading and excavation; (2) construction workers traveling to and from project site; (3)
delivery and hauling of construction supplies to, and debris from, the project site; (4) fuel combustion by
onsite construction equipment; (5) building construction and application of architectural coatings; and
paving. The volume of emissions generated on a daily basis would vary, depending on the intensity and
types of construction activities occurring.
It is mandatory for all construction projects to comply with several SCAQMD Rules, including Rule 403
for controlling fugitive dust, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions from construction activities. Rule 403 requirements
include, but are not limited to: applying water in sufficient quantities to prevent the generation of visible
dust plumes, applying soil binders to uncovered areas, reestablishing ground cover as quickly as possible,
utilizing a wheel washing system to remove bulk material from tires and vehicle undercarriages before
vehicles exit the site, covering all trucks hauling soil with a fabric cover and maintaining a freeboard height
of 12-inches, and maintaining effective cover over exposed areas. Compliance with Rule 403 was accounted
for in the construction emissions modeling for the project.
As shown in Table AQ-2, CalEEMod results indicate that construction emissions generated by the proposed
project would not exceed SCAQMD regional thresholds. Therefore, no new impacts would occur.
2 Regional thresholds are from the SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds, March 2015.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 61 of 149
Table AQ-2: Maximum Daily Construction Emissions Summary (lbs/day)
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
Activity VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Site Preparation
Onsite 4.48 50.41 20.01 0.06 10.65 6.02
Offsite 0.08 0.32 0.81 <0.01 0.24 0.07
Total 4.56 50.73 20.81 0.06 10.90 6.08
Grading
Onsite 3.91 41.69 28.08 0.07 5.68 3.01
Offsite 0.11 1.89 1.24 0.01 0.55 0.17
Total 4.02 43.58 29.31 0.08 6.23 3.17
Building Construction (year 2023)
Onsite 1.57 14.38 16.24 0.03 0.70 0.66
Offsite 0.70 1.97 7.10 0.02 2.29 0.63
Total 2.27 16.36 23.34 0.05 2.99 1.29
Combined Building Construction (year 2024), Paving, and Architectural Coatings
Onsite 50.11 24.19 32.60 0.05 1.14 1.07
Offsite 0.22 0.14 2.23 0.01 0.73 0.20
Total 50.33 24.32 34.83 0.06 1.87 1.26
Maximum Daily
Construction Emissions 50.33 50.73 34.83 0.08 10.90 6.08
SCQAMD Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A
Operation
Operation of the 140 residences would result in long-term regional emissions of criteria air pollutants and
ozone precursors associated with area sources, such as natural gas consumption, landscaping, applications
of architectural coatings, and consumer products. However, vehicular emissions would generate a majority
of the operational emissions from the project. Operational emissions associated with the proposed project
were modeled using CalEEMod and are presented in Table AQ-3. As shown, the proposed project would
result in long-term regional emissions of the criteria pollutants that would be below the SCAQMD’s
applicable thresholds. Therefore, operation of the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable
net increase of any criteria pollutant impacts, and no new operational impacts would occur.
Table AQ-3: Maximum Daily Operational Emissions(lbs/day)
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
Activity VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Area Sources 7.52 0.13 11.55 <0.01 0.06 0.06
Energy Usage 0.09 0.75 0.32 <0.01 0.06 0.06
Mobile Sources 2.84 3.62 24.93 0.06 5.66 1.54
Total Emissions 10.45 4.50 36.79 0.06 5.78 1.66
SCQAMD Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (No New Impact.)
The SCAQMD’s Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (SCAQMD 2008) recommends the
evaluation of localized NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 construction-related impacts to sensitive receptors in the
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 62 of 149
immediate vicinity of the project site. Such an evaluation is referred to as a localized significance threshold
(LST) analysis. According to the SCAQMD’s Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, “off-
site mobile emissions from the project should not be included in the emissions compared to the LSTs”
(SCAQMD 2008). SCAQMD has developed LSTs that represent the maximum emissions from a project
that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standards, and thus would not cause or contribute to localized air quality impacts.
LSTs are developed based on the ambient concentrations of NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 pollutants for each
of the 38 source receptor areas (SRAs) in the SCAB. The project site is located in SRA 25, Lake Elsinore.
Sensitive receptors can include residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, athletic facilities. The
closest receptors to the project site include mobile homes and a preschool located as near as 10 feet (3
meters) northwest of the project site, single-family residences located as near as 14 feet (4 meters) southeast
of the project site, and townhomes located as near as 35 feet (11 meters) to the southwest of the project site.
According to SCAQMD LST methodology, any receptor located closer than 25 meters (82 feet) shall be
based on the 25-meter thresholds.
Construction
The localized thresholds from the mass rate look-up tables in SCAQMD’s Final LST methodology
document, were developed for use on projects that are less than or equal to 5-acres in size or have a
disturbance of less than or equal to 5 acres daily. The site is 10.29 acres and the CalEEMod evaluation
determined that the proposed project could conservatively disturb a maximum of 4 acres per day.
The Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds, prepared by SCAQMD,
2015, provides guidance on how to determine the appropriate site acreage size to utilize for LST analyses.
The Fact Sheet details that the maximum number of acres disturbed on the peak day of construction is
calculated from the construction equipment list utilized in the CalEEMod model, which identifies that
crawler tractors, graders, and rubber-tired dozers disturb 0.5-acre in an 8-hour day and scrapers disturb 1.0-
acre in an 8-hour day.
Table AQ-4 lists all of the construction equipment modeled in CalEEMod and utilizes the methodology in
the Fact Sheet to calculate the acres disturbed per day. As shown, the maximum disturbed per day would
occur during the grading phase when 4.0-acres would be disturbed. As such, the 2-acre and 5-acre project
sites thresholds from the SCAQMD look-up tables were interpolated in order to calculate the 4.0-acre
threshold that has been utilized.
Table AQ-4 – Construction Equipment Modeled in CalEEMod and Acres Disturbed per Day
Construction
Activity Equipment Type
Equipment
Quantity
Acres Disturbed per
piece of Equipment
per Day
Operating
Hours per
Day
Acres
Disturbed
per Day
Site
Preparation
Rubber Tired Dozers 3 0.5 8 1.5
Crawler Tractors 4 0.5 8 2.0
Total Acres Disturbed per Day During Site Preparation 3.5
Grading
Graders 2 0.5 8 0.5
Excavators 1 0 8 0
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 0.5 8 0.5
Scrapers 2 1.0 8 2.0
Crawler Tractors 2 0.5 8 1.0
Total Acres Disturbed per Day During Grading 4.0
Building
Construction
Cranes 1 0 7 0
Forklifts 3 0 8 0
Generator Sets 1 0 8 0
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 0 7 0
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 63 of 149
Construction
Activity Equipment Type
Equipment
Quantity
Acres Disturbed per
piece of Equipment
per Day
Operating
Hours per
Day
Acres
Disturbed
per Day
Welders 1 0 8 0
Total Acres Disturbed per Day During Building Construction 0
Paving
Pavers 2 0 8 0
Paving Equipment 2 0 8 0
Rollers 2 0 8 0
Total Acres Disturbed per Day During Paving 0
Architectural
Coating
Air Compressor 1 0 6 0
Total Acres Disturbed per Day During Architectural Coating 0
Maximum Acres Disturbed during All Construction Activities 4.0
Source: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A
Table AQ-5 identifies the localized impacts at the nearest air quality sensitive receptor locations in the
vicinity of the project site. As shown, the proposed project would result in emissions that would be below
the SCAQMD’s applicable thresholds. Therefore, LST related construction impacts would be less than
significant.
Table AQ-5: Construction Localized Significance Threshold Emissions
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
Construction Phase NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Site Preparation 50.45 20.11 10.68 6.02
Grading 41.93 28.23 5.75 3.03
Building Construction (Year 2023) 14.63 17.13 0.99 0.74
Combined Building Construction, Paving and Architectural
Coatings (Year 2024) 24.20 32.88 1.23 1.09
Maximum Daily Construction Emissions 50.45 32.88 10.68 6.02
SCAQMD Local Construction Thresholds3 325 1,677 11 7
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No
Source: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A
Toxic Air Pollutants. The construction equipment would emit diesel particulate matter (DPM), which is a
carcinogen, However, the DPM emissions would be short-term in nature and occur intermittently
throughout the 18-month construction process. Determination of risk from DPM is considered over a 30-
year exposure time. As such, considering the short time frame for construction, exposure to DPM during
construction would be less than significant.
Operation
Project-related air emissions from operational onsite sources such as architectural coatings, landscaping
equipment, and onsite usage of natural gas appliances create localized emissions. Table AQ-6 shows the
onsite emissions from the CalEEMod model that includes area sources, energy usage, and vehicles
operating in the immediate vicinity of the project site and the calculated emissions thresholds. As detailed,
the on-going operations of the proposed project would not exceed the localized significance thresholds.
Therefore, LST related operational emissions would be less than significant.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 64 of 149
Table AQ-6: Operational Localized Significance Threshold Emissions
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
Onsite Emission Source NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Area Sources 0.13 11.55 0.06 0.06
Energy Usage 0.75 0.32 0.06 0.06
Mobile Sources 0.45 3.12 0.71 0.19
Total Emissions 1.33 14.98 0.83 0.32
SCAQMD Local Operational Thresholds 325 1,677 3 2
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No
Source: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A
CO Hotspots. Areas of vehicle congestion have the potential to create pockets of CO called hotspots. These
pockets have the potential to exceed the state one-hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight-hour standard of 9
ppm. Because CO is produced in greatest quantities from vehicle combustion and does not readily disperse
into the atmosphere, adherence to ambient air quality standards is typically demonstrated through an
analysis of localized CO concentrations. Hotspots are typically produced at intersections, where traffic
congestion is highest because vehicles queue for longer periods and are subject to reduced speeds.
With the turnover of older vehicles and introduction of cleaner fuels, electric vehicles, and vehicles with
stop-start systems (where the engine shuts down when the vehicle is stopped and restarts when the break
petal is released), as well as implementation of control technology on industrial facilities, CO
concentrations in the South Coast Air Basin and the state have steadily declined.
The analysis of CO hotspots compares the volume of traffic that has the potential to generate a CO hotspot
(exceedance the state one-hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight-hour standard of 9 ppm) and the volume of
traffic with implementation of the proposed project. In 2003, the SCAQMD estimated that a project would
have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection by more than 44,000 vehicles per hour—or 24,000
vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal air does not mix—in order to exceed state standards and
generate a CO hot spot.
As detailed in Section XVII, Transportation, shown on Table T-2, the proposed project would generate 67
new vehicle trips (21 inbound trips and 46 outbound trips) during the AM peak hour. During the PM peak
hour, the project would generate 80 vehicle trips (45 inbound trips and 35 outbound trips). Over a 24-hour
period, the project is forecast to generate approximately 1,008 daily trips. Thus, the proposed project would
not result in an increase in traffic volumes at a single intersection by more than 44,000 vehicles per hour—
or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal air does not mix and would not generate a CO
hotspot. Therefore, impacts related to CO hotspots from operation of the proposed project would not occur.
(Sources: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A)
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number
of people? (No New Impact.)
No New Impact. The proposed project would not emit other emissions, such as those generating
objectionable odors, that would affect a substantial number of people. The threshold for odor is identified
by SCAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, which states:
A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air
contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance
to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort,
repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 65 of 149
natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. The provisions of
this rule shall not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for
the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals.
The type of facilities that are considered to result in other emissions, such as objectionable odors, include
wastewater treatments plants, compost facilities, landfills, solid waste transfer stations, fiberglass
manufacturing facilities, paint/coating operations (e.g., auto body shops), dairy farms, petroleum refineries,
asphalt batch plants, chemical manufacturing, and food manufacturing facilities.
The proposed project would implement residential development that does not involve the types of uses that
would emit objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. In addition, odors generated by
non-residential land uses are required to be in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402, which would prevent
nuisance odors.
During construction, emissions from construction equipment, architectural coatings, and paving activities
may generate odors. However, these odors would be temporary, intermittent in nature, and would not affect
a substantial number of people. The noxious odors would be confined to the immediate vicinity of the
construction equipment. Also, the short-term construction-related odors would cease upon the drying or
hardening of the odor-producing materials. Therefore, impacts associated with other emissions, such as
odors, would not adversely affect a substantial number of people.
(Sources: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A)
Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies
The following existing requirements would reduce pollutant air quality emissions from the proposed
project:
PPP AQ-1: Rule 402. The construction plans shall include a note that the project is required to comply
with the provisions of South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 402. The project
shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material
which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the
public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or
which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property.
PPP AQ-2: Rule 403. The construction plans shall include a note that the project is required to comply
with the provisions of South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 403, which
includes the following:
• All clearing, grading, earth-moving, or excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 25
mph per SCAQMD guidelines in order to limit fugitive dust emissions.
• The contractor shall ensure that all disturbed unpaved roads and disturbed areas within the project
are watered, with complete coverage of disturbed areas, at least 3 times daily during dry weather;
preferably in the mid-morning, afternoon, and after work is done for the day.
• The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds on unpaved roads and project site areas are reduced
to 15 miles per hour or less.
PPP AQ-3: Rule 1113. The construction plans shall include a note that the project is required to comply
with the provisions of South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule (SCAQMD) Rule 1113. Only
“Low-Volatile Organic Compounds” paints (no more than 50 gram/liter of VOC) and/or High Pressure
Low Volume (HPLV) applications shall be used.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 66 of 149
PPP AQ-4: Rule 445. No wood burning devices shall be installed and any dwelling units consistent
with SCAQMD Rule 445.
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding air quality. There have not been 1) changes
related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect to the
circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions of the
Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the
severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial importance
relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have
been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Mitigation Measures: The Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measure for air quality,
which is listed previously, was completed through preparation of the Air Quality, Energy, and GHG
Emissions Impact Analysis, that is included as Appendix A.
No new mitigation measures are required.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND describes that the Specific Plan area is characterized by vegetation and trees that are
commonly found in urbanized areas and surrounded by existing development and has been weed abated
and the site does not include any special status species or sensitive natural community. The MND
determined that the Specific Plan area does not include any riparian habitat, wetland, or jurisdictional areas.
The Final MND describes that the Specific Plan area is surrounded by existing development which prevent
the project site from functioning as a wildlife corridor; that the City does not have any local policies or
ordinances to protect biological resources of local concern, and the Specific Plan would not have any
adverse impact on locally protected biological resources. Further, the Final MND describes that there are
no known HCPs or NCCPs encompassing the Specific Plan area. The Final MND determined that no
significant impacts related to biological resources would occur from implementation of the Specific Plan.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
None.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
This section is based on the General Biological Assessment prepared for the proposed project by Hernandez
Environmental Services (Appendix B).
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?
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 67 of 149
(No New Impacts.)
As detailed in the General Biological Assessment, the project site consists of disturbed, ruderal habitat and
disturbed, non-vegetated areas that appear to be disked regularly. The dominant plant species observed
within these areas include slender wild oats (Avena barbata), wall barley (Hordeum murinum), fiddleneck
(Amsinckia menziesii), shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), and wild radish (Raphanus sativus).
Ornamental plant and tree species including Lemon-scented gum (Corymbia citriodora), European fan
palm (Chamaerops humilis), Oleander (Nerium oleander), and Weeping willow (Salix babylonica) were
observed along the southwestern and western property boundaries. In addition, the project includes a graded
man-made basin containing a storm drain outlet located at the northern portion of the project site.
The General Biological Assessment determined that due to the disturbed condition of the site that is
surrounded by development and Lakeshore Drive, no sensitive plant or animal species have a potential to
occur on the project site; therefore, no sensitive species would be impacted by the project.
(Sources: General Biological Assessment, Appendix B)
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? (No New Impact.)
The General Biological Assessment (Appendix B) describes that the project site does not include any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. As described in the previous response, the site consists
of disturbed, ruderal habitat and disturbed, non-vegetated areas that appear to be disked regularly. The
General Biological Assessment describes that the project site contains approximately 0.22 acre of an
unvegetated, man-made basin containing a storm drain outlet. The basin was constructed in uplands and
directs onsite stormwater flows to the existing adjacent offsite storm drain system and does not include any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community and the man-made basin is not connected to a natural
stream, or other riparian area. Therefore, no new impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community would occur from the project.
(Sources: General Biological Assessment, Appendix B)
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means? (No New Impact.)
The project site does not include any state or federally protected wetlands. The General Biological
Assessment (Appendix B) describes that the project site contains approximately 0.22 acre of an
unvegetated, man-made basin containing a storm drain outlet. The basin was constructed in uplands and
directs onsite stormwater flows to the existing adjacent offsite storm drain system. The man-made basin is
not connected to a natural stream, nor does it divert natural flow from any river, stream or lake. Therefore,
the onsite basin is not jurisdictional by CDFW. Further, the man-made basin is not adjacent to and is not a
water of the United States. The basin is an isolated feature constructed in uplands that is not tributary to nor
does it have a significant nexus (biological, chemical, or physical connection) to traditional navigable
waters of the United States. Therefore, the man-made basin on the project site is not federally jurisdictional
under the Clean Water Act. No new impacts would occur.
(Sources: General Biological Assessment, Appendix B)
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 68 of 149
species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites? (No New Impact.)
Habitat linkages are areas which provide a communication between two or more other habitat areas which
are often larger or superior in quality to the linkage. Corridors are similar to linkages but provide specific
opportunities for individual animals to disperse or migrate between areas, generally extensive but otherwise
partially or wholly separated regions. Adequate cover and tolerably low levels of disturbance are common
requirements for corridors.
The site is surrounded by a walls and fences on three sides and a roadway on the fourth. The areas beyond
those structures are developed with residential and commercial uses. The General Biological Assessment
determined that no wildlife corridors exist within the project site. Thus, impacts related to wildlife corridors
would not occur from implementation of the project.
Wildlife nurseries are sites where wildlife concentrate for hatching and/or raising young, such as rookeries,
spawning areas, and bat colonies. No wildlife nurseries or maternity roosts for colonial bat species exist
within the project site. However, the project site contains shrubs, and ground cover that provide suitable
habitat for nesting native birds during the nesting bird season of February 1 through September 15. Nesting
bird species are protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and Sections 3503, 3503.5,
and 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code. Therefore, PPP BIO-1 is included to require nesting bird
surveys if vegetation is removed during nesting bird season pursuant with the MBTA and the California
Fish and Game Code requirements. The potential of nesting birds in shrubs within the Specific Plan area is
not a new condition and significant impacts would not occur with compliance with existing regulations.
Therefore, no new impacts would occur.
(Sources: General Biological Assessment, Appendix B)
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance? (No New Impact.)
The General Biological Assessment (Appendix B) determined that the project site does not contain any
trees or other biological resources protected by City of Lake Elsinore policies or ordinances. Public trees in
Lake Elsinore are protected under Chapter 15.120, Tree Preservation, of the Municipal Code (PPP BIO-
2), which regulates street trees or trees located in other public locations in the City; including the location
and species of any trees to be installed along Lakeshore Drive. The proposed project would be required to
comply with the Municipal Code requirements as part of the City permitting process would ensure that the
project does not conflict with local policies or ordinances related to public trees. As a result, no new impact
would occur.
(Sources: General Biological Assessment, Appendix B)
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? (No
New Impact.)
The Project site is located within the Elsinore Area Plan of the MSHCP and is not located within MSHCP
criteria cells, cell groups, or public/quasi-public (PQP) lands [Exhibit 5 – MSHCP Map]. The Project site
is not located within the MSHCP Criteria Area Plant Species Survey Area (CAPSSA), the Narrow Endemic
Plant Species Survey Area (NEPSSA), Mammal Survey Areas, Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia)
Survey Area, Amphibian Survey Area, or Core and Linkage areas.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 69 of 149
The General Biological Assessment (Appendix B) describes that implementation of the project would not
result in impacts to MSHCP resources. The project site does not contain habitat that may be considered
riparian/riverine areas as defined in Section 6.1.2 of the Western Riverside County MSHCP. The General
Biological Assessment details that the project site was evaluated for the presence of habitat capable of
supporting branchiopods. It was determined that the project site is comprised of sandy loams that do not
allow for water pooling on the site for any significant length of time after rain events. No vernal pools,
swales, or vernal pool mimics such as ditches, borrow pits, cattle troughs, or cement culverts with signs of
pooling water were found on the site. In addition, the site does not contain areas that showed signs of
ponding water, hydrophytic vegetation, or soils typical of vernal pools that would be suitable for large
branchiopods.
The General Biological Assessment (Appendix B) also describes that the project site is not located within
the Western Riverside County MSHCP Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area (NEPSSA) pursuant
to Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP. Therefore, the NEPSSA requirements are not applicable to the project. The
project site is not located within or adjacent to a MSHCP Conservation Area. The project site is not located
within the MSHCP Additional survey areas for amphibians, mammals, burrowing owl, or any special
linkage areas. In addition, the project site is not located within the MSHCP Criteria Area Plant Species
Survey Area (CAPSSA) pursuant to Section 6.3.2 of the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Thus, the
project would not result in impacts related to the MSHCP.
(Sources: General Biological Assessment, Appendix B)
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding biological resources. There have not been
1) changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects or
a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect to
the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions
of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial
importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and
could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies
The following existing requirements would reduce potential biology related impacts from the proposed
project:
PPP BIO-1: Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Prior to issuance of grading or demolition permits that
include vegetation and/or tree removal activities that will occur within the active breeding season for
birds (February 1 through September 15), the project applicant (or their Construction Contractor) shall
retain a qualified biologist (meaning a professional biologist that is familiar with local birds and their
nesting behaviors) to conduct a nesting bird survey no more than 3 days prior to commencement of
construction activities.
The nesting survey shall include the project site and areas immediately adjacent to the site that could
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 70 of 149
potentially be affected by project-related construction activities, such as noise, human activity, and
dust, etc. If active nesting of birds is observed within 100 feet (ft) of the designated construction area
prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall establish an appropriate buffer around the active nests
(e.g., as much as 500 ft for raptors and 300 ft for non-raptors [subject to the recommendations of the
qualified biologist]), and the buffer areas shall be avoided until the nests are no longer occupied and
the juvenile birds can survive independently from the nests.
PPP BIO-2: Tree Regulations. The trees shrubs and plants installed on public property shall conform
to the regulations within Municipal Code Chapter 15.120.
PPP BIO-3: MSHCP Fees. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant/developer shall pay the
Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) development
mitigation fee in effect at the time the permits are issued.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND determined that no historic resources, archaeological resources, or human remains are
known to exist within the Specific Plan area, which is undeveloped and weed abated. However, mitigation
was included in the Final MND, as listed below, to provide procedures should any archaeological or
historical artifacts be uncovered during the construction within the Specific Plan area to reduce the potential
impacts to unknown resources to a less than significant level.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
Final MND Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Throughout site grading, should any archaeological or historical
artifacts be uncovered, work shall be halted and a cultural resources consultant shall be retained to assess
the significance of the find and make recommendations to ensure that impacts to the uncovered artifact is
alleviated to the greatest extent feasible. The applicant is required to comply with the recommendations of
said consultant.
Project Applicability: This measure is applicable to the proposed Project and would be included in
the Project’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
This section is based on the Cultural Resources Study prepared for the proposed project by Brian F. Smith
and Associates, Inc. (Appendix C). The Cultural Resources Study includes a records search, Sacred Land
File search, historic archival research, and a field survey.
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines §15064.5? (No New Impact.)
According to the State CEQA Guidelines, a historical resource is defined as something that meets one or
more of the following criteria:
1) Listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources;
2) Listed in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code (PRC) Section
5020.1(k);
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 71 of 149
3) Identified as significant in a historical resources survey meeting the requirements of PRC Section
5024.1(g); or
4) Determined to be a historical resource by the project’s Lead Agency.
PRC Section 5024.1 directs evaluation of historical resources to determine their eligibility for listing on the
CRHR. The criteria for listing resources on the CRHR were expressly developed to be in accordance with
previously established criteria developed for listing on the NRHP, enumerated above, and require similar
protection to what NHPA Section 106 mandates for historic properties. According to PRC Section
5024.1(c)(1-4), a resource is considered historically significant if it meets at least one of the following
criteria:
1) Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or
regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States;
2) Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history;
3) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of construction or
represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; or
4) Has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the
local area, California or the nation.
The project site is vacant and does not include any buildings or structures, and no potential impacts related
to historic resources would occur. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in new impacts to a
historic resource.
(Sources: Phase I Cultural Resources Survey, Appendix C)
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines §15064.5? (No New Impact.)
An archaeological records search for the project site that was completed in 2017 identified archaeological
resources within a 1-mile radius of the project site that include prehistoric habitation sites and prehistoric
lithic scatter. An updated records search and Sacred Lands File Search of the NAHC was requested in 2022;
however, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, records search access has become limited, and results are
delayed for the foreseeable future.
The Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the site describes the previous ground disturbance and absence
of recorded cultural resources within the project boundaries, there is little potential for cultural resources to
be present/disturbed by the proposed project. The proposed project includes excavation and grading of the
site to an approximately 3 feet below existing grade or 2 feet below the bottom of the footings, whichever
is deeper. This ground disturbance would be within the fill soils that were identified by the Geotechnical
Investigation (Appendix D), and the Final MND Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would be implemented that
requires construction work be halted if a potential resource is uncovered. Therefore, no new impacts to
buried archaeological resources would occur from the project.
(Sources: Phase I Cultural Resources Survey, Appendix C)
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (No New
Impact.)
The Cultural Resources Study describes that the project site has been previously used for agricultural
activities. The project site has not been previously used as a cemetery. Thus, human remains are not
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 72 of 149
anticipated to be uncovered during project construction. However, California Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5, CEQA Section 15064.5, and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 mandate a process to
be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains. Specifically, California Health
and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that if human remains are discovered, disturbance of the site shall
remain halted until the coroner has conducted an investigation into the circumstances, manner, and cause
of death, and made recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains to the
person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner provided in
Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject
to his or her authority and if the coroner has reason to believe the human remains to be those of a Native
American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage
Commission. Compliance with existing law would ensure that no new impacts to human remains would
occur.
(Sources: Phase I Cultural Resources Survey, Appendix C)
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding cultural resources. There have not been 1)
changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect to
the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions
of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial
importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and
could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Mitigation Measures: The Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measure for cultural
resources, which is listed previously, is applicable to the proposed project and would be included in the
Project MMRP to ensure implementation.
No new mitigation measures are required.
VI. ENERGY
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND did not identify any significant impacts related to energy
resources from construction or operation of the Specific Plan land uses.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
None.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
This section is based on the Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis prepared for the
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 73 of 149
proposed project and is included as Appendix A. The project’s construction and operational energy usage
was calculated using CalEEMod, Version 2020.4.0. The energy calculations are summarized herein.
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? (No New Impact.)
The Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas to the project vicinity and gas lines are currently
located within Lakeshore Drive, adjacent to the site. Southern California Edison currently provides
electricity services to the project area. The proposed project would install onsite electrical and natural gas
infrastructure that would connect to the existing offsite lines.
Construction
During construction of the proposed project, energy would be consumed in three general forms:
1. Petroleum-based fuels used to power off-road construction vehicles and equipment on the project
site, construction worker travel to and from the project site, as well as delivery truck trips;
2. Electricity associated with providing temporary power for lighting and electric equipment; and
3. Energy used in the production of construction materials, such as asphalt, steel, concrete, pipes,
and manufactured or processed materials such as lumber and glass.
Based on these uses of energy during construction activities, the proposed buildings and the associated
infrastructure would not be expected to result in demand for fuel greater on a per-unit-of-development basis
than other development projects in Southern California. Construction does not involve any unusual or
increased need for energy and would not be wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary. In addition, the extent of
construction activities that would occur is limited to an 18-month period, and the demand for construction-
related electricity and fuels would be limited to that time frame.
Construction contractors are required to demonstrate compliance with applicable California Air Resources
Board (CARB) regulations governing the accelerated retrofitting, repowering, or replacement of heavy-
duty diesel on- and off-road equipment as part of the City’s construction permitting process. Compliance
with existing CARB idling restrictions, which is included as PPP E-3, would reduce fuel combustion and
energy consumption. The energy modeling shows that project construction equipment usage over the 18-
month construction period is estimated to use 57,656 gallons of diesel fuel, as shown in Table E-1.
Table E-1: Estimated Construction Equipment Diesel Fuel Consumption
Equipment Type
Equipment
Quantity
Horse-
power
Load
Factor
Operating
Hours per Day
Total
Operational
Hours
Fuel Used
(gallons)
Site Preparation
Rubber Tired Dozers 3 247 0.40 8 240 1,224
Crawler Tractors 4 212 0.43 8 320 1,506
Grading
Excavators 2 158 0.38 8 480 1,488
Grader 1 187 0.41 8 240 950
Rubber Tired Dozer 1 247 0.40 8 240 1,224
Scrapers 2 367 0.48 8 480 4,365
Crawler Tractors 2 212 0.43 8 480 2,259
3 https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroadzone/pdfs/offroad_booklet.pdf
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 74 of 149
Equipment Type
Equipment
Quantity
Horse-
power
Load
Factor
Operating
Hours per Day
Total
Operational
Hours
Fuel Used
(gallons)
Building Construction
Crane 1 231 0.29 7 2,100 7,263
Forklifts 3 89 0.20 8 7,200 7,355
Generator Set 1 84 0.74 8 2,400 8,562
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 97 0.37 7 6,300 12,977
Welder 1 46 0.45 8 2,400 2,851
Paving
Pavers 2 130 0.42 8 720 2,029
Paving Equipment 2 132 0.36 8 720 1,766
Rollers 2 80 0.38 8 720 1,256
Architectural Coating
Air Compressor 1 78 0.48 6 270 580
Total Off-Road Equipment Diesel Fuel Used during Construction (gallons) 57,656
Source: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A
Table E-2 shows that the the on-road construction vehicle trips would consume 31,749 gallons of gasoline
and 12,655 gallons of diesel fuel.
Table E-2: Estimated Construction On-Road Vehicle Fuel Consumption
Vehicle Trip
Types/ Fuel Type
Daily
Trips
Trip
Length
(miles)
Total
Miles per
Day
Total Miles
per Phase1
Fleet Average
Miles per
Gallon2
Fuel Used
(gallons)
Site Preparation
Worker (Gasoline) 18 14.7 265 2,646 26.0 102
Vendor Truck
(Diesel) 6 6.9 41 414 8.2 50
Grading
Worker (Gasoline) 20 14.7 294 8,820 26.0 339
Vendor Truck
(Diesel) 6 6.9 41 1,242 8.2 151
Haul Truck (Diesel) 15.5 20 309 9,280 8.2 1,128
Building Construction
Worker (Gasoline) 177 14.7 2,602 780,570 26.0 30,035
Vendor Truck
(Diesel) 45 6.9 311 93,150 8.2 11,325
Paving
Worker (Gasoline) 15 14.7 221 9,923 26.0 382
Architectural Coatings
Worker (Gasoline) 35 14.7 515 23,153 26.0 891
Total Gasoline Fuel Used from On-Road Construction Vehicles (gallons) 31,749
Total Diesel Fuel Used from On-Road Construction Vehicles (gallons) 12,655
Source: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 75 of 149
Operation
Once operational, the project would generate demand for electricity, natural gas, as well as gasoline for
motor vehicle trips. Operational use of energy includes the heating, cooling, and lighting of the residences,
water heating, operation of electrical systems and plug-in appliances, and outdoor lighting, and the transport
of electricity, natural gas, and water to the residences where they would be consumed. This use of energy
is typical for residential development, no additional energy infrastructure would be required to be built to
operate the project, and no operational activities would occur that would result in extraordinary energy
consumption.
The on-road operations-related vehicle trips fuel usage was calculated through use of the total annual
vehicle miles traveled assumptions from the CalEEMod model run, which found that operation of the
proposed project would generate 2,658,656 vehicle miles traveled per year. The calculated total operational
miles were then divided by the Southern California fleet average rate of 27.5 miles per gallon, which was
calculated through use of the EMFAC2017 model and based on the year 2024. Based on this calculation
methodology, operational vehicle trips generated from the proposed project would consume 96,765 gallons
of gasoline per year.
The proposed project would be required to meet the current Title 24 energy efficiency standards, which is
included as PPP E-1. The City’s administration of the Title 24 requirements includes review of design
components and energy conservation measures that occurs during the permitting process, which ensures
that all requirements are met. Typical Title 24 measures include insulation; use of energy-efficient heating,
ventilation and air conditioning equipment (HVAC); solar-reflective roofing materials; solar panels;
energy-efficient indoor and outdoor lighting systems; and incorporation of skylights, etc. In complying with
the Title 24 standards, impacts to peak energy usage periods would be minimized, and impacts on statewide
and regional energy needs would be reduced. The operations-related electricity usage was calculated in the
CalEEMod model that found the proposed townhomes would use 38,148 kilowatt hours (kWh) per year of
electricity. Also, operation of the proposed project is estimated to result in the annual use of approximately
2,954,000 thousand British thermal units (kBTU) of natural gas. Thus, operation of the project would not
use large amounts of energy or fuel in a wasteful manner, and no new operational energy impacts would
occur.
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? (No
New Impact.)
The proposed project would be required to meet the CalGreen energy efficiency standards in effect during
permitting of the project, as included as PPP E-1. The City’s administration of the requirements includes
review of design components and energy conservation measures during the permitting process, which
ensures that all requirements are met. In addition, the project would not conflict with or obstruct
opportunities to use renewable energy, such as solar energy. As discussed, the project includes photovoltaic
(PV) solar panels on each of the residential buildings to offset their energy demand in accordance with the
existing Title 24 requirements (included as PPP E-1). As such, the project would not conflict with or
obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, and no new impacts would occur.
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 76 of 149
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding energy resources. There have not been 1)
changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect to
the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions
of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial
importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and
could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies: The following existing requirements would reduce energy
consumption from the proposed project:
PPP E-1. CalGreen Compliance. The project is required to comply with the CalGreen Building Code
as included in the City’s Municipal Code Section 15.32.010 to ensure efficient use of energy. CalGreen
specifications are required to be incorporated into building plans as a condition of building permit
approval.
PPP E-2: Idling Regulations. The project is required to comply with California Air Resources Board
(CARB) Rule 2485 (13 CCR, Chapter 10 Section 2485), Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit
Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS.
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND determined that the Specific Plan area does not contain, or near a Alquist-Priolo Special
Studies Zone. However, the Specific Plan area is located close to the North Elsinore Fault and the Glen Ivy
North Fault and would be affected by seismic activity, typical with the seismically active Southern
California region. The Final MND determined that compliance with standard measures contained in the
California Building Code and City Municipal Code, and included as mitigation, would ensure that
significant impacts would not result.
The Final MND also determined that the Specific Plan area is not subject to potential liquefaction during a
local seismic event, and that the Specific Plan area and surrounding areas are characterized by flat
topography and not subject to landslides. The Final MND describes that 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. However, erosion would be
controlled onsite in accordance with City standards, included as mitigation, and impacts would be less than
significant.
The Final MND states that the Specific Plan area is comprised of soils from the Hanford-Tujunga-
Greenfield Association and Monserate-Arlington-Exeter Association that are not unstable, and compliance
with standard measures contained in the California Building Code and City Municipal Code regarding
foundations, footings, structures, and construction, included as mitigation, ensures that significant impacts
would not result. In addition, the Final MND determined that the proposed Specific plan development
would not be serviced by septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
Final MND Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall prepare
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 77 of 149
and submit the following to the City Engineer for review and approval:
• Prepare final grading plan. All grading activities shall occur in accordance with guidelines contained
within of the Uniform Building Code and City requirements.
• Prepare erosion control plan. Said plan shall describe measures and City requirements to control
onsite erosion.
• Prepare final geologic and geotechnical reports. Said reports shall further evaluate soils conditions
and discuss how project walls, foundations, drains, etc. will be supported. Reports shall also indicate
ground surface acceleration from earth movement and recommend methods to ensure potential
hazards will be alleviated to greatest extent feasible. All structures shall be constructed in accordance
with the g-factors indicated in the final geotechnical report. Calculations for foundations, footings,
and structural members to withstand anticipated g-factors shall also be submitted.
Project Applicability: This measure is applicable to the proposed Project and would be included in
the Project’s MMRP.
Final MND Mitigation Measure GEO-2: To reduce erosion, the applicant shall implement the following:
• Use sandbagging and temporary debris basins during construction. Erosion control shall be in place
during the rainy season from November to March.
• The site shall be cleared of all obstructions, miscellaneous trash, debris, and organic material.
• All concentrated surface water entering the project site from offsite sources shall be collected and
directed to a permanent drainage system.
Project Applicability: This measure is applicable to the proposed Project and would be included in
the Project’s MMRP.
Final MND Mitigation Measure GEO-3: Building foundations and structures shall conform with
appropriate and applicable structural requirements contained in the aforementioned final geologic and
geotechnical reports, grading plan, Uniform Building Code, recommendations of the Structural Engineers
Association of California, and Lake Elsinore Municipal Code.
Project Applicability: This measure is applicable to the proposed Project and would be included in
the Project’s MMRP.
Final MND Mitigation Measure GEO-4: Grading and site preparation activities shall include the
following:
• Site soils shall be compacted in accordance with City specifications in order to support foundations
of proposed structures.
• Expansive soils shall not be placed at or near final grades unless special design and construction
procedures to offset such soil conditions.
• To ensure slope stability, all designed slopes shall meet the minimum safety factor or 1.5 for static
cases and 1.1 for pseudo static cases.
• Remove and replace all loose native soils with properly engineered and compacted fill soils during
site grading.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 78 of 149
• Foundations for new structures shall be founded within either bedrock or engineered and compacted
fill soils.
Project Applicability: This measure is applicable to the proposed Project and would be included in
the Project’s MMRP.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
This section is based on the Geotechnical Investigation, 2017, and Geotechnical Update, prepared by
Sladden Engineering., 2020 (Appendix D); the Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan, prepared
by Wilson Mikami Corporation, 2022 (Appendix H); and the Paleontological Assessment, prepared by
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc., 2021 (Appendix E).
a) Directly or indirectly cause 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. (No New Impact.)
The Geotechnical Investigation describes that the project site is not within a Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zone based on published geologic hazard maps. The closest identified fault is the
Elsinore fault that is approximately 1.3 miles from the site. Thus, no new impacts related to fault
rupture would occur from implementation of the project.
(Sources: Geotechnical Investigation, 2017, and Geotechnical Update, 2021, Appendix D)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (No New Impact.)
The project site is located within a seismically active region of Southern California. The Elsinore
fault that is approximately 1.3 miles from the site. Thus, moderate to strong ground shaking can be
expected at the site. The amount of motion can vary depending upon the distance to the fault
activity, the magnitude of the earthquake, and the local geology. Greater movement can be expected
at sites located closer to an earthquake epicenter, that consists of poorly consolidated material such
as alluvium, and in response to an earthquake of great magnitude.
Structures built in the City are required to be built in compliance with the California Building Code
(CBC [California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2]), included in the Municipal Code as Title
15. In addition, PPP GEO-1 has been included to provide provisions for earthquake safety based
on factors including occupancy type, the types of soils onsite, and the probable strength of the
ground motion. Compliance with the CBC would include the incorporation of: 1) seismic safety
features to minimize the potential for significant effects as a result of earthquakes; 2) proper
building footings and foundations; and 3) construction of the building structures so that it would
withstand the effects of strong ground shaking. Because the proposed project would be constructed
in compliance with the CBC, the no new impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking would
occur.
(Sources: Geotechnical Investigation, 2017, and Geotechnical Update, 2021, Appendix D)
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 79 of 149
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? (No New Impact.)
Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated, cohesionless soils layers, located within
approximately 50 feet of the ground surface, lose strength due to cyclic pore water pressure
generation from seismic shaking or other large cyclic loading. During the loss of stress, the soil
acquires “mobility” sufficient to permit both horizontal and vertical movements. Soil properties
and soil conditions such as type, age, texture, color, and consistency, along with historical depths
to ground water are used to identify, characterize, and correlate liquefaction susceptible soils.
Soils that are most susceptible to liquefaction are clean, loose, saturated, and uniformly graded fine-
grained sands that lie below the groundwater table within approximately 50 feet below ground
surface. Lateral spreading is a form of seismic ground failure due to liquefaction in a subsurface
layer.
According to the Geotechnical Investigation prepared for the proposed project, the site is mapped
by Riverside County as having moderate potential for liquefaction. No groundwater was
encountered on the site during onsite borings and soils were identified as generally dense.
Therefore, the Geotechnical Investigation determined that risks related to liquefaction are low and
includes engineering and design recommendations in compliance with the CBC that include
excavation and recompaction of the upper 3 feet of existing soils.
In addition, as described previously, structures built in the City are required to be built in
compliance with the CBC, as included in the City’s Municipal Code as Title 15 (and herein as PPP
GEO-1), which implements specific requirements for seismic safety, excavation, foundations, and
building construction. Compliance with the CBC, as included as PPP GEO-1 would ensure that
no new impacts would occur.
(Sources: Geotechnical Investigation, 2017, and Geotechnical Update, 2021, Appendix D)
iv) Landslides? (No New Impact.)
Landslides and other slope failures are secondary seismic effects that are common during or soon
after earthquakes. Areas that are most susceptible to earthquakes induced landslides are steep slopes
underlain by loose, weak soils, and areas on or adjacent to existing landslide deposits.
As described above, the project site is located in a seismically active region subject to strong ground
shaking. However, the project site is generally flat and does not contain any hills or any other areas
that could be subject to landslides, and no substantial slopes are located adjacent to the site. The
Geotechnical Investigation describes that the project site is relatively flat and does not include a
hillside and is not adjacent to a hillside that could result in a landslide. Therefore, the project would
not result in impacts related to landslides.
(Sources: Geotechnical Investigation, 2017, and Geotechnical Update, 2021, Appendix D)
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (No New Impact.)
Construction of the project has the potential to contribute to soil erosion and the loss of topsoil. Grading
and excavation activities that would be required for the proposed project would expose and loosen topsoil,
which could be eroded by wind or water. However, the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 14.08 implements
the requirements of the NDPES Storm Water Permit and all projects in the City are required to conform to
the permit requirements. This includes installation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) in compliance
with the NPDES permit, which establishes minimum stormwater management requirements and controls
that are required to be implemented for the proposed project. To reduce the potential for soil erosion and
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 80 of 149
the loss of topsoil, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required by the Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations to be developed by a QSD (Qualified SWPPP Developer).
The SWPPP is required to address site-specific conditions related to specific grading and construction
activities. The SWPPP is required to identify potential sources of erosion and sedimentation loss of topsoil
during construction, identify erosion control BMPs to reduce or eliminate the erosion and loss of topsoil,
such as use of silt fencing, fiber rolls, or gravel bags, stabilized construction entrance/exit, hydroseeding.
With compliance with the City’s Municipal Code, RWQCB requirements, and the BMPs in the SWPPP
that is required to be prepared to implement the project included as PPP WQ-1, construction impacts related
to erosion and loss of topsoil would not occur.
In addition, the proposed project includes installation of landscaping, such that during operation of the
project large areas of loose topsoil that could erode would not exist. In addition, as described in Section X,
Hydrology and Water Quality, the onsite drainage features that would be installed by the project have been
designed to slow, filter, and infiltrate stormwater, which would also reduce the potential for stormwater to
erode topsoil during project operations. Furthermore, implementation of the project requires City approval
of a site specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), included as PPP WQ-2, which would ensure
that the City’s Municipal Code, RWQCB requirements, and appropriate operational BMPs would be
implemented to minimize or eliminate the potential for soil erosion or loss of topsoil to occur. As a result,
no new impacts related to substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil would occur.
(Sources: Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan, Appendix H)
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? (No New Impact.)
Landslide. As described above, the project site is generally flat, and does not contain nor is adjacent to any
slope or hillside area. The project would not create slopes. Thus, on or off-site landslides would not occur
from implementation of the project.
Liquefaction. As described previously, the site is mapped by Riverside County as having a moderate
potential for liquefaction, but due to the lack of groundwater and site soils, the Geotechnical Investigation
determined that the potential for liquefaction is low. The Geotechnical Update includes engineering and
design recommendations in compliance with the CBC, as included in the City’s Municipal Code as Title
15 (and herein as PPP GEO-1), which would ensure that no new impacts related to liquefaction hazards
would occur.
Lateral Spreading. Lateral spreading, a phenomenon associated with seismically induced soil liquefaction,
is a display of lateral displacement of soils due to inertial motion and lack of lateral support during or post
liquefaction. It is typically exemplified by the formation of vertical cracks on the surface of liquefied soils,
and usually takes place on gently sloping ground or level ground with nearby free surface such as drainage
or stream channel. The Geotechnical Investigation describes that due to the lack of groundwater and
compacted site soils, lateral spread potential is expected to be minimal, and no new impact would occur
with implementation of PPP GEO-1.
Subsidence and Collapse. The Geotechnical Update describes that settlement resulting from the project
would be minimal with the recommended CBC compliant foundation designs. As described previously, the
project includes excavation and recompaction of the upper 3 feet of existing soils. Implementation of the
CBC measures would be ensured by PPP GEO-1 and no new impacts would occur.
(Sources: Geotechnical Investigation, 2017, and Geotechnical Update, 2021, Appendix D)
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 81 of 149
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? (No New Impact.)
Expansive soils contain certain types of clay minerals that shrink or well as the moisture content changes;
the shrinking or swelling can shift, crack, or break structures built on such soils. Arid or semiarid areas with
seasonal changes of soil moisture experiences, such as southern California, have a higher potential of
expansive soils than areas with higher rainfall and more constant soil moisture.
The Geotechnical Update describes that the site is underlain by alluvial soils, that consist of interbedded
silty and sandy silt and gravelly sand. The testing of the onsite soils identified a low to very low expansion
potential. As described previously, compliance with the CBC, as included as PPP GEO-1 would ensure
that foundation designs are consistent with the CBC regulations, included as PPP GEO-1. Thus, no new
impacts related to expansive soils would occur.
(Sources: Geotechnical Investigation, 2017, and Geotechnical Update, 2021, Appendix D)
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? (No New Impact.)
The project would not use septic tanks or alternative methods for disposal of wastewater into subsurface
soils. Furthermore, the proposed project would connect to existing public wastewater infrastructure within
Lakeshore Drive. Therefore, the project would not result in new impacts related to septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal methods.
(Sources: Project Plans)
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature? (No New Impact.)
Paleontological resources are the remains of prehistoric life that have been preserved in geologic strata.
These remains are called fossils and include bones, shells, teeth, and plant remains (including their
impressions, casts, and molds) in the sedimentary matrix, as well as trace fossils such as footprints and
burrows. Fossils are considered older than 5,000 years of age (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 2010),
but may include younger remains (subfossils), for example, when viewed in the context of local extinction
of the organism or habitat.
A Paleontological Resource Assessment (Appendix E) was completed for the project, which describes that
the geologic units mapped as underlying the project site are Holocene and late Pleistocene-aged, young,
sandy, alluvial-valley deposits (Qyva). These sedimentary deposits are almost entirely of Holocene age,
consisting of unconsolidated silt, sand, and clay-bearing alluvium. The Paleontological Resource
Assessment describes that Holocene alluvium is generally considered to be geologically too young to
contain significant fossils. However, older deposits of Pleistocene age underlie the Holocene surficial
deposits, which have the potential to contain paleontological resources.
The City of Lake Elsinore General Plan (Figure 4.6, Paleontological Resources) identifies the site as having
a low potential for paleontological resources sensitivity. In addition, the Paleontological Resource
Assessment included a records search of the Los Angeles County Natural History Museum (LACM), the
San Bernardino County Museum (SBCM), the University of California at Riverside (UCR), and primary
literature, identified that no fossil localities have been previously found within the project boundaries. The
closest known fossil localities are approximately five and eight miles east of the project site.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 82 of 149
The proposed project includes excavation and grading of the site to an approximately 3 feet below existing
grade or 2 feet below the bottom of the footings, whichever is deeper. This ground disturbance would be
within the fill soils that were identified by the Geotechnical Investigation (Appendix D) and the low
paleontological sensitivity Holocene-aged sediments. This is consistent with the previous MND findings
regarding paleontological resources on the site. Thus, no new impacts would occur.
(Sources: Geotechnical Investigation, 2017, Geotechnical Update, 2021, Appendix D, and Paleontological
Assessment, Appendix E)
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding geology and soils. There have not been 1)
changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect to
the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions
of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial
importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and
could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies
The following existing requirements would reduce geology and soils related impacts from the proposed
project:
PPP GEO-1: California Building Code. Prior to issuance of any construction permits, the project is
required to demonstrate compliance with the California Building Code as included in the City’s
Municipal Code Title 15 to preclude significant adverse effects associated with seismic hazards.
California Building Code related and geologist and/or civil engineer specifications for the project are
required to be incorporated into grading plans and specifications as a condition of construction permit
approval.
PPP WQ-1: NPDES/SWPPP. As listed in in Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality.
PPP WQ-2: WQMP. As listed in in Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality.
Mitigation Measures: The Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures for geology
and soils, which are listed previously are applicable to the proposed project and would be included in the
Project MMRP to ensure implementation.
No new mitigation measures are required.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 83 of 149
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND does not identify any significant impacts related to
greenhouse gas emissions (GHG).
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
None.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
This section is based on the Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis (Appendix A). The
project’s construction and operational emissions were calculated using CalEEMod, Version 2020.4.0. The
results and conclusions of the report and calculations relative to emissions are summarized herein. These
impacts are analyzed on a cumulative basis, utilizing Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO2e), measured in
metric tons (MT) or MTCO2e.
Global climate change refers to changes in average climatic conditions on Earth as a whole. GHGs
contribute to an increase in the temperature of the earth’s atmosphere by allowing solar radiation (sunlight)
into the Earth’s atmosphere but preventing radiative heat from escaping. The principal GHGs include
carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), ozone, and water vapor. For purposes of
planning and regulation, CCR Section 15364.5 defines GHGs to include CO2, CH4, N2O,
hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). GHGs are emitted by both natural
processes and human activities. Fossil fuel consumption in the transportation sector (on-road motor
vehicles, off-highway mobile sources, and aircraft) is the single largest source of GHG emissions,
accounting for approximately half of GHG emissions globally. Industrial and commercial sources are the
second largest contributors of GHG emissions with about one-fourth of total emissions. Emissions of GHGs
in excess of natural ambient concentrations are thought to be responsible for the enhancement of the
greenhouse effect and contributing to what is termed “global warming,” the trend of warming of the Earth’s
climate from anthropogenic activities.
GHG Thresholds
The City of Lake Elsinore has not adopted a numerical significance threshold to evaluate greenhouse gas
(GHG) impacts. SCAQMD does not have approved thresholds; however, it does have draft thresholds that
provides a tiered approach to evaluate GHG impacts, which includes the following:
• Tier 1 consists of evaluating whether or not the project qualifies for any applicable exemption under
CEQA.
• Tier 2 consists of determining whether the project is consistent with a GHG reduction plan. If a
project is consistent with a qualifying local GHG reduction plan, it does not have significant GHG
emissions.
• Tier 3 consists of screening values, which the lead agency can choose, but must be consistent with
all projects within its jurisdiction. A project’s construction emissions are averaged over 30 years
and are added to the project’s operational emissions. If a project’s emissions are below one of the
following screening thresholds, then the project is less than significant:
o Residential and Commercial land use: 3,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
(MTCO2e) per year
o Industrial land use: 10,000 MTCO2e per year
o Based on land use type: residential: 3,500 MTCO2e per year; commercial: 1,400 MTCO2e
per year; or mixed use: 3,000 MTCO2e per year
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 84 of 149
The SCAQMD’s draft threshold uses the Executive Order S-3-05 year 2050 goal as the basis for the Tier 3
screening level. Achieving the Executive Order’s objective would contribute to worldwide efforts to cap
CO2 concentrations at 450 parts per million (ppm), thus stabilizing global climate. Therefore, for purposes
of examining potential GHG impacts from implementation of the proposed project, and to provide a
conservative analysis of potential impacts, the Tier 3 screening level for all land use projects of 3,000
MTCO2e was selected as the significance threshold.
In addition, SCAQMD methodology for evaluating a project’s construction emissions are to amortize them
over 30-years and then add them to the project’s operational emissions to determine if the project would
exceed the screening values listed above.
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment? (No New Impact.)
Construction activities produce GHG emissions from various sources, such as site excavation, grading,
utility engines, heavy-duty construction vehicles onsite, equipment hauling materials to and from the site,
asphalt paving, building construction, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew. As shown on
Table GHG-1, construction of 140 residences would result in a total of 29.75 MTCO2e amortized over 30
years. In addition, operation of the proposed residences would result in area and indirect sources of
operational GHG emissions that would primarily result from vehicle trips, electricity and natural gas
consumption, water transport (the energy used to pump water), and solid waste generation. GHG emissions
from electricity consumed by the residences would be generated off-site by fuel combustion at the
electricity provider. GHG emissions from water transport are also indirect emissions resulting from the
energy required to transport water from its source. The estimated operational GHG emissions that would
be generated from 140 residences was determined using CalEEMod. Additionally, in accordance with
SCAQMD recommendation, the project’s amortized construction related GHG emissions are added to the
operational emissions estimate in order to determine the project’s total annual GHG emissions.
As shown on Table GHG-1, operation of 140 residences would generate approximately 1,224.75 MTCO2e
per year, which would be below the screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year. In addition, the Project
would result in a 3.06 MTCO2e per service population, which is below the City’s 2030 efficiency target of
4.4 MTCO2e per service population. Therefore, operation of the proposed 140 residences would not result
in exceedance of a GHG threshold, and no new impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions would occur.
Table GHG-1: Project Related Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Metric Tons per Year)
Category CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Area Sources 2.36 <0.01 0.00 2.42
Energy Usage 164.40 <0.01 <0.01 165.37
Mobile Sources 895.79 0.05 0.05 910.71
Solid Waste 28.21 1.67 0.00 69.88
Water and Wastewater 36.97 0.30 <0.01 29.75
Construction 29.38 <0.01 <0.01 29.75
Total GHG Emissions 1,157.11 2.02 0.06 1,224.75
SCAQMD Draft Threshold of Significance 3,000
Service Population 400
GHG Emissions per Service Population 3.06
City of Lake Elsinore Year 2030 Efficiency Target8 4.4
Source: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 85 of 149
(Sources: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A)
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases? (No New Impact.)
The proposed project would develop the site with residences that would comply with state programs that
are designed to be energy efficient. The proposed project would comply with all mandatory measures under
the California Title 24, California Energy Code, and the CalGreen Code, which would provide efficient
energy and water consumption. Consistent with these requirements, the project includes photovoltaic (PV)
solar panels to offset the energy demand. The City’s administration of the requirements includes review of
the energy conservation measures during the permitting process, which ensures that all requirements are
met.
Also, as described in Section XVII, Transportation, the proposed project would not result in impacts related
to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impact because the project is located within a low VMT generating area,
where the VMT per service population and VMT per capita is lower than the jurisdictional average; and
therefore, is consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy and SB
375.
In addition, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Scoping Plan recommends strategies for
implementation at the statewide level to meet the goals of the California Climate Change Scoping Plan to
reduce GHG emissions levels. The Scoping Plan identifies the 2030 target of a 40% reduction below 1990
levels, set by SB 32. The proposed project would be consistent with the applicable measures established in
the Scoping Plan, as shown in Table GHG-2. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with CARB
plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the greenhouse gas emissions.
Table GHG-2: Project Consistency with CARB Scoping Plan
Action Responsible
Parties Consistency
Implement SB 350 by 2030
Increase the Renewables Portfolio
Standard to 50% of retail sales by 2030
and ensure grid reliability.
CPUC,
CEC,
CARB
Consistent. The project area uses
energy from Southern California
Edison (SCE). SCE has committed to
diversify its portfolio of energy sources
by increasing energy from wind and
solar sources. The project would not
interfere with or obstruct SCE energy
source diversification efforts.
Establish annual targets for statewide
energy efficiency savings and demand
reduction that will achieve a
cumulative doubling of statewide
energy efficiency savings in electricity
and natural gas end uses by 2030.
Consistent. The new development
implemented by the project would be
designed and constructed to implement
the energy efficiency measures. The
project would not interfere with or
obstruct policies or strategies to
establish annual targets for statewide
energy efficiency savings and demand
reduction.
Reduce GHG emissions in the
electricity sector through the
implementation of the above measures
Consistent. The new development
would be designed and constructed to
implement the Title 24 (CalGreen)
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 86 of 149
Action Responsible
Parties Consistency
and other actions as modeled in
Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) to
meet GHG emissions reductions
planning targets in the IRP process.
Load-serving entities and publicly-
owned utilities meet GHG emissions
reductions planning targets through a
combination of measures as described
in IRPs.
Standards.
Implement Mobile Source Strategy (Cleaner Technology and Fuels)
At least 1.5 million zero emission and
plug-in hybrid light-duty EV by 2025.
CARB,
California State
Transportation
Agency (CalSTA),
Strategic Growth
Council (SGC),
California
Department of
Transportation
(Caltrans),
CEC,
OPR,
Local Agencies
Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile
Source Strategy. The project would not
obstruct or interfere with CARB zero
emission and plug-in hybrid light-duty
EV 2025 targets.
At least 4.2 million zero emission and
plug-in hybrid light-duty EV by 2030.
Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile
Source Strategy. The project would not
obstruct or interfere with CARB zero
emission and plug-in hybrid light-duty
EV 2030 targets.
Further increase GHG stringency on
all light-duty vehicles beyond existing
Advanced Clean cars regulations.
Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile
Source Strategy. The project would not
obstruct or interfere with CARB efforts
to further increase GHG stringency on
all light-duty vehicles beyond existing
Advanced Clean cars regulations.
Medium- and Heavy-Duty GHG
Phase 2.
Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile
Source Strategy. The project would not
obstruct or interfere with CARB efforts
to implement Medium- and Heavy-
Duty GHG Phase 2.
Innovative Clean Transit: Transition
to a suite of to-be-determined
innovative clean transit options.
Assumed 20% of new urban buses
purchased beginning in 2018 will be
zero emission buses with the
penetration of zero-emission
technology ramped up to 100% of new
sales in 2030. Also, new natural gas
buses, starting in 2018, and diesel
buses, starting in 2020, meet the
optional heavy-duty low-NOX
standard.
Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile
Source Strategy. The project would not
obstruct or interfere with CARB efforts
improve transit-source emissions.
Last Mile Delivery: New regulation
that would result in the use of low NOX
or cleaner engines and the deployment
of increasing numbers of zero-
Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile
Source Strategy. The project would not
obstruct or interfere with CARB efforts
to improve last mile delivery emissions.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 87 of 149
Action Responsible
Parties Consistency
emission trucks primarily for class 3-7
last mile delivery trucks in California.
This measure assumes ZEVs comprise
2.5% of new Class 3–7 truck sales in
local fleets starting in 2020, increasing
to 10% in 2025 and remaining flat
through 2030.
Further reduce vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) through continued
implementation of SB 375 and
regional Sustainable Communities
Strategies; forthcoming statewide
implementation of SB 743; and
potential additional VMT reduction
strategies not specified in the Mobile
Source Strategy but included in the
document “Potential VMT Reduction
Strategies for Discussion.”
Consistent. The project would not
obstruct or interfere with
implementation of SB 375 and would
therefore, not conflict with this
measure.
Increase stringency of SB 375
Sustainable Communities Strategy
(2035 targets).
CARB
Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile
Source Strategy. The project would not
obstruct or interfere with CARB efforts
to Increase stringency of SB 375
Sustainable Communities Strategy
(2035 targets).
Harmonize project performance with
emissions reductions and increase
competitiveness of transit and active
transportation modes (e.g. via
guideline documents, funding
programs, project selection, etc.).
CalSTA,
SGC,
OPR,
CARB,
Governor’s Office
of Business and
Economic
Development
(GO-Biz),
California
Infrastructure and
Economic
Development
Bank (IBank),
Department of
Finance (DOF),
California
Transportation
Commission
(CTC),
Caltrans
Consistent. The project would not
obstruct or interfere with agency efforts
to harmonize transportation facility
project performance with emissions
reductions and increase
competitiveness of transit and active
transportation modes.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 88 of 149
Action Responsible
Parties Consistency
By 2019, develop pricing policies to
support low-GHG transportation (e.g.
low-emission vehicle zones for heavy
duty, road user, parking pricing, transit
discounts).
CalSTA,
Caltrans,
CTC,
OPR,
SGC,
CARB
Consistent. The project would not
obstruct or interfere with agency efforts
to develop pricing policies to support
low-GHG transportation.
Implement California Sustainable Freight Action Plan
Improve freight system efficiency.
CalSTA,
CalEPA,
CNRA,
CARB,
Caltrans,
CEC,
GO-Biz
Consistent. This measure would apply
to all trucks accessing the project site,
this may include existing trucks or new
trucks that are part of the statewide
goods movement sector. The project
would not obstruct or interfere with
agency efforts to Improve freight
system efficiency.
Deploy over 100,000 freight vehicles
and equipment capable of zero
emission operation and maximize both
zero and near-zero emission freight
vehicles and equipment powered by
renewable energy by 2030.
Consistent. The project would not
obstruct or interfere with agency efforts
to deploy over 100,000 freight vehicles
and equipment capable of zero emission
operation and maximize both zero and
near-zero emission freight vehicles and
equipment powered by renewable
energy by 2030.
Adopt a Low Carbon Fuel Standard
with a Carbon Intensity reduction of
18%.
CARB
Consistent. The project would not
obstruct or interfere with agency efforts
to adopt a Low Carbon Fuel Standard
with a Carbon Intensity reduction of
18%.
Implement the Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Strategy (SLPS) by 2030
40% reduction in methane and
hydrofluorocarbon emissions below
2013 levels.
CARB,
CalRecycle,
CDFA,
SWRCB,
Local Air Districts
Consistent. These are not emissions
related to the proposed project. Hence,
the proposed project would not obstruct
or interfere agency efforts to reduce
SLPS emissions.
50% reduction in black carbon
emissions below 2013 levels.
By 2019, develop regulations and
programs to support organic waste
landfill reduction goals in the SLCP
and SB 1383.
CARB,
CalRecycle,
CDFA
SWRCB,
Local Air Districts
Consistent. The new development
would be required through City
permitting to implement waste
reduction and recycling measures
consistent with state and City
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 89 of 149
Action Responsible
Parties Consistency
requirements. The project would not
obstruct or interfere agency efforts to
support organic waste landfill reduction
goals in the SLCP and SB 1383.
Implement the post-2020 Cap-and-
Trade Program with declining annual
caps.
CARB
Consistent. The project is not
applicable to implementation of Cap-
and-Trade Program provisions. Thus,
the project would not obstruct or
interfere implementation the post-2020
Cap-and-Trade Program.
By 2018, develop Integrated Natural and Working Lands Implementation Plan to secure
California’s land base as a net carbon sink
Protect land from conversion through
conservation easements and other
incentives.
CNRA,
Departments
Within
CDFA,
CalEPA,
CARB
Consistent. The project includes
preservation of 15.65-acres of natural
open space. Thus, the project would not
obstruct or interfere agency efforts to
protect land from conversion through
conservation easements and other
incentives.
Increase the long-term resilience of
carbon storage in the land base and
enhance sequestration capacity
Consistent. The project provides for
residential development. The project
would not obstruct or interfere agency
efforts to increase the long-term
resilience of carbon storage in the land
base and enhance sequestration
capacity.
Utilize wood and agricultural
products to increase the amount of
carbon stored in the natural and built
environments
Consistent. Where appropriate, the
new development would incorporate
wood or wood products. The project
would not obstruct or interfere agency
efforts to encourage use of wood and
agricultural products to increase the
amount of carbon stored in the natural
and built environments.
Establish scenario projections to serve
as the foundation for the
Implementation Plan
Consistent. The project would not
obstruct or interfere agency efforts to
establish scenario projections to serve
as the foundation for the
Implementation Plan.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 90 of 149
Action Responsible
Parties Consistency
Establish a carbon accounting
framework for natural and working
lands as described in SB 859 by 2018
CARB
Consistent. The project would not
obstruct or interfere agency efforts to
establish a carbon accounting
framework for natural and working
lands as described in SB 859.
Implement Forest Carbon Plan
CNRA,
California
Department of
Forestry and Fire
Protection
(CAL FIRE),
CalEPA and
Departments
Within
Consistent. The project would not
obstruct or interfere agency efforts to
implement the Forest Carbon Plan.
Identify and expand funding and
financing mechanisms to support
GHG reductions across all sectors.
State Agencies &
Local Agencies
Consistent. The project would not
obstruct or interfere agency efforts to
identify and expand funding and
financing mechanisms to support GHG
reductions across all sectors.
Source: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A.
The City of Lake Elsinore adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) in 2011. The following table consists of
an analysis of project consistency with the policies in the CAP.
Table GHG-4: Project Consistency with the City’s Climate Action Plan
CAP Measure Applicability to
Proposed Project Consistency
Measure T-1.2:
Pedestrian Infrastructure Applicable
Consistent. This measure requires the installation of
sidewalks along new and reconstructed streets and
sidewalks or paths to internally link all uses and
provide connections to neighborhood activity centers,
major destinations, and transit facilities contiguous
with the project site.
The project would provide sidewalks along all
internal streets and would be implemented through
project permitting. As such, the proposed project
would not conflict with this measure.
Measure T-1.4: Bicycle
Infrastructure Applicable
Consistent. This measure requires new development
to implement and connect to the network of Class I, II
and III bikeways, trails and safety features identified
in the General Plan, Bike Lane Master Plan, Trails
Master Plan and Western Riverside County Non-
Motorized Transportation plan.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 91 of 149
CAP Measure Applicability to
Proposed Project Consistency
The General Plan and Specific Plan do not include
bicycle infrastructure near the project site. The project
does include constructing a 6-foot-wide sidewalk
along the project frontage to meet the future roadway
buildout of the Lake Elsinore General Plan. As such,
the proposed project would not conflict with this
measure.
Measure T-1.5: Bicycle
Parking Standards Not Applicable
Not Applicable. This measure requires the City to
enforce short-term and long-term bicycle parking
standards for new non- residential developments. This
measure is not applicable to the residential project. As
such, the proposed project would not conflict with this
measure.
Measure T-2.1:
Designated Parking for
Fuel Efficient Vehicles
Not Applicable
Not Applicable. This measure requires new non-
residential developments to designate 10% of total
parking spaces for low-emitting, fuel-efficient
vehicles. This measure is not applicable to the
residential project. As such, the proposed project
would not conflict with this measure.
Measure T-4.1:
Commute Trip
Reduction Program
Not Applicable
Not Applicable. This measure requires the City to
institute a commute trip reduction program for
employers with fewer than 100 employees. This
measure is not applicable to the residential
project. As such, the proposed project would not
conflict with this measure.
Measure E-1.1: Tree
Planting Requirements Applicable
Consistent. This measure requires new developments
to plant at minimum one 15-gallon non-deciduous,
umbrella-form tree per 30 linear feet of boundary
length near buildings. The project would comply with
this measure as shown on Figure 5, Open Space,
Recreation, and Landscape Conceptual Plan. This
measure is implemented by the Departments of
Planning, Public Works, and Parks and Recreation
through the development review process, and
conditions of approval. As such, the proposed project
would not conflict with this measure.
Measure E-1.2: Cool
Roof Requirements Not Applicable
Not Applicable. This measure requires new non-
residential development to use roofing materials
having solar reflectance, thermal emittance, or Solar
Reflectance Index consistent with CALGreen Tier 1
values. This measure is not applicable to the
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 92 of 149
CAP Measure Applicability to
Proposed Project Consistency
residential project. As such, the proposed project
would not conflict with this measure.
Measure E-1.3: Energy
Efficient Building
Standards
Applicable
Consistent. This measure requires that new
construction exceed the California Energy Code
requirements through either the performance-based or
prescriptive approach described in the California
Green Building Code. This measure is implemented
by the Departments of Planning, Public Works, and
Building through the development review process,
and conditions of approval. As such, the proposed
project would not conflict with this measure.
Measure E-3.2: Energy
Efficient Street and
Traffic Signal Lights
Applicable
Consistent. This measure requires the City to work
with Southern California Edison to replace existing
high-pressure sodium streetlights and traffic lights
with high efficiency alternatives, such as Low
Emitting Diode (LED) lights; replace existing City
owned traffic lights with LED lights; require any new
street and traffic lights to be LED. This measure is
currently being implemented by the Department of
Public Works through renovation. This measure
would apply to any street and/or traffic lights replaced
or installed as part of the project. This measure is
implemented by the Departments of Planning, Public
Works, and Building through the development review
process, and conditions of approval. As such, the
proposed project would not conflict with this
measure.
Measure E-4.1:
Landscaping Ordinance Applicable
Consistent. This measure requires the City to enforce
the City’s AB 1881 Landscaping Ordinance, which
requires that landscaping be water efficient, thereby
consuming less energy and reducing emissions. The
proposed project is consistent with the City’s
landscaping and irrigation requirements. This
measure is verified by the Departments of Planning,
Public Works, and Building through the development
review process, and conditions of approval. As such,
the proposed project would not conflict with this
measure.
Measure E-4.2: Indoor
Water Conservation
Requirements
Applicable
Consistent. This measure requires that development
projects reduce indoor water consumption. The
proposed project is designed to be consistent with the
Title 24 water conservation requirements. This
measure would be verified by the Departments of
Building and Planning through project permitting. As
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 93 of 149
CAP Measure Applicability to
Proposed Project Consistency
such, the proposed project would not conflict with this
measure.
Measure E-5.1:
Renewable Energy
Incentives
Applicable
Consistent. This measure facilitates the voluntary
installation of small-scale renewable energy systems,
such as solar photovoltaic and solar hot water
systems, by connecting residents and businesses with
technical and financial assistance through the City
website. This measure is implemented by the
Departments of Building and Planning through
outreach and incentive programs. The proposed
project is designed to be consistent with the Title 24
energy requirements and would include PV solar
panels. No elements of the proposed project would
conflict with this measure.
Measure S-1.4:
Construction and
Demolition Waste
Diversion
Applicable
Consistent. This measure requires development
projects to divert, recycle or salvage nonhazardous
construction and demolition debris generated at the
site, and requires all construction and demolition
projects to be accompanied by a waste management
plan for the project. This measure is implemented by
the Departments of Planning and Building through
City contracts, Municipal Code amendments,
development and review process, and conditions of
approval. The proposed project would implement
construction and demolition waste diversion, as
further detailed in Section XIX, Utilities and Service
Systems. As such, the proposed project would not
conflict with this measure.
Source: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A.
(Sources: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A)
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding greenhouse gas emissions. There have not
been 1) changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects
or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect
to the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions
of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial
importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and
could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 94 of 149
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND describes that the Specific Plan would construct and operate residential and commercial
uses, which typically do not handle hazardous materials that would significantly endanger the public and
that significant impacts are not expected. The Final MND also states that there is no significant potential
for release of hazardous materials from accidental conditions. There are no schools within a quarter mile
radius of the Specific Plan area, and the Specific Plan area is not located on any hazardous materials site as
designated by Government Code Section 65962.5 or located within any airport land use plan.
The MND also finds that there are no known emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans
applicable to the Specific Plan area and that the Specific Plan area is surrounded by existing development
and is not typically subjected to wildland fires. Prior to approval of Design Review, the Fire Department
would review future projects and establish fire prevention measures, as included by mitigation, to ensure
people and/or structures would not be unnecessarily exposed to fire hazards.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
Final MND Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Prior to Design Review approval, the Fire Department
shall review project plans and establish fire prevention measures. Applicant shall comply with said
fire prevention measures.
Project Applicability: This measure is applicable to the proposed Project and would be included in
the Project’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
This section is based on the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by Sladden Engineering,
Inc., 2021. (Appendix F).
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials? (No New Impact.)
A hazardous material is defined as any material that, due to its quantity, concentration, or physical or
chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the
environment if released into the environment. Hazardous materials include, but are not limited to, hazardous
substances, hazardous wastes, and any material that regulatory agencies have a reasonable basis for
believing would be injurious to the health and safety of persons or harmful to the environment if released
into the home, workplace, or environment. Hazardous wastes require special handling and disposal because
of their potential to damage public health and the environment.
Construction
The proposed construction activities would involve the routine transport, use, and disposal of hazardous
materials such as paints, solvents, oils, grease, and caulking during construction activities. In addition,
hazardous materials would routinely be needed for fueling and servicing construction equipment on the
site. These types of materials are not acutely hazardous, and all storage, handling, use, and disposal of these
materials are regulated by federal and state regulations that are implemented by the City during building
permitting for construction activities. Construction of the project would not require the use of acutely
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 95 of 149
hazardous materials. As such, impacts to surrounding residential neighborhoods through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials is not expected. Therefore, no new impacts related to use
of these materials during construction would occur.
Operation
The project involves operation of 140 new residences and recreation facilities, which involve routinely
using hazardous materials including solvents, cleaning agents, paints, pesticides, batteries, fertilizers, and
aerosol cans. These types of materials are not acutely hazardous and would only be used and stored in
limited quantities. The normal routine use of these hazardous materials products pursuant to existing
regulations would not result in a significant hazard to people or the environment in the vicinity of the
project. Therefore, operation of the project would not result in a significant hazard to the public or to the
environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous waste, and no new impacts would
occur.
(Sources: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Appendix F)
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
(No New Impact.)
Construction
While the routine use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials in accordance with applicable
regulations during construction activities would not pose health risks or result in significant impacts;
improper use, storage, transportation and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes could result in
accidental spills or releases, posing health risks to workers, the public, and the environment. To avoid an
impact related to an accidental release, the use of best management practices (BMPs) during construction
are implemented as part of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) as required by the National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System General Construction Permit (and included as PPP WQ-1).
Implementation of an SWPPP would minimize potential adverse effects to workers, the public, and the
environment. Construction contract specifications would include strict on-site handling rules and BMPs
that include, but are not limited to:
• Establishing a dedicated area for fuel storage and refueling and construction dewatering activities
that includes secondary containment protection measures and spill control supplies;
• Following manufacturers’ recommendations on the use, storage, and disposal of chemical products
used in construction;
• Avoiding overtopping construction equipment fuel tanks;
• Properly containing and removing grease and oils during routine maintenance of equipment; and
• Properly disposing of discarded containers of fuels and other chemicals.
Operation
Other operational aspects of the proposed residential project involve use and storage of common hazardous
materials such as paints, solvents, cleaning products, fuels, lubricants, adhesives, sealers, and
pesticides/herbicides. These types of hazardous materials are regulated by existing laws that have been
implemented to reduce risks related to the use of these substances. Normal routine use of typical residential
products pursuant to existing regulations would not result in a significant hazard to the environment,
residents, or workers in the vicinity of the project.
(Sources: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Appendix F)
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 96 of 149
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (No New
Impact.)
The closest school to the project site is the Machado Elementary School that is located at 5150 Joy Street,
which is approximately 0.7-mile driving distance from the project site, but less than 0.25-mile aerial
distance from the site. As detailed previously, construction and operation of the proposed residential project
would involve the use, storage, and disposal of small amounts of hazardous materials on the project site.
These hazardous materials would be limited and used and disposed of in compliance with federal, state,
and local regulations, which would reduce the potential of accidental release into the environment near the
school.
Additionally, the emissions that would be generated from construction and operation of the project were
evaluated in the Air Quality analysis presented in Section III, and the emissions generated from the project
would not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the federal or state air quality standards. Thus, the project
would not emit hazardous or handle acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste near the school, and
no new impacts would occur.
(Sources: Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A, and Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment, Appendix F)
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 New Impact.)
A search of government databases was conducted during preparation of the Phase I and the environmental
database report system did not identify the project site on any list of hazardous material sites. In addition,
the Phase I conducted a search to identify if there are any hazardous material uses in the project vicinity
that could adversely affect the project site. Information from the search was reviewed for potential
environmental concerns; however, none of the offsite listings were identified as a potential impact.
Therefore, the proposed project would not be located on a list of hazardous material sites or create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment, and no new impacts would occur.
(Sources: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Appendix F)
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (No New Impact.)
The project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or within an airport land use plan. The
closest airport is the Skylark Field located approximately 5.8 miles southeast of the project site. As such,
the project would not be exposed to hazards related to airport operations, and no impacts would occur.
(Sources: Google Earth; Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Appendix F; Noise Impact Analysis,
Appendix I)
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan? (No New Impact.)
The proposed project would not physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 97 of 149
Construction
Short-term construction activities include development of the project driveway, and installation of utility
connections to the existing infrastructure systems. These activities could require the temporary closure of
one lane of Lakeshore Drive. However, the construction activities would be required to ensure emergency
access in accordance with Section 503 of the California Fire Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations,
Part 9), which would be ensured through the City’s permitting process, as incorporated into the construction
permits. Thus, no new impacts related to an emergency response or evacuation plan would occur during
construction.
Operation
Direct access to the project site would be provided from Lakeshore Drive. The design of internal streets
would provide access to each of the proposed residences. The project is required to provide internal streets
and fire suppression facilities (e.g., hydrants and sprinklers) that conform to the California Fire Code
requirements, included in Municipal Code Chapter 15.56 (included as PPP HAZ-1), as verified through the
City’s permitting process. As such, the project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, and no new impacts would occur.
(Sources: project plans, City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code)
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires? (No New Impact.)
The project site is vacant and moderately covered with vegetation. The project site is adjacent to residential,
roadways, commercial uses, and developed areas within the urban environment. The project site is not
within or adjacent to any wildland areas. According to the CalFire Hazard Severity Zone map, the project
site is not within a high fire hazard zone. As a result, the proposed project would not expose people or
structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires.
(Sources: CalFire Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map, Accessed: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/; and CalFire
Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Lake Elsinore Local Responsibility Area, Accessed:
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5915/lake_elsinore.pdf )
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding hazards and hazardous materials. There
have not been 1) changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial
changes with respect to the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that
require major revisions of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects
or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new
information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives
that were not known and could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 98 of 149
Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies
The following existing requirements would reduce the potential for impacts related to hazards:
PPP WQ-1: NPDES/SWPPP. As listed in in Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality.
PPP HAZ-1: Fire Code. The project shall conform to the California Fire Code (Title 24, California Code
of Regulations, Part 9), as included in the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 15.56, Fire Code. Specifically,
Section 503 of the California Fire Code provides regulations related to emergency access.
Mitigation Measures: The Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measure regarding Fire
Department review of the project, which is listed previously, is applicable to the proposed project and would
be included in the Project MMRP to ensure implementation.
No new mitigation measures are required.
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND describes that development of the Specific Plan would create urban pollutants typical of
any development, including oils and other substances. To ensure water quality standards and discharge
requirements would not be violated 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 is required.
Compliance with NPDES and Best Management Practices (BMP) regulations is required and ensures that
significant water quality impacts would not result.
The Final MND determined that the Specific Plan area is not a groundwater recharge area given its limited
size and close location to the lake. The Final MND determined that the Specific Plan would not include
activities that would substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with regional groundwater
recharge. The MND also determined that stormwater runoff would be conveyed into existing drainage
facilities that would be accommodated by drainage facilities. In addition, the Final MND determined that
the Specific Plan area is not subject to mudflows, seiches or tsunamis.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
Final MND Mitigation Measure HWQ-1: Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall
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 and comply with
appropriate NPDES and Best Management Practices regulations.
Project Applicability: This measure is applicable to the proposed Project and would be included in
the Project’s MMRP.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
The discussion below is based on the Preliminary Hydrology Report and Project Specific Water Quality
Management Plan, prepared by Wilson Mikami Corporation, 2022, included as Appendix G and Appendix
H.
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground water quality? (No New Impact.)
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 99 of 149
Construction
Implementation of the proposed project includes grading, site preparation, construction of new buildings,
and infrastructure improvements. Grading, stockpiling of materials, excavation, construction of new
structures, and landscaping activities would expose and loosen sediment and building materials, which
would have the potential to mix with stormwater and urban runoff and degrade surface and receiving water
quality.
Additionally, construction generally requires the use of heavy equipment and construction-related materials
and chemicals, such as concrete, cement, asphalt, fuels, oils, antifreeze, transmission fluid, grease, solvents,
and paints. In the absence of proper controls, these potentially harmful materials could be accidentally
spilled or improperly disposed of during construction activities and could wash into and pollute surface
waters or groundwater, resulting in a significant impact to water quality.
Pollutants of concern during construction activities generally include sediments, trash, petroleum products,
concrete waste (dry and wet), sanitary waste, and chemicals. Each of these pollutants on its own or in
combination with other pollutants can have a detrimental effect on water quality. In addition, chemicals,
liquid products, petroleum products (such as paints, solvents, and fuels), and concrete-related waste may
be spilled or leaked during construction, which would have the potential to be transported via storm runoff
into nearby receiving waters and eventually may affect surface or groundwater quality. During construction
activities, excavated soil would be exposed, thereby increasing the potential for soil erosion and
sedimentation to occur compared to existing conditions. In addition, during construction, vehicles and
equipment are prone to tracking soil and/or spoil from work areas to paved roadways, which is another
form of erosion that could affect water quality.
However, the use of BMPs during construction implemented as part of a SWPPP as required by the National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit (and Municipal Code
Section 14.08) and included as PPP WQ-1 would serve to ensure that project impacts related to
construction activities resulting in a degradation of water quality would not occur. Furthermore, an Erosion
and Sediment Transport Control Plan prepared by a qualified SWPPP developer (QSD) is required to be
included in the SWPPP for the project, and typically includes the following types of erosion control methods
that are designed to minimize potential pollutants entering stormwater during construction:
• Prompt revegetation of proposed landscaped areas;
• Perimeter gravel bags or silt fences to prevent off-site transport of sediment;
• Storm drain inlet protection (filter fabric gravel bags and straw wattles), with gravel bag check
dams within paved roadways;
• Regular sprinkling of exposed soils to control dust during construction and soil binders for
forecasted wind storms;
• Specifications for construction waste handling and disposal;
• Contained equipment wash-out and vehicle maintenance areas;
• Erosion control measures including soil binders, hydro mulch, geotextiles, and hydro seeding of
disturbed areas ahead of forecasted storms;
• Construction of stabilized construction entry/exits to prevent trucks from tracking sediment on City
roadways;
• Construction timing to minimize soil exposure to storm events; and
• Training of subcontractors on general site housekeeping.
Therefore, compliance with the Statewide General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit requirements,
included as PPP WQ-1, which would be verified during the City’s construction permitting process, would
ensure that no new impacts related to construction activities resulting in a degradation of water quality
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 100 of 149
would occur.
Operation
The proposed project includes operation of residential and recreation/open space uses. Potential pollutants
associated with the proposed uses include various chemicals from cleaners, pathogens from pet wastes,
nutrients from fertilizer, pesticides and sediment from landscaping, trash and debris, and oil and grease
from vehicles. If these pollutants discharge into surface waters, it could result in degradation of water
quality. However, operation of the proposed project would be required to comply with the requirements of
the Santa Ana Regional MS4 Permit and has prepared a project-specific WQMP (included as Appendix H)
that describes the low-impact development (LID) infrastructure and non-structural, structural, and source
control and treatment control BMPs that are included in the project’s design to protect surface water quality.
The Santa Ana Regional MS4 Permit regulations are included in the City’s Municipal Code in Chapter
14.08. The MS4 Permit:
• Provides the framework for the program management activities and plan development;
• Provides the legal authority for prohibiting unpermitted discharges into the storm drain system and
for requiring BMPs in new development and significant redevelopment;
• Ensures that all new development and significant redevelopment incorporates appropriate Site
Design, Source Control, and Treatment Control BMPs to address specific water quality issues; and
• Ensures that construction sites implement control practices that address construction related
pollutants including erosion and sediment control and onsite hazardous materials and waste
management.
The Santa Ana Regional MS4 Permit requires that new development and significant redevelopment projects
(or priority projects), such as the proposed project, develop and implement a WQMP that includes BMPs
and LID design features that would provide onsite treatment of stormwater to prevent pollutants from onsite
uses from leaving the site. A WQMP has been developed (included as Appendix H) and is required to be
approved prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit.
The proposed project would install two bio filtration units and an underground storm water detention basin
to provide stormwater treatment, which has been sized to treat runoff from the Design Capture Storm (85th
percentile, 24-hour) from the project site. As described previously, the WQMP is required to be approved
prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit. The project’s WQMP would be reviewed and approved
by the City to ensure it complies with the Santa Ana RWQCB MS4 Permit regulations. In addition, the
City’s permitting process would ensure that all BMPs in the WQMP would be implemented with the project.
Overall, implementation of the WQMP pursuant to the existing regulations (included as PPP WQ-2) would
ensure that operation of the proposed project would not violate any water quality standards, waste discharge
requirements, or otherwise degrade water quality; and no new impacts would occur.
(Sources: Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan, Appendix H)
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge, such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
(No New Impact.)
The Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) provides water services to the project area. The
EVMWD’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan describes that the EVMWD obtains water from local
groundwater wells, surface water from Canyon Lake Reservoir and treated at the Canyon Lake Water
Treatment Plant, and imported water purchased from the Metropolitan Water District. EVMWD pumps
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 101 of 149
water from the Elsinore Valley Subbasin and the Bedford-Coldwater Subbasin. EVMWD actively manages
the groundwater subbasins and serves as the Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) for the Elsinore
Valley Subbasin and is a member of the Bedford-Coldwater Groundwater Sustainability Authority
(BCGSA), which serves as the GSA for the Bedford-Coldwater Subbasin. The EVMWD 2020 Urban Water
Management Plan (UWMP) shows that the anticipated production of groundwater would remain the same
through 2045 and the supply would exceed demand in both normal years and multiple dry year conditions
(shown in Table UT-1 in Section XIX, Utilities and Service Systems). The project would not result in
changes to the projected groundwater pumping that would decrease groundwater supplies, and the project
would not otherwise impede the sustainable groundwater management of the basin.
The project site is undeveloped with pervious surfaces. After completion of project construction, a large
portion of the site would be impervious. The project would convey stormwater drainage into landscaping
areas and the two bio filtration units and an underground storm water detention basin, which would infiltrate
into soils and groundwater. Therefore, no new impacts related to interference with groundwater recharge
would occur.
(Sources: Preliminary Hydrology Report, Appendix G; Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan,
Appendix H)
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would:
i). Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? (No New Impact.)
The project site does not include, and is not adjacent to, a natural stream or river. The project would
not alter the existing drainage pattern and implementation of the project would not alter the course of a
stream or river.
Construction
Construction of the proposed project would require excavation and grading activities that would expose
and loosen building materials and sediment, which has the potential to mix with storm water runoff and
result in erosion or siltation off-site. However, the project site does not include any slopes, which
reduces the erosion potential, and the large majority of soil disturbance would be related to excavation
and backfill for installation of building foundations and underground utilities.
The NPDES Construction General Permit requires preparation and implementation of a SWPPP by a
Qualified SWPPP Developer for the proposed construction activities (included as PPP WQ-1). The
SWPPP is required to address site-specific conditions related to potential sources of sedimentation and
erosion and would list the required BMPs that are necessary to reduce or eliminate the potential of
erosion or alteration of a drainage pattern during construction activities. In addition, a Qualified SWPPP
Practitioner (QSP) is required to ensure compliance with the SWPPP through regular monitoring and
visual inspections during construction activities. The SWPPP would be amended and BMPs revised, as
determined necessary through field inspections, in order to protect against substantial soil erosion, the
loss of topsoil, or alteration of the drainage pattern. Compliance with the Construction General Permit
and a SWPPP prepared by a QSD and implemented by a QSP (per PPP WQ-1) would prevent
construction-related impacts related to potential alteration of a drainage pattern or erosion from
development activities. With implementation of the existing construction regulations that would be
verified by the City during the permitting approval process, no new impacts related to alteration of an
existing drainage pattern during construction that could result in substantial erosion, siltation, and
increases in stormwater runoff would occur.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 102 of 149
Operation
The project site consists of a generally undeveloped site with a grassland and soil surface, which has
the potential for erosion and sedimentation. With development of the project, a large portion of the site
would be covered by impervious surfaces, such as residential structures, roadways, sidewalks, and
driveways, which would not be subject to erosion. Pervious areas of the site would be landscaped with
groundcovers that would inhibit erosion and the water quality basin that is designed to filter in infiltrate
stormwater and would not result in erosion or sedimentation.
The proposed project would maintain the existing drainage pattern. The runoff from the project area
would be collected by roof drains, surface flow designed pavement, curbs, and area drains and conveyed
to either landscaping areas or to the two bio filtration units and an underground storm water detention
basin. Additionally, the MS4 permit requires new development projects to prepare a WQMP (included
as Appendix H) that is required to include BMPs to reduce the potential of erosion and/or sedimentation
through site design and structural treatment control BMPs. As part of the permitting approval process,
the proposed drainage and water quality design and engineering plans would be reviewed by the City’s
Engineering Division to ensure that the site-specific design limits the potential for erosion and siltation.
Overall, the proposed drainage system and adherence to the existing regulations would ensure that no
new impacts related to alteration of a drainage pattern and erosion/siltation from operational activities
would occur.
(Sources: Preliminary Hydrology Report, Appendix G; Project Specific Water Quality Management
Plan, Appendix H)
ii). Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on- or offsite; (No New Impact.)
Construction
Construction of the proposed project would require excavation and grading. These activities could
temporarily alter the existing drainage pattern of the site and change runoff flow rates. However, as
described previously, implementation of the project requires a SWPPP (included as PPP WQ-1) that
would address site specific drainage issues related to construction of the project and include BMPs to
eliminate the potential of flooding or alteration of a drainage pattern during construction activities. This
includes regular monitoring and visual inspections during construction activities. Compliance with the
Construction General Permit and a SWPPP prepared by a QSD and implemented by a QSP (per PPP
WQ-1) as verified by the City through the construction permitting process would prevent construction-
related impacts related to potential alteration of a drainage pattern or flooding on or off-site from
development activities. Therefore, no new construction impacts would occur.
Operation
As described previously, the proposed project would result in an increase of impervious surfaces on the
project site. However, the project would convey runoff to landscaped areas or to two bio filtration units
and an underground storm water detention basin for treatment and infiltration that has been designed
to accommodate the stormwater volume pursuant to the MS4 permit requirements, as shown in the
Preliminary Hydrology Report, Appendix H. Therefore, an increase in the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite would not occur.
As part of the permitting approval process, the proposed drainage design and engineering plans would
be reviewed by the City’s Public Works Department to ensure that the proposed drainage would
accommodate the appropriate design flows. Overall, the proposed drainage system and adherence to
the existing MS4 permit regulations, which would ensure that no new impacts related to alteration of a
drainage pattern or flooding from operational activities would occur.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 103 of 149
(Sources: Preliminary Hydrology Report, Appendix H; Project Specific Water Quality Management
Plan, Appendix G)
iii). 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; or;
(No New Impact.)
Construction
As described in the previous response, construction of the proposed project would require grading and
excavation activities that could temporarily alter the existing drainage pattern of the site and could
result in increased runoff and polluted runoff if drainage is not properly controlled. However,
implementation of the project requires a SWPPP (included as PPP WQ-1) that would address site
specific pollutant and drainage issues related to construction of the project and include BMPs to
eliminate the potential of polluted runoff and increased runoff during construction activities. This
includes regular monitoring and visual inspections during construction activities. Compliance with the
Construction General Permit and a SWPPP prepared by a QSD and implemented by a QSP (per PPP
WQ-1) as verified by the City through the construction permitting process would prevent construction-
related impacts related to increases in run-off and pollution from development activities. Therefore, no
new impacts would occur.
Operation
As described previously, the proposed project would result in an increase of impervious surfaces.
However, the project would manage stormwater flows with landscaping and two bio filtration units and
an underground storm water detention basin that have been designed to accommodate the stormwater
volume pursuant to the MS4 permit requirements. As stormwater flow conditions would be controlled
and accommodated by the proposed infrastructure, an increase in runoff that could exceed the capacity
of storm drain systems and provide polluted runoff would not occur.
As part of the permitting approval process, the proposed drainage design and engineering plans would
be reviewed by the City’s Public Works Department to ensure that project specifications adhere to the
existing MS4 permit regulations, which would ensure that pollutants are removed prior to discharge.
Overall, with compliance to the existing regulations as verified by the City’s permitting process, no
new impacts related to the capacity of the drainage system and polluted runoff would occur.
(Sources: Preliminary Hydrology Report, Appendix G; Project Specific Water Quality Management
Plan, Appendix H)
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? (No New Impact.)
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Map 06065C2036G, the project
site not within a flood zone. As detailed in the previous responses, implementation of the project would
result in an increase of impermeable surfaces on the site. However, the runoff from the project area
would be accommodated by landscaping and the two bio filtration units and an underground storm
water detention basin that have been sized to accommodate the MS4 required design storm. Therefore,
the project would not result in impeding or redirecting flood flows by the addition of the impervious
surfaces. As detailed previously, the City’s permitting process would ensure that the drainage system
specifications adhere to the existing MS4 permit requirements, and compliance with existing
regulations would ensure that no new impacts would occur.
(Sources: Preliminary Hydrology Report, Appendix G; Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan,
Appendix H)
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 104 of 149
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
(No New Impact.)
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Map 06065C2036G, the project site
not within a flood zone. Thus, the project site is not located within a flood hazard area that could be
inundated with flood flows and result in release of pollutants. Impacts related to flood hazards and pollutants
would not occur from the project.
Tsunamis are generated ocean wave trains generally caused by tectonic displacement of the sea floor
associated with shallow earthquakes, sea floor landslides, rock falls, and exploding volcanic islands. The
proposed project is approximately 23 miles from the ocean shoreline and behind mountains. Based on the
distance of the project site to the Pacific Ocean, the project site is not at risk of inundation from tsunami.
Therefore, the proposed project would not risk release of pollutants from inundation from a tsunami. No
impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.
Seiching is a phenomenon that occurs when seismic ground shaking induces standing waves (seiches) inside
water retention facilities (e.g., reservoirs and lakes). Such waves can cause retention structures to fail and
flood downstream properties. The project site is located approximately 0.75 miles from Lake Elsinore,
which could generate a seiche. However, due to the range of intervening structures between the site and the
lake, that include walls, the possibility of seiches impacting the site negligible. Therefore, the proposed
project would not result in new impacts related to risk related to the release of pollutants from inundation
from a seiche.
(Sources: Preliminary Hydrology Report, Appendix G; Google Earth)
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan? (No New Impact.)
As described previously, use of BMPs during construction implemented as part of a SWPPP as required by
the NPDES Construction General Permit and PPP WQ-1 would serve to ensure that project impacts related
to construction activities resulting in a degradation of water quality would be less than significant. Thus,
construction of the project would not conflict or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan.
All new development projects are required to implement a WQMP (per PP WQ-2) that would comply with
the MS4 permit requirements. The WQMP and applicable BMPs are verified as part of the City’s permitting
approval process, and construction plans would be required to demonstrate compliance with these
regulations. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation
of a water quality control plan.
Water production from groundwater basins is managed by EVMWD, who is the Groundwater Sustainability
Agency (GSA) for the Elsinore Valley Subbasin, and by the Bedford-Coldwater Groundwater
Sustainability Authority for the Bedford-Coldwater Subbasin. The 2020 UWMP details that the anticipated
production of groundwater would remain steady through 2045 (as shown in Table UT-1). As detailed in
Section XIX, Utilities and Service Systems, the EMWD’s supply of water listed in Table UT-1 would be
sufficient during both normal years and multiple dry year conditions between 2025 and 2045 to meet all of
the estimated needs, including the proposed project. Therefore, the project would be consistent with the
groundwater management plan and would not conflict with or obstruct its implementation. Thus, no new
impacts related to water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan would occur.
(Sources: Preliminary Hydrology Report, Appendix G; Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan,
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 105 of 149
Appendix H)
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding hydrology and water quality. There have
not been 1) changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with
respect to the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major
revisions of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of
substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not
known and could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies
The following existing requirements would reduce potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality:
PPP WQ-1: NPDES/SWPPP. Prior to issuance of any grading or demolition permits, the applicant shall
provide the City Building and Safety Department evidence of compliance with the NPDES (National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) requirement to obtain a construction permit from the State Water
Resource Control Board (SWRCB). The permit requirement applies to grading and construction sites of
one acre or larger. The project applicant/proponent shall comply by submitting a Notice of Intent (NOI)
and by developing and implementing a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a monitoring
program and reporting plan for the construction site.
PPP WQ-2: WQMP. Prior to the approval of the Grading Plan and issuance of Grading Permits a
completed Final Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be prepared by the project applicant and
submitted to and approved by the City Engineering Department. The Final WQMP shall identify all Post-
Construction, Site Design. Source Control, and Treatment Control Best Management Practices (BMPs) that
will be incorporated into the development project in order to minimize the adverse effects on receiving
waters.
Mitigation Measures: The Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measure for hydrology
and water quality regarding NPDES permitting, which is listed previously, is applicable to the proposed
project and would be included in the Project MMRP to ensure implementation.
No new mitigation measures are required.
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND describes that the Specific Plan area is surrounded by residential and commercial uses
similar to the Specific Plan. The project would incorporate into the surrounding neighborhood and would
not physically divide the community.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 106 of 149
The Final MND also determined that the Specific plan area is intended for residential and commercial uses
and the Specific Plan development would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation, and no significant impacts would occur.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
None.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
a) Physically divide an established community? (No New Impact.)
The project site is currently vacant and undeveloped. The site is planned for residential development by the
City’s General Plan and zoning designations. The site is adjacent and across the street from existing
residential development. The proposed project would develop the site with 140 residential units, which is
consistent with the existing development adjacent to the site and consistent with the land use and zoning
designations. Therefore, the change of the project site from a vacant site to a residential neighborhood
would not physically divide an established community. Conversely, it would add to the existing
neighborhoods surrounding the site. In addition, the proposed driveway/sidewalk system provides for
circulation through the site and does not result in any physical division. Thus, the proposed project would
not result in impacts related to physical division of an established community.
(Sources: Project site plan, General Plan Land Use map, Accessed: http://www.lake-
elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=24601; and City of Lake Elsinore Zoning map, Accessed:
http://www.lake-elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=24603)
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (No New
Impact.)
As described previously, the project site is adjacent to residential, retail/service commercial, and roadways.
The project would develop the project site to provide 140 new residences, which would be similar to the
existing uses that are adjacent to the site.
General Plan
The project site has General Plan land use designation of Lake View District Medium Density Residential.
The Lake View District Medium Density Residential land use designation provides for residential densities
between 7 and 18 units per net acre.
The project includes 140 single-family residences within 9.71 acres of the site, which would result in 14.4
units per acre. Thus, the project would not exceed the allowable Lake View District Medium Density
Residential density of 18 dwelling units per acre. Therefore, the project would not conflict with the existing
residential General Plan land use designations for the site, and no new impacts related to General Plan land
uses would occur.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan
The project site has Lakeshore Village Specific Plan designations of Attached Residential (AR) and
Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF). The Specific Plan states that the AR designation is to provide for two
to three-story residential buildings, and that the CRF designation is to provide for either one- and two-story
commercial structures or two- to three-story residential buildings consistent with the AR designation.
The proposed project includes 140 two-story residences within 9.71 acres of the site. As shown previously
in Table AES-2, the proposed project meets the Specific Plan development standards. Therefore, a conflict
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 107 of 149
with the Specific Plan development standards would not occur. Therefore, the project would not result in a
conflict with the Specific Plan designations for the site, and no new impact would occur.
(Sources: Project site plan, General Plan Land Use map, Accessed: http://www.lake-
elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=24601; and City of Lake Elsinore Zoning code, Accessed:
http://www.lake-elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=24603)
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding land use and planning. There have not been
1) changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects or
a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect to
the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions
of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial
importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and
could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND determined that the Specific Plan area is not known to have any mineral resource that may
be of value to the region or State and is not designated as a locally important mineral resource recovery site
by any plan. Therefore, the Final MND determined that impacts related to mineral resources would not
occur from implementation of the Specific Plan.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
None.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region
and the residents of the state? (No New Impact.)
Figure 3.12-1 of the General Plan EIR shows that the project site is located within the Mineral Resource
Zone 3 Area (MRZ-3), or areas containing mineral deposits, the significance of which cannot be evaluated
from available data. The project site is not located within an area that has been classified or designated as
a mineral resource area by the State Board of Mining and Geology, nor has mineral extraction been
documented to occur on site. The project site has a land use designation of Lake View District Medium
Density Residential and is not planned for mineral extraction use. Therefore, impacts associated with the
loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of
the state would not occur.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 108 of 149
(Sources: City of Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR Section 3.12 and Figure 3.12-1, Mineral Resource Zones)
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 New Impact.)
As described in the previous response, Figure 3.12-1 of the General Plan EIR shows that the project site is
located within an MRZ-3 area and is not designated as a mineral resource recovery site. The project site
has a land use designation of Lake View District Medium Density Residential and is not planned for mineral
extraction use. Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of a mineral resource recovery site as
delineated on a land use plan. No impacts would occur.
(Sources: City of Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR Section 3.12 and Figure 3.12-1, Mineral Resource Zones)
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding mineral resources. There have not been 1)
changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect to
the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions
of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial
importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and
could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
XIII. NOISE
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND determined that implementation of the Specific Plan would increase noise levels; however,
the increase in noise would be less than significant. In addition, the MND determined that the Specific plan
development projects are required to comply with noise standards contained in the City's Noise Ordinance.
The Final EIR also describes that prior to Design Review approval, noise attenuation in accordance with
the Noise Ordinance would be conditioned to the development projects, as appropriate, which is included
as mitigation. The Final MND also determined that construction noise can reach high levels and included
mitigation to ensure that construction noise from implementation of the Specific Plan would not result in
any significant disturbances. Furthermore, the Final MND determined that the Specific Plan is not located
within any airport land use plan, and thus, impacts related to airport noise would not occur.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 109 of 149
Final MND Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Prior to Design Review approval, the applicant shall show how
proposed site plans will attenuate noise levels and show how the project complies with noise standards
contained in the City's Noise Ordinance.
Project Applicability: This measure is applicable to the proposed Project, is implemented by
Condition of Approval COA N-1 and N-2 and would be included in the Project’s MMRP.
Final MND Mitigation Measure NOI-2: The contractor shall ensure the following:
• All construction and general maintenance activities, except in an emergency, shall be limited to the
hours of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM and prohibited on Sundays and all legally proclaimed holidays
(Section 17.78.080.F.1 of City Municipal Code).
• All construction shall comply with the noise ordinance performance standards where technically
and economically feasible (Section 17.78.080.F.2).
• All construction equipment shall use properly operating mufflers (Section 17.78.080.F.3).
• All construction equipment shall be operated as far away from neighboring uses as possible.
Project Applicability: This measure is applicable to the proposed Project and would be included in
the Project’s MMRP.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
A Noise Impact Analysis was prepared for the proposed project by Vista Environmental (Appendix I) to
assess the project’s potential noise and vibration related impacts. The following analysis incorporates
information from the study.
California Building Code
The State of California’s interior noise standards for all new construction with habitable spaces are codified
in the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24, Building Standards Administrative Code, Chapter
12, Section 1206. A habitable space in a building is defines as a space used for “living, sleeping, eating, or
cooking. The acceptable interior noise limit is 45 CNEL in all habitable rooms.
General Plan
The City’s General Plan Public Safety and Welfare Element includes a compatibility matrix (Table 3-1) to
determine if new land uses are compatible with the existing noise environment. The table identifies noise
environments that are less than 70 dBA CNEL to be normally compatible with residential uses.
Additionally, areas that have existing ambient noise levels above 75 dBA CNEL are considered clearly
incompatible with residential uses.
Municipal Code
Section 17.176.060, Exterior Noise Limits, identifies the maximum permissible sound levels by receiving
land use. For residential land use, the noise level limits for the daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) hours of
50 dBA L50 and 40 dBA L50 during the nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours for:
• a cumulative period of 30 minutes in any hour (L₅₀); or
• the standard plus 5 dBA for a cumulative period of more than 15 minutes in any hour (L₂₅); or
• the standard plus 10 dBA for a cumulative period of more than 5 minutes in any hour (L8); or
• the standard plus 15 dBA for a cumulative period of more than 1 minute in any hour (L2); or
• the standard plus 20 dBA for any period of time (Lmax).
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 110 of 149
Municipal Code Section 17.176.060 for residential uses are detailed in Table N-1.
Table N-1: Municipal Code Residential Exterior Noise Level Standards
Receiving Land Use Condition
Based Exterior Noise Level Standards (dBA)
L50 L25 L8 L2 Lmax
(30 mins) (15 mins) (5 mins) (1 min) (Anytime)
Single-Family Residential Daytime 50 55 60 65 70
Nighttime 40 45 50 55 60
Source: Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix I.
Section 17.176.080.F, Construction/Demolition, states that the following is prohibited:
1. Operating or causing the operation of any tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair,
alteration, or demolition work between weekday hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., or at any time on
weekends or holidays, such that the sound therefrom creates a noise disturbance across a residential or
commercial real property line, except for emergency work of public service utilities or by variance
issued by the City.
2. Noise Restrictions at Affected Properties. Where technically and economically feasible, construction
activities shall be conducted in such a manner that the maximum noise levels at affected residential
properties will not exceed those listed in the following schedule:
Mobile Equipment: Maximum noise levels for nonscheduled, intermittent, short‐term operation (less
than 10 days) of mobile equipment:
Type I Areas
Single‐Family
Residential
Type II Areas
Multifamily
Residential
Type III Areas
Semi‐Residential/
Commercial
Daily, except Sundays and Legal Holidays
7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. 75 dBA 80 dBA 85 dBA
Daily, 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and all day
Sunday and Legal Holidays 60 dBA 65 dBA 70 dBA
Stationary Equipment: Maximum noise levels for repetitively scheduled and relatively long‐term
operation (period of 10 days or more) of stationary equipment:
Type I Areas
Single‐Family
Residential
Type II Areas
Multifamily
Residential
Type III Areas
Semi‐Residential/
Commercial
Daily, except Sundays and Legal Holidays
7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. 60 dBA 65 dBA 70 dBA
Daily,7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and all day
Sunday and Legal Holidays 50 dBA 55 dBA 60 dBA
Section 17.176.080.G, Vibration, states that it is prohibited to operate any device that creates a vibration
which is above the vibration perception threshold of any individual at or beyond the property boundary of
the source if on private property or at 150 feet (46 meters) from the source if on public space or public
right-of-way.
However, the Municipal code does not define a quantitative vibration threshold. The Caltrans
Transportation- and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, 2020, provides numeric thresholds for
vibration impacts. Thresholds are established for continuous (construction-related) and transient
(transportation-related) sources of vibration, which found that the human response becomes distinctly
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 111 of 149
perceptible at 0.25 inch per second PPV for transient sources and 0.04 inch per second PPV for continuous
sources.
Existing Noise Levels
As detailed in the Noise Impact Analysis (Appendix I), to identify the existing ambient noise level
environment, 24-hour noise level measurements were taken at the project site on July 14 through July 15.
The background ambient noise levels in the project area is dominated by the transportation-related noise
associated with Lakeshore Drive and other nearby streets. The location of the noise measurements is
provided in Figure 13 and a description of the locations and the existing noise levels are provided in Table
N-2.
Table N-2: Summary of 24-Hour Ambient Noise Level Measurements
Site
No. Site Description
Average
(dBA Leq)
Maximum
(dBA Lmax)
(dBA Leq 1-hour/Time) Average
(dBA
CNEL) Min Max
1
Located on a sign post on the northeastern
portion of the project site, approximately 80 feet
southwest of the Lakeshore Drive centerline.
63.4 92.3 53.4
2:18 a.m.
67.5
5:21 p.m. 68.1
2
Located on a tree on the northwestern portion of
the project site, approximately 30 feet southeast
of the preschool.
52.3 77.9 42.9
2:09 a.m.
56.9
8:47 a.m. 56.4
Source: Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix I.
Sensitive Receivers
Sensitive receivers are defined as locations where people reside or where the presence of unwanted sound
could otherwise adversely affect the use of the land, including: residences, schools, hospitals, churches,
libraries, and recreation areas. The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are mobile homes and a
preschool located as near as 10 feet northwest of the project site, single-family homes located as near as 14
feet southeast of the project site, and townhomes located as near as 35 feet southwest of the project site.
The nearest school is Machado Elementary School, which is located as near as 680 feet southwest of the
project site.
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or other applicable standards of other agencies? (No New Impact.)
Construction
The construction noise from the proposed project would occur throughout various portions of the project
site over an 18-month period. Noise generated by construction equipment would include a combination of
trucks, power tools, concrete mixers, and portable generators that when combined can reach high levels.
Construction is expected to occur in the following stages: site preparation, grading, building construction,
architectural coating, paving. Noise levels generated by heavy construction equipment would range from
approximately 74 dBA to 84 dBA at 50 feet from the noise source.
Per Municipal Code Section 17.176.080, included as PPP N-1, construction activities are prohibited
between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. or at any time on weekend or on holidays. Section
17.176.080(F)(2) of the City’s Municipal Code limits construction noise that occurs during the allowable
times in Type I (single-family residential) areas to 75 dBA for mobile equipment and 60 dBA for stationary
equipment. Section 17.176.080(F)(2) also limits construction noise that occurs during the allowable times
Lakeshore Drive ResidentialCity of Lake ElsinoreFigure 13Noise Measurement Locations
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 113 of 149
in Type II (multi-family residential) areas to 80 dBA for mobile equipment and 65 dBA for stationary
equipment. The construction activities would be in compliance with the City’s construction related noise
standards. Therefore, the construction noise would be limited. In addition, construction noise would be
temporary in nature as the operation of each piece of construction equipment would not be constant
throughout the construction day, and equipment would be turned off when not in use. The typical operating
cycle for a piece of construction equipment involves one or two minutes of full power operation followed
by three or four minutes at lower power settings. The construction equipment would include a combination
of trucks, power tools, concrete mixers, and portable generators.
The calculated noise from construction equipment was attenuated to the sensitive receiver locations. As
shown on Table N-3 the construction noise levels are expected to range from 56 to 71 dBA Leq.
Table N-3: Project Construction Noise Levels at Receivers
Construction Phase
Construction Noise Level (dBA Leq) at:
Mobile Homes &
Preschool to the
Northwest1
Single-Family Homes
to the Southeast2
Multi-Family
Homes to the
Southwest3
Site Preparation 70 70 68
Grading 71 71 68
Building Construction 70 69 67
Paving 64 64 62
Painting 56 56 54
City’s Mobile Equipment Threshold4 75 75 80
City’s Stationary Equipment
Threshold4 60 60 65
1 The mobile homes and preschool to the northwest are located as near as 210 feet from the center of the project site. In order to account for
existing and proposed 6 foot high cmu wall (see Project Design Feature 1), 5 dB of attenuation was added to RCNM model.
2 The single-family homes to the southeast are located as near as 215 feet from the center of the project site. In order to account for existing 6
foot high cmu wall, 5 dB of attenuation was added to RCNM model.
3 The multi-family homes to the southwest are located as near as 500 feet from the center of the project site.
4 City construction noise threshold from Section 17.176.080(F)(2) of the Municipal Code for Type I Areas (single-family and mobile homes)
and Type II Areas (multi-family homes).
Source: Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix I.
Table N-4 shows that construction noise would be up to 71 dBA Leq at the mobile homes and preschool to
the northwest, 71 dBA Leq at the single-family residences to the southeast, and 68 dBA Leq at the multi-
family residences to the southwest.
The proposed construction process includes constructing the proposed six-foot high cmu wall on the
northwest side, adjacent to the preschool, prior to the start of grading and construction activities. Table N-
4 shows that with installation of the wall first, none of the construction phases would exceed the City’s
mobile equipment thresholds. The proposed construction provides for a 100-foot setback for stationary
construction equipment from offsite sensitive receptors and provides that should any stationary construction
equipment need to be used within 100 feet of any off-site sensitive receptor, a temporary sound barrier
would be installed between the stationary equipment and nearby sensitive receptors. With implementation
of these proposed measures, construction-related noise impacts would not exceed City noise standards. To
ensure these proposed measures are implemented, Condition of Approval COA N-1 and N-2 have been
included to require these measures be included in the project’s construction specifications and in the City’s
construction permitting for the project, which is consistent with the Final MND Mitigation Measure NOI-
1 that requires the applicant to show compliance with the standards in the City’s Noise Ordinance. Thus,
no new impacts related to construction noise would occur from the project.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 114 of 149
Operation
Consistency with Residential Noise Standards. Although CEQA analysis is to evaluate the project’s
potential impact on the environment, the following evaluation is provided to show that the project would
not result an inconsistency (or non-compliance) with noise standards related to residential uses.
As described previously, the project site is located along Lakeshore Drive which generates the ambient
noise on the project site. To reduce the onsite and residential interior noise from vehicular noise from the
adjacent roadway the project includes development of an 6-foot-high concrete masonry wall along the
project site frontage of Lakeshore Drive and the project would install forced air circulation systems (e.g.,
air conditioning) or active ventilation systems (e.g., fresh air supply) pursuant to the requirements of the
Uniform Building Code such that exterior doors and windows can be kept closed to reduce hearing exterior
noise and still receive circulated air.
Typical building construction provides a noise reduction of approximately 12 dBA with "windows open"
and a minimum 25 dBA noise reduction with "windows closed." Table N-4 shows that noise levels at all
analyzed townhomes private open space areas would be within the City’s 60 dBA Ldn noise standard.
Table N-4 also shows that as proposed, the interior noise levels of all residences would be within the City’s
45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. Therefore, no impacts related to noise standard compliance would
occur.
Table N-4: Proposed Residences Exterior and Interior Noise Levels
Lot
Number Roadway
Private
Outdoor Area
Noise Level1
(dBA CNEL)
Interior Noise Levels Exceed 60 dBA
Exterior or 45 dBA
Interior Threshold? Floor Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)2
1 Lakeshore Drive West
of Gunnerson Street 59 First 35 No/No
Second 41 No/No
2 Lakeshore Drive West
of Gunnerson Street 59 First 35 No/No
Second 41 No/No
43 Lakeshore Drive East
of Gunnerson Street 59 First 35 No/No
Second 41 No/No
44 Lakeshore Drive East
of Gunnerson Street 59 First 33 No/No
Second 39 No/No
1 As shown in the Wall and Fence Plan (see Figure 3, above), the private outdoor area noise calculations account for the noise reduction
provided by a 6-foot high cmu wall at the rear of the private outdoor areas that are adjacent to Lakeshore Drive.
2 Interior noise level based on a 25 dB exterior to interior noise reduction rate with implementation of Project Design Feature 1 that allows for
a “windows closed” condition (U.S. Department of Transportation, 2011)
Source: Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix I.
Project Traffic Generated Noise. Development of the proposed project would result in 140 residences,
which would generate approximately 1,008 daily vehicular trips; of which 67 would occur in the a.m. peak
hour and 80 would occur in the p.m. peak hour. The noise generated from these vehicular trips has been
identified through utilization of the FHWA Roadway Noise Model, and a comparison of noise generated
by traffic volumes with and without the project is provided in Table N-5.
Neither the General Plan or Municipal Code quantifies what constitutes a significant increase in ambient
noise. Therefore, thresholds from the Federal Transit Agency have been utilized, which identifies noise
impacts by comparing the existing noise levels and the future noise levels with the proposed project. Based
on the FTA guidance, a substantial increase in ambient noise from vehicular traffic could occur when the
noise levels at noise-sensitive land uses (e.g. residential, etc.) are less than 60 dBA CNEL and the project
creates an increase of 2 dBA CNEL or greater noise level increase; or when noise levels are above 60 dBA
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 115 of 149
CNEL and the project creates a 1 dBA CNEL or greater noise level increase.
The proposed project’s potential offsite roadway noise impacts were calculated through a comparison of
the opening year 2024 with cumulative projects scenario to the opening year 2024 with cumulative projects
plus project scenario, not including noise barriers. As shown in Table N-5, without the project traffic in the
opening year, would range from 60.0 to 71.2 dBA CNEL. With inclusion of project traffic, noise levels
would range from range from 60.1 to 71.2 dBA CNEL, and an increase of 0.0 to 0.2 dBA CNEL would
result, which is less than the 1 dBA CNEL threshold. Therefore, impacts related to operational traffic noise
would occur.
Table N-5: Project Generated Traffic Noise in the Opening Year Condition
dBA CNEL at Nearest Receptor1
Increase
Threshold2 Impact? Roadway Segment
Year
2024
Year 2024
Plus
Project
Project
Contribution
Lakeshore Drive West of Machado Street 65.8 65.8 0.0 +1 dBA No
Lakeshore Drive West of Gunnerson Street 66.7 66.8 0.1 +1 dBA No
Lakeshore Drive East of Gunnerson Street 68.3 68.5 0.2 +1 dBA No
Lakeshore Drive East of Highway 74 60.0 60.1 0.1 +3 dBA No
Machado Street South of Lakeshore Drive 65.4 65.4 0.0 +1 dBA No
Gunnerson Street North of Lakeshore Drive 55.7 55.8 0.1 +3 dBA No
Highway 74 North of Lakeshore Drive 68.5 68.6 0.1 +1 dBA No
Highway 74 South of Lakeshore Drive 71.2 71.2 0.0 +1 dBA No
Source: Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix I.
(Sources: Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix I)
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (No New Impact.)
Construction
Construction activities for development of the project would include demolition, excavation, and grading
activities, which have the potential to generate low levels of groundborne vibration. People residing in close
proximity to the construction could be exposed to the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels related to construction activities. The results from vibration can range from no
perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations at
moderate levels, to slight structural damage at the highest levels. Site ground vibrations from construction
activities very rarely reach the levels that can damage structures, but they can be perceived in the audible
range and be felt in buildings very close to a construction site. The reference vibration levels provided by
the Caltrans how that a large bulldozer results in a velocity of 0.089 in/sec PPV at 25 feet, as shown in
Table N-9.
Table N-9: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment
Equipment
Peak Particle Velocity
(inches/second) at 25 feet
Approximate Vibration Level
(Lv) at 25 feet
Hoe Ram 0.089 87
Large bulldozer 0.089 87
Caisson drill 0.089 87
Loaded trucks 0.076 86
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Small bulldozer 0.003 58
Source: Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix I.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 116 of 149
The primary source of vibration during construction would be from the operation of a bulldozer. Based on
typical propagation rates, the vibration level at the nearest offsite residence (10 feet to the northwest) would
be 0.24 inch per second PPV. The vibration level at the nearest offsite residence would be below the 0.25
inch per second PPV threshold detailed above. Impacts would be less than significant.
(Sources: Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix I)
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or 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 two miles of a public airport or within an airport land use plan. The
closest airport is the Skylark Field located approximately 5.8 miles southeast of the project site. The project
site is located outside of the 60 dBA CNEL noise contours of this airport. As such, the project site would
not be exposed to excessive noise levels from airport operations, and no impacts would occur.
(Sources: Google Earth, Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix I)
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding noise and vibration. There have not been
1) changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects or
a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect to
the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions
of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial
importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and
could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies
The following existing requirements would reduce the potential for impacts related noise:
PPP N-1: Construction Hours. The project shall comply with Municipal Code Section 17.176.080, that
prohibits construction activities between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. or at any time on weekend or
on holidays.
Conditions of Approval
The following Conditions of Approval is required by the City as part of implementation of the project to
ensure adherence to the City’s construction noise limits.
COA N-1: The project construction plans and specifications and City construction permitting requirements
shall require installation of the proposed 6-foot-high concrete masonry unit (cmu) wall along the northwest
side of the project site that is adjacent to the preschool prior to the start of grading and other construction
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 117 of 149
activities to minimize potential construction related disruption and ensure compliance with Municipal Code
Section 17.176.080.F.
COA N-2: The project construction plans and specifications and City construction permitting requirements
shall require a 100-foot setback between stationary construction equipment and any off-site sensitive
receptors, or installation of a temporary sound barrier between the stationary construction equipment and
nearby sensitive receptors to minimize potential construction related disruption and ensure compliance with
Municipal Code Section 17.176.080.F.
Mitigation Measures: The Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures for noise,
which are listed previously are applicable to the Project and would be included in the Project MMRP to
ensure implementation.
No new mitigation measures are required.
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND determined that the same land uses that were anticipated for the Specific Plan area would
continue with the Specific Plan and onsite residential and non-residential uses would be provided as
intended by the City, the fact that the site is currently vacant and undeveloped means that infrastructure and
utilities would be extended and that surrounding vacant areas could develop as a result. The Final MND
determined that the City of Lake Elsinore supports development and construction within its boundaries and
that implementation of the Specific Plan would be a beneficial means of better responding to demands for
more residential and commercial development in the City. In addition, the Final MND determined that the
Specific Plan area is vacant and undeveloped, and no displacement of housing would occur from
implementation of the Specific Plan.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
None.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
a) Induce substantial unplanned 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)? (No New Impact.)
The proposed project would construct 140 two-story condominium residences and the associated amenities
and infrastructure on the project site. The California Department of Finance (CDF) data details that the City
of Lake Elsinore has a residential population of 64,762 and 19,306 housing units in 2021. The Lake Elsinore
General Plan Update EIR (GPU EIR) details that the City has an average of 3.27 persons per household.
Furthermore, the GPU EIR details that by 2030 the population in the City is projected to be approximately
85,376 and the City would have approximately 28,704 housing units.
Based on this information, the proposed 140 condominiums would result in a net increase of approximately
458 new residents. The addition of 458 new residents would represent a population increase of 0.7 percent
and the new housing units would result in a 0.7 percent increase in residential units within the City.
Additionally, the proposed population and housing unit increase would be within the projected population
and housing stock as analyzed by the GPU EIR. Furthermore, the proposed project is located in an urbanized
area of the City, is surrounded by residential and urban uses, and is already served by the existing roadways
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 118 of 149
and infrastructure systems. No infrastructure would be extended or constructed to serve areas beyond the
project site, and indirect impacts related to growth would not occur from implementation of the proposed
project. Therefore, no new impacts related to inducement of unplanned population growth, either directly
or indirectly, would occur from the project.
(Sources: Lake Elsinore General Plan Update, Draft Program EIR, August 2011; California Department of
Finance, Population and Housing Estimates, September 2021,
https://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-5/)
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere? (No New Impact.)
The project site is undeveloped and vacant. The site does not include any existing housing and no people
are located onsite. Therefore, the project would not displace any people or housing, and no impacts would
occur.
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding population and housing. There have not
been 1) changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects
or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect
to the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions
of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial
importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and
could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
XV. PUBLIC SERVICES
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
Fire Protection. The Final MND states that the Riverside County Fire Department provides fire protection
and safety services to the City. The nearest fire station is No. 10, at 410 West Graham Avenue. The final
MND determined the implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would not result in significant impacts
and that development is required to comply with Fire Department requirements and standards to ensure
adequate fire protection improvements and access are provided. The Final MND includes mitigation
measures, that are listed below, related to compliance with fire related design measures to ensure that
potential impacts would be less than significant.
Police Protection. The Final MND states that law enforcement services are provided by the Riverside
County Sheriff's Department station located at 117 South Langstaff. The Final MND describes that Specific
Plan development is required to comply with Police Department requirements and standards to ensure
adequate safety and access are provided. The Final MND includes mitigation, as listed below, to ensure
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 119 of 149
Police Department reviews development plans and applicant revision to address any issues raised by the
Police Department to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.
Schools. The Final MND states that the Specific plan would directly increase student enrollment at schools
within the Lake Elsinore Unified School District. To offset any impact, any future development is required
to pay appropriate school fees, in accordance with SB 50.
Parks. The Final MND states that the Specific plan would increase population and associated burden on
parks in the area. To offset any impact, any future development is required to pay park fees.
Other Public Facilities. The Final MND states that the Specific plan would 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.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
Final MND Mitigation Measure PS-1: Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant is required to
pay appropriate school, park, and library fees.
Project Applicability: This measure is applicable to the proposed Project and would be included in
the Project’s MMRP.
Final MND Mitigation Measure PS-2: Prior to any tentative tract map or Design Review approval, the
applicant shall interface with the Fire and Police Departments to address and respond to any issues and
concerns raised by the Fire and Police Departments, including emergency access.
Project Applicability: This measure is applicable to the proposed Project and would be included in
the Project’s MMRP.
Final MND Mitigation Measure PS-3: Prior to Design Review approval, the applicant shall comply
with the following fire mitigation:
• The applicant shall participate in the Development Impact Fee Program as adopted by the City of
Lake Elsinore.
• All water mains and fire hydrants shall be constructed m accordance with Riverside County
Ordinance No. 460 and/or No. 787.1.
• Prepare a Fire Protection/Vegetation Management Plan for Fire Department approval.
• The Homeowner's Association shall be responsible for implementing the Fire Protection/Vegetation
Management Plan.
• The project shall provide an alternate or secondary access.
Project Applicability: This measure is applicable to the proposed Project and would be included in
the Project’s MMRP.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
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
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 120 of 149
service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection? (No New Impact.)
The Riverside County Fire Department provides fire protection services throughout the City. The Fire
Department has four fire stations within 4.8 roadway miles of the project site, as listed in Table PS-1.
Table PS-1: Fire Stations Serving Project
Station Address Distance from Site
(roadway miles)
#85 29405 Grand Avenue, Lake
Elsinore, CA 92530
2.4 miles
#11 33020 Maiden Lane, Lake
Elsinore, CA 92530
4.8 miles
#10 410 W. Graham Ave, Lake
Elsinore, CA 92530
2.7 miles
#97 41725 Rosetta Canyon Dr,
Lake Elsinore, CA 92532
4.0 miles
The proposed project would develop 140 two-story condominium residences and the associated amenities
and infrastructure within the site. Implementation of the project would be required to adhere to the
California Fire Code, as included in the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 15.56. As part of the permitting
process the project plans would be reviewed by the City’s Building and Safety Division to ensure that
project plans meet the fire protection requirements.
Due to the increase in onsite people that would occur from implementation of the project, an incremental
increase in demand for fire protection and emergency medical services would occur. However, the increase
in residents onsite is limited (458 residents) and would not increase demands such that the four fire stations
would not be able to accommodate servicing the project in addition to its existing commitments.
Furthermore, per the Riverside County Fire Department Master Plan, the City falls into the Urban category
(GPU EIR). This classification requires a fire station be within three roadway miles of the project site and
has a response time goal of 7 minutes. As shown in Table PS-1, Riverside County Fire Department Station
85 is approximately 2.4 roadway miles from the site. Based on the travel distance from the station to the
site, the approximate response time would be six minutes. As such, per the Riverside County Fire
Department Master Plan, the project site would have adequate fire service. Provision of a new or physically
altered fire station would not be required that could cause environmental impacts. Therefore, no new
impacts related to fire protection services would result from the proposed project.
(Sources: Lake Elsinore General Plan Update, Draft Program EIR (GPU EIR), August 2011; Riverside
County Fire Department)
b) Police protection? (No New Impact.)
The City of Lake Elsinore contracts with the County of Riverside Sheriff’s Department for police services.
The Sheriff Station serving the project area is the Lake Elsinore Station, located at 333 W. Limited Avenue,
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530. The Station is located approximately 2.9 roadway miles from the project site.
The City’s Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Operating Budget describes that the City has 52.7399 sworn officers and
5 community service officers. The California Department of Finance (CDF) data details that the City of
Lake Elsinore has a residential population of 64,762 in 2021. Therefore, the City currently has
approximately 1.2 officer per 1,000 residents.
Because the project site is currently vacant, development of the proposed 140 residences would result in an
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 121 of 149
incremental increase in demands on law enforcement services. However, the increase would not be
significant when compared to current demand levels. As described previously, the residential population of
the project site at full occupancy would be approximately 458 residents. Based on the current staffing ratio
of 1.2 officers for every 1,000 residents, the proposed project would require 0.55 percent of an additional
officer. This additional staffing would not require the construction or expansion of the City’s existing
policing facilities. Thus, no new impacts would occur.
In addition, the project would be required to comply with the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, which
requires a development impact fee (DIF) payment to the City for impacts to public services and facilities,
including sheriff facilities and services. Payment of the DIF fee would ensure that funds are available for
either the purchase of new equipment and/or the hiring of additional sheriff personnel to maintain the
County’s desired level of service for sheriff protection. Therefore, no new impacts related to police services
would occur.
(Sources: City of Lake Elsinore FY 2020-2021 Annual Operating Budget, Accessed: http://www.lake-
elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=27115; California Department of Finance, Population and Housing
Estimates, September 2021, https://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-5/; Lake
Elsinore General Plan Update, Draft Program EIR (GPU EIR), August 2011; Riverside County Sheriff’s
Department, https://www.riversidesheriff.org/743/Lake-Elsinore-Station)
c) Schools? (No New Impact.)
The project site is located within the Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD) that is comprised of
13 elementary schools, 2 K-8 schools, 4 middle schools, and 3 high schools. The schools that serve the site
are listed below:
• Withrow Elementary School located at 30100 Audelo Street Lake Elsinore, approximately 1.9
miles from the project site. Withrow Elementary School has an existing remaining capacity of 689
students.
• Terra Cotta Middle School located at 29291 Lake Street, Lake Elsinore, approximately 2.98 miles
from the project site. Terra Cotta Middle School has an existing remaining capacity of 226 students.
• Lakeside High School located at 32593 Riverside Drive, Lake Elsinore, approximately 1.9 mile
from the project site. Lakeside High School has a capacity of 3,363 students.
The project would develop 140 condominiums. The LEUSD student generation rate is 0.28 students per
dwelling unit for elementary school; 0.15 students per dwelling unit for middle school; and 0.20 students
per dwelling unit for high school. Based on the existing capacity of the schools serving the project site, both
schools would be able to serve the project, as shown in Table PS-2.
Table PS-2: School Capacity and Project Generated Students
School School
Capacity
2020-2021
Enrollment1
Existing
Remaining
Capacity
Students
Generated by
Project
Remaining
Capacity with
Project
Withrow
Elementary School
1,300 611 689 40 649
Terra Cotta Middle
School
1.300 1,074 226 21 205
Lakeside High
School
3,363 1,811 1,552 28 1,524
1Source: Lake Elsinore Unified School District, School Accountability Report Cards
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 122 of 149
Additionally, pursuant to Government Code Section 65995 et seq., the need for additional school facilities
is addressed through compliance with school impact fee assessment. SB 50 (Chapter 407 of Statutes of
1998) sets forth a state school facilities construction program that includes restrictions on a local
jurisdiction’s ability to condition a project on mitigation of a project’s impacts on school facilities in excess
of fees set forth in the Government Code. These fees are collected by school districts at the time of issuance
of building permits for development projects. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65995 applicants
shall pay developer fees to the appropriate school districts at the time building permits are issued;
and payment of the adopted fees provides full and complete mitigation of school impacts. As a result,
impacts related to school facilities would not occur with the Government Code required fee payments.
(Sources: Lake Elsinore General Plan Update, Draft Program EIR (GPU EIR), August 2011; Lake Elsinore
Unified School District, https://www.leusd.k12.ca.us/)
d) Parks? (No New Impact.)
As of 2011, the City of Lake Elsinore had approximately 559 acres of developed parks and open space
within the City. There are 16 existing park facilities totaling approximately 125.1 acres and four recreational
facilities totaling 21,000 square feet. The parks closest to the project site include the following:
• Summerlake Park located at 900 W Broadway, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530, approximately 1.7
roadway miles from the project site. This park includes a tot lot, basketball courts, picnic areas,
soccer fields, barbeques, and pedestrian walkways.
• Machado Park located at 15150 Joy St, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530, approximately 0.8 miles from
the project site. This park includes volleyball courts, tennis courts, play equipment, picnic areas,
barbecues, and pedestrian walkways.
The proposed project would develop 140 condominium residences and the associated amenities and
infrastructure on the site. The project includes a 0.86-acre recreation area and a recreation center on the site.
The 0.86-acre open space recreation area would include playground equipment, swing set, barbeques,
overhead trellis, turf areas, seating, sidewalks. The recreation center would include restrooms, drinking
fountains, pool and spa, shade structure, lounge chairs, table and chairs. The City’s Municipal Code Section
17.84.120 provides park requirements that are based on the number of dwelling units. Based on the Code’s
requirement of 250 square feet of common open space per unit, the project would require 35,000 square
feet or 0.80 acres of common open space. Therefore, a large majority of the project’s park demand would
be met by the provision of the onsite recreation area. In addition, the project would be required to pay
parkland fees pursuant to Municipal Code Section 19.12.170, as a condition of the approval of a tentative
map (included as PPP PS-2), which would be used by the City for public purposes and facilities to the
benefit of the public and the residents of the City. Also, as described previously, the City currently has over
125.1 acres of park facilities, including two parks within 1.7 miles of the project site. Therefore, no new
impacts related to the need to provide new or altered park and recreation facilities in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios would occur.
Further, the impacts of development of the proposed 0.86-acre recreation area is considered part of the
impacts of the proposed project as a whole and are analyzed throughout the various sections of this CEQA
Addendum. For example, activities such as excavation, grading, and construction as required for the
recreation area are analyzed in the Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Noise, and Transportation
sections.
(Sources: Lake Elsinore General Plan Update, Draft Program EIR (GPU EIR), August 2011)
e) Other public services/facilities? (No New Impact.)
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 123 of 149
The proposed project would redevelop the project site with 140 condominium units within an area is
developed with commercial and residential uses. The additional residences would result in a limited
incremental increase in the need for additional services, such as public libraries and post offices, etc.
Because the project area is already served by other services and the project would result in a limited increase
in residences, the project would not result in the need for new or physically altered facilities to provide
other services, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts. Therefore, no new
impacts would occur.
(Sources: Lake Elsinore General Plan Update, Draft Program EIR (GPU EIR), August 2011)
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding public services. There have not been 1)
changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect to
the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions
of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial
importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and
could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies
The following existing requirements would reduce impacts to school facilities from the proposed project:
PPP PS-1: Schools Development Impact Fees. Prior to issuance of building permit, the project shall pay
applicable development fees levied by the Lake Elsinore Unified School District pursuant to the School
Facilities Act (Senate Bill [SB] 50, Stats. 1998, c.407).
PPP PS-2: Park Fees. As a condition of the approval of a tentative map, the project shall pay applicable
park related fees pursuant to Municipal Code 19.12.170.
Mitigation Measures: The Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures for public
services, which are listed previously, are applicable to the proposed project and would be included in the
Project MMRP to ensure implementation.
No new mitigation measures are required.
XVI. RECREATION
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND describes that implementation of the Specific Plan development would increase population
and associated burden on parks in the area, but that residential developments would include open space and
recreation areas, which would lessen the burden on existing recreational facilities in the City. Impacts were
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 124 of 149
determined to be less than significant.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
None.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
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? (No New Impact.)
As described previously, the project would develop 140 condominium units and 0.86-acre recreation area
would include playground equipment, swing set, barbeques, overhead trellis, turf areas, seating, sidewalks.
The recreation center would include restrooms, drinking fountains, pool and spa, shade structure, lounge
chairs, tables, and chairs. The City’s Municipal Code Section 17.84.120 provides park requirements that
are based on the number of dwelling units. Based on the Code’s requirement of 250 square feet of common
open space per unit, the project would require 35,000 square feet or 0.80 acres of common open space.
Therefore, a large majority of the project’s park demand would be met by the provision of the onsite
recreation area. In addition, the project would be required to pay parkland fees pursuant to Municipal Code
Section 19.12.170, as a condition of the approval of a tentative map (included as PPP PS-2), which would
be used by the City for public purposes and facilities to the benefit of the public and the residents of the
City. Also, as described previously, the City currently has over 125.1 acres of park facilities, including two
parks within 1.7 miles of the project site. Therefore, no new impacts related to the increase in the use of
existing parks and recreational facilities, such that physical deterioration of the facility would be accelerated
would occur.
(Sources: Lake Elsinore General Plan Update, Draft Program EIR (GPU EIR), August 2011; City of Lake
Elsinore Municipal Code)
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 New
Impact.)
As described above, the project includes 0.86-acre recreation area would include playground equipment,
swing set, barbeques, overhead trellis, turf areas, seating, sidewalks. The recreation center would include
restrooms, drinking fountains, pool and spa, shade structure, lounge chairs, tables, and chairs. The impacts
of development of the recreation area is considered part of the impacts of the proposed project as a whole
and are analyzed throughout the various sections of this CEQA Addendum. For example, activities such as
excavation, grading, and construction as required for the park are analyzed in the Air Quality, Greenhouse
Gas Emissions, Noise, and Transportation Sections.
In addition, while the project would contribute development impact fees pursuant to Municipal Code
Section 19.12.170 (included as PPP PS-2) to be used towards the future expansion or maintenance of parks
and recreational facilities, these fees are standard with every residential development, and the proposed
project would not require the construction or expansion of other recreational facilities that might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment. As a result, no new impact would occur.
(Sources: Lake Elsinore General Plan Update, Draft Program EIR (GPU EIR), August 2011; City of Lake
Elsinore Municipal Code)
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 125 of 149
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding recreation. There have not been 1) changes
related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect to the
circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions of the
Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the
severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial importance
relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have
been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies
The following existing requirement would reduce impacts to recreation facilities from the proposed project:
PPP PS-2: Park Fees. Listed previously in Section 15, Public Services.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
XVII. TRANSPORTATION
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND determined that buildout of the Specific Plan would generate approximately 7,600 daily
trips, which represent about 8,400 or over 50 percent less trips than the previous allowable development
within the Specific Plan area. The Final MND concluded that the Specific Plan buildout would not result
in any significant traffic or congestion impact, but that all development in the City is required to pay traffic
mitigation fees to offset any incremental project impact on the City's overall circulation system. In addition,
the Final MND states that to ascertain the specific roadway improvements necessary to provide safe access
to the Specific Plan developments, the applicant is required to prepare traffic studies for the future attached
residential product and commercial uses, which is included as mitigation to ensure that potential traffic
impacts are reduced to a less than significant level.
Regarding emergency access and internal circulation, the Fire Department would review development plans
as part of the development permitting process to ensure adequate emergency access, which is also included
as mitigation to ensure that emergency access impacts would not result from development of the Specific
Plan area. Furthermore, the Final MND describes that development applicants are required to show
compliance with City's alternative transportation policies, such as sidewalks and bicycle parking, during
the City’s permitting review and approval process. The Final MND determined that transportation impacts
would be less than significant with mitigation.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
Final MND Mitigation Measure TR-1: Prior to approval of a Tentative Tract Map or Design Review
application for the proposed attached residential product and/or neighborhood commercial uses, the
applicant shall prepare traffic studies for the future attached residential product and commercial uses. The
traffic studies shall address the following:
• Project trip generation of the proposed attached residential product and neighborhood commercial
uses.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 126 of 149
• Show that access and roadway improvements will be designed to comply with design criteria
contained in the Caltrans Design Manual and other City requirements and standards.
• Show that the Fire Department has reviewed and accepted plans for emergency access.
• Show that the City's parking requirements have been satisfied.
• Show compliance with the City's alternative transportation policies.
Project Applicability: This measure is applicable to the proposed Project and would be included in
the Project’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).
Final MND Mitigation Measure TR-2: Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall pay
appropriate City traffic mitigation fees.
Project Applicability: This measure is applicable to the proposed Project and would be included in
the Project’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
This section is based on the Traffic Impact Analysis included in Appendix J and the Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT) Screening Analysis Memo included in Appendix K. The project’s vehicular trips were calculated
using the Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2021).
Traffic Threshold
The City of Lake Elsinore requires that peak-hour intersections operate at LOS “D” or better to be
considered acceptable. Therefore, any City intersection operating at LOS “E” or LOS “F” will be considered
deficient. An addition of Project traffic that degrades operations from LOS D or better to LOS E or worse
or increases delay on a facility operating at LOS D or worse will be considered deficient and would need
to identify an improvement to return to LOS D or better. However, automobile delay, as described solely
by LOS or similar measure of traffic congestion, is no longer considered a significant impact under CEQA,
except in locations specifically identified in the Guidelines. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21099(b)(2).) CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.3 - Determining the Significance of Transportation Impacts states that Vehicle
Miles Traveled (VMT) is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts and provides lead
agencies with the discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology and thresholds for evaluating
VMT. Thus, the LOS analysis using a threshold of LOS D is provided to describe the project effect on local
intersections and project consistency with the General Plan circulation requirement.
Traffic Study Area and Existing Conditions
The following five intersections were evaluated for impacts related to the project:
1. Lakeshore Drive & Machado Street (Signalized)
2. Lakeshore Drive & Gunnerson Street-Project Driveway (Two-Way Stop Control)
3. Lakeshore Drive & Viscaya Street (Signalized)
4. Lakeshore Drive & SR-74 (Signalized)
5. Gunnerson Street & SR-74 (Two-Way Stop Control)
As shown in Table T-1, two of the intersections currently operate at LOS E or F during the a.m. and/or p.m.
peak hours, which is considered an unsatisfactory condition per City criteria.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 127 of 149
Table T-1: Existing Peak Hour Levels of Service
Intersection Traffic
Control
AM Peak PM Peak Threshold of
Significance Delay1 LOS2 Delay1 LOS2
1. Lakeshore Dr/Machado St Signal 16.6 B 19.1 B D
2. Lakeshore Dr/Gunnerson St-Proj Dwy TWSC 31.2 D 61.5 F D
3. Lakeshore Dr/Viscaya St Signal 9.9 A 14.1 B D
4. Lakeshore Dr/SR-74 Signal 33.7 C 35.0 C D
5. Gunnerson St/SR-74 TWSC 693.0 F 537.0 F D
=Unsatisfactory Level of Service
Source: Traffic Impact Analysis, Appendix J
TWSC = Two Way Stop Control
1 Delay in Seconds
2 Level of Service
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? (No New Impact.)
The proposed project would develop the project site with 140 residences and recreation/open space
facilities. The trip generation for the project was calculated using trip rates from the Institute of
Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation 11th Edition, 2021. As shown in Table T-2, the project would
generate approximately 1,008 daily trips including 67 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 80 trips during
the p.m. peak hour.
Table T-2: Project Trip Generation
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Trip Rates
Single-Family Attached Housing1 DU 7.20 0.15 0.33 0.48 0.32 0.25 0.57
Project Trip Generation
Proposed Townhomes 140 DU 1,008 21 46 67 45 35 80
Source: Traffic Impact Analysis, Appendix J
Opening Year Plus Project Conditions
The project would provide a gated entry from Lakeshore Drive at the intersection of Gunnerson Street and
install a traffic signal. As per the City of Elsinore Circulation Plan, Lakeshore Drive is a 6-lane urban
arterial that the project would provide dedication for 3-lanes, consistent with the urban arterial roadway
designation, and would have a right turn into the project site, a straight through lane, and a left turn lane
onto Gunnerson Street. The striping plan of the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street-
Project Driveway is shown in Figure 9 and the Traffic Impact Analysis includes these improvements.
An intersection operations analysis was conducted for the study area to evaluate the opening year a.m. and
p.m. peak hour conditions with operation of the proposed project. The opening year traffic forecasts were
developed by applying an annual growth rate of 2% to 2022 traffic volumes. As the proposed project is
expected to be complete by 2024, two years of growth was applied to existing counts, plus the project
generated trips.
As shown in Table T-3, the unsignalized intersection of Gunnerson Street and SR-74 would operate at an
unsatisfactory LOS F during the AM and PM peak hours. This LOS is consistent with the existing condition;
however, the delay would increase by 320.5 seconds in the a.m. and increase by 283.3 seconds in the p.m.
peak hour.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 128 of 149
Table T-3: Opening Year Plus Project Peak Hour Level of Service
Intersection Traffic
Control
AM Peak PM Peak
Delay1 LOS2 Delay1 LOS2
1 Lakeshore Dr/Machado St Signal 16.8 B 20.3 C
2 Lakeshore Dr/Gunnerson St-Proj Dwy TWSC 6.4 A 8.5 A
3 Lakeshore Dr/Viscaya St Signal 10.0 B 14.5 B
4 Lakeshore Dr/SR-74 Signal 37.9 D 40.1 D
5 Gunnerson St/SR-74 TWSC 1,013.5 F 820.3 F
=Unsatisfactory Level of Service
Source: Traffic Impact Analysis, Appendix J
TWSC = Two Way Stop Control
1 Delay in Seconds
2 Level of Service
To improve operating conditions, the unsignalized intersection of Gunnerson Street and SR-74 would be
improved from a two-way stop control to a signalized intersection, which is consistent with previous
recommendation for this intersection. The project would be responsible for paying fair share contribution
for this improvement. As shown on Table T-4, with signalization, the intersection of Gunnerson Street and
SR-74 would operate at satisfactory LOS B during the a.m. peak and LOS A during the p.m. peak hour.
Table T-4: Opening Year Plus Project with Signalization Peak Hour Level of Service
Intersection
AM Peak PM Peak
Delay1 LOS2 Delay1 LOS2
5 Gunnerson St/SR-74 13.3 B 9.1 A
Source: Traffic Impact Analysis, Appendix J
TWSC = Two Way Stop Control
1 Delay in Seconds
2 Level of Service
Opening Year Plus Project Plus Cumulative Conditions
The traffic volumes of opening year plus project and cumulative projects scenario were developed by
applying an ambient growth rate of two percent per year to the existing (2022) traffic volumes and adding
traffic generated by the proposed project and also by adding the traffic generated by 15 cumulative
(approved and not yet built and those under review) development projects. As shown in Table T-5, the
intersection of Lakeshore Drive and SR-74 would operate at an unsatisfactory LOS E during the p.m. peak
hours; and the unsignalized intersection at Gunnerson Street and SR-74 would operate at an unsatisfactory
LOS F in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours in the cumulative plus project condition. The LOS at the
unsignalized intersection is consistent with the existing condition; however, the delay at Gunnerson Street
and SR-74 would increase by 1,049.6 seconds in the a.m. and by 991.2 increase in the p.m. peak hour.
Table T-5: Opening Year Plus Project Plus Cumulative Peak Hour Level of Service
Intersection Traffic
Control
AM Peak PM Peak
Delay1 LOS2 Delay1 LOS2
1 Lakeshore Dr/Machado St Signal 17.2 B 21.6 C
2 Lakeshore Dr/Gunnerson St-Proj Dwy TWSC 6.8 A 9.1 A
3 Lakeshore Dr/Viscaya St Signal 9.9 B 15.0 B
4 Lakeshore Dr/SR-74 Signal 46.2 D 63.7 E
5 Gunnerson St/SR-74 TWSC 1,742.6 F 1,528.2 F
=Unsatisfactory Level of Service
Source: Traffic Impact Analysis, Appendix J
TWSC = Two Way Stop Control
1 Delay in Seconds
2 Level of Service
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 129 of 149
As shown on Table T-6, with signalization of the intersection Gunnerson Street and SR-74 would operate
at satisfactory LOS C during the a.m. peak and LOS B during the p.m. peak hour. In addition to improve
the operation of the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and SR-74, the signal phasing would be changed from
Protected 4 to Protected-Permissive at the northbound left and southbound left turns during p.m. peak hour.
With implementation of this improvement, the intersection would operate at LOS D during the p.m. peak
hour. The project would be responsible for paying fair share contribution for these improvements.
Table T-6: Opening Year Plus Project Plus Cumulative with Signalization Changes Peak Hour
Level of Service
Intersection
AM Peak PM Peak
Delay1 LOS2 Delay1 LOS2
4 Lakeshore Dr/SR-74 - - 44.8 D
5 Gunnerson St/SR-74 21.6 C 14.8 B
Source: Traffic Impact Analysis, Appendix J
1 Delay in Seconds
2 Level of Service
To provide for optimum traffic flow conditions, a Condition of Approval COA T-1 has been included to
require the project to be responsible for a 6.83% fair share contribution for the improvements to the
intersection of Lakeshore Drive and SR-74, and a 9.75% fair share contribution for the improvements to
the intersection of Gunnerson Street and SR-74.
Transit Services. The Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) provides 36 local fixed-routes services that connect
local communities, nine Commuter Link express bus routes, and a Rapid Link Gold Line for long-distance
commuters traveling to Metrolink, Coaster and Sprinter stations, business parks, shopping malls and
regional transit facilities. Bus routes that run through the City include RTA routes 8, 9, 22, 40, 205/206 that
serve major destinations in the region.
RTA Route 8 is the closest to the project site and stops at Lakeshore Drive and Viscaya Street. Route 8 runs
from the Lake Elsinore Outlet Center south to Wildomar. It operates Monday through Friday from 4:40
a.m. to 8:00 p.m. and on weekends from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. with one-hour headways. These existing
transit services would serve project residents. The proposed 140 residences would not alter or conflict with
existing transit stops and schedules, and impacts related to transit services would not occur.
Bicycle Circulation. Class II bicycle facilities are striped lanes that provide bike travel and can be located
next to a curb or parking lane and vary between 4 and 5 feet wide. There is an existing Class II bicycle
facility on Lakeshore Drive adjacent to the project site. The project would not remove or otherwise impact
the existing bicycle lane. The existing bicycle lane would provide bicycle transportation opportunities for
residents of the project. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with, existing bicycle facilities.
Thus, no new impacts related to bicycle facilities would occur from the project.
Pedestrian Facilities. There is no existing sidewalk next to the project site along Lakeshore Drive. The
proposed project would provide onsite sidewalks throughout the project site and a new sidewalk along the
project site frontage of Lakeshore Drive. This would facilitate pedestrian use and walking to nearby
locations. Therefore, the proposed project would improve, and not conflict with, pedestrian facilities. Thus,
no new impacts related to pedestrian facilities would occur.
(Sources: Traffic Impact Analysis, Appendix J)
4 Protected phasing consists of providing a separate phase for left-turning traffic and allowing left turns to be made only on a green
left arrow signal. Protected-Permissive phasing not only allows left-turns on a green left arrow, but also allows left turns when
there are adequate gaps in opposing traffic to complete left turns safely.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 130 of 149
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision
(b)? (No New Impact.)
Senate Bill (SB) 743 was signed by Governor Brown in 2013 and required the Governor’s Office of
Planning and Research (OPR) to amend the CEQA Guidelines to provide an alternative to LOS for
evaluating transportation impacts. SB743 specified that the new criteria should promote the reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks and a diversity of land
uses. The bill also specified that delay-based level of service could no longer be considered an indicator of
a significant impact on the environment. In response, Section 15064.3 was added to the CEQA Guidelines
beginning January 1, 2019. Section 15064.3(c) states that the provisions of the section shall apply statewide
beginning on July 1, 2020.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 - Determining the Significance of Transportation Impacts states that
VMT is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts and provides lead agencies with the
discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology and thresholds for evaluating VMT. The City of
Lake Elsinore Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service
Assessment (June 2020) provides the following VMT screening criteria from Western Riverside Council of
Governments (WRCOG) to assess the potential for VMT impacts:
1. Transit Priority Area (TPA) Screening: Projects which are located within a TPA are presumed to
have a less than significant impact on VMT.
2. Low VMT Area Screening: This screening threshold applies to residential or office projects that are
located within a low VMT-generating area, which are identified by WRCOG as traffic analysis zones
(TAZ) where total daily VMT per service population performs at or below the jurisdictional average
of total VMT per service population under base year (2012) conditions. Projects which are located
within a low VMT-generating area are presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT.
3. Project Type Screening: Local serving projects listed in the TIA Guidelines and projects that generate
fewer than 110 net new daily vehicle trips (or 11 single-family residences) are presumed to have a
less than significant impact on VMT.
A VMT analysis was prepared for the project (Appendix K) using the web-based VMT screening tool
developed by WRCOG that is used by the City. The screening tool identified the City wide VMT/service
population is 34, and that the TAZ (TAZ 954) that the project site is located within has a daily total VMT
of 33.5 per service population. The VMT/service population of the project zone is 1.47 percent below the
jurisdiction VMT, as shown on Figure 14. Therefore, the project would meet the screening criteria of being
in a low-VMT area. Based on the City’s screening thresholds, the proposed project is within a low VMT-
generating area and would not result in a new impact related to VMT.
(Sources: Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis Memo, Appendix K)
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? (No New Impact.)
The project includes development of residences and recreation facilities and open space. The project
includes community type uses and does not include any incompatible uses, such as farm equipment. The
proposed project would be accessed from Lakeshore Drive through a gated driveway that has been designed
to City standards that would be verified during construction permitting. The Traffic Impact Analysis
evaluated the current design of the gated driveway with the left-turn lane improvements and determined
that there would be no queueing deficiencies for both the northbound and southbound left turn lanes.
Lakeshore Drive ResidentialCity of Lake ElsinoreFigure 14VMT screening
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 132 of 149
The proposed onsite roadway would provide access to each residence and would be developed in
conformance with City design standards. The City’s construction permitting process includes review of
project plans to ensure that no potentially hazardous transportation design features would be introduced by
the project. For example, the design of the project street and driveway would be reviewed to ensure fire
engine accessibility and turn around area is provided to the fire code standards. As a result, no new impacts
related to vehicular circulation design features would occur.
(Sources: Traffic Impact Analysis, Appendix J)
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? (No New Impact.)
Construction
The proposed construction activities, including equipment and supply staging and storage, would occur
within the project site, and would not restrict access of emergency vehicles to the project site or adjacent
areas. The installation of the driveway, and connections to existing infrastructure systems that would be
implemented during construction of the proposed project could require the temporary closure of one lane
of Lakeshore Drive. However, the construction activities would be required to ensure emergency access in
accordance with Section 503 of the California Fire Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations, Part
9),which would be ensured through the City’s permitting process. Thus, implementation of the project
through the City’s permitting process would ensure existing regulations are adhered to and that no new
impacts related to construction emergency access would occur.
Operation
As described previously, the proposed project area would be accessed from a driveway along Lakeshore
Drive through the onsite street to each residence. The project also includes off-site circulation
improvements to Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street that would include installation of a traffic signal
and exclusive left and right turn lanes. The design and permitting of these roadways would provide adequate
and safe circulation to, from, and through the project area for emergency responders. Because the project
is required to comply with all applicable City codes, as verified by the City during the development
permitting process, no new impacts related to inadequate emergency access would occur.
(Sources: Traffic Impact Analysis, Appendix J)
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding transportation. There have not been 1)
changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect to
the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions
of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial
importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and
could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 133 of 149
Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies
The following existing requirements would reduce the potential for impacts related to transportation:
PPP HAZ-1: Fire Code. The project shall conform to the California Fire Code (Title 24, California
Code of Regulations, Part 9), as included in the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 15.56, Fire Code.
Specifically, Section 503 of the California Fire Code provides regulations related to emergency access.
Condition of Approval
The following Condition of Approval is required by the City as part of implementation of the project to
assist in meeting the City’s LOS requirements.
COA T-1: Prior to certificate of occupancies are granted, the project applicant shall provide a 9% fair
share contribution for the improvements to the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and SR-74, and a 13%
fair share contribution for the improvements to the intersection of Gunnerson Street and SR-74 to
improve the function of the roadway system with implementation of the proposed project.
Mitigation Measures: The Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures for
transportation, which is listed previously, is applicable to the proposed project and would be included in
the project MMRP to ensure implementation.
No new mitigation measures are required.
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
Tribal cultural resources were not specifically evaluated in the Final MND as it was not a separate
environmental topic in the CEQA checklist in 2003 when the Final MND was prepared. However, impacts
related to tribal cultural resources were evaluated as part of the Cultural Resources evaluation, and the
potential for specific tribal cultural resources to exist within the Lake Elsinore region were determined to
be less than significant with the mitigation measure listed previously in Section V, Cultural Resources.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
CUL1. Listed previously in Section V, Cultural Resources.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
This section is based on the Cultural Resources Study prepared for the proposed project by Brian F. Smith
and Associates, Inc. (Appendix C). The Cultural Resources Study includes a records search, Sacred Land
File search, historic archival research, and a field survey.
AB 52 Requirements
Assembly Bill (AB) 52 (Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014) establishes a formal consultation process for
California tribes as part of the CEQA process and equates significant impacts on “tribal cultural resources”
with significant environmental impacts (Public Resources Code [PRC] § 21084.2). AB 52 requires that lead
agencies undertaking CEQA review evaluate, just as they do for other historical and archeological
resources, a project’s potential impact to a tribal cultural resource. In addition, AB 52 requires that lead
agencies, upon request of a California Native American tribe, begin consultation prior to the release of a
negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or EIR for a project. AB 52 does not apply to a Notice
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 134 of 149
of Exemption or Addendum.
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register
of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k). (No New Impact.)
As detailed previously in Section V, Cultural Resources, the project site does not include any resources
that are listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register
of historical resources. The potential of currently unidentified resources being onsite is also limited. The
records search for the project identified resources within 1-mile of the project site that include prehistoric
habitation sites. However, the project site has been highly disturbed from past agricultural activities and
excavation for the existing onsite basin. Additionally, the Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the site
describes the previous ground disturbance and absence of bedrock and dependable water sources at the site
limits the potential of resources at the project site. Therefore, the Phase I Cultural Resources Survey
determined that no new impacts to buried resources would occur from the project.
(Sources: Cultural Resources Study, Appendix C)
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe. (No New Impact.)
As described in the previous response, no known tribal cultural resources are known to exist on the project
site. The records search for the project identified resources within 1-mile of the project site that include
prehistoric habitation sites. However, the project site has been highly disturbed from past agricultural
activities and excavation for the existing onsite basin. Additionally, the Phase I Cultural Resources Survey
for the site describes the previous ground disturbance and absence of bedrock and dependable water sources
at this location limits the potential of the site to be a previous habitation site and limits the potential of
resources. Therefore, the Phase I Cultural Resources Survey determined that no new impacts to buried
resources would occur from the project.
(Sources: Cultural Resources Study, Appendix C)
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding tribal cultural resources. There have not
been 1) changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects
or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect
to the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions
of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial
importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and
could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 135 of 149
Mitigation Measures: CUL1. Listed previously in Section V, Cultural Resources.
No new mitigation measures are required.
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
Water and Wastewater. The Final MND describes that the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
(EVMWD) would provide both water and wastewater services to the Specific Plan area and that the District
has adequate capacity to serve the project. The Final MND includes requirements to coordinate the
EVMWD as part of any tentative tract map approval regarding provision of water connections and facilities,
including mainline extensions, and that with District coordination, included as mitigation, impacts would
be less than significant.
Drainage. The Final MND describes that to ensure onsite and offsite drainage is conveyed properly and
sufficient facilities are provided, the applicant is required, per mitigation, to prepare a drainage plan, prior
to approval of any tentative tract map or Design Review application, which describes those onsite and
offsite drainage facilities that are necessary to service the site. The Final MND states that locations, sizes,
capacities, etc. of proposed drainage lines, channels, basins, etc. are required to be shown on drainage and
that development would not be allowed unless sufficient and adequate drainage improvements and facilities
are designed and provided with the proposed project.
Landfills. The Final MND determined that buildout of the Specific Plan area would be adequately served
by the existing landfills and the Specific Plan would not significantly impact solid waste services or
facilities. The MND describes that Specific Plan development would be required to comply with
construction and debris removal and recycling requirements and contract with the City's waste hauler/
franchisee for all bins and their removal in accordance with City Ordinance.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
Final MND Mitigation Measure UT-1: The applicant shall prepare a drainage plan, prior to
approval of any tentative tract map or Design Review application, which describes those onsite
and offsite drainage facilities that are necessary to service the proposed apartments and commercial
uses. Locations, sizes, capacities, etc. of proposed drainage lines, channels, basins, etc. must be
described and shown on said drainage plans. If appropriate, the Riverside County Flood Control
District shall review and accept said drainage plan.
Final MND Mitigation Measure UT-2: The applicant 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 Associated with the Proposed Project
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater
treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? No New Impact.
Water Infrastructure. The proposed project would redevelop the project site, which is served by Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). Water is not currently provided to the project site as it is
vacant and undeveloped. The proposed project would install onsite 8-inch water lines that would serve each
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 136 of 149
of the proposed residences and would connect to the existing 12-inch water line within Lakeshore Drive.
The new onsite water system would convey water supplies to the proposed residences and landscaping
through plumbing/landscape features that are compliant with the CalGreen Plumbing Code for efficient use
of water. The proposed offsite water lines would be sized to serve the proposed project and would not
provide new water supplies to any off-site areas.
The construction activities related to the onsite water infrastructure that would be needed to serve the
proposed residences and associated open space areas is included as part of the proposed project and would
not result in any physical environmental effects beyond those identified throughout this CEQA Addendum.
For example, construction emissions for excavation and installation of the water infrastructure is included
in Sections III, Air Quality and VIII, Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Therefore, the proposed project would
not result in the construction of new water facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental effects, and no new impacts would occur.
Wastewater Infrastructure. EVMWD provides wastewater treatment services to the project site via a 15-
inch sewer line within Lakeshore Drive. The project would install an 8-inch sewer line that would serve
each of the proposed residences and connect with the existing offsite 15-inch sewer line within the
Lakeshore Drive right-of-way. The proposed sewer lines would be sized to serve the proposed project and
would not provide sewer service to any off-site areas.
The construction activities related to installation of the onsite sewer infrastructure that would serve the
proposed project, is included as part of the proposed project and would not result in any physical
environmental effects beyond those identified throughout this CEQA Addendum. For example,
construction emissions for excavation and installation of the sewer infrastructure is included in Section III,
Air Quality and VIII, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and noise volumes from these activities are evaluated in
Section XIII, Noise. As the proposed project includes facilities to serve the proposed development, it would
not result in the need for construction of other new wastewater facilities or expansions, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental effects. Therefore, no new impacts would occur.
Stormwater Drainage. The project includes installation of an onsite stormwater drainage system that
would convey onsite runoff to two bio filtration units and an underground storm water detention basin that
would treat and infiltrate runoff. The construction activities related to installation of onsite stormwater
drainage that would serve the proposed project, is included as part of the proposed project and would not
result in any physical environmental effects beyond those identified throughout this CEQA Addendum. For
example, construction emissions for excavation and installation of the stormwater infrastructure is included
in Section III, Air Quality and 8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, drainage changes are analyzed in Section X,
Hydrology and Water Quality, and noise volumes from these activities are evaluated in Section XIII, Noise.
As the proposed project includes facilities to serve the proposed development, it would not result in the
need for construction of other new stormwater drainage facilities or expansions, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects. Therefore, no new impacts would occur.
Electricity, Natural Gas, & Telecommunications. Southern California Edison provides electricity to the
project site and Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas to the project site via existing utility
lines in Lakeshore Drive. Spectrum provides telephone service to the project site and Cox Communications
provides cable and internet to the project site.
The proposed project would install onsite infrastructure that would connect to the existing service systems.
The construction activities related to installation of onsite electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications
that would serve the proposed project, is included as part of the proposed project and would not result in
any physical environmental effects beyond those identified throughout this CEQA Addendum. For
example, construction emissions for excavation and installation of the infrastructure is included in Section
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 137 of 149
III, Air Quality and 8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and noise volumes from these activities are evaluated in
Section XIII, Noise. As the proposed project includes facilities to serve the proposed development, it would
not result in the need for construction of other new infrastructure facilities or expansions, the construction
of which could cause significant environmental effects. Therefore, no new impacts would occur.
(Sources: Project Site Plans)
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? (No New Impact.)
The proposed project would result in an increased demand for water supplies from the 140 residential units.
The Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP)
details that in 2020 the water demand in the City for residential uses was 129 gallons per day per capita,
which was below the water use target of 188.6 gallons per day per capita. To provide a conservative estimate
of project water use, a generation rate of 188.6 gallons per capita per day was used to estimate water demand
from the proposed project. As described in Section XIV, Population and Housing, the proposed project
would result in 458 additional residents at full occupancy. Based on the City’s 2020 water use target of
188.6 gallons per capita per day, the 458 additional residents would generate a water demand of 86,379
gallons per day (96.8 acre-feet per year). The project would limit water demand by inclusion of low-flow
plumbing and irrigation fixtures, pursuant to the California Title 24 requirements, and by reusing treated
rainwater to irrigate the park area, as detailed in the Project Description.
The EVMWD’s 2020 UWMP estimates water supply increase to 47,219 and total water demand of 38,932
in 2025, as shown in Table UT-1. The project’s demand of 96.8 acre-feet equates to 0.3 percent of projected
water demand in 2025. Therefore, the City would have water supplies available to serve the project. Because
the project’s residential uses are consistent with the existing General Plan land use and zoning designation
of the site, which are used to project future water demands, the demand from the project is included in the
UWMP demand projections listed in Table UT-1.
Table UT-1: Urban Water Management Plan Projections
Water
Supply
Additional Detail on
Water Supply
Projected Water Supply (AFY)
2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Reasonably
Available
Volume
Reasonably
Available
Volume
Reasonably
Available
Volume
Reasonably
Available
Volume
Reasonably
Available
Volume
Purchased or
imported
water
Western/Metropolitan1 26,286 26,286 26,286 26,286 26,286
Purchased or
imported
water
Raw Imported Water
Western/Metropolitan1,2 0 3,700 3,700 3,700 3,700
Groundwater Elsinore Valley
Subbasin3 5,500 5,500 5,500 5,500 5,500
Groundwater Coldwater Subbasin3 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200
Groundwater Bedford Subbasin3 1,300 1,300 1,300 1,300 1,300
Groundwater Lee Lake Subbasin3 875 875 875 875 875
Groundwater Palomar Well
Replacement3 450 450 450 450 450
Groundwater Temecula-Pauba GW3 0 0 750 750 750
Surface
Water Canyon Lake/CLWTP4 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500
Other IPR at Regional WRF5 0 0 0 940 1,970
Recycled Temescal Wash & Lake 7,270 8,027 8,863 8,960 8,960
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 138 of 149
Water
Supply
Additional Detail on
Water Supply
Projected Water Supply (AFY)
2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Reasonably
Available
Volume
Reasonably
Available
Volume
Reasonably
Available
Volume
Reasonably
Available
Volume
Reasonably
Available
Volume
Water Elsinore
Replenishment5
Recycled
Water Metered Customers6 1,459 1,459 1,459 1,459 1,459
Recycled
Water
Canyon Lake and
Summerly Golf
Course6
378 378 378 378 378
Total Projected Supply7: 47,219 51,675 53,261 54,298 55,328
Total Projected Demand: 38,932 41,994 45,313 48,085 50,967
1Imported water will be used to fill the gaps will be based on the availability of local supplies. There is no total right or safe yield. EVMWD
can purchase more water at an additional charge.
2 Starting in 2026, EVMWD plans to start purchasing about 3,700 AFY of raw imported water from Western/Metropolitan for treatment at the
CLWTP.
3 The safe yield for the groundwater subbasins will be established with their respective GSPs.
4 In settlement of litigation, EVMWD agreed not to treat more than 8,000 AFY of San Jacinto River flows in any water year at EVMWD’s
CLWTP. This 8,000 AFY limit applies only to San Jacinto River runoff and excludes any imported water conveyed in the river channel.
5 In accordance with its NPDES permit, EVMWD is permitted to discharging 0.5 MGD to Temescal Wash and 7.5 MGD to Lake Elsinore.
EVMWD is planning to use excess wastewater collected at the Regional WRF to implement an IPR project. It is anticipated that this water will
be available between 2035 and 2040.
6 Includes recycled water produced by the three EVMWD WRFs and recycled water from SRRRA and Eastern.
7 The total right or safe yield were not calculated because the groundwater safe yields are being updated as part of the GSP projects.
Source: EVMWD 2020 UWMP
The EVMWD 2020 UWMP details the available supply, including groundwater, surface water, imported
water, and recycled water would meet the projected demand during normal, single dry and multiple dry
years. Therefore, no new impacts related to water supplies from the proposed project would occur.
(Sources: 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (2020 UWMP), Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
May 2021, https://www.evmwd.com/home/showpublisheddocument/2233/637571268195170000)
c) 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? (No New Impact.)
EVMWD operates and maintains sewer collection pipes in the project area that feed into EVMWD’s trunk
sewers that convey wastewater to the Regional Water Reclamation Facility that has a regular capacity of
8.0 million gallons per day (MGD) and is going through an expansion to provide an additional 4 MGD of
treatment capacity.
Based on EVMWD’s wastewater generation rate of 3,500 gallons per day per acre for high density
residential, the proposed project would generate approximately 36,015 gallons per day over the 10.29-acre
site. The project generated 36,015 gallons per day is within the 4 MGD of additional capacity that is being
developed within the Regional Water Reclamation Facility. Therefore, no new impacts related to
wastewater treatment capacity would occur.
(Sources: 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (2020 UWMP), Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
May 2021, https://www.evmwd.com/home/showpublisheddocument/2233/637571268195170000;
EVMWD, 2016 Sewer System Master Plan, August 2016,
https://www.evmwd.com/home/showdocument?id=1773)
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 139 of 149
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? (No New
Impact.)
In 2019, approximately 92 percent of the solid waste from the City of Lake Elsinore, which was disposed
of in landfills, went to the El Sobrante Landfill. The El Sobrante Landfill is permitted to accept 16,054 tons
per day of solid waste and is permitted to operate through 2051. In June 2019, a maximum of 13,796 tons
in a day was disposed at the El Sobrante Landfill, which provides for a remaining capacity of 2,258 tons
per day.
Construction
Project construction would generate solid waste in the form of packaging and discarded materials. Section
5.408.1 of the 2016 California Green Building Standards Code requires demolition and construction
activities to recycle or reuse a minimum of 65 percent of the nonhazardous construction and demolition
waste. Thus, the demolition and construction solid waste that would be disposed of at the landfill would be
approximately 35 percent of the waste generated. As project construction does not require demolition of
any structure, solid waste generated would be limited in comparison to operation wastes. As described
above, the El Sobrante Landfill has a remaining capacity of approximately 2,258 tons per day. Therefore,
the facility would be able to accommodate the limited construction waste generated by the project, and no
new impacts would occur.
Operation
The CalEEMod solid waste generation rate for single-family residential land use is 0.41 tons per resident
per year. As described in Section XIV, Population and Housing, full occupancy of the proposed project
would generate approximately 458 new residents. Thus, operation of the project would generate
approximately 187.78 tons per solid waste per year; or 3.61 tons per week.
However, at least 75 percent of the solid waste is required by AB 341 to be recycled, which would reduce
the volume of landfilled solid waste to approximately 0.9 tons per week. As the El Sobrante Landfill has
additional capacity of approximately 2,258 tons per day, the solid waste generated by the project would be
within the capacity of the landfill. Thus, the proposed project would be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs and the project would not
impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. No new impacts related to landfill capacity would
occur.
(Sources: CalRecycle Solid Waste Information System Facility/Site Search. Available at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/; CalRecycle Jurisdiction Disposal and Alternative
Daily Cover (ADC) Tons by Facility (ca.gov). Accessed:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/DisposalReporting/Destination/DisposalByFacility)
g) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related
to solid waste? No New Impact.
The proposed project would result in new development that would generate an increased amount of solid
waste. All solid waste-generating activities within the City is subject to the requirements set forth in Section
5.408.1 of the 2016 California Green Building Standards Code that requires demolition and construction
activities to recycle or reuse a minimum of 65 percent of the nonhazardous construction and demolition
waste, and AB 341 that requires diversion of a minimum of 75 percent of operational solid waste.
Implementation of the proposed project would be consistent with all state regulations, as ensured through
the City’s development project permitting process. Therefore, the proposed project would comply with all
solid waste statute and regulations; and no new impacts would not occur.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 140 of 149
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding utilities and service systems. There have
not been 1) changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with
respect to the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major
revisions of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of
substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not
known and could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Mitigation Measures: The Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND mitigation measures for utilities
and service systems, which are listed previously, are applicable to the proposed project and would be
included in the Project MMRP to ensure implementation.
No new mitigation measures are required.
XX. WILDFIRES
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND describes that the Specific Plan area is surrounded by existing development and is not
typically subjected to wildland fires. As is typical of any development project, prior to approval of Design
Review, the Fire Department would review development projects and establish fire prevention measures to
ensure people and/or structures would not be unnecessarily exposed to fire hazards.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
HAZ-1. Listed previously in Section IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
The discussion below is based on CalFire Fire Hazard Severity Zone Mapping of the project site and
vicinity.
a) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan? (No New Impact.)
The project site is vacant and moderately covered with vegetation. The project site is adjacent to residences,
roadways, commercial uses, and developed areas within the urban environment. The project site is not
within or adjacent to any wildland areas. According to the CalFire Hazard Severity Zone map, the project
site is not within a high fire hazard zone. Also, as described previously, the proposed onsite street system
would meet City design standards for emergency access. Permitting of the onsite circulation would provide
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 141 of 149
adequate and safe circulation through the project area for emergency responders. Because the project is not
located within a high fire hazard zone and is required to comply with all applicable City codes, as verified
by the City, no new impacts related to wildfire emergency response or evacuation would occur.
(Sources: CalFire Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map, Accessed: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/; and CalFire
Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Lake Elsinore Local Responsibility Area, Accessed:
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5915/lake_elsinore.pdf)
b) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? (No New Impact.)
The project site is generally flat and does not contain or adjacent to slopes. The project site is adjacent to a
roadway, residences, and developed areas. The project site is not adjacent to any wildland areas, and as
determined by the CAL FIRE Hazard Severity Zone map, the project site is not within a high fire hazard
zone. There are no factors on or adjacent to the project site that would exacerbate wildfire risks. Thus, no
new impacts related to other factors that would expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from
a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire would occur from the project.
(Sources: CalFire Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map, Accessed: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/; and CalFire
Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Lake Elsinore Local Responsibility Area, Accessed:
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5915/lake_elsinore.pdf)
c) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as
roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire
risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? (No Impact.)
As described previously, the project site is not within a wildfire hazard zone. The project does not include
any infrastructure that would exacerbate fire risks. In addition, the project would provide internal streets
and fire suppression facilities (e.g., hydrants and sprinklers) that conform to the California Fire Code
requirements, included as Municipal Code Chapter 8.16, as verified through the City’s permitting process.
Therefore, no new impacts related to infrastructure that could exacerbate fire risks would occur with the
proposed project.
(Sources: CalFire Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map, Accessed: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/; and CalFire
Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Lake Elsinore Local Responsibility Area, Accessed:
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5915/lake_elsinore.pdf)
d) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or
downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage
changes? (No Impact.)
As described previously, the project site is not within a wildfire hazard zone. In addition, the
project site is relatively flat and adjacent to flat areas. There are no slope or hillsides that would
become unstable. In addition, the project would install onsite drainage that would convey runoff
to a water quality basin on the project site. Therefore, no new impacts related to flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes would not occur
from the proposed project.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 142 of 149
(Sources: CalFire Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map, Accessed: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/; and CalFire
Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Lake Elsinore Local Responsibility Area, Accessed:
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5915/lake_elsinore.pdf)
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding wildfires. There have not been 1) changes
related to development of the project site that involve new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial changes with respect to the
circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that require major revisions of the
Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the
severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new information of substantial importance
relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have
been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Mitigation Measures: The Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measure for wildfires,
which is listed previously, is applicable to the proposed project and would be included in the Project MMRP
to ensure implementation.
No new mitigation measures are required.
V. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Summary of Impacts Identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND
The Final MND determined that implementation of the Specific Plan would have limited potential to
degrade the quality of the environment and would not significantly affect the environment or result in
individually limited but cumulatively considerable impacts with implementation of the previously listed
mitigation measures. In addition, the Final MND determined that implementation of the Specific Plan
would not have the potential to significantly adversely affect humans, either directly or indirectly with
implementation of the previously listed mitigation measures.
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Air quality analysis, as listed in Section III, Air Quality.
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Unanticipated resources. As listed in Section V, Cultural Resources.
Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Grading and erosion control plans. As listed in Section VII, Geology and
soils.
Mitigation Measure GEO-2: Erosion and construction plans. As listed in Section VII, Geology and soils.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Fire Department Review. As listed in Section IX, Hazards and Hazardous
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 143 of 149
Materials.
Mitigation Measure HWQ-1: NPDES. As listed in Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality.
Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Noise Ordinance. As listed in Section XIII, Noise.
Mitigation Measure NOI-2: Construction. As listed in Section XIII, Noise.
Mitigation Measure PS-1: Public Service Fees. As listed in Section XIV, Public Services.
Mitigation Measure PS-2: Public Service Emergency Access. As listed in Section XIV, Public Services.
Mitigation Measure PS-3: Fire Services. As listed in Section XIV, Public Services.
Mitigation Measure TR-1: Traffic Study. As listed in Section XVII, Transportation.
Mitigation Measure TR-2: Traffic Fees. As listed in Section XVII, Transportation.
Mitigation Measure UT-1: Drainage Plan. As listed in Section XIX, Utilities and Service Systems.
Mitigation Measure UT-2: Solid waste. As listed in Section XIX, Utilities and Service Systems.
Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
The following are Mandatory Findings of Significance in accordance with Section 21083 of CEQA and
Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines.
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially 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,
substantially 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? (No New
Impact.)
As described in Section IV, Biological Resources, the project site consists of disturbed, ruderal habitat and
disturbed, non-vegetated areas that appear to be disked regularly The General Biological Assessment
determined that due to the disturbed condition of the site that is surrounded by development and Lakeshore
Drive, no sensitive plant or animal species have a potential to occur on the project site; therefore, no
sensitive habitat, sensitive species, or other biological resource would be impacted by the project.
As described in Section V, Cultural Resources, the project site does not contain any buildings or structures
that meet any of the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) criteria or qualify as
“historical resources” as defined by CEQA. Therefore, the proposed project would not cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. Also, due to previous ground-disturbance
activities and absence of bedrock and dependable water sources at the site no new impacts to important
examples of California prehistory would occur from the project.
(Sources: General Biological Assessment, Appendix B; Cultural Resources Study, Appendix C)
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,
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 144 of 149
and the effects of probable future projects)? (No New Impact.)
The project would develop 140 residences with recreation, open space, and associated infrastructure and
amenities on a site that was planned for such uses within an urban area. The cumulative effect of the
proposed project taken into consideration with other development projects in the area would be limited,
because the project would develop the site in consistency with the General Plan land use designation, zoning
designation, and municipal code. As described by the City’s General Plan EIR Section 6.1, Growth
Inducement and Section 4.0, Cumulative Impacts, which includes development of the project site pursuant
to the existing land use designations, buildout of the General Plan is anticipated to provide direction for
future growth and facilitate development. As described herein, the project site has a General Plan land use
designation of Lake View District Medium Density Residential that allows for a variety of residential types
and prescribes a density range of 7 to 18 units per net acre. The project would result in 14.4 units per net
acre, which is within the growth projections of the General Plan, and the cumulative impacts of which have
been identified in the General Plan EIR.
Also, as described above, all of the potential impacts related to implementation of the project would be less
than significant or reduced to a less than significant level with implementation of the Lakeshore Village
Specific Plan Final MND mitigation measures that would be imposed by the City and would effectively
reduce environmental impacts. The project would not result in any new substantial effects to any
environmental resource topic that could become cumulatively significant.
As discussed in Section III, Air Quality, SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook methodology describes
that any projects that result in daily emissions that exceed any of these thresholds would have both an
individually (project-level) and cumulatively significant air quality impact. If estimated emissions are less
than the thresholds, impacts would be considered less than significant. As shown in Tables AQ-2 through
AQ-5, CalEEMod results indicate that construction and operational emissions generated by the proposed
Project would not exceed SCAQMD. Therefore, the project’s operational emissions would not exceed the
NAAQS and CAAQS, would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant
impacts, and operational impacts would be less than significant.
As discussed in Section VIII, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, global climate change occurs as the result of
global emissions of GHGs. An individual development project does not have the potential to result in direct
and significant global climate change effects in the absence of cumulative sources of GHGs. The project’s
total annual GHG emissions at buildout would not exceed the annual GHG emissions threshold of 3,000
MTCO2e. As shown on Table GHG-2, the project would result in approximately 1,224.75 MTCO2e per
year. Therefore, the project would not result in cumulative impacts related to GHG emissions.
As discussed in Section XVII, Transportation, the project meets the City’s VMT screening criteria because
it is located within a low VMT-generating area. Therefore, cumulatively considerable transportation related
impacts would be less than significant. Overall, impacts to environmental resources or issue areas would
not be cumulatively considerable; and no new cumulative impacts would occur.
(Sources: Previous responses and associated studies)
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly? (No New Impact.)
The project proposes the construction and operation of 140 residences and related park and open space
areas. The project would not consist of any use or any activities that would result in a substantial negative
affect on persons in the vicinity. All resource topics associated with humans the proposed project have been
analyzed in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and were found to pose no impacts or
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 145 of 149
less-than-significant impacts, or less-than-significant impacts with implementation of Lakeshore Village
Specific Plan Final MND mitigation measures. For impacts related to humans, the topic areas that require
implementation of Specific Plan Final MND mitigation measures include construction related air quality
emissions and geology. The other subject areas that require implementation of mitigation measures are
related to cultural resources, hazards, transportation, and public services and utilities, which do not have an
adverse effect on a living human being. Consequently, with implementation of mitigation, no new impacts
on human beings directly or indirectly would occur.
No new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project when
compared to those identified in the Final MND. The proposed project is consistent with the impacts
identified in the Final MND and the level of impact remains unchanged from that cited in the Final MND.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that
would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental MND or other environmental document to
evaluate project impacts or mitigation measures exist regarding mandatory findings of significance. There
have not been 1) changes related to development of the project site that involve new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; 2) substantial
changes with respect to the circumstances under which development of the project site is undertaken that
require major revisions of the Final MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects
or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or 3) the availability of new
information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives
that were not known and could not have been known when the Final MND was adopted as completed.
Mitigation Measures: The Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Final MND mitigation measures, which are
listed previously, are applicable to the proposed project and would be included in the Project MMRP to
ensure implementation.
No new mitigation measures are required.
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 146 of 149
VI. DOCUMENT PREPARERS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED
This section identifies those persons who prepared or contributed to the preparation of this document. This
section is prepared in accordance with Section 15129 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Lead Agency:
City of Lake Elsinore
Damaris Abraham, Planning Manager
Kevin Beery, Associate Planner
Bradley Brophy, PE, Traffic Engineer
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
CEQA Document Preparer:
EPD Solutions, Inc.
Konnie Dobreva, J.D.
Renee Escario
Meaghan Truman
Brooke Blandino
Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis, Appendix A
Vista Environmental
Greg Tonkovich, AICP
General Biological Assessment, Appendix B
Hernandez Environmental Services
Shawn Gatchel-Hernandez, Principal Regulatory Specialist
Cultural Resources Study, Appendix C
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc.
Brian F. Smith, MA
Andrew J. Garrison, MA, RPA
Geotechnical Investigation and Geotechnical Update, Appendix D
Sladden Engineering, Inc.
Matthew J. Cohrt, PG, Principal Geologist
Brett L. Anderson, PG, Principal Engineer
Paleontological Assessment, Appendix E
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc.
Todd A. Wirths, M.S., Senior Paleontologist, California Professional Geologist No. 7588
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Appendix F
Sladden Engineering, Inc.
James W. Minor, PG, Project Geologist
Brett L. Anderson, PG, Principal Engineer
Preliminary Hydrology Study, Appendix G
Wilson Mikami Corporation
Scott M. Wilson, PE, PLS, Principal
Lakeshore Drive Condos Project - CEQA Addendum
Page 147 of 149
Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan, Appendix H
Wilson Mikami Corporation
Scott M. Wilson, PE, PLS, Principal
Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix I
Vista Environmental
Greg Tonkovich, AICP
Traffic Impact Analysis, Appendix J
EPD Solutions, Inc.
Meghan Macias, T.E.
Abby Pal
Daji Yuan
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis Memo, Appendix K
EPD Solutions, Inc.
Meghan Macias, T.E.
Daji Yuan
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, will hold
a Public Hearing on March 28, 2023 at the Lake Elsinore Cultural Center, 183 North Main Street,
Lake Elsinore, California, 92530, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard,
to consider the following item:
Planning Application No. 2021-38 (Lakeshore Drive Condos): A request for approval of
Tentative Tract Map No. 38271 (TTM No. 2021-02) to subdivide an approximately 10.29-acre site
into one lot for condominium purposes, in conjunction with Residential Design Review (RDR No.
2021-05) to construct 140 two-story attached condominium residences and associated
improvements within the Attached Residential (AR) and Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF) land
use designations of the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan. The project site is located on the
southwest side of Lakeshore Drive at the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street.
(APNs: 379-230-001, 379-230-002; Applicant: Lake Elsinore Lakeshore, LLC; Property Owner:
Lake Elsinore Lakeshore, LLC). On March 7, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public
hearing to consider this matter and recommended City Council approval of the application.
Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15162, the project
would not have a significant effect on the environment and no new environmental documentation
is necessary because all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in a
previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND No. 2003-03) prepared for the
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an Addendum
providing minor additions and changes to MND No. 2003-03 has been prepared for the project.
All potentially significant effects have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to MND No. 2003-03
and none of the conditions described in Section 15162 have occurred. MND No. 2003-03 was
adopted by the City Council on October 28, 2003.
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to submit written information, express opinions or otherwise
submit written evidence by email to calvarez@lake-elsinore.org. The State strongly recommends that
persons exercising their right to engage in political expression, including attendance and participation
in a city council meeting, should utilize alternative channels, such as Zoom videoconferencing utilized
by the City of Lake Elsinore, in place of in-person gatherings. Consistent with State and County Public
Health Orders, remote public participation is allowed in the following ways:
1) Cable T.V. Broadcast on Spectrum Channel 29 and Frontier Channel 31.
2) Livestream on the City’s Website.
3) Email comments to calvarez@lake-elsinore.org before or during the City Council meeting,
prior to the close of public hearing on this item, to be read by the City Clerk during public
comment. Lengthy public comment may be summarized in the interest of time.
If you wish to legally challenge any action taken by the City on the above matter, you may be limited
to raising only those issues you or someone else at the Public Hearing described in this notice, or in
written correspondence delivered to the City prior to or at the Public Hearing. If you require
accommodation to participate in a Public Hearing, please contact the Administrative Secretary at (951)
674-3124 ext. 297. All Agenda materials are available for review on the City’s website at www.lake-
elsinore.org the Friday before the Public Hearing.
FURTHER INFORMATION on this item may be obtained by contacting Kevin Beery, Associate
Planner, at kbeery@lake-elsinore.org or (951) 674-3124, ext. 805.
March 3, 2023
Candice Alvarez, MMC,
City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE City of Lake Elsinore
A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ON TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 2023, AT THE LAKE
ELSINORE CULTURAL CENTER, 183 NORTH MAIN STREET, LAKE ELSINORE, CA, 92530, AT 7:00 P.M. OR AS SOON THEREAFTER AS THE
ITEM MAY BE HEARD TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PROJECT:
Planning Application No. 2021-38 (Lakeshore Drive Condos): A request for approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 38271 (TTM No. 2021-02) to
subdivide an approximately 10.29-acre site into one lot for condominium purposes, in conjunction with Residential Design Review (RDR No. 2021-05) to
construct 140 two-story attached condominium residences and associated improvements within the Attached Residential (AR) and
Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF) land use designations of the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan. The project site is located on the southwest side of
Lakeshore Drive at the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street. (APNs: 379-230-001, 379-230-002; Applicant: Lake Elsinore Lakeshore,
LLC; Property Owner: Lake Elsinore Lakeshore, LLC). On March 7, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider this matter and
recommended City Council approval of the application.
Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15162, the project would not have a significant effect on the environment
and no new environmental documentation is necessary because all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in a previously adopted
Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND No. 2003-03) prepared for the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an
Addendum providing minor additions and changes to MND No. 2003-03 has been prepared for the project. All potentially significant effects have been
avoided or mitigated pursuant to MND No. 2003-03 and none of the conditions described in Section 15162 have occurred. MND No. 2003-03 was adopted
by the City Council on October 28, 2003.
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to submit written information, express opinions or otherwise submit written evidence by email to calvarez@lake-
elsinore.org. The State strongly recommends that persons exercising their right to engage in political expression, including attendance and participation
in a city council meeting, should utilize alternative channels, such as Zoom videoconferencing utilized by the City of Lake Elsinore, in place of in-person
gatherings. Consistent with State and County Public Health Orders, remote public participation is allowed in the following ways:
1) Cable T.V. Broadcast on Spectrum Channel 29 and Frontier Channel 31.
2) Livestream on the City’s Website.
3) Email comments to calvarez@lake-elsinore.org before or during the City Council meeting, prior to the close of public hearing on this item, to
be read by the City Clerk during public comment. Lengthy public comment may be summarized in the interest of time.
If you wish to legally challenge any action taken by the City on the above matter, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else at
the Public Hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City prior to or at the Public Hearing. If you require
accommodation to participate in a Public Hearing, please contact the Administrative Secretary at (951) 674-3124 ext. 297. All Agenda materials are
available for review on the City’s website at www.lake-elsinore.org the Friday before the Public Hearing.
FURTHER INFORMATION on this item may be obtained by contacting Kevin Beery, Associate Planner at kbeery@lake-elsinore.org or (951) 674-3124,
ext. 805.
Candice Alvarez, MMC, City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE City of Lake Elsinore
A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ON TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 2023, AT THE LAKE
ELSINORE CULTURAL CENTER, 183 NORTH MAIN STREET, LAKE ELSINORE, CA, 92530, AT 7:00 P.M. OR AS SOON THEREAFTER AS THE
ITEM MAY BE HEARD TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PROJECT:
Planning Application No. 2021-38 (Lakeshore Drive Condos): A request for approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 38271 (TTM No. 2021-02) to
subdivide an approximately 10.29-acre site into one lot for condominium purposes, in conjunction with Residential Design Review (RDR No. 2021-05) to
construct 140 two-story attached condominium residences and associated improvements within the Attached Residential (AR) and
Commercial/Residential Flex (CRF) land use designations of the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan. The project site is located on the southwest side of
Lakeshore Drive at the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Gunnerson Street. (APNs: 379-230-001, 379-230-002; Applicant: Lake Elsinore Lakeshore,
LLC; Property Owner: Lake Elsinore Lakeshore, LLC). On March 7, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider this matter and
recommended City Council approval of the application.
Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15162, the project would not have a significant effect on the environment
and no new environmental documentation is necessary because all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in a previously adopted
Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND No. 2003-03) prepared for the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an
Addendum providing minor additions and changes to MND No. 2003-03 has been prepared for the project. All potentially significant effects have been
avoided or mitigated pursuant to MND No. 2003-03 and none of the conditions described in Section 15162 have occurred. MND No. 2003-03 was adopted
by the City Council on October 28, 2003.
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to submit written information, express opinions or otherwise submit written evidence by email to calvarez@lake-
elsinore.org. The State strongly recommends that persons exercising their right to engage in political expression, including attendance and participation
in a city council meeting, should utilize alternative channels, such as Zoom videoconferencing utilized by the City of Lake Elsinore, in place of in-person
gatherings. Consistent with State and County Public Health Orders, remote public participation is allowed in the following ways:
1) Cable T.V. Broadcast on Spectrum Channel 29 and Frontier Channel 31.
2) Livestream on the City’s Website.
3) Email comments to calvarez@lake-elsinore.org before or during the City Council meeting, prior to the close of public hearing on this item, to
be read by the City Clerk during public comment. Lengthy public comment may be summarized in the interest of time.
If you wish to legally challenge any action taken by the City on the above matter, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else at
the Public Hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City prior to or at the Public Hearing. If you require
accommodation to participate in a Public Hearing, please contact the Administrative Secretary at (951) 674-3124 ext. 297. All Agenda materials are
available for review on the City’s website at www.lake-elsinore.org the Friday before the Public Hearing.
FURTHER INFORMATION on this item may be obtained by contacting Kevin Beery, Associate Planner at kbeery@lake-elsinore.org or (951) 674-3124,
ext. 805.
Candice Alvarez, MMC, City Clerk
City of Lake Elsinore
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
OFFICIAL NOTICE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
City of Lake Elsinore
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
OFFICIAL NOTICE
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT