HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem No. 29 PA No. 2019-63 (Lakeview Plaza) Neighborhood Shopping CenterCity Council Agenda Report
City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
www.lake-elsinore.org
File Number: TMP 21-214
Agenda Date: 6/22/2021 Status: Approval FinalVersion: 1
File Type: Council Public
Hearing
In Control: City Council / Successor Agency
Agenda Number: 29)
Planning Application No. 2019-63 (Lakeview Plaza) Requesting to Develop a New
Neighborhood Shopping Center with Four (4) Buildings (43,120 sq. ft. in total) and 207 Parking
Spaces
1.Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ER 2020-01) (SCH NO.
2021030580) FOR PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2019-63 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37854
AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2019-24);
2.Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2019-63 (TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP NO. 37854 AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2019-24) IS CONSISTENT
WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION
PLAN (MSHCP);
3.Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37854 SUBDIVIDING 3.9 ACRES INTO
FOUR PARCELS RANGING IN SIZE FROM 0.48 ACRES TO 1.49 ACRES LOCATED AT APNS
375-092-002 THROUGH 006; and
4.Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2019-24 PROVIDING BUILDING
DESIGN AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE LAKEVIEW PLAZA PROJECT LOCATED
AT APNS 375-092-002 THROUGH 006.
Page 1 City of Lake Elsinore Printed on 12/29/2023
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Jason Simpson, City Manager
Prepared by: Damaris Abraham, Senior Planner
Date: June 22, 2021
Subject: Planning Application No. 2019-63 (Lakeview Plaza) requesting to develop a
new neighborhood shopping center with four (4) buildings (43,120 sq. ft. in
total) and 207 parking spaces
Applicant: Shahin Motamed Hashemi, Lakeview Centre, LLC
Recommendation
1. Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ER 2020-01) (SCH
NO. 2021030580) FOR PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2019-63 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
NO. 37854 AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2019-24);
2. Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2019-63
(TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37854 AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2019-
24) IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES
HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP);
3. Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37854 SUBDIVIDING 3.9
ACRES INTO FOUR PARCELS RANGING IN SIZE FROM 0.48 ACRES TO 1.49 ACRES
LOCATED AT APNS 375-092-002 THROUGH 006; and
4. Adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2019-24 PROVIDING
BUILDING DESIGN AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE LAKEVIEW PLAZA
PROJECT LOCATED AT APNS 375-092-002 THROUGH 006.
Planning Commission Action
On May 18, 2021, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing and
recommended approval of the project to the City Council with a 3-0 vote. The applicant attended
the hearing. No one spoke in opposition to the project.
Project Location
The 3.9-acre project site is located north of Lakeshore Drive, northwest of Manning Street, and
southwest of Ryan Avenue (APNs 375-092-002, 003, 004, 005, and 006).
PA 2019-63 (Lakeview Plaza)
CC: 06/22/2021
Page 2
Environmental Setting
EXISTING
LAND USE
GENERAL PLAN ZONING
Project
Site
Vacant Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Neighborhood Commercial (C-1)
North Vacant &
Residential
Hillside Residential (HR) Hillside Single-Family Residential (R-H)
South Vacant Recreational (R) Lakeshore (L)
East Vacant Hillside Residential (HR) Hillside Single-Family Residential (R-H)
West Vacant Neighborhood Commercial (NC)
& General Commercial (GC)
Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) &
General Commercial (C-2)
Table 1: Environmental Setting
Project Description
The Lakeview Plaza Project consists of applications for a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM 37854) and
a Commercial Design Review (CDR 2019-24), which collectively are being processed under
Planning Application No. 2019-63.
Tentative Parcel Map No. 37854 is proposing to subdivide the 3.9-acre site into four (4) parcels
ranging in size from 0.48 acres to 1.49 acres. The project will be required to form a Property
Owner’s Association (POA) for reciprocal access easements, shared parking spaces as well as
for the maintenance of common areas. Table 2 below provides parcel summary information:
Parcel Number Approximate Parcel Size
(acres)
1 0.79
2 1.49
3 1.14
4 0.48
Total 3.9
Table 2: Parcel Summary
Commercial Design Review No. 2019-24 is proposing to construct a neighborhood retail center
with four (4) buildings ranging in size from 3,480 sq. ft. to 15,600 sq. ft. (approximately 43,120 sq.
ft. in total) with 207 parking spaces, including 12 accessible spaces and 29 compact spaces and
related improvements as follows:
Floor Plans
Building 1: 10,000 sq. ft. retail building on Parcel 1
Building 2: 15,600 sq. ft. retail building on Parcel 2
Building 3: 14,040 sq. ft. total building on Parcel 3
o Retail: 10,520 sq. ft.
o Restaurant: 3,520 sq. ft.
Building 4: 3,480 sq. ft. restaurant building on Parcel 4
Architecture and Treatments
The buildings will be a single-story buildings with a maximum height of 30 feet. Each building
would incorporate architectural elements (such as parapets) of different heights that would
PA 2019-63 (Lakeview Plaza)
CC: 06/22/2021
Page 3
provide for a varying roofline. The buildings would be constructed of earth tone (off-white, light
brown, and beige) exterior cement plaster, and stone veneer. The buildings would incorporate
decorative architectural features including awnings and trellis features.
Grading
Currently, the topography for the project site generally rises approximately eight (8) to twenty-four
(24) feet in elevation from its Lakeshore Drive frontage to Ryan Avenue, with a significant portion
near the middle of the site rising upwards of forty (40) plus feet due to the rolling terrain. Earthwork
for the site is anticipated to require 85,019 cubic yards of cut, 109 cubic yards of fill, and 84,910
cubic yards of export. Upon completion of grading activities, the improved project site pad will
generally be at or up to three feet above Lakeshore Drive street grade. A retaining wall (“pile &
lagging wall w/ tieback”) reaching a maximum height of 42 feet and concrete “V” ditch will be
constructed adjacent to the Ryan Avenue frontage at the rear (northeast) boundary of the project
site. A similar retaining wall (“pile & lagging wall w/ tieback”) reaching a maximum height of 28
feet at the rear with a concrete “V” ditch will be constructed on the southwestern property line.
Landscaping
The proposed landscaping plan has been designed to complement the architectural style for the
proposed buildings. The project site would include approximately 29,009 sq. ft. of landscaping,
representing 16 percent of the site. Landscaping would be provided in the street setback and
interior property line setbacks along the perimeter of the project site, as well as around the
buildings. Trees and a variety of shrubs are proposed to be utilized for landscape massing, accent
plantings, groundcover, and screening. Vines would be planted to cover the retaining walls.
Site Access
Vehicular Access to the project site would be taken from either of the two (2) new driveways to
be located on Lakeshore Drive or from the driveway to be located on Manning Street. Access on
Lakeshore Drive is planned via one signalized full-access driveway and one right-in right-out
driveway. Access on Manning Street is planned via one full access driveway.
Street Improvements
Lakeshore Drive is a Secondary Highway as shown on the General Plan. The applicant is required
to dedicate approximately 15 feet for a total right-of -way of 45 feet wide from the centerline to the
project property line. Street improvements on Lakeshore Drive along the project site’s frontage
would include sidewalk, landscape, and a new six‐foot wide bike lane (Class II).
Manning Street is a local street and the applicant is required to dedicate for a total right-of-way of
15 feet wide from the centerline to the project property line. Street improvements on Manning
Street along the project site’s frontage would include sidewalk and landscape.
Analysis
General Plan Consistency
The project has a General Plan Land Use designation of Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and is
located within the Country Club Heights District. The NC Land Use designation allows
neighborhood shopping centers and small convenience centers which offer day-to-day retail
PA 2019-63 (Lakeview Plaza)
CC: 06/22/2021
Page 4
goods and services required by residents in the immediate vicinity. The NC designation is
intended to provide a concentration of retail uses including, but not limited to, personal services,
food and general merchandise stores, eating establishments, and repair stores, and similar and
compatible uses with a maximum 0.30 Floor Area Ratio (FAR). The project is proposing to develop
a neighborhood shopping center with 0.24 FAR. Therefore, the project is consistent with the
General Plan.
Municipal Code Consistency
The current zoning for the subject site is Neighborhood Commercial (C-1). According to Section
17.120.040 of the C-1 zone, there is no minimum lot size required for a property located in the C-
1 zone. The development of the shopping center will provide a safe and efficient on-site circulation
and convenient access to surface streets with adequate capacity. The proposed tentative map for
the subdivision of the 3.9-acre site into four (4) parcels and ranging in size from 0.48 acres to 1.49
acres will provide sufficient parcel size to ensure adequate buffering and screening where needed
to protect residential developments. Therefore, the project meets the site criteria identified in
Section 17.120.040 of the C-1 zone. The tentative map also complies with Chapter 16.24
(Tentative Map) of the LEMC and the Subdivision Map Act.
The C-1 zone is intended to provide locations for general retail and office uses, which offer the
sale of goods and services to the general public and which, through characteristics of their
operation, serve primarily the day-to-day shopping needs of the local residents. The project is
proposing to construct shell buildings for future tenants for retail and restaurant use. Below are
the relevant development standards applicable to the project as identified in the C-1 zone:
Development Standard Required Proposed
Front Setback 15’-0” 15’-0”
Side Yard (ROW) 15’-0” 15’-0”
Building Height 35’-0” 30’-0”
Landscape improvement:
Adjacent to Street 15’-0” 15’-0”
Landscape Coverage 15% 16%
Table 3: Development Standards
Parking Analysis
Section 17.148.030.A of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) requires one (1) space for
each 250 sq. ft. of gross floor area for commercial uses. Section 17.148.030.E.13 of the LEMC
requires one (1) space for each 45 sq. ft. of customer area, plus one (1) space for each 200 sq.
ft. of noncustomer area for restaurants. The proposed project would require 223 parking spaces.
The project is proposing to provide 207 parking spaces including 29 compact spaces based on
the parking analysis completed for the proposed project. The following findings are in accordance
with Section 17.148.030.D of the LEMC for the parking reduction:
1. A Shared Parking Analysis provided in the Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by TJW
Engineering, Inc., dated 1-7-2020 was submitted and approved by the Engineering
Department.
2. An Urban Land Institute (ULI) Shared Parking Model was prepared for the proposed
project based on the land uses and square footages as identified on the site plan. The
analysis is based on the principle that different land uses have different peak periods of
PA 2019-63 (Lakeview Plaza)
CC: 06/22/2021
Page 5
parking demand, therefore they may be able to share a single pool of parking. This would
allow for less parking than if each use had to provide enough parking to satisfy its peak
parking demand separately. The shared parking model also includes adjustments for
mode splits (using transit, biking, or walking to site) and internal trip capture (trips between
two land uses on a single site – such as a patron visiting a retail space and then picking
up food at a restaurant within the same site).
3. The Shared Parking Analysis supports the finding that the number of parking spaces
actually needed for proposed use is less than that required by the code. Based on the
results of the shared parking analysis, the proposed parking supply of 207 parking spaces
including 29 compact spaces is projected to adequately accommodate peak parking
demand at the project site.
4. The compact spaces will only account for 14% of the required parking spaces and will not
affect traffic and pedestrian safety by the modification of the parking requirements.
5. Reduced parking will not affect the health, safety and welfare of the public.
6. The project has been conditioned to ensure compliance with the findings and the intent of
Section 17.148.030.D of the LEMC and to ensure that additional parking spaces will be
provided per code requirements should demand for parking increase on site (COA Nos.
19 and 20).
The architectural design of the proposed building complies with the Nonresidential Development
Standards (Chapter 17.112) of the LEMC. The architecture of the building has been designed to
achieve harmony and compatibility with surrounding area. The colors and materials proposed will
assist in blending the architecture into the existing landscape and are compatible with other colors
and materials used on other properties near the project site. The proposed landscaping
improvements serve to enhance the building designs and soften portions of building elevations,
provide shade and break-up expanses of pavement.
The Design Review Committee that includes staff from Planning, Building and Safety, Fire, and
Engineering have reviewed the proposed Project, and have conditioned the project to ensure
compliance with the general plan, the municipal code, and the related environmental document.
AB 52 Tribal Consultations
On January 29, 2020, the City provided written notification of the Project in accordance with AB
52 to all of the Native American tribes that requested to receive such notification from the Ci ty.
Staff received requests from Rincon, Pechanga, and Soboba Tribes within the 30-day period,
requesting to initiate consultation. Consultation was concluded with the Rincon Band of Luiseño
Indians on April 24, 2020. Consultation is still ongoing with the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians
and the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians pursuant to their request. Mitigation measures have
been added to address a concern over the potential for uncovering tribal cultural resources
(TCRs) or other tribal‐affiliated resources during construction of the project.
Environmental Determination
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, an Initial Study (Environmental Review No. 2020-
01) was prepared for the project to assess potential environmental impacts. The Initial Study
revealed that the Project would have potentially significant environmental impacts but those
PA 2019-63 (Lakeview Plaza)
CC: 06/22/2021
Page 6
potentially significant impacts could be mitigated to less than significant levels. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND) (SCH# 2021030580) was prepared and was made available for
public review and comment for a 30-day review period from March 29, 2021 to April 28, 2021.
The MND determined that the proposed Project would have potentially significant environmental
impacts upon Biological Resources, Cultural and Tribal Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, Noise, and Wildfire. These impacts will be mitigated to below a level of
significance through compliance with the mitigation measures set forth in the MND and the
Mitigation Monitoring Report (MMRP). Notice to all interested persons and agencies inviting
comments on the MND was published in accordance with the provisions of CEQA, and posted at
the Office of the County Clerk of Riverside County and at the State Clearinghouse on March 29,
2021 for a 30-day public comment period. No comments were received during the public review
comment period.
MSHCP Consistency
The project is consistent with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The project site is not located in a Criteria Cell and was not required
to be processed through the Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process (LEAP) and Joint Project Review
(JPR) processes. The project complies with all other applicable requirements of the MSHCP.
Fiscal Impact
The time and costs related to processing this application have been covered by application fees
paid for by the applicant. No General Fund budgets have been allocated or used in the processing
of this application.
Exhibits
A – CEQA Resolution
A1 – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
B – MSHCP Resolution
C – TPM Resolution
D – CDR Resolution
E – Conditions of Approval
F – IS/MND
G – Vicinity Map
H – Aerial Map
I – TPM 37854
J – Design Review Package
K – Perspective Street Views
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ER 2020-01)
(SCH NO. 2021030580) FOR PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2019-63 (TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP NO. 37854 AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2019-24)
Whereas, Shahin Motamed Hashemi, Lakeview Centre, LLC has filed an application with
the City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2019-63
(Tentative Parcel Map No. 37854 and Commercial Design Review No. 2019-24) to subdivide the
3.9-acre vacant site into four (4) parcels ranging in size from 0.48 acres to 1.49 acres. The project
also proposes to construct a neighborhood retail center with four (4) buildings ranging in size from
3,480 sq. ft. to 15,600 sq. ft. (approximately 43,120 sq. ft. in total) with 207 parking spaces,
including 12 accessible spaces and 29 compact spaces and related improvements. The project
site is located north of Lakeshore Drive, northwest of Manning Street, and southwest of Ryan
Avenue (APNs 375-092-002, 375-092-003, 375-092-004, 375-092-005, and 375-092-006); and,
Whereas, the project is subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.: “CEQA”) and the State Implementation Guidelines
for CEQA (14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15000, et seq.: “CEQA Guidelines”)
because the Project involves an activity which may cause either a direct physical change in the
environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and
involves the issuance of a lease, permit license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or
more public agencies (Public Resources Code Section 21065); and,
Whereas, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, the City conducted an Initial
Study to determine if the project would have a significant effect on the environment. The Initial
Study revealed that the project would have potentially significant environmental impacts but those
potentially significant impacts could be mitigated to less than significant levels; and,
Whereas, based upon the results of the Initial Study (Environmental Review No. 2020-
01), and based upon the standards set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, it was
determined that it was appropriate to prepare and circulate a Mitigated Negative Declaration
(MND) for the project; and,
Whereas, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072, on March 29, 2021, the City duly
issued a notice of intent to adopt the MND; and,
Whereas, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15073, the MND was made
available for public review and comment for a minimum of 30 days beginning on March 29, 2021,
and ending on April 28, 2021; and,
Whereas, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the project has
been prepared in accordance with Section 21081.6 of CEQA; and,
Whereas, the Planning Commission (Commission) has been delegated with the
responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council (Council) for adopting MNDs; and,
Whereas, the MND was sent to the Commission members on or about March 29, 2021
and considered by the Commission on May 18, 2021 at a duly noticed Public Hearing and, after
consideration of evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other
CC Reso. No. 2021-____
Page 2 of 3
interested parties on the adequacy of the MND, the Commission adopted a resolution
recommending that the Council adopt the MND for the project; and,
Whereas, on June 22, 2021, 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 evaluated all comments, written and oral, received from
persons who have reviewed the MND. The Council hereby finds and determines that all public
comments have been addressed.
Section 3: The Council hereby finds that the MND for the project is adequate and has
been completed in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines and the City’s procedures for
implementation of CEQA. The Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in
the MND and finds that the MND represents the independent judgment of the City.
Section 4: The Council further finds and determines that none of the circumstances listed
in CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5 requiring recirculation of the MND are present and that it
would be appropriate to adopt the MND as proposed.
Section 5: The Council hereby makes, adopts, and incorporates the following findings
regarding the potential environmental impacts of the project and the analysis and conclusions set
forth in the MND:
1. Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study was released for public review and
mitigation measures set forth in the Initial Study would avoid the effects or mitigate the
effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur.
Based upon the Initial Study conducted for the project, there is substantial evidence
suggesting that all potential impacts to the environment resulting from the project can be
mitigated to less than significant levels. All appropriate and feasible mitigation has been
incorporated into the project design. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP)
contains an implementation program for each mitigation measure. After implementation of
the mitigation contained in the MMRP, potential environmental impacts will be reduced to
less than significant levels.
2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency including
the initial study and any comments received, that the Project will have significant effect on
the environment.
Pursuant to the evidence received, including comment letters, and in the light of the whole
record presented, the project will not have a significant effect on the environment with the
incorporation of the mitigation measures identified in the MMRP.
CC Reso. No. 2021-____
Page 3 of 3
Section 6: Based upon the evidence presented, the above findings, and the conditions of
approval imposed upon the project, the Council hereby adopts MND (ER 2020-01 SCH No.
2021030580) and the MMRP, which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A1”, for Planning Application
No. 2019-63 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 37854 and Commercial Design Review No. 2019-24).
Section 7: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Section 8: 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 22nd day of June, 2021.
Robert E. Magee, 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. 2021-____ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California,
at the regular meeting of June 22, 2021, and that the same was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Candice Alvarez, MMC
City Clerk
1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
PROJECT NAME: Lakeview Plaza: Planning Application (PA) No. 2019-63; Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) No. 37854; Commercial
Design Review (CDR) No. 2019-24; and Environmental Review No. 2020-01 (ER 2020-01)
DATE: April 2021
PROJECT MANAGER: Damaris Abraham, Senior Planner
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Project consists of applications for a Tentative Parcel Map No. 37854 (TPM 37854) and a Commercial Design
Review No. 2019-24 (CDR 2019-24) which are being processed collectively under Planning Application No. 2019-
63 (PA 2019-63). The Project will provide a neighborhood retail center with approximately 43,120 square feet (sq.
ft.) of retail in 4 separate building clusters, as outlined below:
Total Building – 43,120 sq. ft.
o Retail – 36,120 sq. ft.
o Restaurant – 7,000 sq. ft.
PROJECT LOCATION: The Project site is located in the City of Lake Elsinore (City), Riverside County, California, northeast of Lakeshore
Drive, northwest of Manning Street, and southwest of Ryan Avenue. The Project site consists of an approximately
3.9-acre undeveloped area (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 375-092-002, 375-092-003, 375-092-004, 375-092-005, and
375-092-006,) and is located within Section 6, Township 6S, Range 5W as shown on the Lake Elsinore, California
7.5 minute U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) topographic map.
2
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
III.
AIR QUALITY
MM-AQ -1 MM-AQ -1: During construction, the applicant and
contractors shall comply with the following to the
satisfaction of the City Planning Department and
Inspectors as applicable:
All construction equipment shall be maintained in
proper tune.
All construction vehicles shall be prohibited from
excessive idling. Excessive idling is defined as five
minutes or longer.
Establish an electricity supply to the construction site
and use electric powered equipment instead of diesel-
powered equipment or generators, where feasible.
The use of heavy construction equipment shall be
suspended during first stage smog alerts.
“Clean diesel” equipment shall be used when
modified engines (catalyst equipped, or newer
Moyer Program retrofit) are available at a
reasonable cost.
The Project must follow SCAQMD rules and
requirements with regards to fugitive dust control,
which include but are not limited to the following:
o All active construction areas shall be watered
two (2) times daily.
o All haul trucks shall be covered or shall
maintain at least two (2) feet of freeboard.
o All unpaved parking or staging areas shall be
paved or watered a minimum of two (2) times
daily.
o Speed on unpaved roads shall be reduced to
less than 15 mph.
o Any visible dirt deposition on any public
roadway shall be swept or washed at the site
access points within 30 minutes.
o Any on-site stockpiles of debris, dirt or other
dusty material shall be covered or watered
twice daily.
o All operations on any unpaved surface shall be
Applicant/Developer
and Contractors
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Building &
Safety Division
and Engineering
Dept.
3
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
suspended if winds exceed 25 mph.
Carpooling shall be encouraged for construction
workers.
Any dirt hauled off-site shall be wet down or
covered.
Access points shall be washed or swept daily.
Construction sites shall be sandbagged for erosion
control.
Use low VOC content paint wherever possible.
The Project shall comply with all SCAQMD Rule
461 requirements regarding gasoline transfer and
dispensing.
MM-AQ -2: The number of hauling trips during
construction activities, including importing or exporting
of soil materials during grading, shall not exceed 107
daily trips.
Applicant/Developer
and Contractors
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Building &
Safety Division
and Engineering
Dept.
MM-AQ -3: To minimize diesel particulate emissions
from construction activities, the applicant and
contractors shall implement the following:
All off-road construction equipment shall be fitted
with Tier 4 engines to the extent practical and
feasible by the determination of the City;
Construction vehicle staging areas shall be located
as far as possible from nearby residences;
The operation of onsite diesel equipment shall be
suspended during Stage 4 Air Alerts when
SCAQMD identifies the Air Quality Index (AQI) as
“Unhealthy” (http://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-
quality).
Applicant/Developer
and Contractors
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Building &
Safety Division
and Engineering
Dept.
IV.
BIOLOGICAL
RESOURCES
MM-BIO-1: MSHCP Fees. Prior to issuance of a
building permit, the applicant/developer shall pay the
Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (MSHCP) development mitigation
fee for commercial development in effect at the time the
permits are issued.
Applicant/Developer CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Planning and
Building &
Safety Divisions
4
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
MM-BIO-2: Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Survey
and Avoidance. Implementation of the following
recommended measures would help assure avoidance
and/or minimization of potential impacts to nesting birds
and raptors:
To avoid take of nesting birds, vegetation removal
and initial ground disturbance should occur outside
the nesting bird breeding season, which is
approximately February 1 through August 31. If
construction must begin within the bird breeding
season, then no more than one (1) week prior to
ground disturbance and/or vegetation removal, a
nesting bird preconstruction survey should be
conducted by a qualified biologist within the
disturbance footprint plus a 300-foot buffer. If no
nests are observed, no further action is required.
If nests are found, their locations should be flagged
and then mapped onto an aerial photograph of the
Project site and/or recorded with the use of a GPS
unit. An appropriate avoidance buffer (size of buffer
depending upon the species and the proposed work
activity) should be determined and demarcated by
a qualified biologist. No work should occur within
the avoidance buffer, and a qualified biologist
should be present on site to monitor bird behavior
and ensure no disturbance to the nest occurs as
necessary.
If disturbance is detected (e.g., alarm calling, flight
from the nest) as determined by the qualified
biologist, work in the area should halt immediately
until such time as the young have left the nest of
their own volition. Work may take place on other
areas of the Project site as long the activity does
not likewise result in disturbance to the nest or
nesting bird, as determined by a qualified biologist.
Applicant/Developer
and Qualified
Biologist
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Planning
Division and
Engineering
Dept.
V.
CULTURAL
MM-CUL-1: Unanticipated Resources. The
developer/permit holder or any successor in interest
Developer/Permit
Holder or Any
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
5
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
RESOURCES shall comply with the following for the life of this permit.
If during ground disturbance activities, unanticipated
cultural resources are discovered, the following
procedures shall be followed:
1. All ground disturbance activities within 100 feet of
the discovered cultural resource shall be halted until a
meeting is convened between the developer, the
Project Archaeologist, the Native American tribal
representative(s) from consulting tribes (or other
appropriate ethnic/cultural group representative), and
the Community Development Director or their designee
to discuss the significance of the find.
2. The developer shall call the Community
Development Director or their designee immediately
upon discovery of the cultural resource to convene the
meeting.
3. At the meeting with the aforementioned parties, the
significance of the discoveries shall be discussed, and
a decision is to be made, with the concurrence of the
Community Development Director or their designee, as
to the appropriate mitigation (documentation, recovery,
avoidance, etc.) for the cultural resource.
4. Further ground disturbance shall not resume within
the area of the discovery until a meeting has been
convened with the aforementioned parties and a
decision is made, with the concurrence of the
Community Development Director or their designee, as
to the appropriate mitigation measures.
Successor in
Interest
Planning
Division and
Engineering
Dept.
MM-CUL-2: Archaeologist/CRMP. Prior to issuance
of grading permits, the applicant/developer shall
provide evidence to the Community Development
Department that a Secretary of Interior Standards
qualified, and certified Registered Professional
Archaeologist (RPA) has been contracted to implement
a Cultural Resource Monitoring Program (CRMP) that
addresses the details of all activities that must be
completed and procedures that must be followed
regarding cultural resources associated with this
Applicant/Developer CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Planning
Division
6
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
Project. The CRMP document shall be provi ded to the
Community Development Director or their designee for
review and approval prior to issuance of the grading
permit.
The CRMP provides procedures to be followed and are
to ensure that impacts on cultural resources will not
occur without procedures that would reduce the impacts
to less than significant. These measures shall include,
but shall not be limited to, the following:
Archaeological Monitor - An adequate number of
qualified monitors shall be present to ensure that all
earth-moving activities are observed and shall be on-
site during all grading activities for areas to be
monitored including off-site improvements. Inspections
will vary based on the rate of excavation, the materials
excavated, and the presence and abundance of
artifacts and features. The frequency and location of
inspections will be determined by the Project
Archaeologist, in consultation with the Tribal monitor.
Cultural Sensitivity Training - The Project Archaeologist
and a representative designated by the consulting
Tribe(s) shall attend the pre-grading meeting with the
contractors to provide Cultural Sensitivity Training for all
Construction Personnel. Training will include a brief
review of the cultural sensitivity of the Project and the
surrounding area; what resources could potentially be
identified during earthmoving activities; the
requirements of the monitoring program; the protocols
that apply in the event unanticipated cultural resources
are identified, including who to contact and appropriate
avoidance measures until the find(s) can be properly
evaluated; and any other appropriate protocols. This is
a mandatory training, and all construction personnel
must attend prior to beginning work on the Project site.
7
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
A sign-in sheet for attendees of this training shall be
included in the Phase IV Monitoring Report.
Unanticipated Resources - In the event that previously
unidentified potentially significant cultural resources are
discovered, the Archaeological and/or Tribal Monitor(s)
shall have the authority to divert or temporarily halt
ground disturbance operations in the area of discovery
to allow evaluation of potentially significant cultural
resources. The Project Archaeologist, in consultation
with the Tribal monitor(s) shall determine the
significance of the discovered resources. The
Community Development Director or their designee
must concur with the evaluation before construction
activities will be allowed to resume in the affected area.
Before construction activities are allowed to resume in
the affected area, the artifacts shall be recovered, and
features recorded using professional archaeological
methods.
Phase IV Report - A final archaeological report shall be
prepared by the Project archaeologist and submitted to
the Community Development Director or their designee
prior to grading final. The report shall follow County of
Riverside requirements and shall include at a minimum:
a discussion of the monitoring methods and techniques
used; the results of the monitoring program including
any artifacts recovered; an inventory of any resources
recovered; updated DPR forms for all sites affected by
the development; final disposition of the resources
including GPS data; artifact catalog and any additional
recommendations. A final copy shall be submitted to the
City, Project Applicant, the Eastern Information Center
(EIC), and the Tribe.
MM-CUL-3: Cultural Resources Disposition. In the
event that Native American cultural resources are
discovered during the course of grading (inadvertent
Applicant/Developer
and Archaeological/
Native American
Monitors
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Planning
Division
8
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
discoveries), the following procedures shall be carried
out for final disposition of the discoveries:
One or more of the following treatments, in order of
preference, shall be employed with the tribes. Evidence
of such shall be provided to the Community
Development Department:
1. Preservation-In-Place of the cultural resources, if
feasible. Preservation in place means avoiding the
resources, leaving them in the place where they were
found with no development affecting the integrity of the
resources.
2. Relocation of the resources on the Project property.
The measures for relocation shall include, at least, the
following: Measures and provisions to protect the future
reburial area from any future impacts by means of a
deed restriction or other form of protection (e.g.,
conservation easement) in order to demonstrate
avoidance in perpetuity.
Relocation shall not occur until all legally required
cataloging and basic recordation have been completed,
with an exception that sacred items, burial goods and
Native American human remains are excluded. Any
reburial process shall be culturally appropriate. Listing
of contents and location of the reburial shall be included
in the confidential Phase IV report. The Phase IV
Report shall be filed with the City under a confidential
cover and not subject to Public Records Request.
3. If relocation is not agreed upon by the Consulting
Tribes then the resources shall be curated at a culturally
appropriate manner at a Riverside County curation
facility that meets State Resources Department Office
of Historic Preservation Guidelines for the Curation of
Archaeological Resources ensuring access and use
pursuant to the Guidelines. The collection and
associated records shall be transferred, including title,
and are to be accompanied by payment of the fees
necessary for permanent curation. Evidence of
curation in the form of a letter from the curation facility
9
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
stating that subject archaeological materials have been
received and that all fees have been paid, shall be
provided by the landowner to the City. There shall be
no destructive or invasive testing on sacred items, burial
goods and Native American human remains. Results
concerning finds of any inadvertent discoveries shall be
included in the Phase IV monitoring report.
MM-CUL-4: Tribal Monitoring. Prior to the issuance
of a grading permit, the applicant shall contact the
consulting Native American Tribe(s) that have
requested monitoring through consultation with the City
during the AB 52 and/or the SB 18 process (“Monitoring
Tribes”). The applicant shall coordinate with the
Tribe(s) to develop individual Tribal Monitoring
Agreement(s). A copy of the signed agreement(s) shall
be provided to the City of Lake Elsinore Community
Development Department, Planning Division prior to the
issuance of a grading permit. The Agreement shall
address the treatment of any known tribal cultural
resources (TCRs) including the Project’s approved
mitigation measures and conditions of approval; the
designation, responsibilities, and participation of
professional Tribal Monitors during grading, excavation
and ground disturbing activities; Project grading and
development scheduling; terms of compensation for the
monitors; and treatment and final disposition of any
cultural resources, sacred sites, and human
remains/burial goods discovered on the site per the
Tribe(s) customs and traditions and the City’s mitigation
measures/conditions of approval. The Tribal Monitor
will have the authority to stop and redirect grading in the
immediate area of a find in order to evaluate the find
and determine the appropriate next steps, in
consultation with the Project archaeologist.
Applicant/Developer CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Planning
Division
10
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
MM-CUL-5: Phase IV Report. Upon completion of the
implementation phase, a Phase IV Cultural Resources
Monitoring Report shall be submitted that complies with
the Riverside County Planning Department's
requirements for such reports for all ground disturbing
activities associated with this grading permit. The
report shall follow the County of Riverside Planning
Department Cultural Resources (Archaeological)
Investigations Standard Scopes of Work posted on the
County website. The report shall include results of any
feature relocation or residue analysis required as well
as evidence of the required cultural sensitivity training
for the construction staff held during the required pre -
grade meeting.
Applicant/Developer
and Project
Archaeologist
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Planning
Division
MM-CUL-6: Discovery of Human Remains. In the
event that human remains (or remains that may be
human) are discovered at the Project site during
grading or earthmoving, the construction contractors,
Project archaeologist and/or designated Native
American Monitor shall immediately stop all activities
within 100 feet of the find. The Project applicant shall
then inform the Riverside County Coroner and the City
of Lake Elsinore Community Development Department
immediately, and the coroner shall be permitted to
examine the remains as required by California Health
and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b).
Section 7050.5 requires that excavation be stopped in
the vicinity of discovered human remains and that no
further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside
County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to
origin. If human remains are determined to be Native
American, the applicant shall comply with the state law
relating to the disposition of Native American burials
that fall within the jurisdiction of the NAHC (PRC
Section 5097). The coroner shall contact the NAHC
within 24 hours and the NAHC will make the
Construction
Contractors/Project
Archaeologist and/or
Designated Native
American Monitor(s)
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Planning
Division and
Engineering
Dept.
11
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
determination of most likely descendant. The most
likely descendant shall then make recommendations
and engage in consultation concerning the treatment of
the remains as provided in Public Resource Code
Section 5097.98. In the event that the applicant and the
MLD are in disagreement regarding the disposition of
the remains, State law will apply, and the mediation
process will occur with the NAHC, if requested (see
PRC Section 5097.98(e) and 5097.94(k)).
According to the California Health and Safety Code, six
or more human burial at one location constitutes a
cemetery (Section 81 00), and disturbance of Native
American cemeteries is a felony (Section 7052).
MM-CUL-7: Non-Disclosure of Reburial Location. It
is understood by all parties that unless otherwise
required by law, the site of any reburial of Native
American human remains or associated grave goods
shall not be disclosed and shall not be governed by
public disclosure requirements of the California Public
Records Act. The Coroner, pursuant to the specific
exemption set forth in California Government Code
6254 (r), parties, and Lead Agencies, will be asked to
withhold public disclosure information related to such
reburial, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in
California Government Code 6254 (r).
All Parties Involved
in Project
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Planning
Division
VI.
GEOLOGY &
SOILS
MM-GEO-1: Compliance with Recommendations
from the Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the proposed
Project applicant/developer shall comply with all
recommendations contained within the Soil and
Foundation Report.
Applicant/Developer CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Engineering
Dept.
12
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
MM-PAL-1: Unanticipated Discovery of
Paleontological Resources In the event an
unanticipated fossil discovery is made during the
course of Project development, then in accordance with
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (2010) guidelines, it
is the responsibility of any worker who observes fossils
within the Project site to stop work in the immediate
vicinity of the find and notify a qualified professional
paleontologist who shall be retained to evaluate the
discovery, determine its significance and if additional
mitigation or treatment is warranted. Work in the area
of the discovery will resume once the find is properly
documented and authorization is given to resume
construction work. Any significant paleontological
resources found during construction monitoring will be
prepared, identified, analyzed, and permanently
curated in an approved regional museum repository.
Applicant/Developer
and Qualified
Professional
Paleontologist
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Planning
Division and
Engineering
Dept.
VIII.
HAZARDS &
HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS
MM-HAZ-1: Individual projects implemented pursuant
to the Land Use Plan in each District and within the 3rd
Street Annexation Area will be required to demonstrate
their avoidance of significant impacts associated with
wildfire hazards through implementation of all policies
under the Wildland Hazards section of the Public Safety
and Welfare chapter.
Applicant/Developer CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Building &
Safety Division
and Fire Dept.
XIII.
NOISE
MM-NOI-1: Project construction will only be allowed
during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday and would not occur on Sundays and
federal holidays.
Applicant/Developer
and Contractors
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Building &
Safety Division
MM-NOI-2: Prior to initiating construction of the
retaining wall along the northern edge of the Project
site, the Project applicant will erect barriers along the
northern and eastern property lines with a top of wall
elevation of 18-feet above the on-site grade. The
barrier along the eastern property line will extend
southerly from the north property line for 65 feet along
the eastern property line. The eastern barrier is
estimated to be 18 feet high at the southern end and 15
Applicant/Developer
and Contractors
CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Building &
Safety Division
13
IS SECTION MITIGATION MEASURE
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION
VERIFICATION COMMENTS
feet high at the northern end. The barrier along the
northern property line will extend from the eastern
property line westerly for 80 feet. Due to the slope of
the hillside, the northern barrier can vary in height from
14 feet in height at the eastern end, where the terrain is
similar to the existing ground elevation of 1,290, to zero
feet high, where the existing terrain is 1,305 above
mean sea level. The noise barrier will be constructed
of material with a minimum weight of two pounds per
square foot with no gaps or perforations. Noise barriers
may be constructed of, but not limited to, 5/8-inch
plywood, 5/8-inch oriented strand board, and hay bales.
XVII.
TRIBAL
CULTURAL
RESOURCES
MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-7 shall apply.
XX.
WILDFIRE
MM-WILD-1: Individual projects implemented pursuant
to the Land Use Plan in each District and within the 3rd
Street Annexation Area will be required to demonstrate
their avoidance of significant impacts associated with
wildfire hazards through implementation of all policies
under the Wildland Hazards section of the Public Safety
and Welfare chapter of the City General Plan.
Applicant/Developer CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE
Building &
Safety Division
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2019-
63 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37854 AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW
NO. 2019-24) IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP)
Whereas, Shahin Motamed Hashemi, Lakeview Centre, LLC has filed an application with
the City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2019-63
(Tentative Parcel Map No. 37854 and Commercial Design Review No. 2019-24) to subdivide the
3.9-acre vacant site into four (4) parcels ranging in size from 0.48 acres to 1.49 acres. The project
also proposes to construct a neighborhood retail center with four (4) buildings ranging in size from
3,480 sq. ft. to 15,600 sq. ft. (approximately 43,120 sq. ft. in total) with 207 parking spaces,
including 12 accessible spaces and 29 compact spaces and related improvements. The project
site is located north of Lakeshore Drive, northwest of Manning Street, and southwest of Ryan
Avenue (APNs 375-092-002, 375-092-003, 375-092-004, 375-092-005, and 375-092-006); 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 the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) Section 17.415.050
(Major Design Review), Chapter 16.24 (Tentative Map), Section 17.410.070 (Approving
Authority), and Section 17.410.030 (Multiple Applications), the Planning Commission
(Commission) has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City
Council (Council) pertaining to tentative maps and design review applications; and,
Whereas, on May 18, 2021, at a duly noticed Public Hearing the Commission has
considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested
parties with respect to this item; and,
Whereas, on June 22, 2021 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 Council has considered the project and its consistency with the MSHCP
prior adopting Findings of Consistency with the MSHCP.
Section 2: That in accordance with the MSHCP, the Council makes the following findings
for MSHCP consistency:
CC Reso. No. 2021-____
Page 2 of 4
1. The project 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. Pursuant to the City’s MSHCP
Resolution, the project is required to be reviewed for MSHCP consistency, including
consistency with other “Plan Wide Requirements.” These include the Protection of Species
Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (MSHCP, § 6.1.2),
Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines (MSHCP, § 6.1.3), Additional Survey
Needs and Procedures (MSHCP, § 6.3.2), Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines (MSHCP, §
6.1.4), Vegetation Mapping (MSHCP, § 6.3.1) requirements, Fuels Management Guidelines
(MSHCP, § 6.4), and payment of the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee (MSHCP
Ordinance, § 4).
2. The Project is subject to the City’s LEAP and the Western Riverside County Regional
Conservation Authority’s (RCA) Joint Project Review (JPR) processes.
As stated above, the project is not located within a Criteria Cell and therefore was not required
to go through the LEAP and JPR processes.
3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines.
According to a MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment prepared by Rincon
Consultants, Inc. dated September 2019, there are no areas that meet the MSHCP’s definition
of riparian/riverine areas or vernal pools that occur on the project site.
Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP describes the process to protect species associated with
riparian/riverine areas and vernal pools. As defined in the MSHCP, riparian/riverine areas are
lands which contain habitat dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, or emergent
mosses and lichens, which occur close to or depend on a nearby freshwater source or areas
that contain a freshwater flow during all or a portion of the year. These areas may support one
or more species listed in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP.
Vernal pools are seasonal wetlands that occur in depressions, typically have wetland
indicators that represent all three parameters (soils, vegetation, and hydrology), and are
defined based on vernal pool indicator plant species during the wetter portion of the growing
season but normally lack wetland indicators associated with vegetation and/or hydrology
during the drier portion of the growing season.
The single ditch observed within the project site does not drain into areas designated for
conservation under the MSHCP. Further, this ditch does not provide wetland habitat, did not
result from human actions to create open waters, or from the alteration of natural stream
courses, and does not contain habitat dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, or
emergent mosses and lichens, and is therefore excluded from the definitions of
riparian/riverine areas and vernal pools. Additionally, the ditch described does not contain
suitable habitat for MSHCP-covered species that occur in riparian/riverine areas (e.g., least
Bell’s vireo [Vireo bellii pusillus], southwestern willow flycatcher [Empidonax traillii extimus],
western yellow-billed cuckoo [Coccyzus americanus occidentalis], etc.). For these reasons, it
has been determined that the ditch does not provide any function or value to these MSHCP-
covered species. The project is therefore consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and
CC Reso. No. 2021-____
Page 3 of 4
Vernal Pool Guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. No further action regarding
this section of the MSHCP is required.
4. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines.
The property is not in a Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area (NEPSSA) for any narrow
endemic species, and no NEPSSA surveys are required. The proposed project is therefore
consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines.
5. The Project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures.
The project site is not subject to any of the Critical Area Species Survey Area Guidelines as
set forth in Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP. Therefore, the project is consistent with MSHCP
Section 6.3.2.
6. The Project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.
According to section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP, the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines are
intended to address indirect effects associated with locating development in proximity to the
MSHCP Conservation Area. The project site is not near a conservation area. Therefore, the
Urban/Wildlife Interface Guidelines are not applicable.
7. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements.
There are no resources located on the project sites requiring mapping as set forth in MSHCP
Section 6.3.1.
8. The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines.
Section 6.4 of the MSHCP requires that new developments adjacent to the MSHCP
Conservation Area or other undeveloped lands incorporate any fuel/brush management zones
and Best Management Practices. The project site is not located in or adjacent to a
conservation area, is proposed as a non-combustible commercial development consistent
with the Fire Code requirements, and undeveloped areas adjacent to the project site are
anticipated to be developed and is therefore not expected to be subject to fuel modification
requirements. The project will incorporate the BMPs outlined in Volume I, Appendix C of the
MSHCP as part of the development. Therefore, the project is consistent with the Fuels
Management Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.4 of the MSHCP.
9. The Project will be conditioned to pay the City’s MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee.
As a condition of approval, the project will be required to pay the City’s MSHCP Local
Development Mitigation Fee at the time of issuance of building permits.
10. The Project is consistent with the MSHCP.
The project site is not within or adjacent to any MSHCP Criteria Cell or conservation areas.
As described above, the project complies with all applicable MSHCP requirements.
Section 3: Based upon the evidence presented, both written and testimonial, and the
above findings, the Council hereby finds that the project is consistent with the MSHCP.
CC Reso. No. 2021-____
Page 4 of 4
Section 4: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Section 5: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and enter it into
the book of original Resolutions.
Passed and Adopted on this 22nd day of June, 2021.
Robert E. Magee, 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. 2021-____ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California,
at the regular meeting of June 22, 2021, and that the same was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Candice Alvarez, MMC
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-___
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 37854 SUBDIVIDING
3.9 ACRES INTO FOUR PARCELS RANGING IN SIZE FROM 0.48 ACRES TO 1.49
ACRES LOCATED AT APNS 375-092-002 THROUGH 006
Whereas, Shahin Motamed Hashemi, Lakeview Centre, LLC has filed an application with
the City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2019-63
(Tentative Parcel Map No. 37854 and Commercial Design Review No. 2019-24) to subdivide the
3.9-acre vacant site into four (4) parcels ranging in size from 0.48 acres to 1.49 acres. The project
also proposes to construct a neighborhood retail center with four (4) buildings ranging in size from
3,480 sq. ft. to 15,600 sq. ft. (approximately 43,120 sq. ft. in total) with 207 parking spaces,
including 12 accessible spaces and 29 compact spaces and related improvements. The project
site is located north of Lakeshore Drive, northwest of Manning Street, and southwest of Ryan
Avenue (APNs 375-092-002, 375-092-003, 375-092-004, 375-092-005, and 375-092-006); 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 tentative maps; and,
Whereas, on May 18, 2021, at a duly noticed Public Hearing, the Commission considered
evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with
respect to this item; and,
Whereas, pursuant to Section 16.24.120 of the LEMC, the Council has the responsibility
of making decisions to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove recommendations of the
Commission for tentative maps; and,
Whereas, on June 22, 2021, 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 Council has reviewed and analyzed the proposed project pursuant to the
appropriate Planning and Zoning Laws, and Chapter 16 (Subdivisions) of the LEMC.
Section 2: On June 22, 2021, after consideration and evaluation of all written reports and
comments and oral testimony presented by the Community Development Department and other
City departments, property owners, residents and other interested parties and such other matters
as are reflected in the record of the noticed Public Hearing on the project, the Council adopted a
resolution finding and determining that the Mitigated Negative Declaration (ER 2020-01) (SCH
No. 2021030580) is adequate and is prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA.
Section 3: That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning Law and the LEMC, the
Council makes the following findings for approval of Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) No. 37854:
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
CC Reso. No. 2021-____
Page 2 of 3
objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan
(Government Code Section 66473.5).
a. The project has a General Plan Land Use designation of Neighborhood Commercial
(NC) and is located within the Country Club Heights District. The NC Land Use
designation allows neighborhood shopping centers and small convenience centers,
which offer day-to-day retail goods and services required by residents in the immediate
vicinity. The NC designation is intended to provide a concentration of retail uses
including, but not limited to, personal services, food and general merchandise stores,
eating establishments, and repair stores, and similar and compatible uses with a
maximum 0.30 Floor Area Ratio (FAR). The project is proposing to develop a
neighborhood shopping center with 0.24 FAR. The proposed subdivision is compatible
with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General
Plan.
b. All offsite mitigation measures have been identified in a manner 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.
a. The proposed project does not include a residential development. The proposed
subdivision is consistent and compatible with the adjacent communities.
3. The effects that this project are likely to have upon the housing needs of the region, the
public service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and environmental
resources have been considered and balanced.
a. The project is consistent with the City’s General Plan. The project has a Neighborhood
Commercial (NC) Land Use Designation and will not have a direct impact on housing
needs. During the approval of the General Plan, housing needs, public services and
fiscal resources were scrutinized to achieve a balance within the City
4. The proposed division of land or type of improvements is not likely to result in any significant
environmental impacts.
a. A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) (ER 2020-01) (SCH# 2021030580) was
prepared for TPM 37854. The Initial Study identified potentially significant environmental
effects but these impacts will be mitigated to below a level of significance through
compliance with the mitigation measures set forth in the MND. TPM 37854 has been
conditioned to comply with these mitigation measures.
5. The design of the proposed division of land or type of improvements is not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
a. TPM 37854 has been designed in a manner consistent with the General Plan and does
not divide previously established communities.
6. The design of the proposed division of land or type of improvements will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the
proposed division of land.
CC Reso. No. 2021-____
Page 3 of 3
a. All known easements or request for access have been incorporated into the design of
TPM 37854.
b. The map has been circulated to City departments and outside agencies, and appropriate
Conditions of Approval have been applied to the project.
Section 4: Based upon all of the evidence presented, the above findings, and the
conditions of approval imposed upon the project, the Council hereby approves Tentative Parcel
Map No. 37854.
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 22nd day of June, 2021.
Robert E. Magee, 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. 2021-____ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California,
at the regular meeting of June 22, 2021, and that the same was adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Candice Alvarez, MMC
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-___
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2019-24
PROVIDING BUILDING DESIGN AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE
LAKEVIEW PLAZA PROJECT LOCATED AT APNS 375-092-002 THROUGH 006
Whereas, Shahin Motamed Hashemi, Lakeview Centre, LLC has filed an application with
the City of Lake Elsinore (City) requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2019-63
(Tentative Parcel Map No. 37854 and Commercial Design Review No. 2019-24) to subdivide the
3.9-acre vacant site into four (4) parcels ranging in size from 0.48 acres to 1.49 acres. The project
also proposes to construct a neighborhood retail center with four (4) buildings ranging in size from
3,480 sq. ft. to 15,600 sq. ft. (approximately 43,120 sq. ft. in total) with 207 parking spaces,
including 12 accessible spaces and 29 compact spaces and related improvements. The project
site is located north of Lakeshore Drive, northwest of Manning Street, and southwest of Ryan
Avenue (APNs 375-092-002, 375-092-003, 375-092-004, 375-092-005, and 375-092-006); and,
Whereas, pursuant to Section 17.415.050 (Major Design Review), Section 17.410.070
(Approving Authority), and Section 17.410.030 (Multiple Applications) 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 design
review applications; and,
Whereas, on May 18, 2021, 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.
Whereas, pursuant to Section 17.410.070 and Section 17.410.030 of the LEMC, the
Council has the responsibility of making decisions to approve, conditionally approve, or
disapprove recommendations of the Commission for design review applications; and,
Whereas, on June 22, 2021, 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 Council has reviewed and analyzed the proposed project pursuant to the
California Planning and Zoning Laws (Cal. Gov. Code §§ 59000 et seq.), the Lake Elsinore
General Plan (GP), and the LEMC and finds and determines that the proposed project is
consistent with the requirements of California Planning and Zoning Law and with the goals and
policies of the GP and the LEMC.
Section 2: On June 22, 2021, after consideration and evaluation of all written reports and
comments and oral testimony presented by the Community Development Department and other
City departments, property owners, residents and other interested parties and such other matters
as are reflected in the record of the noticed Public Hearing on the project, the Council adopted a
resolution finding and determining that the Mitigated Negative Declaration (ER 2020-01) (SCH
No. 2021030580) is adequate and is prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA.
CC Reso. No. 2021-____
Page 2 of 4
Section 3: That in accordance with Section 17.415.050.G of the LEMC, the Council
makes the following findings regarding Commercial Design Review No. 2019-24:
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 has a General Plan Land Use designation of Neighborhood Commercial (NC)
and is located within the Country Club Heights District. The NC Land Use designation allows
neighborhood shopping centers and small convenience centers which offer day-to-day retail
goods and services required by residents in the immediate vicinity. The NC designation is
intended to provide a concentration of retail uses including, but not limited to, personal
services, food and general merchandise stores, eating establishments, and repair stores,
and similar and compatible uses with a maximum 0.30 Floor Area Ratio (FAR). The project
is proposing to develop a neighborhood shopping center with 0.24 FAR. Therefore, the
project is consistent with the General Plan. The project complies with the goals and
objectives of the General Plan because it will assist in achieving the development of a well-
balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational,
and institutional land uses. The project will serve to diversify and expand Lake Elsinore’s
economic base.
The current zoning for the subject site is Neighborhood Commercial (C-1). The C-1 zone is
intended to provide locations for general retail and office uses, which offer the sale of goods,
and services to the general public and which, through characteristics of their operation,
serve primarily the day-to-day shopping needs of the local. The project is proposing to
construct shell buildings for future tenants for retail and restaurant use. The project meets
requirements identified for the proposed use including development standards for setbacks,
landscaping, screening and all other additional requirements for development of this type.
2. The Project complies with the design directives contained in the General Plan and all other
applicable provisions of the LEMC.
The project is appropriate to the site and surrounding developments. The architectural
design of the proposed building complies with the Nonresidential Development Standards
(Chapter 17.112) of the LEMC. The architecture has been designed to achieve harmony
and compatibility with the surrounding area. The colors and materials proposed will assist
in blending the architecture into the existing landscape and are compatible with other colors
and materials used on other properties near the Project site. In addition, safe and efficient
circulation has been achieved onsite.
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 May 18, 2021 and subsequently by
the City Council at a noticed Public Hearing on June 22, 2021. The project, as reviewed and
conditioned by all applicable City divisions, departments and agencies, will not have a
significant effect on the environment.
CC Reso. No. 2021-____
Page 3 of 4
Section 4: That in accordance with Section 17.148.030.D of the LEMC, the Council makes
the following findings regarding Commercial Design Review No. 2019-24 for the parking
reduction:
1. A Shared Parking Analysis provided in the Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by TJW
Engineering, Inc., dated 1-7-2020 was submitted for this project.
2. An Urban Land Institute (ULI) Shared Parking Model was prepared for the prop osed
project based on the land uses and square footages as identified on the site plan. The
analysis is based on the principle that different land uses have different peak periods of
parking demand, therefore they may be able to share a single pool of parking. This would
allow for less parking than if each use had to provide enough parking to satisfy its peak
parking demand separately. The shared parking model also includes adjustments for
mode splits (using transit, biking, or walking to site) and internal trip capture (trips between
two land uses on a single site – such as a patron visiting a retail space and then picking
up food at a restaurant within the same site).
3. The Shared Parking Analysis supports the finding that the number of parking spaces
actually needed for proposed use is less than that required by the code. Based on the
results of the shared parking analysis, the proposed parking supply of 207 parking spaces
including 29 compact spaces is projected to adequately accommodate peak parking
demand at the project site.
4. The compact spaces will only account for 14% of the required parking spaces and will not
affect traffic and pedestrian safety by the modification of the parking requirements.
5. Reduced parking will not affect the health, safety and welfare of the public.
6. The project has been conditioned to ensure compliance with the findings and the intent of
Section 17.148.030.D of the LEMC and to ensure that additional parking spaces will be
provided per code requirements should demand for parking increase on site (COA Nos.
19 and 20).
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 Commercial
Design Review No. 2019-24.
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 22nd day of June, 2021.
Robert E. Magee, Mayor
CC Reso. No. 2021-____
Page 4 of 4
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. 2021-____ was adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California,
at the regular meeting of June 22, 2021, 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 17
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PROJECT: PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24
PROJECT NAME: Lakeview Plaza
PROJECT LOCATION: APNs: 375-092-002, 003, 004, 005, and 006
APPROVAL DATE:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
EXPIRATION DATE:
GENERAL
1. Tentative Parcel Map No. 37854 proposes to subdivide the 3.9-acre vacant site into four (4)
parcels ranging in size from 0.48 acres to 1.49 acres. Commercial Design Review No. 2019-
24 proposes to construct a neighborhood retail center with four (4) buildings ranging in size
from 3,480 sq. ft. to 15,600 sq. ft. (approximately 43,120 sq. ft. in total) with 207 parking
spaces, including 12 accessible spaces and 29 compact spaces and related improvements.
The project site is located north of Lakeshore Drive, northwest of Manning Street, and
southwest of Ryan Avenue (APNs 375-092-002, 375-092-003, 375-092-004, 375-092-005,
and 375-092-006).
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 TPM 37854 and
CDR 2019-24, 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 TPM 37854 and CDR 2019-24
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 $2,530.25 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.
PLANNING DIVISION
5. Tentative Parcel Map No. 37854 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
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 2 of 17
Map Act and applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC).
6. Tentative Parcel Map No. 37854 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. Commercial Design Review No. 2019-24 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. Provisions of the City's Noise Ordinance (LEMC Chapter 17.176) shall be satisfied during
all site preparation and 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.
13. No signs are approved as part of this approval. Prior to installation, the applicant shall submit
a sign program application with the appropriate fees for the shopping center for review and
approval by the Planning Commission. Sign plans submitted to the City for review shall
incorporate City identification signs.
14. Graffiti shall be removed within 24 hours.
15. The entire site shall be kept free from trash and debris at all times and in no event shall
trash and debris remain for more than 24 hours.
16. All roof mounted or ground support air conditioning units or other mechanical equipment
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 3 of 17
incidental to development shall be architecturally screened or shielded by landscaping so
that they are not visible from neighboring property or public streets. If the backside of the
parapets are visible from public views, they shall be finished to provide adequate screening.
Any roof mounted central swamp coolers shall also be screened, and the Community
Development Director, prior to issuance of building permit shall approve screening plan.
17. The property address (in numerals at least six inches high) shall be displayed near the
entrance and be easily visible from the front of the subject property and public right-of-way.
18. The applicant shall construct trash enclosure(s) with a decorative roof to match the colors,
materials and design of the project architecture.
19. In accordance with Section 17.148.030.D of the LEMC and the Shared Parking Analysis
provided in the Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by TJW Engineering, Inc., dated 1-7-2020,
the project shall provide 207 parking spaces including 29 compact spaces. Per Section
17.148.030.D.1.i of the LEMC, the project shall provide additional parking spaces should
demand for parking increase on site.
20. In accordance with Section 17.148.030.D.2 of the LEMC, the parking determination granting
reduced parking requirements may be revoked at any time if there is evidence of insufficient
on-site parking, i.e., “spill over” parking onto a public right-of-way or onto an adjacent lot.
Upon revocation of a parking determination approval, the applicant will be required to submit
a new application for a parking determination or provide on-site parking per code
requirements.
21. 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.
Prior to Recordation of Final Map(s)
22. All lots shall comply with minimum standards set forth in the Neighborhood Commercial (C-
1) zoning designation of the LEMC.
23. A precise survey with closures for boundaries and all lots shall be provided per the LEMC.
24. All of the project improvements shall be designed by the applicant's Civil Engineer to the
specifications of the City of Lake Elsinore.
25. Prior to recordation of a Final Map, the applicant shall initiate and complete the formation of
a Property Owner’s Association (POA) which shall be approved by the City. All Association
documents that address including, but not limited to, reciprocal easements, 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).
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 4 of 17
a. All slopes, landscaping within public right-of-way, all drainage basins, and common
areas including but not limited to parking areas and drive aisles, shall be maintained by
the (POA).
b. Provisions to restrict parking upon other than approved and developed parking spaces
shall be written into the CC&Rs for the project.
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits/Building Permits
26. The applicant shall pay all applicable City fees, including but not limited to Development
Impact Fees (DIF) and MSHCP Fees per LEMC Section 16.85, at the rate in effect at the
time of payment.
27. All roof mounted or ground support air conditioning units or other mechanical equipment
incidental to development shall be architecturally screened or shielded by landscaping so
that they are not visible from neighboring property or public streets. Any roof mounted
central swamp coolers shall also be screened, and the Community Development Director,
prior to issuance of building permit shall approve screening plan.
28. Prior to issuance of Building Permit, the Applicant shall submit a photometric study to the
Community Development Department for review and approval. The plan shall ensure that
all exterior on-site lighting are shielded and directed on-site so as not to create glare onto
neighboring properties and streets or allow illumination above the horizontal plane of the
fixture.
29. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, all exterior wall mounted and freestanding light
fixtures shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Community
Development, or their designee. Light fixtures shall compliment the architectural style of the
buildings onsite.
30. A uniform hardscape and street furniture design including seating benches, trash
receptacles, free-standing potted plants, bike racks, light bollards, etc., shall be utilized and
be compatible with the architectural style. Detailed designs shall be submitted for Planning
Division review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
31. Prior to issuance of a building permit, Final Landscaping / Irrigation Detail Plans (one full
size set along with a PDF copy) shall be submitted along with appropriate fees for review
and approval by the Community Development Director or designee.
a. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler system with 50% plant
coverage using a drip irrigation method.
b. Mature specimen trees shall be planted on locations visible from public views.
c. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six inch (6”) high and six
inch (6”) wide concrete curb. Runoff shall be allowed from paved areas into landscape
areas.
d. Planting within fifteen feet (15’) of ingress/egress points shall be no higher than twenty-
four inches (24”).
e. Landscape planters shall be planted with an appropriate parking lot shade tree pursuant
to the LEMC and Landscape Design Guidelines.
f. No required tree planting bed shall be less than 5 feet wide.
g. Root barriers shall be installed for all trees planted within 10 feet of hardscape areas to
include sidewalks.
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 5 of 17
h. Any transformers and mechanical or electrical equipment shall be indicated on
landscape plan and screened as part of the landscaping plan.
i. The landscape plan shall provide for ground cover, shrubs, and trees and meet all
requirements of the City’s adopted Landscape Guidelines.
j. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed within affected portion of any phase at
the time a Certificate of Occupancy is requested for any building.
k. Final landscape plan must be consistent with approved site plan.
l. Final landscape plans to include planting and irrigation details.
m. Final landscape plans shall include drought tolerant planting consistent with Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District standards subject to plan check and approval by the
City’s landscape plan check consultant.
n. No turf shall be permitted.
32. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable
satisfaction of the Community Development Director. If it is determined that the landscaping
is not being maintained, the Director of Community Development shall have the authority to
require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved
landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the
responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest.
33. The proposed location of on-site construction trailers shall be approved by the Community
Development Director or designee. A cash bond of $1,000 shall be required for any
construction trailers placed on the site and used during construction. Bonds will be released
after removal of trailers and restoration of the site to an acceptable state, subject to approval
of the Community Development Director or designee. Such trailer(s) shall be fully on private
property and outside the public right of way.
BUILDING DIVISION
General Conditions
34. 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.
35. Compliance with Code. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of
the 2019 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes: 2019 California
Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, 2019 California Energy Codes, 2019
California Green Building Standards, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and
Lake Elsinore Municipal Code.
36. 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.
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 6 of 17
37. 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.
38. 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.
39. Obtain Approvals Prior to Construction. Applicant must obtain all building plans and permit
approvals prior to commencement of any construction work.
40. Obtaining Separate Approvals and Permits. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards,
and any block walls will require separate approvals and permits.
41. 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.
42. 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
43. 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 Section 5.507
of the 2019 edition of the California Building Code.
c. A precise grading plan to verify accessibility for the persons with disabilities.
d. Truss calculations that have been stamped by the engineer of record of the building and
the truss manufacturer engineer.
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s)
44. Onsite Water and Sewer Plans. Onsite water and sewer plans, submitted separately from
the building plans, shall be submitted to Building and Safety for review and approval.
45. Demolition Permits. A demolition permit shall be obtained if there is an existing structure to
be removed as part of the project.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s)
46. Plans Require Stamp of Registered Professional. Applicant shall provide appropriate stamp
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 7 of 17
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
47. Pre-Construction Meeting. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector
prior to the start of the building construction.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
GENERAL
48. All new submittals for plan checks and permits shall be made using the City’s online Citizen
Self-Service Portal (CSSP).
49. All plans (Street, Storm Drain, Improvement, Grading) shall be prepared by a Registered
Civil Engineer using the City’s standard title block.
50. All required soils, geotechnical, hydrology and hydraulic reports shall be prepared by a
Registered Civil Engineer.
51. In accordance with the City’s Franchise Agreement for waste disposal and recycling, the
developer shall be required to contract with CR&R Inc. for removal and disposal of all waste
material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear
and grubbing or all other phases of construction.
52. All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of development as
specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) and Lake Elsinore Public Works
Standard Plans.
53. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained prior to any work on City and/or State public
right-of-way. The developer shall submit the permit application, required fees and executed
agreements, security and other required documentation prior to issuance.
54. All slopes and landscaping within the public right-of-way shall be maintained by the property
owner or another maintenance entity approved by the City Council.
FEES
55. 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.
56. Applicant shall pay all applicable Mitigation and Development Impact Fees at the prevalent
rate at time of payment in full. Mitigation and Development Impact Fees include without
limitation the following:
Traffic Infrastructure Fee: $3.84 per square foot – Due at Building Permit
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF): $7.50 per square foot – Due at
Occupancy
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 8 of 17
57. The project may be eligible for TIF credit of capacity enhancing road improvements
(excludes sidewalk, landscape, streetlights) constructed on Lakeshore Drive.
58. Developer shall participate in Fair Share payment of off-site improvements as described in
Table ES-2 of the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TJW Engineering, Inc. dated January
7, 2020. Riverside Drive and Joy Street intersection has been signalized by a separate
project. No fair share participation will be required for the Riverside and Joy Street
intersection.
LAND DIVISION – PARCEL MAP
59. The developer shall submit for plan check review and approval of final Parcel Map.
60. Prior to City Council approval of the Parcel Map, the developer shall, in accordance with
Government Code, have constructed all improvements or noted on the title sheet of the map
of the improvements to be constructed or have improvements plans submitted and
approved, agreements executed and securities posted.
61. Legal agreements and financial commitments (LLMD, CFD, etc.) for operat ion and
maintenance be recorded prior to or concurrent with recordation of Parcel Map.
62. Monumentation shall be in accordance with LEMC 16.32 and Subdivision Map Act.
63. Security and inspection fee for monumentation shall be paid and two contiguous monuments
shall be inspected prior to scheduling map for City Council.
64. Ownership of slopes along right-of-ways and open spaces shall be identified on the map as
held by the developer.
65. The applicant shall cause to be recorded Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs)
with recordation of final map which provides for irrevocable reciprocal parking and access
easement, subject to approval of the City Attorney.
66. Dedicate to the City of Lake Elsinore in fee title right-of-way along Lakeshore Drive adjacent
to the property frontage for a total right-of-way of 45 feet wide from the centerline to the
project property line. Dedication may be made on the Parcel Map or by separate instrument.
67. Dedicate to the City of Lake Elsinore in fee title right-of-way along Manning Street adjacent
to the property frontage for a total right-of-way of 15 feet wide from the centerline to the
project property line. Dedication may be made on the Parcel Map or by separate instrument.
68. Underground water rights shall be dedicated to the City pursuant to the provisions of Section
16.52.030 (LEMC), and consistent with the City’s agreement with the Elsinore Valley
Municipal Water District.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT / POLLUTION PREVENTION / NPDES
Design
69. The project is responsible for complying with the Santa Ana Region NPDES Permits as
warranted based on the nature of development and/or activity. Permits include:
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 9 of 17
General Permit – Construction
De Minimis Discharges
MS4
70. A 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 rough or precise grading plan approval
and issuance of any permit for construction.
71. The Final WQMP shall be in substantial conformance with the approved Preliminary WQMP
prior to entitlement.
72. 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 location.
HCOC – demonstrate that discharge flow rates, velocities, duration and volume for
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.
(Note the facilities may need to be larger due to flood mitigation for the 10-yr 6-
and 24-hour rain events).
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 maintenance
of the referenced BMPs
4. Provide for annual certification of water quality facilities by a Registered
Civil Engineer. The City format shall be used. For facilities in the right-of-
way to be maintained by the City, the project shall annex into a CFD for
funding.
The grading and/or improvement plan shall include a table listing each stormwater
facility, and the plan sheet where it appears.
73. The 2010 SAR MS4 Permit requires implementation of LID Principles and LID Site Design,
where feasible, to treat the pollutants of concern identified for the project, in the following
manner (from highest to lowest priority): (Section XII.E.2, XII.E3, and XII.E.7).
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 10 of 17
Evaluate site for highest and best us applicability (Exemption for projects that
discharge to the lake).
Preventative measures (these are mostly non-structural measures, e.g.,
preservation of natural features to a level consistent with the MEP standard;
minimization of urban runoff through clustering, reducing impervious areas, etc.)
The Project shall infiltrate, harvest and use, evapotranspire and/or bio-treat the
Design Capture Volume (DCV).
The Project shall consider a properly engineered and maintained bio-treatment
system only if infiltration, harvesting and use and evapotranspiration cannot be
feasibly implemented at the project site.
Any portion of the DCV that is not infiltrated, harvested and used, evapotranspired,
and/or bio-treated shall be treated and discharged in accordance with the
requirements set forth in Section XII.G.
74. Parking lot landscaping areas shall be designed to provide for treatment, retention or
infiltration of runoff.
75. Project hardscape areas shall be designed constructed to provide for drainage into adjacent
landscape.
76. Project trash enclosure shall be covered, bermed, and designed to divert drainage from
adjoining paved areas and regularly maintained.
77. Hydromodification / Hydraulic Conditions of Concern – The project shall identify potential
Hydraulic Conditions of Concern (HCOC) and implement measures to limit disturbance of
natural water bodies and drainage systems; conserve natural areas; protect slopes,
channels and minimize significant impacts.
78. 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.
79. All storm drain inlet facilities shall be appropriately marked “Only Rain in the Storm Drain”
using the City authorized marker.
80. The project shall use either volume-based and/or flow-based criteria for sizing BMPs in
accordance with NPDES Permit Provision XII.D.4.
Construction
81. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) (as required by the NPDES General
Construction Permit) and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post construction
are required this project.
82. Prior to grading or building permit for construction or demolition and/or weed abatement
activity, projects subject to coverage under the NDPES 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
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 11 of 17
the project site, updated, and be available for review upon request.
Post-Construction
83. 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 all structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) described in the
BMP Exhibit from the project’s approved WQMP have been implemented,
constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications.
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 and operational.
Submit a copy of the fully executed, recorded Operations and Maintenance (O&M)
Plan for all structural BMPs or a copy of the City approved CC&R.
Demonstrate that copies of the project’s approved WQMP (with recorded O&M Plan
or CC&Rs attached) are available for each of the initial occupants.
Agree to pay for a Special Investigation from the City of the 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 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 WQMP.
UTILITIES
84. All arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) out of
the roadway shall be the responsibility of the property owner or his agent.
85. All overhead utilities shall be undergrounded in accordance with Chapter 12.16 of the LEMC.
86. The developer shall apply for, obtain and submit to the Engineering Department a letter from
Southern California Edison (SCE) indicating that the construction activity will not interfere
with the existing SCE facilities.
IMPROVEMENTS
87. Sight distance into and out and throughout the project location shall comply with City or
Caltrans standards.
88. 10-year storm runoff shall be contained within the curb and the 100-year shall be contained
within the street right-of-way. When either of these criteria are exceed, drainage facilities
shall be provided.
89. All drainage facilities in this project shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control
District Standards. Antecedent Moisture Condition (AMC) value of 2 shall be used for
hydrology calculations.
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 12 of 17
90. A drainage study shall be provided. The study shall include the following: identify storm
water runoff from the upstream of the site; show existing and proposed off - and on-site
drainage facilities; and include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of the facilities.
91. 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.
92. Developer shall mitigate to prevent any flooding and/or erosion downstream caused by the
development of the site and/or diversion of drainage.
93. Roof drains shall be allowed to outlet directly through coring in the street curb. Roofs should
drain to a landscaped area.
94. The site shall be planned and developed to keep surface water from entering buildings
(California Green Building Standards Code 4.106.3).
95. 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.
96. All California Registered Civil Engineer shall prepare the improvement plans required for
this project. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to City standards (LEMC
12.04 and 16.34). Improvement plans will be reviewed and approved by the City of Lake
Elsinore.
97. Streetlight, signing and striping and traffic signal plans are required for this project. The
applicant shall be responsible for any additional paving and/or striping removal caused by
the striping plan.
98. Developer shall construct improvements on Lakeshore Drive and Manning Street along the
property’s frontage.
99. Developer shall install public street lighting along Lakeshore Drive consistent with the City
Street Light Standards. It is the responsibility of the Developer to ensure any streetlights
associated with the project are energized.
100. Installation of permanent benchmarks / monuments per City standards at the intersection of
project entrance and the centerline of Lakeshore Drive and Manning Street, and Ryan
Avenue intersection shall be shown on plan.
PRIOR TO GRADING PERMIT
Design
101. A grading plan signed and stamped by a California Registered Civil Engineer shall be
submitted for City review and approval for all addition and/or movement of soil (grading) on
site. The plan shall include separate sheets for erosion control, haul route (if applicable) and
traffic control. The grading submittal shall include all supporting documentation and be
prepared using City standard title block, standard drawings and design manual.
102. All grading plan contours shall extend to a minimum of 50 feet beyond property lines to
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 13 of 17
indicate existing drainage patterns.
103. The grading plan shall show that no structures, landscaping, or equipment are located near
the project entrances that could reduce sight distance.
104. The developer shall obtain all necessary off-site easement and/or permits for off-site grading
and the applicant shall accept drainage from the adjacent property owners.
105. The grading plan will reflect the recommendations of a final geologic and geotechnical study,
including construction procedures and/or design criteria.
106. The geologic and geotechnical study shall include a seismic investigation of the site to
identify any hidden earthquake faults, liquefaction and/or subsidence zones present on-site
and include recommendations for parameters for seismic design of buildings and walls. A
certified letter from a registered geologist or geotechnical engineer shall be submitted
conforming the absence of this hazard prior to grading permit.
107. An Alquist Priolo seismic study/investigation shall be performed. The study shall be
submitted to the Engineering Department for plan check. The cost of plan check shall be
paid by the developer.
108. Where the finished of the property is in excess of six (6) inches or higher or lower than the
abutting property or adjacent lots, a retaining wall or other suitable solution acceptable to
the City Engineer shall be required, and any fence or wall shall be measured from the top
of grade on the higher side of the retaining wall or slope. Retaining walls shall be shown on
the grading plans will required a separate building permit.
Permit/Construction
109. Developer shall execute and submit grading and erosion control agreement, post grading
security and pay permit fees as a condition of grading permit issuance. A grading permit
does not include the construction of retaining walls or other structures for which a building
permit is required.
110. A preconstruction meeting with City Engineering Inspector is required to prior to
commencement of any grading activity.
111. Prior to commencement of grading operations, developer is to provide the City a map of all
proposed haul routes to be used for movement of export/import material. All such routes
shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. Haul route shall be submitted
prior to issuance of a grading permit. Hauling in excess of 5,000 cubic yards shall be
approved by the City Council (LEMC 15.72.065).
112. Export sites located within the Lake Elsinore city limits must have an active grading permit.
113. Applicant to provide to the City a video record of the condition of all proposed public City
haul roads. In the event of damage to such roads, the applicant shall pay full cost of restoring
public roads to the baseline condition. A bond may be required to ensure payment of
damages to the public right-of-way, subject to approval of the City Engineer.
114. 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
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 14 of 17
City.
115. 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.
116. Approval of the project Final WQMP for post construction shall be received prior to issuance
of a grading permit.
117. Submit applicable environmental clearance document to the Engineering Department. This
approval shall identify and clear all proposed grading activity anticipated for this project.
118. Submit a “Will Serve” letter to the City Engineering Department from the applicable water
agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project and
specify the technical data for the water service at the location, such as water pressure,
volume, etc.
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT
119. Provide soils, geology and seismic report, including recommendation for parameters for
seismic design of buildings and walls prior to building permit.
120. All required public right-of-way dedications, easements, dedications and vacations and
easement agreement(s) for ingress and egress through adjacent property(ies) shall be
recorded with a recorded copy provided to the City prior to building permit issuance.
121. All street improvement, traffic signal, and signing and striping plans shall be completed and
approved by the City Engineer.
PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY/FINAL APPROVAL
122. All public improvements shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans or as
condition or as condition of this development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
123. As-built plans for all approved plan set shall be submitted for review and approval by the
City. The developer is responsible for revising the original mylar plans. Developer shall
provide the City with an electronic copy of the as-built plan in .tif format.
124. In the event of damage to City roads from hauling or other construction related activities,
applicant shall pay full cost of restoring public roads to the baseline condition.
125. 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 USB flash drive or electronically to the Engineering Department
before final inspection will be scheduled.
126. Provide electronically AutoCAD and GIS shapefiles of all final maps and street and storm
drain plans. All data must be in projected coordinate system, NAD 83 State Plane California
Zone VI US Fleet.
127. Developer shall submit documentation pursuant to City’s Security Release handout.
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 15 of 17
128. Developer shall pay all outstanding processing development fees prior to occupancy/final
approval.
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE FIRE MARSHAL
129. 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.
130. Hazardous Fire Area: this project is in 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. Any building
constructed within this project shall comply with the special construction provision contained
in Riverside County Ordinance 787 and the California Building Code.
131. Fire flow and hydrants – the applicant or 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. Based on current standards, the required fire flow is estimated to be 1,750
GPM at 20 PSI for a 2 hour duration.
132. Prior to building permit issuance, install the approved water system, approved access roads,
and contact the Fire Department for a verification inspection.
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Annex into the City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District No. 2015-2 (Maintenance
Services)
133. Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel Map, 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 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.
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 16 of 17
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
134. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring
& Reporting Program for the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Environmental Review No.
2020-01; SCH # 2021030580) prepared for the project.
Conditions of Approval PC: May 18, 2021
PA 2019-63/TPM 37854/CDR 2019-24 CC: June 22, 2021
Applicant’s Initials: _____ Page 17 of 17
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:
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 1 of 165
LAKEVIEW PLAZA
Planning Application (PA) No. 2019-63
Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) No. 37854
Commercial Design Review (CDR) No. 2019-24
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW NO. 2020-01
(INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION)
Prepared By:
CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
130 South Main Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
Applicant: Lakeview Centre, LLC
Shahin Motamed Hashemi
18103 Sky Park Circle
Irvine, CA 92614
Environmental Consultant:
Matthew Fagan Consulting Services, Inc.
42011 Avenida Vista Ladera
Temecula, CA 92591
March 2021
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 2 of 165
Table of Contents
I. INTRODUCTION 4
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 10
III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 12
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 31
I. AESTHETICS 31
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES 38
III. AIR QUALITY 41
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 49
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES 57
VI. ENERGY 62
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS 66
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 76
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 81
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 89
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING 106
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES 107
XIII. NOISE 109
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING 123
XV. PUBLIC SERVICES 124
XVI. RECREATION 127
XVII. TRANSPORTATION 128
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES 143
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS 149
XX. WILDFIRE 157
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 161
V. PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED 163
VI. REFERENCES 163
Figures
Figure 1, Regional Location Map 14
Figure 2, Vicinity Map 15
Figure 3, Aerial Photo 16
Figure 4, Site Plan 17
Figure 5, TPM 37854 18
Figure 6, Colors/Materials – Elevations 19
Figure 7, Landscape Plan 20
Figure 8, General Plan Land Use Map 21
Figure 9, Zoning Map 22
Figure VII-1, Surrounding Topography 70
Figure IX-1, GeoTracker 85
Figure IX-2, EnviroStor 86
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 3 of 165
Figure X-1, Project Site - Receiving Waters Map 90
Figure X-2, Project Site Hydrology Map – Pre-Condition 92
Figure X-3, Project Site Hydrology Map – Post Condition 94
Figure X-4, WQMP Site Plan 98
Figure X-5, FEMA Firmette Map 104
Figure XIII-1, Project Vicinity Sound Level Monitoring Results 112
Figure XIII-2, Daytime and Nighttime Noise Levels at Off-site Land
Uses (dBA Leq) 118
Figure XIII-3, Modeled Façade Receivers and Traffic Noise Level Contours 120
Figure XVII-1, TIA Study Area Map 130
Figure XVII-2, Cumulative Projects 133
Tables
Table 1, TPM 37854 11
Table 2, Surrounding Land Uses 12
Table III-1, Project Construction Emissions 44
Table III-2, Project Operational Emissions 44
Table VI-1, Electricity Consumption in the SCE Service Area in 2018 63
Table VI-2, Natural Gas Consumption in the SCE Service Area in 2018 63
Table VI-3, Total Project Energy Consumption 64
Table VIII-1, Project Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions 77
Table VIII-2, Consistency with Applicable SCAG RTP/SCS GHG Emission
Reduction Strategies 78
Table VIII-3, Consistency with Applicable Lake Elsinore CAP Measures 79
Table X-1, Proposed Project Runoff Characteristics 97
Table XIII-1, Traffic Volumes 113
Table XIII-2, Vibration Levels Measured during Construction Activities 114
Table XIII-3, Equipment Sound Power Levels (dBA) 115
Table XIII-4, HVAC Noise Levels 115
Table XVII-1, Study Area Intersections 129
Table XVII-2, Intersection Analysis – Existing Conditions 131
Table XVII-3, Intersection Analysis – EAP Conditions 134
Table XVII-4, Fair Share Calculations 135
Table XVII-5, General Plan Consistency Analysis 137
Table XIX-1, Landfills Serving Lake Elsinore 153
Table XIX-2, Solid Waste Generation Factors 155
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 4 of 165
I. INTRODUCTION
A. PURPOSE
This document is an Initial Study for evaluation of environmental impacts resulting from
implementation of Lakeview Plaza or Planning Application (PA) No. 2019-63, which covers Tentative
Parcel Map (TPM) No. 37854; Commercial Design Review (CDR) No. 2019-24; and Environmental
Review (ER) No. 2020-01. For purposes of this document, this application will be called the “Project”.
B. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
As defined by Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an
Initial Study is prepared primarily to provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for
determining whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or Mitigated
Negative Declaration would be appropriate for providing the necessary environmental documentation
and clearance for any proposed project.
According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15065, an EIR is deemed appropriate for a particular proposal
if the following conditions occur:
• The project has 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 an endangered, rare or threatened species; or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
• The project has the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-
term environmental goals.
• The project has possible environmental effects that are individually limited but cumulatively
considerable.
• The environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly.
According to CEQA Section 21080(c)(1) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15070(a), a Negative
Declaration can be adopted if it can be determined that the project will not have a significant effect on
the environment.
According to CEQA Section 21080(c)(2) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15070(b), a Mitigated
Negative Declaration can be adopted if it is determined that although the Initial Study identifies that
the project may have potentially significant effects on the environment, revisions in the project plans
and/or mitigation measures, which would avoid or mitigate the effects to below the level of
significance, have been made or agreed to by the applicant.
This Initial Study has determined that the proposed Project may result in potentially significant
environmental effects but that said effects can be reduced to below the level of significance
through the implementation of mitigation measures and therefore, a Mitigated Negative
Declaration is deemed the appropriate document to provide the necessary environmental
evaluations and clearance.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 5 of 165
This Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration are prepared in conformance with the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.); the
State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA
Guidelines”), as amended (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, 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.
C. INTENDED USES OF INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
This Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration are informational documents, which are intended
to inform the City of Lake Elsinore decision-makers, other responsible or interested agencies, and the
general public of the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. The environmental review
process has been established to enable public agencies to evaluate environmental consequences and to
examine and implement methods of eliminating or reducing any potentially adverse impacts. While
CEQA requires that consideration be given to avoiding environmental damage, the Lead Agency and
other responsible agencies must balance adverse environmental effects against other public objectives,
including economic and social goals (CEQA Guidelines Section 15021).
The City of Lake Elsinore City Council, as Lead Agency, has determined that environmental clearance
for the proposed Project can be provided with a Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Initial Study and
Notice of Availability and Intent to Adopt prepared for the Mitigated Negative Declaration will be
circulated for a period of 30 days for public and agency review. Comments received on the document
will be considered by the Lead Agency before it acts on the proposed Project.
D. CONTENTS OF INITIAL STUDY
This Initial Study is organized to facilitate a basic understanding of the existing setting and
environmental implications of the proposed Project.
I. INTRODUCTION presents an introduction to the entire report. This section identifies City of Lake
Elsinore contact persons involved in the process, scope of environmental review, environmental
procedures, and incorporation by reference documents.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION describes the proposed Project. A description of discretionary
approvals and permits required for Project implementation is also included.
III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM contains the City’s Environmental Checklist Form.
The checklist form presents results of the environmental evaluation for the proposed Project and those
areas that would have either a potentially significant impact, a less than significant impact with
mitigation incorporated, a less than significant impact, or no impact.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS provides the background analysis supporting each response
provided in the environmental checklist form. Each response checked in the checklist form is discussed
and supported with sufficient data and analysis. As appropriate, each response discussion describes
and identifies specific impacts anticipated with Project implementation. In this section, mitigation
measures are also set forth, as appropriate, that would reduce potentially significant adverse impacts to
levels of less than significance.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 6 of 165
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 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration.
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 Initial Study. All
responses will take into account the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
impacts. Project impacts and effects will be evaluated and quantified, when appropriate. To each
question, there are four possible responses, including:
1. No Impact: A “No Impact” response is adequately supported if the referenced information sources
show that the impact simply does not apply to the proposed Project. A “No Impact” answer should
be explained where it is based on Project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the
Project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a Project-specific screening
analysis).
2. Less Than Significant Impact: Development associated with Project implementation will have
the potential to impact the environment. These impacts, however, will be less than the levels of
thresholds that are considered significant and no additional analysis is required.
3. Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: This applies where incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than
Significant Impact”. The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain
how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.
4. Potentially Significant Impact: There is substantial evidence that the proposed Project may have
impacts that are considered potentially significant and an EIR is required.
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
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:
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 7 of 165
“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 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 Lake Elsinore General Plan Final EIR with respect to
remaining issue areas.
2. Incorporation by Reference
An EIR or Negative Declaration 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])
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 8 of 165
Incorporation by reference is a procedure for reducing the size of EIRs/MND 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 document(s) is/are 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.
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 the Initial Study. The following technical reports are included as
appendices to this Initial Study:
Appendix A Map My County 3-10-2020
Appendix B Lakeview Plaza Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study, prepared by
Rincon Consultants, Inc., 7-28-2020
Appendix C Lakeview Plaza Project MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment, prepared
by Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-25-2019
Appendix D Lakeview Plaza Project Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, prepared by Rincon
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 9 of 165
Consultants, Inc., 9-2019
Appendix E Lakeview Plaza Energy Conservation Analysis, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc.,
2-11-2021
Appendix F Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report, prepared by Soil Pacific, Inc., 2-13-2019
Appendix G Paleontological Resources Evaluation for Lakeview Plaza, City of Lake Elsinore,
Riverside County, California, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-26-2019
Appendix H Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Lakeview Plaza, prepared by Rincon Consultants,
Inc., 9-23-2019
Appendix I1 Water Quality Management Plan Lakeview Plaza, prepared by Blue Peak Engineering,
Inc., 3-24-2020
Appendix I2 Lakeview Plaza Preliminary Hydrology Report, prepared by Blue Peak Engineering, Inc.,
7-22-2019
Appendix J Lakeview Plaza Project Noise and Vibration Study, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc.,
7-9-2020
Appendix K1 Lakeview Plaza Project Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by TJW Engineering, Inc.1-7-
2020
Appendix K2 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis, City of Lake Elsinore, prepared by TJW
Engineering, Inc.8-26-2020
Appendix L Project Plans, 12-2019
Appendix M Lakeview Plaza Commercial Development Utilities and Service Systems Study, prepared
by Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-2019
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
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 10 of 165
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING
Lakeview Plaza (“Project”) is located in the City of Lake Elsinore (City), Riverside County, California,
northeast of Lakeshore Drive, northwest of Manning Street, and southwest of Ryan Avenue. The Project
site consists of an approximately 3.9-acre undeveloped area (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 375-092-002, 375-
092-003, 375-092-004, 375-092-005, and 375-092-006,) and is located within Section 6, Township 6S,
Range 5W as shown on the Lake Elsinore, California 7.5 minute U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) topographic
map. Reference Figure 1, Regional Location Map and Figure 2, Vicinity Map.
A field reconnaissance survey of the study area was conducted by Rincon Consultants, Inc. on August 14,
2019 (reference Appendix C). According to the field survey, the Project site is undeveloped, vacant land
that has been disturbed by repeated disking. Only disturbed habitat (according to the Western Riverside
County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan [MSHCP], developed or disturbed lands consist of
areas that have been disked, cleared, or otherwise altered) is present on site. One drainage feature that
drains into a culvert is also located on site. This ditch originates from runoff from improved roads generally
east of the property and conveys flows northeast to southwest onto the study area along the eastern property
boundary. It is an approximately 20-foot long incised, ephemeral ditch which enters a culvert pipe and
flows under Lakeshore Drive and continues into a larger, offsite ditch approximately 100 feet long that
dissipates before reaching the shoreline at Lake Elsinore. No surface water was present within this ditch
during the field survey. The average width of this ditch is 2 feet on site. The single ditch observed within
the study area does not drain into areas designated for conservation under the MSHCP. Additionally, the
ditch described does not contain suitable habitat for MSHCP-covered species that occur in riparian/riverine
areas and has been determined to not provide any function or value to these MSHCP-covered species. The
ditch within the study area contains ephemeral flow and was not excavated in, and did not relocate, a
covered tributary. It does not fall under the jurisdiction of United States Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) due to its isolation and substantial distance from navigable or interstate waters. Please see Initial
Study Section IV, Biological Resources for a more detailed analysis.
The Project site is zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) and is bound to the north by Ryan Avenue and
mostly vacant land (there are two (2) residences north of the Project site) zoned as Hillside Single-Family
Residential (R-H), to the south by Lakeshore Drive and vacant land zoned as Lakeshore (L), to the east by
Manning Street and mostly vacant land (there are two (2) residences northeast of the Project site) zoned as
RH, and vacant land to the immediate west zoned as C-1. Reference Figure 3, Aerial Photo.
B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project consists of applications for a Tentative Parcel Map No. 37854 (TPM 37854) and a Commercial
Design Review No. 2019-24 (CDR 2019-24) which are being processed collectively under Planning
Application No. 2019-63 (PA 2019-63). The Project will provide a neighborhood retail center with
approximately 43,120 square feet (sq. ft.) of retail in 4 separate building clusters, as outlined below and as
shown on Figure 4, Site Plan.
• Total Building – 43,120 sq. ft.
o Retail – 36,120 sq. ft.
o Restaurant – 7,000 sq. ft.
Vehicular Access to the Project site would be taken from either of the two (2) driveways to be located on
Lakeshore Drive or from the driveway to be located on Manning Street. The Project will provide 207
parking spaces, including 12 accessible spaces and 29 compact spaces. Per the City’s Municipal Code,
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 11 of 165
parking for the site requires 223 stalls, however, based on the results of the Shared Parking Analysis
provided in the Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by TJW Engineering, Inc., dated 1-7-2020 (Appendix
K), only 198 parking spaces would be required during peak weekend parking demand and, therefore, the
207 parking spaces provided on-site will be adequate for the Project.
The Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) proposes to subdivide the existing five (5) lots into four (4) parcels via
TPM 37854. Parcels sizes are as follows, as shown on Table 1, TPM 37854.
Table 1
TPM 37854
Parcel Number Net/Gross Acreage
1 0.79
2 1.49
3 1.14
4 0.48
Total 3.9
Source: Project Plans (Appendix L)
Reference Figure 5, TPM 37854.
The building architecture is single-story with earth tones and incorporates stone, awning, and trellis
features. Reference Figure 6, Colors/Materials - Elevations. The Project will provide 29,009 sq. ft. (16%)
of landscaping on the site; the City’s Municipal Code requires 15% of the site to be landscaped. Reference
Figure 7, Landscape Plan.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 12 of 165
III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. BACKGROUND
1. Project Title: “Lakeview Plaza” - Planning Application No. 2019-63 (PA 2019-63) which covers
Tentative Parcel Map No. 37854 (TPM 37854); Commercial Design Review No. 2019-24 (CDR 2019-
24); and Environmental Review No. 2020-01 (ER 2020-01)
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Lake Elsinore, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA
92530
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Damaris Abraham, Senior Planner (951) 674-3124, ext. 913
4. Project Location: Northeast of West Lakeshore Drive, northwest of Manning Street, and southwest
of Ryan Avenue. Reference Figure 1, Regional Location Map and Figure 2, Vicinity Map.
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Lakeview Centre, LLC, Shahin Motamed Hashemi, 18103
Sky Park Circle, Irvine, CA 92614
6. General Plan Designation: Neighborhood Commercial. Reference Figure 8, General Plan Land
Use Map.
7. Zoning: Neighborhood Commercial (C-1). Reference Figure 9, Zoning Map.
8. Description of Project: The proposed Project, Lakeview Plaza, is a neighborhood retail center
located along Lakeshore Drive with approximately 43,120 square feet (sq. ft.) of retail (36,120 sq. ft.
retail and 7,000 sq. ft. restaurant), in 4 separate building clusters. Reference Figure 4, Site Plan.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The property is zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) and
is bound to the north by Ryan Avenue and mostly vacant land (there are two (2) residences north of the
Project site) zoned as Hillside Single Family Residential (R-H), to the south by Lakeshore Drive and
vacant land zoned as Lakeshore (L), to the east by Manning Street and mostly vacant land (there are two
(2) residences northeast of the Project site) zoned as R-H, and vacant land to the immediate west zoned
as C-1. Reference Table 2, Surrounding land Uses, and Figure 3, Aerial Photo.
Table 2
Surrounding Land Uses
Direction General Plan Land Use
Designation Zoning Classification Existing Land Use
Project Site Neighborhood Commercial C-1 (Neighborhood
Commercial) Vacant
North Hillside Residential R-H (Hillside Single Family
Residential)
Mix of vacant land and
residences
South Recreational L (Lakeshore) Vacant
East Hillside Residential R-H (Hillside Single Family
Residential) Vacant
West Neighborhood Commercial
and General Commercial
C-1 (Neighborhood
Commercial) and C-2 (General
Commercial)
Vacant
Sources: City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Map, Zoning Map, and Google Maps.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 13 of 165
10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required:
• South Coast Air Quality Management District
• Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD)
• Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region
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.?: In accordance with the
requirements of Assembly Bill (AB) 52, the City sent notification to six Native American Tribes
traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Project area on January 29, 2020. Of the tribes notified, the
Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians, the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians, and the Soboba Band of
Luiseño Indians requested formal government-to-government consultation under AB 52. Standard
mitigation measures have been added to address the unanticipated discovery of cultural resources and
human remains during groundbreaking activities. Please see Initial Study Section XVIII, Tribal Cultural
Resources for more detail.
FIGURE 1
REGIONAL LOCATION MAP
Source: Map My County – Riverside County https://gis.countyofriverside.us/Html5Viewer/?viewer=MMC_Public
Lakeview Plaza
Page 14 of 163
SITE
FIGURE 2
VICINITY MAP
Source: Project Plans – (Appendix L)
Lakeview Plaza
Page 15 of 163
FIGURE 3
AERIAL PHOTO
Source: Map My County – Riverside County https://gis.countyofriverside.us/Html5Viewer/?viewer=MMC_Public
Lakeview Plaza
Page 16 of 163
SITE
FIGURE 4
SITE PLAN
Lakeview Plaza
Page 17 of 163
Source: Project Plans – (Appendix L)
FIGURE 5
TPM 37854
Lakeview Plaza
Page 18 of 163
Source: Project Plans – (Appendix L)
FIGURE 6
COLORS/MATERIALS - ELEVATIONS
Source: Project Plans – (Appendix L)
Lakeview Plaza
Page 19 of 163
FIGURE 7
LANDSCAPE PLAN
Lakeview Plaza
Page 20 of 163
Source: Project Plans – (Appendix L)
FIGURE 8
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
Lakeview Plaza
Page 21 of 163
SITE
Source: City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Land Use Map
http://www.lake-elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=24601
FIGURE 9
ZONING MAP
Lakeview Plaza
Page 22 of 163
SITE
Source: City of Lake Elsinore Zoning Map http://www.lake-elsinore.org/home/showdocument?id=24603
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 23 of 165
B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this Project, involving at least
one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agricultural and Forestry
Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources 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
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and
a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the Project have been made
by or agreed to by the Project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will
be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially
significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has
been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
(Damaris Abraham, Senior Planner)
March 17, 2021
Date
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 24 of 165
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
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?
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
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 25 of 165
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 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 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?
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 26 of 165
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 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
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 27 of 165
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the Project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the Project area?
f) 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 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-
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 28 of 165
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 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
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 29 of 165
(b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous
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
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
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 30 of 165
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
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?
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 31 of 165
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
This section provides an evaluation of the impact categories and questions contained in the Environmental
Checklist. A complete list of the reference sources applicable to the following source abbreviations is
contained in Section VII, References, of this document.
I. AESTHETICS
a) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less Than Significant
Impact
The term “aesthetics” generally refers to the identification of visual resources, the quality of one’s view,
and/or the overall visual perception of the environment. The issue of light and glare is related to both
relative to the creation of daytime glare due to the reflection of the sun (such as on glass surfaces) and/or
an increase in nighttime ambient lighting levels (such as from building lights, streetlights, and vehicle
headlights).
Public Resources Code Section 21099 pertains to “Modernization of Transportation Analysis for Transit-
Oriented Infill Projects.” The proposed Project does not meet any of the criteria of a transit-oriented
development which would otherwise preclude an evaluation of aesthetic impacts. Therefore, the provisions
of Public Resources Code Section 21099 are not applicable, and this section will evaluate potential aesthetic
impacts of the Project.
Scenic vistas can be impacted by development in two ways, 1) a structure may be constructed that blocks
the view of a vista, and 2) the vista itself may be altered (e.g., development on a scenic hillside).
The natural setting of the City of Lake Elsinore and the larger Southwest Riverside County region with
lake, mountain and hillside views is significant to the area’s visual character which provides scenic vistas
from many locations within the community.
The City of Lake Elsinore is one of three incorporated cities within Riverside County’s larger Elsinore Area
Plan (EAP) along with the City of Canyon Lake and the City of Wildomar. Much of the EAP is situated
within a valley, generally extending northwest by southeast and framed by the Santa Ana and Elsinore
Mountains on the west and the Gavilan and Sedco Hills on the east. Lake Elsinore is a centerpiece within
the valley. Additional prominent hydrologic features within the valley include the Temescal Wash, the San
Jacinto River, the man-made Canyon Lake/Railroad Canyon Dam, and Murrieta Creek.
The City of Lake Elsinore encompasses approximately forty-three (±43) square miles within the City limits,
plus an additional ±29 square miles within its Sphere of Influence (SOI). According to the General Plan,
as of 2010/2011, almost half of the land within the City was vacant and undeveloped. It should be noted
that a significant portion of these vacant lands will be preserved as open space in conjunction with the
ongoing implementation of the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan by the Regional Conservation
Agency.
Lake Elsinore (“the lake”) is located roughly one and one-quarter (1¼) mile southwest of Interstate 15 (I-
15) and it extends to the City’s southwest boundary contiguous to the unincorporated community of
Lakeland Village. In addition, the lake is located adjacent south/southeast of State Route 74 (SR-74), also
known as Riverside Drive as it extends through the City limits.
The lake is highly visible from SR-74 after it extends east through the Cleveland National Forest from
Orange County and then east/northeast down through the Santa Ana Mountains to the west side of the lake.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 32 of 165
Distant views of the south half of the lake are available from north bound I-15; however, the hillsides
associated with the City’s Country Club Heights District (of which the Project site is a part) block the lake
views from I-15 to the north half of the lake.
In addition, prominent views of the lake are available from various vantage points within the City’s Lake
View and Lake Edge Districts north of the lake and distant “peek-a-boo” views are available from various
locations with the City east of I-15 in the Sedco Hills area and from SR-74 as it proceeds east past the
Meadowbrook community toward the City of Perris.
Lake Elsinore is the largest natural lake in Southern California with a surface area varying from
approximately 2,790 to 3,000 acres. It is generally rectangular in shape extending roughly 2¾ miles long
(northwest x southeast) by 1¾ miles wide (northeast x southwest). The southwest side of the Lake is framed
by steep east/northeast facing slopes of the Santa Ana (Elsinore) Mountains which rise to elevations in the
range of 2,600 to 2,900 above mean sea level (AMSL) or approximately 1,350 to 1,650 feet above the
surface level of the lake.
The lake’s primary water source includes the San Jacinto River and underground springs, and it is drained
by the Temescal Wash and Temescal Creek to the north. Temescal Creek extends approximately twenty-
one (21) miles northwest to its confluence with the Santa Ana River at the Prado Dam adjacent to the
northwest side of the City of Corona.
The San Jacinto River meanders over 40 miles through southwest Riverside County, beginning at Lake
Hemet in the San Jacinto Mountains passing by Valle Vista, Hemet, San Jacinto, Gillman Hot Springs,
Lakeview, Nuevo, and Perris, joining with the Perris Valley Storm Channel adjacent northeast of I-215,
then extending southwest through Railroad Canyon and terminating at Lake Elsinore. The surface level of
Lake Elsinore is regulated by the Railroad Canyon dam and is generally stabilized at an elevation between
1,230 and 1,240 feet AMSL.
The Project site is proximate to the northeast corner of the lake. The site has extensive frontage (921 feet)
along Lakeshore Drive, a General Plan - Circulation Element designated “New Special Roadway” that
extends approximately 2¼ miles along the northeast side of the lake from Riverside Drive/SR-74 (primary
access route to I-15) past Chaney Street (connector to Business District) and Graham Avenue (connector to
Historic District & City Hall) to Poe Street at the Seaport Boat Launching Facility (adjacent to the Temescal
Creek lake outlet).
The Project site’s General Plan land use designation and zoning is Neighborhood Commercial, and it has
good visibility along Lakeshore Drive.
Lakeshore Drive and the Project site sit at the base of a series of incised hillsides which make up the Country
Club Heights District neighborhood. Lakeshore Drive has a very gentle downward gradient proceeding
northwest towards Riverside Drive. In its current condition, the Project site topography generally rises
approximately eight (8) to twenty-four (24) feet in elevation from its Lakeshore Drive frontage to Ryan
Avenue, with a significant portion near the middle of the site rising upwards of forty (40) plus feet due to
the undulating terrain.
• The Project site elevation along its Lakeshore Drive frontage varies from approximately 1,273’ AMSL
at the northwest corner of the site, to ±1,277’ AMSL at mid site, to 1,284’ AMSL at the southwest end
adjacent to Manning Street;
• The Project site elevation along its Ryan Street (narrow, partially graded, unmaintained dirt road) varies
from approximately 1,298’ AMSL at the northeast corner f the site, peaking at ±1,322’ AMSL adjacent
north of the future Building 2, to ±1,292’ AMSL at the southeast corner adjacent to Manning Street.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 33 of 165
Proposed earthwork quantities set forth on the Project site Preliminary Grading Plan indicate the proposed
Project will require 85,019 cubic yards of raw cut, 109 cubic yards of raw fill, and 84,910 cubic yards of
raw export.
Upon completion of grading activities, the improved Project site pad will generally be at or up to three feet
above Lakeshore Drive street grade. Finished floor elevations range from 1,278.80 (Building 1; N. End of
Site) to 1,284.25 feet AMSL (Bldg. 4; SW. End of Site at Manning Street). A retaining wall (“pile &
lagging wall w/ tieback”) reaching a maximum height of 42 feet and concrete “V” ditch will be constructed
adjacent to the Ryan Avenue frontage at the rear (northeast) boundary of the Project site.
As set forth in Table 2, Surrounding Land Uses, provided in Section III of this Initial Study, the Project
site, in its present condition, is mostly surrounded by vacant land parcels designated/zoned for Hillside
Residential use to the northeast across Ryan Avenue and southeast across Manning Street, Neighborhood
Commercial, followed by General Commercial contiguous to the northwest, and Recreational to the
southwest across Lakeshore Drive.
The exception to the above (surrounding vacant land parcels), is an improved single family residence (SFR)
located across Ryan Avenue from the Project site at 17271 Lake View Avenue (backs to Ryan Avenue),
approximately 100 feet northwest of Manning Street (APNs 375-084-011 & 012), and a small cluster of
four SFRs adjacent to the intersection of Manning Street and Ryan Avenue.
Implementation of the proposed Project would change the visual character of the vacant, undeveloped
sloping Project site through grading activity to create a building pad within 3 feet above Lakeshore Drive
street grade and the construction of a four-building commercial retail center consisting of 36,120 square
feet of general retail space (Buildings 1, 2 & 3) and 7,000 square feet of restaurant space (1,760 SF
Restaurant “A” and 1,760 SF Restaurant “B” in Building 3), and freestanding Restaurant “C” (Building 4),
concrete walkways, asphalt paved parking for 207 vehicles, and 29,009 square feet (16%) of landscaping.
In addition, the proposed Project requires street modifications along Lakeshore Drive and Manning Street
and wet and dry utility connections.
Building 1 (10,000 SF) located at the northwest end of the site will be set back 15 to 24 feet from Lakeshore
Drive, Building 2 (15,600 SF) and Building 3 (14,040 SF including 1,760 SF Restaurant “A” and 1,760 SF
Restaurant “B”) will be located toward the rear (northeast) portion of the site (15’ setback from Ryan
Avenue), and Building 4, a freestanding 3,480 square foot restaurant located at the southwest end of the
site will be set back a minimum of 15 feet from Lakeshore Drive and 15 feet from Manning Street.
Each of the four proposed buildings would be single-story wood frame and stucco structures with an
architectural design incorporating earth tones, decorative stone, awning and trellis features.
The Project site’s proposed development plan is consistent with the City’s Neighborhood Commercial
General Plan land use designation and zoning. A change in land use is not being requested.
The Project site is located contiguous south of a single lot with a similar Neighborhood Commercial land
use designation and adjacent south of vacant lands designated General Commercial. Existing commercial
development is adjacent to the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Riverside Drive (aka “four corners”)
approximately one-quarter (¼) mile northwest of the Project site. The Project site represents the
last/southernmost commercially designated land along Lakeshore Drive.
Based on a review of the City’s General Plan and General Plan Circulation Element, Lakeshore Drive is
not a state or local designated Scenic Highway.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 34 of 165
The City’s General Plan – Draft EIR (GP-DEIR, August 2011) addresses visual impacts associated with
proposed and future development within the City. Areas addressed include: 1) Views of Lake Elsinore; 2)
Views of Hillsides and Mountains; 3) Views from Six Public Vantage Points; and 4) District Plan Visual
Impacts.
• Views of Lake Elsinore. The GP-DEIR acknowledges that due the topography of the City, most views
of the lake are from a high elevation and not easily obscured by development. Furthermore, the
character of the lake would be preserved through implementation of Goals 10 and 11 of the Resource
Protection and Preservation Chapter, Aesthetics Section, which provide and maintain a natural and built
environment, Policies 10.1-10.6 and 11.1-11.3 discourage development that blocks or substantially
alters public views of Lake Elsinore and local ridgelines, protect views of the lake, require new
development and redevelopment to incorporate public views of Lake Elsinore, and require design
guidelines and landscaping. The GP-DEIR concludes: “With implementation of these policies of the
GPU, potential impacts on the visual quality of views of the area surrounding the lake will be reduced
to a less-than-significant level.”
With respect to the proposed Project, the location of the Project site along Lakeshore Drive at the base
of the upsloping Country Club Heights District hillside, combined with the grading plan, building
design (single-story), building height and the building siting will reduce the visual impact to a less than
significant level.
• Views of Hillsides and Mountains. Much of the sloping hillsides and mountains surrounding the lake
are protected to the extent feasible by implementation of the General Plan Land Use Plan which
designates large portions of these areas as either Open Space or Hillside Residential. The hillside
designation is intended for low-density single-family residential development and minor agricultural
uses in areas of steep slopes. Parcel sizes of 0.5, 1, 2, 4, or 20 (gross) acres are required, depending on
the predominant slope and if the parcel has access to an adequate sewer connection or package treatment
plant. Furthermore, General Plan Goals 10 and 11 of the Resource Protection and Preservation Chapter,
and Policies 10.1-10.6 and 11.1-11.3, discussed above, would further reduce visual impacts. The GP-
DEIR concludes: “With implementation of the goals, policies and implementation programs of the
GPU, potentially significant impacts on the visual character of mountains and hillsides will be reduced
to a less-than-significant level.”
Similar to the above, with respect to the proposed Project, the location of the Project site along
Lakeshore Drive at the base of the upsloping Country Club Heights District hillside, combined with the
grading plan, building design (single-story), building height and the building siting will reduce the
visual impact to a less than significant level.
• Views from Public Vantage Points. The GP-DEIR analyzes six (6) public vantage points including: 1)
I-15; 2) SR-74/Ortega Highway; 3) Lake Elsinore Recreation and Campground; 4) Minor League
Baseball Stadium; 5) Boat Launch/Recreation Area; and 6) Aloha Pier Look-out. The Project site is
not visible from Items 1, 4, and 5; Item 6 (Aloha Pier) was removed in 1950; and the view from Item 3
is obscured by mature trees and various vegetation on the north side and east sides of the lake across
Lakeshore Drive from the Project site. The Project site is not directly visible from SR-74 to the north
and distant views across the lake from the Ortega Hwy/SR-74 as is descends down the east facing slopes
of the Santa Ana Mountains is minimal. Project impacts would be less than significant.
• District Plans/Country Club Heights District. The GP-DEIR (p.3.3-39) states public views of the lake
from the Country Club Heights District “would be preserved by the district plan policies. Public views
of hillsides would be affected by increased hillside development.” As discussed above, the Project site
setting along Lakeshore Drive at the base of the upsloping Country Club Heights District hillside,
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 35 of 165
combined with the grading plan, building design (single-story), building height and the building siting
will reduce the visual impact to a less than significant level.
Based on the above data and analysis, implementation of the Project as proposed would not have a
substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Any potential impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: General Plan – Circulation Element; General Plan EIR, Section 3.1, Land Use and Planning, and
Section 3.3, Aesthetics; Zoning Map; Project Plans (Appendix L); Public Resources Code; Figure 1,
Regional Location Map, Figure 2, Vicinity Map, Figure 3, Aerial Photo, Figure 4, Site Plan, Figure 5,
TPM 37854, Figure 6, Colors/Materials – Elevations, Figure 7, Landscape Plan, Figure 8, General Plan
Land Use Map, Figure 9, Zoning Map, provided in Section III of this Initial Study, Figure VII-1,
Surrounding Topography, included in Section VII of this Initial Study; and Google Earth.
b) Would the Project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Less Than Significant Impact
Please reference the discussion in Threshold I.a as it pertains to Public Resources Code Section 21099 and
the visual character of the Project site environs.
The Project site is vacant, undeveloped land that has repeatedly been disked over the years for weed
abatement. The topography is characterized as undulating upsloping lands rising approximately eight (8)
to twenty-four (24) feet in elevation from its Lakeshore Drive frontage to Ryan Avenue, with a significant
portion near the middle of the site rising upwards of forty (40) plus feet. There are no building structures
on the Project site and there are no site improvements (no hardscape or landscape improvements).
Based on a visual inspection of the Project site and a review of aerial photographs, on-site vegetation is
limited to two (2) mature eucalyptus trees (one adjacent to Lakeshore Drive), a single palm tree, and a small
cluster of one to three willow trees located near the middle portion of the property.
There are no scenic trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings on the Project site and the Project site is
not located within or adjacent to a state scenic highway corridor.
The California Department of Transportation identifies both I-15 and SR-74 as being eligible for listing as
state scenic highways, but they are not officially designated as such. As previously discussed in Threshold
I.a, the Project site is not visible from I-15 and the limited views from SR-74 are minimal:
• I-15 is located approximately 1¼ mile northeast of the Project site. The Project site is not visible from
I-15 due to its location at the base of a series of southwest facing hillsides that comprise the Country
Club Heights District;
• SR-74, at its closest point, is located approximately one-quarter (¼) mile north of the Project site and
the Project site is not noticeably visible from this location. Distant views of the Project site across the
lake from the Ortega Hwy/SR-74 (over 2½ miles) as is descends down the east facing slopes of the
Santa Ana Mountains is minimal due to the both the distance/size and scale of the proposed Project and
mature vegetation/trees along Lakeshore Drive.
Based on the above, implementation of the proposed Project would not substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic
highway. Any potential impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: General Plan EIR, Section 3.3, Aesthetics; Public Resources Code; and Google Earth.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 36 of 165
c) In non-urbanized areas, would the Project 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? Less Than
Significant Impact
Please reference the discussion in Threshold I.a as it pertains to Public Resources Code Section 21099 and
the visual character of the Project site environs.
The Project site is located in the suburban City of Lake Elsinore, one of twenty-eight (28) incorporated
cities within the County of Riverside. The Project site is situated adjacent northeast of the lake (Lake
Elsinore) on the northeast side of Lakeshore Drive approximately one-quarter mile southeast of SR-74 and
1¼ mile southwest of I-15.
The Project site is zoned Neighborhood Commercial by the City of Lake Elsinore. Furthermore, the Project
site’s General Plan land use designation is Neighborhood Commercial. The Project site is located within
the Country Club Heights District, adjacent northeast of the Lake Edge District and southeast of the Lake
View District. The Project site is not located in a Specific Plan. The Project site’s zoning and general plan
land use designation are consistent with each other and with the proposed Project.
The proposed Project has been designed in accordance with the existing Neighborhood Commercial zoning
and general plan land use designations. The proposed Project does not entail a request for a change in land
use.
The Project proposes the development of a four-building commercial retail center consisting of 36,120
square feet of general retail space (Buildings 1, 2 & 3) and 7,000 square feet of restaurant space (1,760 SF
Restaurant “A” and 1,760 SF Restaurant “B” in Building 3), and freestanding Restaurant “C” (Building 4),
concrete walkways, asphalt paved parking for 207 vehicles, and 29,009 square feet (16%) of landscaping.
In addition, the proposed Project requires street modifications along Lakeshore Drive and Manning Street
and wet and dry utility connections.
Construction of the proposed Project would result in modest short-term impacts to the existing visual
character and quality of the area. Construction activities will require the use of equipment and storage of
materials within the Project site boundaries. Construction activities are temporary and will not result in any
permanent visual impact.
Implementation of the proposed Project would permanently change the visual character of the Project site
through grading activities to create a single building pad within three (3) feet above Lakeshore Drive grade
and adding the four retail building structures, associated parking, and landscaping.
The proposed Project is located in a suburban area and implementation of the proposed Project would not
conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Any potential impacts
would be less than significant.
Sources: General Plan – Land Use Map, Zoning Map; Project Plans (Appendix L); Public Resources Code;
and Google Earth.
d) Would the Project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect
day or nighttime views in the area? Less Than Significant Impact
Please reference the discussion in Threshold I.a as it pertains to Public Resources Code Section 21099 and
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 37 of 165
the visual character of the Project site environs.
Construction
Currently, there are no light sources on the Project site. During Project construction, nighttime lighting
may be used within the construction staging areas to provide security for construction equipment. In
addition, workers arriving at the Project site before dawn, or leaving the Project site after dusk, will require
additional construction lighting. These impacts will be temporary and will cease when Project construction
is completed. For these reasons, and because development of the proposed Project will require a limited
number of construction workers, these impacts are considered less than significant, and no mitigation is
required.
Operations
Excessive or inappropriately directed lighting can adversely impact nighttime views by reducing the ability
to see the night sky and stars (i.e., skyglow). Glare can be caused from unshielded or misdirected lighting
sources. Reflective surfaces (i.e., polished metal, glass windows, other) can also cause glare. Impacts
associated with glare range from simple nuisance to potentially dangerous situations (i.e., if glare is directed
into the eyes of motorists).
There is a limited amount of existing lighting sources adjacent to the Project site consisting of streetlights
(along southwest side of Lakeshore Drive, only), interior and exterior light fixtures associated with the half
dozen or so SFR’s proximate to the Project site, and vehicle headlights. More intensive light sources are
associated with existing commercial development located along Lakeshore Drive northwest of Project site
approaching SR-74.
The Project would include outdoor lighting associated with the proposed operation of the commercial retail
center. Exterior light sources would include a series of pole mounted light standards interspersed
throughout the parking lot area, commercial signage, and exterior building mounted safety/security lighting.
Implementation of the proposed Project would not introduce a substantial amount of new daytime glare to
the area due to the building siting, setback requirements, and perimeter landscaping.
The proposed Project would introduce new sources of nighttime light into the area from additional street
lighting, parking lot lighting, safety/security lighting, commercial signage, and indoor store lighting.
However, the design of all lighting at the proposed Project site will be required to comply with Lake
Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), Section 17.112.040 - Lighting (for Non-residential Development).
• LEMC, Section 17.112.040 requires all outdoor lighting fixtures in excess of 60 watts to be oriented
and shielded to prevent direct illumination above the horizontal plane passing through the luminaire
and prevent any glare or illumination on adjacent properties or streets.
• LEMC, Section 17.148.110 encourages the use of low pressure sodium vapor lighting due to the City’s
proximity to the Mount Palomar Observatory.
Based on the above, implementation of the proposed Project would not create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Any impacts would be less
than significant.
Sources: General Plan EIR, Section 3.3, Aesthetics; Public Resources Code; and Lake Elsinore Municipal
Code.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 38 of 165
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
a) Would the Project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No Impact
The City of Lake Elsinore consists of 27,747 acres (±43 square miles) within the city limits, plus an
additional 18,818 acres (±29 sq. mi.) within its Sphere of Influence (SOI). As of 2010/2011, almost half of
the land within the City was vacant and undeveloped.
The City is comprised of eleven (11) planning districts and eighteen (18) approved specific plans. The
Project site is located at the southwest boundary of the Country Club Heights District, contiguous south and
east of the Lake Edge District which wraps around the north and east side of the lake. The Project site is
not located within a specific plan area. The City of Lake Elsinore General Plan was adopted on December
13, 2011, with a planning horizon of 2030.
The City’s General Plan includes eighteen (18) Land Use Designations. However, it is noted, the General
Plan does not include an Agriculture or Farmland (or similar) land use category.
Table 3.1-1 of the GP-EIR identifies a total of 215.1 acres of Existing Agriculture Land Use within the
City, plus an additional 649.6 acres within its SOI based on 2005 figures from the Southern California of
Governments. The 215.1 acres identified in the GP-DEIR as Existing Agricultural Land within the City
represents less than 1% (0.8%) of the City’s incorporated area.
Historically, agricultural production was once a significant activity in the surrounding area, but urban
development within and surrounding the City during the past decades (50+ years) has removed much of the
land from crop cultivation and livestock raising in favor of residential development and urban
commercial/industrial uses. Crops once prevalent in the area included olives, apricots, and grapes.
According to the GP-EIR, some of this existing agricultural land, as well as vacant land used for purposes
other than agriculture within the City, is designated by the California Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program (FMMP) as Farmland of Local Importance (554 acres within the City), Grazing Land (827 acres
within the City), and Unique Farmland (25 acres within the City). The remaining land is classified by the
FMMP as Urban/Built-Up Land or Other Land, reflecting its developed condition or other characteristics
that make it unsuitable for agriculture. None of the farmland designations applied by the FMMP to land
within the City or SOI is classified as “important farmland” (i.e., Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance) by the State of California.
The Project site’s farmland designation is classified as “Other Land,” according to Map My County.
Based on the above, implementation of the proposed Project would not convert any Prime Farmland,
Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. There would be no impact.
Sources: General Plan, Chapter 2.3, Land Use; General Plan EIR (GP-EIR), Section 3.1, Land Use and
Planning; and Map My County (Appendix A).
b) Would the Project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract? No Impact
The Project site is located along the southwest boundary of the Country Club Heights District, one of eleven
(11) General Plan planning districts within the City of Lake Elsinore.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 39 of 165
The 995.2-acre Country Club Heights District (CCHD) lies adjacent northeast of the Lake Edge and
Lakeview Districts and is bisected by Riverside Drive which is the principal access route to the area from
Interstate 15 (I-15). The CCHD is largely comprised of moderate to steeply sloping hillsides situated
between the lake to the southwest and the City’s Business District and Interstate 15 (I-15) to the northeast.
The topography rises over 250 feet from Lakeshore Drive with predominantly west/southwest facing slopes
cresting just northeast of Skyline Drive before descending with mostly northeast facing slopes to Strickland
Avenue where it transitions to the Business District.
Most of the land within the CCHD is designated Hillside Residential (467.5 acres; 46.98%), followed by
Low Density Residential (301.0 acres; 30.25%). It is also noted that due to various development constraints
(i.e., topography, older legal-non-conforming lot sizes, obsolete street design, lack of infrastructure
including street improvements, wet and dry utilities, other), most of this residential acreage remains in a
vacant and undeveloped condition.
The CCHD and adjacent planning districts do not contain any land designated, or zoned, for agricultural
use and no agricultural activities were observed in the vicinity of the Project site based on a visual site
inspection and a review of aerial photographs.
The Project site’s General Plan land use designation, as well as the Zoning, is Neighborhood Commercial.
The Project site is surrounded by lands designated Hillside Residential (w/in the Country Club Heights
District) northeast across Ryan Avenue, Neighborhood Commercial (APN 375-092-001; w/in the CCHD)
and General Commercial; Lake Edge District) north/northwest extending approximately one-quarter (¼)
mile to Riverside Drive (“four corners”), Recreational (w/in the Lake Edge District) south/southwest across
Lakeshore Drive, and Hillside Residential (w/in CCHD) south across Manning Street.
The Project site is not located within or adjacent to any lands designated, or zoned, for agricultural use.
And, as stated above, no agricultural activities were observed in the vicinity of the Project site based on a
visual site inspection and a review of aerial photographs.
The Williamson Act, also known as the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, is the State law that
enables landowners and local jurisdictions to enter into contractual agreements that offer a reduction in
property taxes in exchange for the limitation of land uses to agricultural production, open space, recreation,
or other uses deemed compatible by the local jurisdiction.
According to the City’s GP-EIR, there are no Williamson Act agricultural preserves located within the City
boundaries. This is consistent with Map My County which states the Project site is not in an Agricultural
Preserve.
Based on the above, implementation of the proposed Project would not conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. There would be no impact.
Sources: General Plan, Chapter 2.3, Land Use, Chapter 2.4, Circulation, Country Club Heights District
Plan, Figure CCH-1, Country Club Heights District Land Use Plan, and Lake Edge District Plan, Figure
LE-1, Lake Edge District Land Use Plan; General Plan EIR, Section 3.1, Land Use and Planning; Figure
8, General Plan Land Use Map and Figure 9, Zoning Map, provided in Section III of this Initial Study;
Map My County (Appendix A); Google Earth; and Project Plans (Appendix L).
c) Would the Project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined
by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined
by Government Code section 51104(g))? No Impact
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 40 of 165
Please reference Thresholds II.a and II.b for a description of the Project site and surrounding properties
zoning and land use designations.
Public Resources Code Section 12220(g) identifies forest land as land that can support 10 percent native
tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management
of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality,
recreation, and other public benefits.
The Project site and surrounding properties are not currently defined, managed, or used as forest land as
identified in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g). Therefore, there would be no impact.
Sources: Public Resources Code Section 12220(g); and Figure 8, General Plan Land Use Map and Figure
9, Zoning Map, provided in Section III of this Initial Study.
d) Would the Project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest uses?
No Impact
As discussed in Threshold II.c, there is no forest land on or adjacent to the Project site. Therefore,
implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use. There would be no impact.
Sources: Public Resources Code Section 12220(g); and Figure 8, General Plan Land Use Map and Figure
9, Zoning Map, provided in Section III of this Initial Study.
e) Would the Project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? No Impact
The Project site is currently vacant, undeveloped land that has been repeatedly disked over past years in
conjunction with weed abatement efforts. As previously discussed in Threshold II.a and Threshold II.b,
the Project site is not located within or adjacent to any lands designated, or zoned, for agricultural use, and
no agricultural activities were observed in the vicinity of the Project site based on a visual site inspection
and a review of aerial photographs.
Based on the above, implementation of the proposed Project would not involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-
agricultural use. There would be no impact.
Sources: Project Plans (Appendix L); Google Earth; and Figure 8, General Plan Land Use Map and
Figure 9, Zoning Map, provided in Section III of this Initial Study.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 41 of 165
III. AIR QUALITY
Any Tables or Figures in this Section are from the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study,
unless stated otherwise.
The California Supreme Court recently undertook review of a certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
in Sierra Club v. Fresno County (December 24, 2018)—Cal.5th (Friant Ranch). The Supreme Court’s
opinion discussed the standard of review a court must apply when adjudicating a challenge to the adequacy
of an EIR’s discussion of significant impacts and mitigation measures; whether CEQA requires an EIR to
connect a project’s air quality impacts to specific health consequences; whether a lead agency retains the
discretion to substitute later-adopted mitigation measures in place of those proposed in the EIR or whether
that is impermissible deferred mitigation; and whether a lead agency may adopt mitigation measures that
reduce a project’s significant and unavoidable impacts, but not to a less-than-significant level (AEP 2019.
Summary of Key 2018 CEQA Court Cases).
The Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study (AQ/GHG Study) found that Project related air
pollutant emissions would be below the established thresholds set by the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD), hence no mitigation was required. In this case, the Friant Ranch
decision does not apply because the Project-generated pollutants are considered to be within the allowable
limits for avoiding significant public health impacts. Friant Ranch is concerned with projects that have
significant impacts and are required to disclose all potential health consequences from exposure to
substantial pollution concentrations.
Therefore, by complying with the National and State Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) and
SCAQMD’s air pollutant thresholds of significance that have been established for the purpose of protecting
public health and welfare within a reasonable margin of safety, the Project is not expected to result in
significant health impacts that would require further disclosure or evaluation.
a) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Less Than Significant Impact
An Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) describes air pollution control strategies to be taken by a City,
County, or Region classified as a nonattainment area. The main purpose of an AQMP is to bring the area
into compliance with Federal and State air quality standards. CEQA requires that certain proposed projects
be analyzed for consistency with the AQMP. For this Project to be consistent with the 2016 AQMP adopted
by the SCAQMD, the pollutants emitted from the Project should not exceed the SCAQMD daily threshold
or cause a significant impact on air quality, or the project must already have been included in the AQMP
projection. A project may also be deemed as consistent with the AQMP if feasible mitigation measures are
implemented and shown to reduce the impact level to less than significant.
The 2016 AQMP states that the most significant air quality challenge in the SCAB is to reduce nitrogen
oxide (NOx) emissions sufficiently to meet the upcoming ozone standard deadlines. The Plan suggests that
total SCAB emissions of NOx must be reduced to approximately 141 tons per day (tpd) in 2023 and 96 tpd
in 2031 to attain the 8-hour ozone standards. This represents an additional 45 percent reduction in NOx in
2023, and an additional 55 percent NOx reduction beyond 2031 levels. Section III.b demonstrates the
Project will comply with the applicable thresholds of significance for NOx, as well as the other criteria
pollutants so it is consistent with the AQMP in this regard.
A project may also be inconsistent with the AQMP if it would generate population, housing, or employment
growth exceeding forecasts used in the development of the AQMP. With regard to air quality planning, the
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) has prepared the Regional Transportation
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 42 of 165
Plan/Sustainable Community Plan (RTP/SCS) which is a long-range transportation plan that uses growth
forecasts to project trends for regional population, housing and employment growth out to 2040 to identify
regional transportation strategies to address mobility needs. These growth forecasts form the basis for the
land use and transportation control portions of the 2016 AQMP. The updated growth forecasts in SCAG’s
2016 RTP/SCS estimate that the employment numbers in Lake Elsinore would be 31,700 in 2040, up 19,900
from an employment number of 11,800 in 2012. Based on employee density factors in the Employee
Density Report produced by SCAG, the proposed Project could result in approximately 147 employees.
This would amount to an approximately one percent increase compared to 2012 employment in the City.
The anticipated increase in employment would be within SCAG’s projected 2040 employment increase of
19,900 from 2012 and the Project would not cause Lake Elsinore to exceed official regional population
projections. This analysis above demonstrates the Project is consistent with the growth projections that
were used to prepare the RTP/SCS.
Based on the analysis above and as demonstrated in Section III.b, the Project is consistent with the
SCAQMD 2016 AQMP. Any impacts will be less than significant.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study, prepared by Rincon
Consultants, Inc., 7-28-2020 (AQ/GHG Study, Appendix B).
b) Would the Project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the Project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
Construction
Construction activities associated with the Project will result in emissions of carbon monoxide (CO),
volatile organic compounds (VOC), NOx, sulfur oxides (SOx), particulate matter – 10 micrometers or less
(PM10), and PM2.5. Construction related emissions are expected from the following construction activities:
• Site Preparation;
• Grading;
• Building Construction;
• Paving;
• Architectural Coating; and
• Construction Workers Commuting.
Construction of the Project is estimated to begin in year 2021 and last approximately 14 months.
Construction activities are expected to consist of site preparation, grading, building construction, paving,
and architectural coating. The assessment assumes that construction phases will not overlap. It is
anticipated that the Project is expected to be operational by year 2022. Should any of these dates be delayed,
they still remain valid, as, due to air quality regulations, emissions continuously improve over time.
The California Emissions Estimator Model Version 2016.3.2 (CalEEMod) was used to calculate criteria air
pollutants and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions from the construction and operation of the Project.
CalEEMod is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform for
government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify criteria air pollutant
and GHG emissions. The model quantifies direct emissions from construction and operation activities
(including vehicle use), as well as indirect emissions, such as GHG emissions from off-site energy
generation, solid waste disposal, vegetation planting and/or removal, and water use. The model also
identifies mitigation measures to reduce criteria pollutant and GHG emissions. The model was developed
for the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) in collaboration with the
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 43 of 165
California air districts.
The CalEEMod default construction equipment list is based on survey data and the size of the site. The
parameters used to estimate construction emissions, such as the worker and vendor trips and trip lengths,
utilize the CalEEMod defaults. The construction equipment list is shown in Appendix A of the AQ/GHG
Study. The quantity of fugitive dust estimated by CalEEMod is based on the number of equipment used
during site preparation and grading. CalEEMod estimates the worst-case fugitive dust impacts will occur
during the site preparation phase. The total disturbance footprint would be 3.5 acres per 8-hour day with
all equipment in use.
Regulatory Compliance
The SCAQMD Rules that are currently applicable during construction activity for this Project include but
are not limited to:
• Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings);
• Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust);
• Rule 1186 / 1186.1 (Street Sweepers); and
• Rule 461 (Gasoline Transfer and Dispensing) – Operational.
In addition to compliance with these SCAQMD rules, the Project will implement Mitigation Measure
MM-AQ-1 to help assure air pollutant emissions during construction do not exceed established standards.
Air Quality Regional Significance Thresholds
The SCAQMD has established air quality emissions thresholds for criteria air pollutants for the purposes
of determining whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment per Section 15002(g) of
the Guidelines for implementing CEQA. By complying with the thresholds of significance, the Project
would be in compliance with the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) and the federal and
state air quality standards (see Table III-1).
Construction Emissions
Regional air quality emissions include both on-site and off-site emissions associated with construction of
the Project. Regional daily emissions of criteria pollutants are compared to the SCAQMD regional
thresholds of significance. As shown in Table III-1, Project Construction Emissions, regional daily
emissions of criteria pollutants are expected to be below the allowable thresholds of significance. In
addition, the maximum onsite emissions will not exceed the SCAQMD’s Local Significance Thresholds
(LSTs). The Project must follow all standard SCAQMD rules and requirements with regards to fugitive
dust control. In addition to compliance with SCAQMD rules, the Project will implement Mitigation
Measure MM-AQ-1 to help assure air pollutant emissions during construction do not exceed established
standards. By incorporating the Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1, the daily regional emissions will be
below the SCAQMD thresholds of significance. Therefore, the Project’s short-term construction impacts
to regional air resources will be less than significant.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 44 of 165
Table III-1
Project Construction Emissions
Activity Maximum Emissions (pounds/day)1
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Construction Emissions 14.2 84.9 29.0 0.2 10.5 6.5
SCAQMD Regional Thresholds 75.0 100.0 550.0 150.0 150.0 55.0
Exceeds Regional Thresholds? No No No No No No
Maximum Onsite Emissions 11.7 42.4 21.5 <0.1 8.1 4.7
SCAQMD Local Significance Thresholds N/A 339 1,763 N/A 12 7
Exceeds Local Significance Thresholds? No No No No No No
1 See AQ/GHG Study Appendix A for modeling results. Some numbers may not add up precisely to the numbers indicated due
to rounding. Maximum on-site emissions are the highest emissions that would occur on the Project site from on-site sources,
such as heavy construction equipment and architectural coatings, and excludes off-site emissions from sources such as
construction worker vehicle trips and haul truck trips.
Operational Emissions
Operational activities associated with the proposed Project will result in emissions of VOC, NOx, CO,
SOx, PM10, and PM2.5. Operational emissions would be expected from the following primary sources:
• Mobile Source Emissions;
• Area Source Emissions; and
• Energy Source Emissions.
Mobile source emissions are from motor vehicles and are the largest single long-term source of air pollutants
from the operation of the Project. Emissions are also generated from area sources such as the consumption
of natural gas for heating, hearths, landscaping equipment, consumer product usage, and architectural
coatings (painting). Energy source emissions typically occur off-site at a power plant and are considered
an indirect source of emissions. Energy source emissions are mainly used for estimating GHG’s.
Long-term operational air pollutant impacts from the Project are shown in Table III-2, Project Operational
Emissions. Project operations are not expected to exceed the allowable daily emissions thresholds for
criteria pollutants at the regional level. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with the current air quality
plan nor violate the established air quality standards, either directly or cumulatively. The Project related
long-term air quality impacts would be less than significant.
Table III-2
Project Operational Emissions
Activity Maximum Emissions (pounds/day)1
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Area 0.9 <0.1 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1
Energy <0.1 0.5 0.5 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Mobile 5.8 27.3 60.5 0.2 15.9 4.4
Project Emissions 6.8 27.8 61.0 0.2 16.0 4.4
SCAQMD Daily Thresholds 75.0 100.0 550.0 150.0 150.0 55.0
Exceeds Thresholds? No No No No No No
1 See AQ/GHG Study Appendix A for modeling results. Some numbers may not add up precisely to the numbers indicated due
to rounding.
With adherence to Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1, the Project will not result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is non-attainment under an
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 45 of 165
applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. Any impacts will be less than significant.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study, prepared by Rincon
Consultants, Inc., 7-28-2020 (AQ/GHG Study, Appendix B).
c) Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than
Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
Sensitive receptors are considered land uses or other types of population groups that are more sensitive to
air pollution exposure. Sensitive population groups include children, the elderly, the acutely and
chronically ill, and those with cardio-respiratory diseases. For CEQA purposes, the SCAQMD considers a
sensitive receptor to be a location where a sensitive individual could remain for 24-hours or longer, such as
residencies, hospitals, and schools (etc.). According to the AQ/GHG Study, the closest sensitive receptors
to the Project site are single-family residences located 35 feet to the northeast and 60 feet to the south.
Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs)
Construction Emissions
Construction-related activities would result in temporary Project-generated emissions of diesel particulate
matter (DPM) exhaust emissions from off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment for site preparation, grading,
building construction, and other construction activities. DPM was identified as a TAC by the California
Air Resources Board (CARB) in 1998. According to CARB, the potential cancer risk from the inhalation
of DPM outweighs the potential non-cancer health impacts. Generation of DPM from construction projects
typically occurs in a single area for a short period. Construction of the proposed Project would occur over
approximately 14 months. The dose to which the receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to
determine health risk. Dose is a function of the concentration of a substance or substances in the
environment and the extent of exposure that person has with the substance. Dose is positively correlated
with time, meaning that a longer exposure period would result in a higher exposure level for the Maximally
Exposed Individual. The risks estimated for a Maximally Exposed Individual are higher if a fixed exposure
occurs over a longer period of time. According to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment,
health risk assessments, which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic emissions, should be
based on a 70-year exposure period; however, such assessments should be limited to the period/duration of
activities associated with the Project. Thus, the duration of proposed construction activities (i.e., 14 months)
is approximately 1.7 percent of the total exposure period used for health risk calculation. Current models
and methodologies for conducting health-risk assessments are associated with longer-term exposure periods
of 9, 30, and 70 years, which do not correlate well with the temporary and highly variable nature of
construction activities, resulting in difficulties in producing accurate estimates of health risk.
The maximum PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would occur during Project site preparation and grading activities.
These activities would last for approximately three months. PM emissions would decrease for the
remaining construction period because construction activities such as building construction and
architectural coating would require less construction equipment. While the maximum DPM emissions
associated with site preparation and grading activities would only occur for a portion of the overall
construction period, these activities represent the worst-case condition for the total construction period.
This would represent less than one percent of the total exposure period for health risk calculation.
Therefore, given the aforementioned, DPM generated by Project construction would not create conditions
where the probability is greater than one in one million of contracting cancer for the Maximally Exposed
Individual or to generate ground-level concentrations of non-carcinogenic TACs that exceed a Hazard Index
greater than one for the Maximally Exposed Individual.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 46 of 165
To reduce potential TAC emissions to the greatest extent feasible, Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-2 and
MM-AQ-3 are recommended to reduce DPM exposure from construction activities at nearby residences.
These measures include Tier 4 engine requirements (assuming availability), construction vehicle staging
areas, and prohibiting the operation of on-site diesel equipment during Stage 4 Air Alerts when there is an
“Unhealthy” Air Quality Index (AQI). With implementation of these measures, potential impacts related
to TACs emitted during construction of the Project would be less than significant.
Operational Emissions
Table III-2 demonstrated that operation of the Project would not exceed the established SCAQMD Local
Significance Thresholds (LSTs). Therefore, the Project the Project will result in less than significant
localized operational emissions impacts, and no mitigation is required.
Carbon Monoxide “Hot Spots”
The significance of localized Carbon Monoxide (CO) “hot spots” impacts depends on whether ambient CO
levels in the vicinity of the Project are above or below federal or state standards. If ambient levels are
below the standards, a project is considered to have a significant impact if project emissions result in an
exceedance of the AAQS. If ambient levels already exceed State or federal standards, project emissions
are considered significant if they increase 1-hour CO concentrations by 1.0 ppm or more or 8-hour CO
concentrations by 0.45 ppm or more.
Current CO levels in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) are in attainment of both federal and state
standards, and local air quality monitoring data indicates there have not been any localized exceedances of
CO over the past three years. Therefore, the Project must not contribute to an exceedance of a federal or
state ambient air quality standard.
A CO hot spot is a localized concentration of CO that is above the state one-hour standard of 20 ppm or the
eight-hour standard of 9 ppm. At the time of the publishing of the 1993 CEQA Air Quality Handbook, the
SCAB was designated nonattainment and projects were required to perform hot spot analyses to ensure
they did not exacerbate an existing problem. Since this time, the SCAB has achieved attainment status and
the potential for hot spots caused by vehicular traffic congestion has been greatly reduced. In fact, the
SCAQMD AQMP found that peak CO concentrations were primarily the result of unusual meteorological
and topographical conditions and not traffic congestion and the 2003 SCAQMD AQMP found that, at four
of the busiest intersections in Los Angeles, there were no CO hot spots concentrations.
Additionally, based on the results of the Traffic Impact Study, all nearby study area intersections were
shown to operate at level of service D or better with the addition of the Project and mitigation measures. It
is reasonable to conclude, therefore, that the Project would not significantly contribute to the formation of
CO Hot Spots in the Project vicinity. Based on this information the Project impact to CO Hot Spots is less
than significant.
Naturally Occurring Asbestos
The Project is located in Riverside County, CA, which is not among the California counties that are found
to have serpentine and ultramafic rock in their soils. Therefore, the potential risk for naturally occurring
asbestos during Project construction is small. However, in the event asbestos is found on the site, the
Project will be required to comply with the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP) Asbestos Program. An Asbestos NESHAP Notification Form shall be completed and submitted
to the California Air Resources Board immediately upon discovery of the contaminant. The Project will be
required to follow NESHAP standards for emissions control during site renovation, waste transport and
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 47 of 165
waste disposal. A person certified in asbestos removal procedures will be required to supervise on-site
activities. By following the required asbestos abatement protocols, the Project impact is less than
significant. These protocols are not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Impact Summary
The preceding analysis has demonstrated the Project will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations including toxic air contaminants. The Project must follow all SCAQMD rules and
requirements with regards to fugitive dust control, as well as Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1. In addition,
the Project will implement Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-1 and MM-AQ-2 to reduce potential TAC
emissions during construction. With implementation of MM-AQ-1 through MM-AQ-3, potential impacts
will be reduced to less than significant levels.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study, prepared by Rincon
Consultants, Inc., 7-28-2020 (AQ/GHG Study, Appendix B).
d) Would the Project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people? Less Than Significant Impact
Heavy-duty equipment in the Project area during construction will emit odors, however, the construction
activity would cease to occur after individual construction is completed. The Project is required to comply
with Rule 402 during construction, which states that 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 natural tendency to cause,
injury or damage to business or property.
Land uses that commonly receive odor complaints include agricultural uses (farming and livestock),
chemical plants, composting operations, dairies, fiberglass molding facilities, food processing plants,
landfills, refineries, rail yards, and wastewater treatment plants. The proposed Project does not contain
land uses that would typically be associated with significant odor emissions.
Onsite restaurant uses may emit odors; however, these are not typically considered offensive and several
standard control measures will be implemented to reduce food odors. The Project will be required to
comply with standard building code requirements related to exhaust ventilation, as well as comply with
SCAQMD Rule 402. Project related odors are not expected to meet the criteria of being a nuisance. The
vehicle trips generated by the Project would occur throughout the day, so the exhaust would not be heavily
concentrated for extended periods. The Project could also result in odor from dispensing gasoline. The gas
pumping areas are located over 350 feet from the nearest sensitive receptors; therefore, the odors from
dispensing gasoline are not expected to be detectible to off-site sensitive receptors.
As discussed in III.c, the Project will not be a significant source of toxic air contaminants and sensitive
receptors would not be exposed to toxic sources of air pollution.
Considering the low intensity of potential odor emissions and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptors,
the Project’s operational activities would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors)
affecting a substantial number of people. No other sources of objectionable odors have been identified for
the proposed Project. Any impacts will be less than significant.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study, prepared by Rincon
Consultants, Inc., 7-28-2020 (AQ/GHG Study, Appendix B).
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 48 of 165
Mitigation Measures:
MM-AQ-1 During construction, the applicant and contractors shall comply with the following to the
satisfaction of the City Planning Department and Inspectors as applicable:
• All construction equipment shall be maintained in proper tune.
• All construction vehicles shall be prohibited from excessive idling. Excessive
idling is defined as five minutes or longer.
• Establish an electricity supply to the construction site and use electric powered
equipment instead of diesel-powered equipment or generators, where feasible.
• The use of heavy construction equipment shall be suspended during first stage
smog alerts.
• “Clean diesel” equipment shall be used when modified engines (catalyst equipped,
or newer Moyer Program retrofit) are available at a reasonable cost.
• The Project must follow SCAQMD rules and requirements with regards to fugitive
dust control, which include but are not limited to the following:
o All active construction areas shall be watered two (2) times daily.
o All haul trucks shall be covered or shall maintain at least two (2) feet of
freeboard.
o All unpaved parking or staging areas shall be paved or watered a
minimum of two (2) times daily.
o Speed on unpaved roads shall be reduced to less than 15 mph.
o Any visible dirt deposition on any public roadway shall be swept or
washed at the site access points within 30 minutes.
o Any on-site stockpiles of debris, dirt or other dusty material shall be
covered or watered twice daily.
o All operations on any unpaved surface shall be suspended if winds exceed
25 mph.
• Carpooling shall be encouraged for construction workers.
• Any dirt hauled off-site shall be wet down or covered.
• Access points shall be washed or swept daily.
• Construction sites shall be sandbagged for erosion control.
• Use low VOC content paint wherever possible.
• The Project shall comply with all SCAQMD Rule 461 requirements regarding
gasoline transfer and dispensing.
MM-AQ-2 The number of hauling trips during construction activities, including importing or
exporting of soil materials during grading, shall not exceed 107 daily trips.
MM-AQ-3 To minimize diesel particulate emissions from construction activities, the applicant and
contractors shall implement the following:
• All off-road construction equipment shall be fitted with Tier 4 engines to the extent
practical and feasible by the determination of the City;
• Construction vehicle staging areas shall be located as far as possible from nearby
residences;
• The operation of onsite diesel equipment shall be suspended during Stage 4 Air
Alerts when SCAQMD identifies the Air Quality Index (AQI) as “Unhealthy”
(http://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality).
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 49 of 165
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
At present, the Project site consists of approximately 4.26 acres of gross land area comprised of five (5)
contiguous Assessor’s parcels that are in a vacant, undeveloped condition. It is further noted that the Project
site has been repeatedly disked over the years in conjunction with weed abatement efforts.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The entire Project site is a part of a descending southwest facing slope with a steeper sloping flank along
the southeast half of the site that is bisected by an ephemeral drainage, and a more modest slope gradient
that comprises the northwest half of the site which becomes increasingly gentle and flattened. The Project
site elevation ranges from 1,277 to 1,342 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The topography of the Project
site and surrounding area are depicted on Figure 3, Aerial Photograph, included in Section III of this Initial
Study, and Figure VII-1, Surrounding Topography, included in Section VII of this Initial Study.
Regulatory Constraints
This Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) indicates the
following sensitive species and conservation requirements for the Project site:
• The proposed Project does not occur within areas requiring surveys for amphibians, burrowing owl,
mammals, Narrow Endemic Plant Species, or Criteria Area Plant Species;
• In addition, the Project’s MSHCP Consistency Analysis also includes assessments for riparian/riverine
habitat, riparian/riverine species and vernal pool/fairy shrimp habitat.
The MSHCP protects special-status species are native species within its boundaries that have been afforded
special legal or management protection because of concern for their continued existence. In addition to the
MSHCP, there are a number of federal and State laws and regulations that protect various biological
resources, including the Federal Endangered Species Act, the California Endangered Species Act, Sections
3503 and 3511 of California Fish and Game Code, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
Watershed and Drainages
The Project site is within the approximate 2,650-square mile Santa Ana River Watershed which spans from
portions of San Jacinto Mountains, San Bernardino Mountains, San Gabriel Mountains, Santa Ana
Mountains, to the cities of Rialto, Lake Elsinore (of which the Project site is a part), Anaheim, Huntington
Beach, and Irvine. Two major rivers drain the Santa Ana River watershed, the Santa Ana River and the
San Jacinto River. A single on-site drainage feature leads into a storm water inlet culvert at the southwest
corner of the Project site adjacent to Manning Street and flows under Lakeshore Drive (MSHCP Analysis,
Figure 3, p. 9).
Existing Vegetation and Wildlife
According to the MSHCP Analysis, only one land cover type occurs within the Project site: disturbed
habitat Figure 5, Vegetation Communities Map). This land cover type is not formally recognized as an
official vegetation community. Disturbed areas comprise the entire Project site and much of the
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 50 of 165
surrounding area and generally consist of lands that have undergone prior grading and/or off-road vehicle
recreational use and unimproved access roads. The site itself is heavily disked and largely un-vegetated.
The Project site and surrounding area provide limited habitat for wildlife species that commonly occur
within urban communities in Riverside County that are tolerant of human activity such as small mammals,
songbirds, and small reptiles.
Riparian/Riverine, Vernal Pool Areas and Jurisdictional Features
Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP describes the process to protect species associated with riparian/riverine areas
and vernal pools. As defined in the MSHCP, riparian/riverine areas are lands which contain habitat
dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, or emergent mosses and lichens, which occur close to or
depend on a nearby freshwater source or areas that contain a freshwater flow during all or a portion of the
year. These areas may support one or more species listed in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP.
Vernal pools are seasonal wetlands that occur in depressions, typically have wetland indicators that
represent all three parameters (soils, vegetation, and hydrology), and are defined based on vernal pool
indicator plant species during the wetter portion of the growing season but normally lack wetland indicators
associated with vegetation and/or hydrology during the drier portion of the growing season.
The single ditch observed within the Project site does not drain into areas designated for conservation under
the MSHCP. Further, this ditch does not provide wetland habitat, did not result from human actions to
create open waters, or from the alteration of natural stream courses, and does not contain habitat dominated
by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, or emergent mosses and lichens, and is therefore excluded from the
definitions of riparian/riverine areas and vernal pools. Additionally, the ditch described does not contain
suitable habitat for MSHCP-covered species that occur in riparian/riverine areas (e.g., least Bell’s vireo
[Vireo bellii pusillus], southwestern willow flycatcher [Empidonax traillii extimus], western yellow-billed
cuckoo [Coccyzus americanus occidentalis], etc.). For these reasons, it has been determined that the ditch
does not provide any function or value to these MSHCP-covered species.
Jurisdictional Drainages and Wetlands
• Waters of the U.S. and Waters of the State are defined under the Clean Water Act (USACE 33 CFR
Part 328) and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (CA Water Code Section 13000 et seq.).
Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWCQB), and California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW) and may require acquisition of permits for impacts to them.
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. According to the federal Clean Water Act, water-filled depressions
created in dry land incidental to mining or construction activity, including gullies, rills, and other
ephemeral features that do not meet the definition of tributary, and non-wetland swales are not classified
as “waters of the United States”. The ditch within the study area contains ephemeral flow and was not
excavated in, and did not relocate, a covered tributary. Therefore, it does not fall under the jurisdiction
of USACE due to its isolation and substantial distance from navigable or interstate waters. For these
reasons, the MSHCP Analysis preliminarily determined that USACE-jurisdictional “waters of the
United States” are not present on the Project site.
• California Regional Water Quality Control Board. Current regulatory practice by the RWQCB indicate
the ditch and culvert inlet do not comprise RWQCB-jurisdictional “waters of the State” as they are
man-made and/or originate from localized erosion and road runoff, and do not contain a natural water
source.
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The ditch and culvert inlet are derived from localized
erosion and road runoff and do not contain a natural water source, with no real origin or destination
beyond the offsite portion of the ditch. This ditch does not contain distinct habitat for wildlife species
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 51 of 165
separate from the adjacent upland habitat. The vegetation type associated with this ditch is entirely
upland and no hydrophytic vegetation is present. Therefore, the ditch and inlet are not subject to the
jurisdiction of the CDFW.
Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines
According to section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP, the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines are intended to
address indirect effects associated with locating development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation
Area. The study area is not near a conservation area (the closest is located approximately 0.75 miles
northeast of the study area) and therefore the Urban/Wildlife Interface Guidelines are not applicable.
Furthermore, the study area is separated from the nearest conservation area by Highway 74 and a residential
area.
Other Sensitive Biological Resources
Sensitive biological resources not addressed by the MSHCP include USFWS critical habitat, nesting birds,
and protected trees.
• Critical Habitat. As indicated by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Critical habitat
portal (USFWS 2019b) and the CDFW BIOS (CDFW 2019c), critical habitat for San Diego ambrosia
(Ambrosia pumila) is located approximately 1.4 miles north of the study area and Critical habitat the
USFWS Critical habitat for coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) is located
approximately 1.4 miles northeast of the study area. San Diego ambrosia is listed as Endangered by
USFWS and has a rank of 1B.1 by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). California coastal
gnatcatcher is listed as a Species of Special Concern in California and is listed as Threatened by the
USFWS. Based on the distance of critical habitat from the study area and lack of suitable habitat, the
proposed Project is not expected to affect Critical habitat for these species.
• Nesting Birds. California Fish and Game Code Section 3503 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA) protect native birds and their nests from direct take. The study area contains trees, shrubs and
ground surfaces suitable for nesting birds. The properties adjacent to the Project site contain
ornamental/landscaping that may provide suitable nesting habitat for several avian species.
Additionally, large stands of eucalyptus and riparian woodlands exist about 106 feet southwest of the
site adjacent to Lakeshore Drive and along the lake shore.
• Protected Trees. There is a single Canary Island date palm (Pheonix canariensis) present on the Project
site that is protected by the Lake Elsinore Significant Palm Trees Ordinance (Chapter 5.116). Based
on review of the site plan, the date palm will require removal to accommodate the proposed Project
footprint. The City requires a palm tree removal permit to remove palm trees that exceed five feet in
height plus an arborist report prepared to City standards pursuant to the ordinance. Removed significant
palms are to be relocated within the City or are replaced/mitigated with palm tree(s) of like species and
quantity and of commensurate aesthetic value as determined by the Director of Community Services.
• Special-Status Plants. No special-status plant species were observed on the study area during the
survey. All species with recorded occurrences in the study area vicinity are associated with habitats not
found on the Project site.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The Project site falls within the MSHCP fee area. Payment of any necessary development mitigation fees
(whether special-status species are present or not), as well as compliance with the requirements of Section
6.0 of the MSHCP, is intended to provide full mitigation under CEQA, the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA), the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), and the Federal Endangered Species Act
(FESA) for impacts on species and habitats covered by the MSHCP, pursuant to agreements with the
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 52 of 165
USFWS and the CDFW, as set forth in the implementing agreement for the MSHCP (reference Mitigation
Measure MM-BIO-1).
• Habitat Assessment. The Project will not impact narrow endemic plant species (NEPS),
riparian/riverine habitat or species, vernal pools/fairy shrimp habitat, or conservation areas. Therefore,
the Project will not conflict with Sections 6.1.2, 6.1.3, and 6.3.2 of the MSHCP. Under the requirements
of Section 6.3.1 of MSHCP, vegetation mapping is provided in the MSHCP Analysis to assess the
presence of suitable habitat for Criteria Area Plant Species.
• Riparian/Riverine and Jurisdictional Features. The Project site study area contains a single ditch;
however, the ditch is not consistent with the MSHCP definition of a riparian/riverine system. No
riparian/riverine species, pursuant to MSHCP guidelines, were observed. Therefore, no further actions
under the MSHCP are recommended. The ditch is also not under the jurisdiction of the USACE,
RWQCB, or CDFW.
• Nesting Birds. Migratory or other common bird species may nest in the red gum (Eucalyptus
camaldulensis), Canary island date palm, and Peruvian pepper trees (Schinus molle) on site or the
adjacent offsite grove of red gum on the other side of Lakeshore Drive to the southwest. Therefore,
construction of the Project has the potential to directly (by destroying a nest) or indirectly (through
construction noise, dust, and other human disturbances that may cause a nest to fail) impact nesting
birds protected under the California Fish and Game Commission (CFGC) and MBTA if construction
occurs during the nesting bird season (February 1 through August 31). Implementation of Mitigation
Measure MM-BIO-2 would help assure avoidance and/or minimization of potential impacts to nesting
birds and raptors.
The Project site falls within the MSHCP fee area and as such the Project proponent/developer would be
required pay MSHCP Mitigation Fees as outlined in MM-BIO-1.
Sensitive Plants. The Project site is not within a survey area for Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey
Areas (NEPSSA) species and no suitable habitat for NEPSSA occurs on the Project site. Therefore,
NEPSSA surveys are not required and no impacts would occur.
Small Mammals. The proposed Project is not located within the Mammal Species Survey Area (MSSA) of
the MSHCP and the site does not provide suitable habitat for sensitive MSHCP mammal species.
Therefore, no impacts would occur to sensitive small mammals.
Burrowing Owl. The MSHCP requires a habitat assessment and survey if burrowing owl habitat occurs on
site. As set forth in the MSHCP Analysis and the RCIP Conservation Summary Report (MSHCP Analysis,
Appendix A, p. A-1), a burrowing owl survey for the Project site is not required as it is not in an area that
requires a survey and due to the disturbed condition of the site caused by repeated disking.
Migratory/Nesting Birds. Development of the proposed Project could potentially disturb or destroy active
migratory bird nests including eggs and young. Disturbance to or destruction of migratory bird eggs, young,
or adults is in violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and is, therefore, considered to be a
potentially significant impact. Therefore, MM-BIO-2 shall be implemented. With incorporation of MM-
BIO-2, any potential impacts would be reduced to a level that is less than significant.
Based on the above, implementation of the proposed Project would not 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. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-BIO-
1 and MM-BIO-2, any impacts would be less than significant.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 53 of 165
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project - MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment, prepared by
Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-2019 (MSHCP Analysis, Appendix C).
b) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact
As set forth in Threshold IV.a, the single ditch identified on the Project site is not consistent with the
MSHCP definition of a riparian/riverine system, and it is not under the jurisdiction of the USACE,
RWQCB, or CDFW. No riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community occurs on the Project site.
Therefore, Threshold IV.b is not applicable to the proposed Project. There would be no impact.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project - MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment, prepared by
Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-2019 (MSHCP Analysis, Appendix C).
c) Would the Project 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 Impact
The Project site contains a single ditch, but its condition is not consistent with the MSHCP definition of a
riparian/riverine system. No riparian/riverine species pursuant to MSHCP guidelines were observed.
Therefore, no further actions under the MSHCP are recommended. The ditch is also not under the
jurisdiction of the USACE, RWQCB, or CDFW.
The USACE, under Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), regulates discharges of dredged
or fill material into “waters of the United States.” These waters include wetlands and non-wetland bodies
of water that meet specific criteria, including a connection to interstate or foreign commerce. This
connection may be direct (through a tributary system linking a stream channel with traditional navigable
waters used in interstate or foreign commerce) or it may be indirect (through a connection identified in
USACE regulations). The USACE typically regulates as non-wetland waters of the U.S. any body of water
displaying an ordinary high water mark. In order to be considered a jurisdictional wetland under Section
404, an area must possess hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. None of these
conditions were identified in the MSCHP Analysis summarized in Threshold IV.a.
The CDFW, under Sections 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code, regulates alterations to
lakes, rivers, and streams. A stream is defined by the presence of a channel bed and banks, and at least an
occasional flow of water. The CDFW also regulates habitat associated with the streambed, such as wetland,
riparian shrub, and woodlands. None of these conditions were identified in the MSHCP Analysis
summarized in Threshold IV.a.
The RWQCB is responsible for the administration of Section 401 of the CWA, through water quality
certification of any activity that may result in a discharge to jurisdictional waters of the U.S. The RWQCB
may also regulate discharges to “waters of the State,” including wetlands, under the California Porter-
Cologne Water Quality Control Act. None of these conditions were identified in the MSHCP Analysis
summarized in Threshold IV.a.
No vernal pools or other wetland features were identified on the Project site.
Lastly, other kinds of perennial or seasonal aquatic features that could be classified as federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (e.g., rivers, open waters, swamps, marshes,
bogs, fens, etc.) are not present on the Project site.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 54 of 165
Based on the above, implementation of the Project would not 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. There would be no impact.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project - MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment, prepared by
Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-2019 (MSHCP Analysis, Appendix C).
d) Would the Project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory
fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation
Incorporated
As previously discussed in Threshold IV.a, California Fish and Game Code Section 3503 and the MBTA
protect native birds and their nests from direct take. The Project site study area contains trees, shrubs and
ground surfaces suitable for nesting birds. The properties adjacent to the study area contain
ornamental/landscaping that may provide suitable nesting habitat for several avian species. Additionally,
large stands of eucalyptus and riparian woodlands exist about 106 feet southwest of the study area, adjacent
to Lakeshore Drive and along the lake shore.
Migratory or other common bird species may nest in the red gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis), Canary island
date palm, and Peruvian pepper trees (Schinus molle) on site or the adjacent offsite grove of red gum trees
on the other side of Lakeshore Drive to the southwest. Therefore, construction of the Project has the
potential to directly (by destroying a nest) or indirectly (through construction noise, dust, and other human
disturbances that may cause a nest to fail) impact nesting birds protected under the CFGC and MBTA if
construction occurs during the nesting bird season (February 1 through August 31).
Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-2 would help assure avoidance and/or minimization of
potential impacts to nesting birds and raptors. With incorporation of MM-BIO-2, any potential impacts
would be reduced to a level that is less than significant.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project - MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment, prepared by
Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-2019 (MSHCP Analysis, Appendix C).
e) Would the Project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Less Than Significant Impact
There is a single Canary Island date palm (Pheonix canariensis) present on the Project site study area that
is protected by the Lake Elsinore Significant Palm Trees Ordinance (Ch. 5.116, [Ord. 1256 § 1, 2008]).
Based on review of the Project site plan, the date palm will require removal to accommodate the proposed
project footprint.
The City requires a palm tree removal permit to remove palm trees that exceed five feet in height. The
palm tree removal permit application requires an arborist report be prepared to City standards pursuant to
the ordinance. Removed significant palms are to be relocated within the City or are replaced/mitigated with
palm tree(s) of like species and quantity and of commensurate aesthetic value as determined by the Director
of Community Services.
Implementation of the proposed Project will accommodate all City of Lake Elsinore development
ordinances including the Lake Elsinore Significant Palm Trees Ordinance. With adherence to Ord. 1256,
the impact caused by the implementation of the proposed Project and subsequent removal/relocation of the
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 55 of 165
single Canary Island date palm would be reduced to a level that would be less than significant.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project - MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment, prepared by
Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-2019 (MSHCP Analysis, Appendix C); and LEMC, Ord. 1256 § 1, 2008.
f) Would the Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation
plan? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
The Project site is located within the Western Riverside County MSHCP Planning Area. The MSHCP is a
comprehensive multi-jurisdictional effort that includes western Riverside County and multiple cities,
including the Project site and surrounding area.
Rather than address sensitive species on an individual basis, the MSHCP focuses on the conservation of
146 species, proposing a reserve system of approximately 500,000 acres and a mechanism to fund and
implement the reserve system. Most importantly, the MSHCP allows participating entities to issue take
permits for listed species so that individual applicants need not seek their own permits from the USFWS
and/or CDFW.
The MSHCP consists of a Criteria Area that assists in facilitating the process by which individual properties
are evaluated for inclusion and subsequent conservation. In addition to Criteria Area requirements, the
MSHCP requires consistency with Sections 6.1.2 (Protection of Species within Riparian/Riverine Areas
and Vernal Pools), 6.1.3 (Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species), 6.1.4 (Urban Wildlands Interface),
6.3.2 (Additional Survey Needs and Procedures), and Section 6.4 (Fuels Management). The MSHCP serves
as a comprehensive, multijurisdictional Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), pursuant to Section (a)(1)(B) of
the Endangered Species Act (ESA), as well as the Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) under
the State NCCP Act of 2001.
The MSHCP establishes “Criteria Area” boundaries in order to facilitate the process by which properties
are evaluated for inclusion in the MSHCP Conservation. The Criteria Area is an area significantly larger
than what may be needed for inclusion in the MSHCP Conservation Area, within which property will be
evaluated using MSHCP Conservation Criteria. The Criteria Area is an analytical tool which assists in
determining which properties to evaluate for acquisition and conservation under the MSHCP.
The Project site is not within a criteria cell or cell group and, therefore, also not within a subunit of the
Elsinore Area Plan. The proposed Project would be subject to the MSHCP Fee, as required under mitigation
measure Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-1.
The MSHCP Analysis evaluated the Project for consistency with the following MSHCP issue areas: •
MSHCP Reserve Assembly requirements; • Section 6.1.2 (Protection of Species Associated with
Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools); • Section 6.1.3 (Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species);
• Section 6.1.4 (Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface); • Section 6.3.2 (Additional Survey
Needs and Procedures); and • Section 6.4 (Fuels Management).
A summary of the findings set forth in the MSHCP is included in Threshold IV.a. The reader is referred to
the report for full particulars.
With payment of MSHCP Development Mitigation Fees (whether special-status species are present or not),
impacts to any special-status species covered under the “take” provisions of the MSHCP would be less than
significant. The proposed Project is not expected to result in any significant impacts to any species-status
plant or wildlife species that are not covered under the “take” provisions of the MSHCP.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 56 of 165
Lastly, implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-2 would help assure avoidance and/or
minimization of potential impacts to nesting birds and raptors. With incorporation of MM-BIO-2, any
potential impacts would be reduced to a level that is less than significant.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project - MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment, prepared by
Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-2019 (MSHCP Analysis, Appendix C).
Mitigation Measures:
MM-BIO-1 MSHCP Fees. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant/developer shall pay the
Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP)
development mitigation fee for commercial development in effect at the time the permits
are issued.
MM-BIO-2 Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Survey and Avoidance. Implementation of the following
recommended measures would help assure avoidance and/or minimization of potential
impacts to nesting birds and raptors:
• To avoid take of nesting birds, vegetation removal and initial ground disturbance
should occur outside the nesting bird breeding season, which is approximately
February 1 through August 31. If construction must begin within the bird breeding
season, then no more than one (1) week prior to ground disturbance and/or vegetation
removal, a nesting bird preconstruction survey should be conducted by a qualified
biologist within the disturbance footprint plus a 300-foot buffer. If no nests are
observed, no further action is required.
• If nests are found, their locations should be flagged and then mapped onto an aerial
photograph of the Project site and/or recorded with the use of a GPS unit. An
appropriate avoidance buffer (size of buffer depending upon the species and the
proposed work activity) should be determined and demarcated by a qualified biologist.
No work should occur within the avoidance buffer, and a qualified biologist should be
present on site to monitor bird behavior and ensure no disturbance to the nest occurs
as necessary.
• If disturbance is detected (e.g., alarm calling, flight from the nest) as determined by the
qualified biologist, work in the area should halt immediately until such time as the
young have left the nest of their own volition. Work may take place on other areas of
the Project site as long the activity does not likewise result in disturbance to the nest
or nesting bird, as determined by a qualified biologist.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 57 of 165
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
a) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15064.5? No Impact
The Project site is identified as consisting of approximately 4.3 acres of undeveloped land (Assessor’s
Parcel Numbers 375-092-002, 375-092-003, 375-092-004, 375-092-005, and 375-092-006) located at the
corner of West Lakeshore Drive and Manning Street. The proposed Project will involve the construction
of a 43,120 square foot retail and restaurant development. The proposed Project requires compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) including CEQA Guidelines §15064.5 entitled
“Determining the Significance of Impacts to Archaeological and Historical Resources”.
The Cultural Resources Assessment prepared for the Project (CRA) presents the results of 1) a cultural
resources records search, 2) Native American outreach, 3) archival research, and 4) field survey. The CRA
has been prepared according to the California Office of Historic Preservation’s (1990) Archaeological
Resource Management Reports guidelines. The findings of the CRA are summarized below:
• The records search conducted at the Eastern Information Center identified 11 cultural resources within
a 0.5-mile search radius of the Project site;
• These resources include one prehistoric archaeological site, three prehistoric isolated artifacts, one
multi-component (prehistoric and historic period) archaeological site, one historic period
archaeological site, and five historic period buildings;
• No cultural resources have been previously documented within or immediately adjacent to the Project
site;
• A search of the Sacred Lands File housed at the Native American Heritage Commission resulted in
negative findings;
• A review of historical maps and aerial photographs indicates that the Project site has been undeveloped
since at least the early 1950s;
• Finally, no cultural resources were identified during the pedestrian survey of the Project site.
The CRA concluded there would be no impacts to historical resources. Based on the results of the CRA,
implementation of the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15064.5. There would be no impact.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, prepared by Rincon Consultants,
Inc., 9-2019 (CRA, Appendix D).
b) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15064.5? Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated
Threshold V.b addresses the potential adverse change in significance of an archeological resource pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines §15064.5. Please refer to the discussion set forth in Threshold V.a, for a summary of
the Project site, the proposed Project development plan, identification of the Project-specific CRA
performed, and the subsequent CRA findings and recommendations. As previously summarized with
respect to archeological resources, “one prehistoric archaeological site, three prehistoric isolated artifacts,
one multi-component (prehistoric and historic period) archaeological site, one historic period
archaeological site, and five historic period buildings” were identified within 0.5-mile of the Project site
and documented in the CRA. No cultural resources have been previously documented within or
immediately adjacent to the Project site. A search of the Sacred Lands File housed at the Native American
Heritage Commission resulted in negative findings, and finally, no cultural resources were identified during
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 58 of 165
the pedestrian survey of the Project site.
While archeological resources are not anticipated to be found at the Project site, Mitigation Measures
MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-5 are recommended to ensure that any potential disturbance to buried
cultural resources during the grading and/or construction phases of the Project is reduced to a less than
significant level. With the incorporation of Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-5,
listed below, implementation of the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5. Any impacts would be less than significant with
mitigation incorporated.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, prepared by Rincon Consultants,
Inc., 9-2019 (CRA, Appendix D).
c) Would the Project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated
Due in part to the Project site having been previously disturbed (extensive disking), no human remains, or
cemeteries are anticipated to be disturbed by the proposed Project. However, previously unknown human
remains may be located below the ground surface which could potentially be encountered during
construction excavations associated with the proposed Project. This conclusion is based on the documented
prehistoric occupation of the region, the identification of multiple surface archaeological resources within
one mile of the Project site, and favorable natural conditions that would have attracted prehistoric
inhabitants to the area.
In order to ensure that implementation of the Project would not disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries, Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-6 and MM-CUL-7, listed below,
will be incorporated. With incorporation of Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-6 and MM-CUL-7, any
impact would be less than significant.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, prepared by Rincon Consultants,
Inc., 9-2019 (CRA, Appendix D.
Mitigation Measures:
MM-CUL-1 Unanticipated Resources. The developer/permit holder or any successor in interest shall
comply with the following for the life of this permit. If during ground disturbance activities,
unanticipated cultural resources are discovered, the following procedures shall be
followed:
1. All ground disturbance activities within 100 feet of the discovered cultural resource
shall be halted until a meeting is convened between the developer, the Project
Archaeologist, the Native American tribal representative(s) from consulting tribes (or
other appropriate ethnic/cultural group representative), and the Community
Development Director or their designee to discuss the significance of the find.
2. The developer shall call the Community Development Director or their designee
immediately upon discovery of the cultural resource to convene the meeting.
3. At the meeting with the aforementioned parties, the significance of the discoveries
shall be discussed, and a decision is to be made, with the concurrence of the
Community Development Director or their designee, as to the appropriate mitigation
(documentation, recovery, avoidance, etc.) for the cultural resource.
4. Further ground disturbance shall not resume within the area of the discovery until a
meeting has been convened with the aforementioned parties and a decision is made,
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 59 of 165
with the concurrence of the Community Development Director or their designee, as to
the appropriate mitigation measures.
MM-CUL-2 Archaeologist/CRMP. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant/developer shall
provide evidence to the Community Development Department that a Secretary of Interior
Standards qualified, and certified Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA) has been
contracted to implement a Cultural Resource Monitoring Program (CRMP) that addresses
the details of all activities that must be completed and procedures that must be followed
regarding cultural resources associated with this Project. The CRMP document shall be
provided to the Community Development Director or their designee for review and
approval prior to issuance of the grading permit.
The CRMP provides procedures to be followed and are to ensure that impacts on cultural
resources will not occur without procedures that would reduce the impacts to less than
significant. These measures shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following:
Archaeological Monitor - An adequate number of qualified monitors shall be present to
ensure that all earth-moving activities are observed and shall be on-site during all grading
activities for areas to be monitored including off-site improvements. Inspections will vary
based on the rate of excavation, the materials excavated, and the presence and abundance
of artifacts and features. The frequency and location of inspections will be determined by
the Project Archaeologist, in consultation with the Tribal monitor.
Cultural Sensitivity Training - The Project Archaeologist and a representative designated
by the consulting Tribe(s) shall attend the pre-grading meeting with the contractors to
provide Cultural Sensitivity Training for all Construction Personnel. Training will include
a brief review of the cultural sensitivity of the Project and the surrounding area; what
resources could potentially be identified during earthmoving activities; the requirements of
the monitoring program; the protocols that apply in the event unanticipated cultural
resources are identified, including who to contact and appropriate avoidance measures until
the find(s) can be properly evaluated; and any other appropriate protocols. This is a
mandatory training, and all construction personnel must attend prior to beginning work on
the Project site. A sign-in sheet for attendees of this training shall be included in the Phase
IV Monitoring Report.
Unanticipated Resources - In the event that previously unidentified potentially significant
cultural resources are discovered, the Archaeological and/or Tribal Monitor(s) shall have
the authority to divert or temporarily halt ground disturbance operations in the area of
discovery to allow evaluation of potentially significant cultural resources. The Project
Archaeologist, in consultation with the Tribal monitor(s) shall determine the significance
of the discovered resources. The Community Development Director or their designee must
concur with the evaluation before construction activities will be allowed to resume in the
affected area. Before construction activities are allowed to resume in the affected area, the
artifacts shall be recovered, and features recorded using professional archaeological
methods.
Phase IV Report - A final archaeological report shall be prepared by the Project
archaeologist and submitted to the Community Development Director or their designee
prior to grading final. The report shall follow County of Riverside requirements and shall
include at a minimum: a discussion of the monitoring methods and techniques used; the
results of the monitoring program including any artifacts recovered; an inventory of any
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 60 of 165
resources recovered; updated DPR forms for all sites affected by the development; final
disposition of the resources including GPS data; artifact catalog and any additional
recommendations. A final copy shall be submitted to the City, Project Applicant, the
Eastern Information Center (EIC), and the Tribe.
MM-CUL-3 Cultural Resources Disposition. In the event that Native American cultural resources are
discovered during the course of grading (inadvertent discoveries), the following procedures
shall be carried out for final disposition of the discoveries:
One or more of the following treatments, in order of preference, shall be employed with
the tribes. Evidence of such shall be provided to the Community Development Department:
1. Preservation-In-Place of the cultural resources, if feasible. Preservation in place means
avoiding the resources, leaving them in the place where they were found with no
development affecting the integrity of the resources.
2. Relocation of the resources on the Project property. The measures for relocation shall
include, at least, the following: Measures and provisions to protect the future reburial
area from any future impacts by means of a deed restriction or other form of protection
(e.g., conservation easement) in order to demonstrate avoidance in perpetuity.
Relocation shall not occur until all legally required cataloging and basic recordation
have been completed, with an exception that sacred items, burial goods and Native
American human remains are excluded. Any reburial process shall be culturally
appropriate. Listing of contents and location of the reburial shall be included in the
confidential Phase IV report. The Phase IV Report shall be filed with the City under a
confidential cover and not subject to Public Records Request.
3. If relocation is not agreed upon by the Consulting Tribes then the resources shall be
curated at a culturally appropriate manner at a Riverside County curation facility that
meets State Resources Department Office of Historic Preservation Guidelines for the
Curation of Archaeological Resources ensuring access and use pursuant to the
Guidelines. The collection and associated records shall be transferred, including title,
and are to be accompanied by payment of the fees necessary for permanent curation.
Evidence of curation in the form of a letter from the curation facility stating that subject
archaeological materials have been received and that all fees have been paid, shall be
provided by the landowner to the City. There shall be no destructive or invasive testing
on sacred items, burial goods and Native American human remains. Results
concerning finds of any inadvertent discoveries shall be included in the Phase IV
monitoring report.
MM-CUL-4 Tribal Monitoring. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall contact
the consulting Native American Tribe(s) that have requested monitoring through
consultation with the City during the AB 52 and/or the SB 18 process (“Monitoring
Tribes”). The applicant shall coordinate with the Tribe(s) to develop individual Tribal
Monitoring Agreement(s). A copy of the signed agreement(s) shall be provided to the City
of Lake Elsinore Community Development Department, Planning Division prior to the
issuance of a grading permit. The Agreement shall address the treatment of any known
tribal cultural resources (TCRs) including the Project’s approved mitigation measures and
conditions of approval; the designation, responsibilities, and participation of professional
Tribal Monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; Project
grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation for the monitors; and
treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human
remains/burial goods discovered on the site per the Tribe(s) customs and traditions and the
City’s mitigation measures/conditions of approval. The Tribal Monitor will have the
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 61 of 165
authority to stop and redirect grading in the immediate area of a find in order to evaluate
the find and determine the appropriate next steps, in consultation with the Project
archaeologist.
MM-CUL-5 Phase IV Report. Upon completion of the implementation phase, a Phase IV Cultural
Resources Monitoring Report shall be submitted that complies with the Riverside County
Planning Department's requirements for such reports for all ground disturbing activities
associated with this grading permit. The report shall follow the County of Riverside
Planning Department Cultural Resources (Archaeological) Investigations Standard Scopes
of Work posted on the County website. The report shall include results of any feature
relocation or residue analysis required as well as evidence of the required cultural
sensitivity training for the construction staff held during the required pre-grade meeting.
MM-CUL-6 Discovery of Human Remains. In the event that human remains (or remains that may be
human) are discovered at the Project site during grading or earthmoving, the construction
contractors, Project archaeologist and/or designated Native American Monitor shall
immediately stop all activities within 100 feet of the find. The Project applicant shall then
inform the Riverside County Coroner and the City of Lake Elsinore Community
Development Department immediately, and the coroner shall be permitted to examine the
remains as required by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b).
Section 7050.5 requires that excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human
remains and that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has
made the necessary findings as to origin. If human remains are determined to be Native
American, the applicant shall comply with the state law relating to the disposition of Native
American burials that fall within the jurisdiction of the NAHC (PRC Section 5097). The
coroner shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours and the NAHC will make the
determination of most likely descendant. The most likely descendant shall then make
recommendations and engage in consultation concerning the treatment of the remains as
provided in Public Resource Code Section 5097.98. In the event that the applicant and the
MLD are in disagreement regarding the disposition of the remains, State law will apply,
and the mediation process will occur with the NAHC, if requested (see PRC Section
5097.98(e) and 5097.94(k)).
According to the California Health and Safety Code, six or more human burial at one
location constitutes a cemetery (Section 81 00), and disturbance of Native American
cemeteries is a felony (Section 7052).
MM-CUL-7 Non-Disclosure of Reburial Location. It is understood by all parties that unless otherwise
required by law, the site of any reburial of Native American human remains or associated
grave goods shall not be disclosed and shall not be governed by public disclosure
requirements of the California Public Records Act. The Coroner, pursuant to the specific
exemption set forth in California Government Code 6254 (r), parties, and Lead Agencies,
will be asked to withhold public disclosure information related to such reburial, pursuant
to the specific exemption set forth in California Government Code 6254 (r).
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 62 of 165
VI. ENERGY
Any Tables or Figures in this Section are from the Energy Analysis, unless stated otherwise.
a) Would the Project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during Project construction or
operation? Less than Significant Impact
The Project proposes the development of a 43,120 square-foot four-building neighborhood serving
commercial retail center (Lakeview Plaza) consisting of 36,120 square feet of general retail space
(Buildings 1, 2 & 3) and 7,000 square feet of restaurant space, concrete walkways, asphalt paved parking
for 207 vehicles, and 29,009 square feet (16%) of landscaping.
The Project has been designed in compliance with the existing City of Lake Elsinore, General Plan land
use designation (Neighborhood Commercial) and Zoning (Neighborhood Commercial) for the Project site.
Implementation of the proposed Project would commit approximately 3.9 acres (net) of vacant,
undeveloped land to neighborhood commercial use. Utility services including electricity and natural gas
connections are being requested in conjunction with the Project. Construction and operation of the
proposed Project would contribute to the incremental depletion of renewable and non-renewable energy
resources.
Electricity
Electricity consumption during construction and operation phases would incrementally increase the
consumption of fossil fuels like natural gas used at power plants located outside the City of Lake Elsinore.
Accordingly, this represents a long-term commitment to the continued consumption of these resources.
Currently, there is not an electricity connection in place serving the Project site in its vacant and
undeveloped condition. The Project site development plan which proposes construction of a commercial
retail center will require electrical service.
The electrical service provider for the Project site, the City of Lake Elsinore, and the greater Southwest
Riverside County region is Southern California Edison (SCE). SCE maintains substations and distribution
lines in the Lake Elsinore area including the Dryden substation located approximately 1½ miles northwest
of the Project site and the Elsinore substation located approximately two (2) miles east of the Project site.
Overhead service lines adjacent to the Project site are located along the southwest side of Lakeshore Drive
and along the southeast side of Manning Street. In addition, overhead service lines extend from Lakeshore
Drive northeast up the hillside one lot northwest of the Project site serving the water storage tank and several
residences in the Country Club Heights District.
In 2018, California used 285,488 gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity of which approximately 31 percent
(±31%) were from renewable resources (California Energy Commission [CEC] 2019). In 2018, SCE
provided approximately 29.2 percent of the total electricity used in California. Electricity consumption
within the SCE service during 2018 is shown in Table VI-1, Electricity Consumption in the SCE Service
Area in 2018.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 63 of 165
Table VI-1
Electricity Consumption in the SCE Service Area in 2018
Agriculture and
Water Pump
Commercial
Building
Commercial
Other Industry Mining and
Construction Residential Streetlight Total
Usage
3,150.9 31,165.5 4,310.9 13,218.5 2,359.1 28,617.1 578.0 83,400.0
Note: All usage expressed in GWh
According to the CalEEMod output provided in the Air Quality Report prepared for the Project, the Project
would demand an estimated 961,816 kWh per year (or 0.96 GWh per year) of electricity to serve the
proposed retail, restaurant, and parking uses. This increased energy demand would amount to slightly more
than 0.001 percent of SCE’s annual demand in 2018.
This nominal increase in energy demand attributed to the proposed Project is not anticipated to require
additional electricity substations or transmission facilities beyond those currently serving the Lake Elsinore
area. Impacts with respect to new or expanded electric power facilities would be less than significant.
Natural Gas
Currently, there is not a natural gas connection in place serving the Project site in its vacant and undeveloped
condition. The natural gas provider for the Project site, the City of Lake Elsinore, and the greater Southwest
Riverside County region is the Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas), also known as The Gas
Company.
SoCal Gas provides natural gas service to approximately six million residential and business customers
across 20,000 square miles of southern California, including Lake Elsinore (SCG 2019). The Project site
is located in SoCal Gas’s Southern Zone. In 2018, California consumed approximately 12,600 million U.S.
therms (MMthm) of natural gas (1 therm is equal to approximately 100 cubic feet of natural gas). In 2018,
SoCal Gas provided approximately 40.9 percent (±40.9%) of the total natural gas used in California.
Natural gas consumption within the SCE service during 2018 is shown in Table VI-2, Natural Gas
Consumption in the SCE Service Area in 2018.
Table VI-2
Natural Gas Consumption in the SCE Service Area in 2018
Agriculture
and Water
Pump
Commercial
Building
Commercial
Other Industry Mining and
Construction Residential Total Usage
77.6 913.0 74.5 1,714.4 229.2 2,147.4 5,156.1
Note: All usage expressed in MMThm
According to the CalEEMod output, the Project would demand an estimated 1,994,266 kBTU (or 0.02
MMThms) per year of natural gas to serve the proposed retail, restaurant, and parking uses. This increased
energy demand would amount to less than 0.0003 percent of SoCal Gas’s annual demand in 2018.
This nominal increase in energy demand attributed to the proposed Project is not anticipated to require
additional natural gas storage or transmission facilities beyond those currently serving the Lake Elsinore
area. Impacts with respect to new or expanded natural gas facilities would be less than significant.
Petroleum Consumption
The Energy Analysis calculated Project construction vehicles would consume a total of 8,217 gallons of
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 64 of 165
gasoline and 40,953 gallons of diesel fuel. In addition, the Energy Analysis estimated that Project operation
would consume 316,638 gallons of gasoline and 71,953 gallons of diesel fuel each year at buildout.
Total Consumption and Conclusion
The Energy Analysis concluded the Project would consume a total of 12,116 million British thermal units
(MBtu) in one year (construction scheduled to last 14 months) and ongoing Project operations would
consume a total of 12,116 MBtu from electrical and natural gas use as well as consumption of vehicle fuel
(which represents 90% of the total estimated consumption). Table VI-3, Total Project Energy
Consumption summarizes the anticipated energy consumption of the Project for both construction and
operation.
Table VI-3
Total Project Energy Consumption
Activity Total Energy
Consumption (MBtu/yr.)1
Annual Energy
Consumption (MBtu/yr.)1
Construction2
Off-Road Equipment
On-road Vehicle Trips
Total
5,566.84
6,549.47
12,116.31
--
--
--
Operation
Electricity
Natural Gas
Petroleum
Total
--
--
--
--
3,281.72
1,994.27
48,017.28
53,293.26
1 Millions of British thermal units per year
2 Construction activities are expected to last for 14 months
The Energy Analysis did not identify any significant impacts of the Project relative to short-term energy
use during construction or long-term energy use during operation, so no mitigation is required. However,
the Energy Analysis did recommend seven “design features” that need to be incorporated into the Project
so that both short- and long-term energy use remains at less than significant levels. While these are not
considered mitigation measures, the City will incorporate the following design features into appropriate
“Conditions of Approval” (COAs) as part of Project approval:
Construction
E-1 All General contractors shall maintain and operate construction equipment so as to minimize
exhaust emissions.
E-2 All Trucks having no current hauling activity shall not idle but to be turned off.
E-3 Carpooling In accordance with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, the
idling of all diesel-fueled commercial vehicles (weighing over 10,000 pounds) during construction
shall be limited to five minutes at any location.
E-4 In accordance with Section 93115 of Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations, operation of
any stationary, diesel-fueled, compression-ignition engines shall meet specified fuel and fuel
additive requirements and emission standards.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 65 of 165
Operation
E-5 Comply with the mandatory requirements of California’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards
and Green Building (CALGreen) Standards, including mandatory installation of electric vehicle
service equipment (EVSE).
E-6 Implement water conservation strategies, including low flow fixtures and toilets, water efficient
irrigation systems, drought tolerant/native landscaping, and reduce the amount of turf.
E-7 Use electric landscaping equipment, such as lawn mowers and leaf blowers.
Based on the above, the Project would not result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during Project construction or
operation. Any impacts would be less than significant with implementation of the recommended design
features.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project, Energy Conservation Analysis, RK Engineering, Inc., 2-1-2021 (Energy
Analysis, Appendix E); Lakeview Plaza Commercial Development - Utilities and Service Systems Study,
Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-2019 (Appendix M); General Plan EIR, Section 3.16, Utilities and Service
Systems; Project Plans (Appendix L); and Google Earth.
b) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency? Less Than Significant Impact
Implementation of the proposed Project would increase the site’s demand for energy in comparison with its
existing vacant, undeveloped condition. Specifically, the proposed Project would increase consumption of
energy for space and water heating, air conditioning, lighting, and operation of miscellaneous equipment
and appliances associated with the general retail and restaurant use.
The Project will purchase electricity through Southern California Edison which is subject to the
requirements of California Senate Bill 100 (SB 100). SB 100 is the most stringent and current energy 5-3
legislation in California; requiring that renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 100%
of retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers and 100% of electricity procured to serve all
state agencies by December 31, 2045.
The Project would also comply with all Title 24 energy conservation requirements. The Title 24 Building
Energy Efficiency Standards were developed by the California Energy Commission and apply to energy
consumed for heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating, and lighting in new residential and non-
residential buildings (inclusive of general retail and restaurant uses). Adherence to these efficiency
standards would result in a “maximum feasible” reduction in unnecessary energy consumption.
With implementation of the design features outlined in sub-section VI.a, the proposed Project would not
conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Any impacts would
be less than significant with implementation of the recommended design features.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project, Energy Conservation Analysis, RK Engineering, Inc., 2-1-2021 (Energy
Analysis, Appendix E); Lakeview Plaza Commercial Development - Utilities and Service Systems Study,
Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-2019 (Appendix M); General Plan EIR, Section 3.16, Utilities and Service
Systems; and Project Plans (Appendix L).
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required (the recommended design features are not
considered mitigation).
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 66 of 165
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
a) Would the Project 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. Less Than Significant Impact
The Project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, nor are any faults mapped or
inferred through the Project site. However, the Project site is identified in Map My County as being within
a County Fault Zone.
The City of Lake Elsinore is located in the northern part of the Peninsular Ranges Province and includes
parts of two structural blocks (structural subdivisions) of the province. The Peninsular Ranges Province
extends from the Santa Monica Mountains approximately 900 miles south to the tip of Baja California. It
is located on the Pacific Plate (crustal/tectonic) which is moving to the northwest relative to the adjacent
North American Plate. The San Andreas Fault forms the boundary between the Pacific and the North
American Plates. As a result, the Southern California area contains numerous regional and local faults, and
experiences substantial ground movement during relatively frequent seismic events.
The active Elsinore fault zone diagonally crosses the southwest corner of the Elsinore 7.5’ quadrangle and
is a major element of the right-lateral strike-slip San Andreas fault-system. The Elsinore Fault Zone forms
a complex series of pull-apart basins:
• The closest faults to the Project site are associated with the Elsinore Fault system. Strands of the
Elsinore fault zone within Riverside County include the Whittier, Glen Ivy, Temecula, and Julian
segments. In the City of Lake Elsinore, the majority of the Elsinore fault zone is located under the lake;
• The closest fault to the Project site is identified as the Glen Ivy North fault located approximately 500
feet southwest of the Project site across Lakeshore Drive, followed by the Willard fault approximately
1.5 miles southwest of the Project site.
According to the GP-EIR (August 2011), the last recorded ground rupture on the Elsinore fault occurred in
2010 in vicinity of the Laguna Salada segment in Baja California. The last earthquake over magnitude 5.2
along the main trace of the Elsinore fault was a Mw 6 quake near the Temescal Valley in 1910 that produced
no known surface rupture. Lesser magnitude earthquakes have occurred along the Elsinore fault zone in
1890, 1918, 1923, 1937, 1954, 1968, and 1982. Although the Elsinore fault complex is active, it is unlikely
that the City and Sphere of Influence would be subject to surface rupture during a seismic event.
Based on the above, the potential for surface rupture due to faulting occurring beneath the Project site
during the design life of the proposed Project is considered low.
Furthermore, all structures constructed as a part of the proposed Project will be subject to seismic design
criteria in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC), which would reduce potential impacts
related to the rupture of an earthquake fault. Adherence to the CBC is a standard condition and is not
considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
In conclusion, impacts associated with rupture of a fault would be less than significant.
Sources: Map My County (Appendix A); Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report, Proposed Commercial
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 67 of 165
Buildings, Lots 14-17, APN Numbers 375-092-002, 003, 004, 005 & 006, Lakeshore Drive, Lake Elsinore,
CA, prepared by Soils Pacific Inc., 2-13-2019 (Soil and Foundation Report, Appendix F); General Plan
EIR, Section 3.11, Geology and Soils.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Less Than Significant Impact
The Soil and Foundation Report used the USGS web-based application US Seismic Design Maps to
estimate the peak ground acceleration modified for site class effects (PGAM). Because of the proximity to
the Project site and the maximum probable events for faults, it appears that a maximum probable event
along the fault zones could produce a peak horizontal acceleration of approximately 1.347g.
While the PGAM is useful for comparison of potential effects of fault activity in a region, other
considerations are important in seismic design, including frequency and duration of motion, and soil
conditions underlying the site.
The Soil and Foundation Report states:
• CGS, 2016, “Earthquake Shaking Potential for California, Map Sheet 48,” suggest the degree of ground
shaking at the Project site, due to earthquakes, will (be) 60% to >70% of gravity; but the degree of
shaking at the Project site will be no greater than shaking at neighboring properties.
Faults in proximity of the proposed Project have the potential to cause moderate to strong ground shaking.
However, the proposed Project would be required to implement all applicable seismic design elements of
the current edition of the CBC. Adherence to the CBC is a standard condition and is not considered unique
mitigation under CEQA. Any impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report, Proposed Commercial Buildings, Lots 14-17, APN
Numbers 375-092-002, 003, 004, 005 & 006, Lakeshore Drive, Lake Elsinore, CA, prepared by Soils Pacific
Inc., 2-13-2019 (Soil and Foundation Report, Appendix F).
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact
Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which loose, saturated, relatively cohesionless soil deposits lose shear
strength during strong ground motions. Primary factors controlling liquefaction include:
• intensity and duration of ground motion;
• gradation characteristics of the subsurface soils;
• in-situ stress conditions; and
• the depth to groundwater (typically, less than 50 feet).
Liquefaction is typified by a loss of shear strength in the liquefied layers due to rapid increases in pore
water pressure generated by earthquake accelerations. Buildings can be damaged or destroyed liquefaction
in underlying soils due to a loss of load bearing strength.
The current standard of practice, as outlined in the “Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG
Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction in California” and “Special
Publication 117A, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California” requires
liquefaction analysis to a depth of 50 feet below the lowest portion of a proposed structure.
Liquefaction typically occurs in areas where the soils above the water table are composed of poorly
consolidated, fine to medium-grained, primarily sandy soil. In addition to the requisite soil conditions, the
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 68 of 165
ground acceleration and duration of the earthquake must also be of a sufficient level to induce liquefaction.
As set forth in the Project sites’ Soil and Foundation Report:
• Subject site is underlain by firm and dense bedrock and the potential for liquefaction susceptibility is null;
• Liquefaction occurs when seismically-induced dynamic loading of a saturated sand or silt causes pore
water pressures to increase to levels where grain-to-grain contact pressure is significantly decreased, and
the soil material temporarily behaves as a viscous fluid. Liquefaction can cause settlement of the ground
surface, settlement and tilting of engineered structures, flotation of buoyant buried structures and fissuring
of the ground surface. A common manifestation of liquefaction is the formation of sand boils (short-lived
fountains of soil and water emerges from fissures or vents and leave freshly deposited conical mounds of
sand or silt on the ground surface). Lateral spreading can also occur when liquefaction occurs adjacent to
a free face such as a slope or stream embankment;
• The types of seismically induced flooding that may be considered as potential hazards to a particular site
normally includes flooding due to a tsunami (seismic sea wave), a seiche, or failure of a major reservoir
or other water retention structure upstream of the site. Since the site has an average elevation of
approximately 200 (sic) feet above sea level, and since it does not lie in close proximity to an enclosed
body of water, the probability of flooding from a tsunami or seiche is considered to be low. In addition,
the site is not located within a designated tsunami inundation area.
Based on the above, implementation of the proposed Project would not directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic-related
ground failure, including liquefaction. Any impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report, Proposed Commercial Buildings, Lots 14-17, APN
Numbers 375-092-002, 003, 004, 005 & 006, Lakeshore Drive, Lake Elsinore, CA, prepared by Soils Pacific
Inc., 2-13-2019 (Soil and Foundation Report, Appendix F).
iv) Landslides? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
Landslides are large movements of the underlying ground that include rock falls, shallow slumping and
sliding of soil, and deep rotational or transitional movement of soil or rock.
Development along hillsides is particularly susceptible to landslides, as they are considered to be a basic
geologic hazard for such development. Seismically induced landsliding and rock falls can be expected to
occur throughout Riverside County, including the City of Lake Elsinore, in a major earthquake. In addition
to seismic shaking, landslides may also be triggered by soil saturation during periods of heavy rains which
can cause soils to lose cohesion and fall down the slope. Factors controlling the stability of slopes include:
1) the slope height and inclination, 2) the engineering characteristics of the earth materials comprising the
slope, and 3) the intensity of ground shaking. Landslides can compromise the integrity of structures and
infrastructure existing on or just above the slope and inundate areas below the slope.
The entire Project site is a part of a descending southwest facing slope. The Project site is further
characterized by its steeper sloping flank along the southeast half of the site that is bisected by an ephemeral
drainage, and a more modest slope gradient that comprises the northwest half of the site which becomes
increasingly gentle and flattened.
According to the Soil and Foundation Report the average elevation of the site is about 1,300 feet above
mean sea level (AMSL), and further describes the topography at the Project site as follows:
• Based on the "Topographic Plan" outline, slopes of the ribs are inclined between 3.0:1 (horizontal to
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 69 of 165
vertical) and 3.5:1; with the slope through the southwesterly part of the parcel inclined between 8.0:1
and 14.0:1;
• A southwest descending drainage course, from Ryan Ave. to Lakeshore Dr., crosses the Project site at
about mid -point;
• An undocumented artificial fill has been constructed to provide access of Ryan Ave. across the
drainage, with a culvert being installed through the fill to allow draining waters to pass.
Map My County reports the Project site elevation at 1,312 feet AMSL; minimum and maximum elevations
are not reported. The elevations for each individual APN vary from 1,296 feet AMSL (375-092-002) to
1,314 feet AMSL (375-092-005); again, no minimum and maximum elevations are reported.
The Country Club Heights District (of which Project site is a part) is distinctly marked by its steep hillsides
(GP-CCH-1). Figure 3.3-8, Percent Slope, of the City’s GP-EIR, depicts the Country Club Heights District
topography as being mostly 15-25% sloping, followed by 25%-35% sloping, and relatively small patches
in excess of 35% slope.
Lakeshore Drive and the Project site sit at the base of a series of incised hillsides which make up the Country
Club Heights District neighborhood. Lakeshore Drive has a very gentle downward gradient proceeding
northwest towards Riverside Drive. In the current “as is” condition, the Project site topography generally
rises approximately eight (8) to twenty-four (24) feet in elevation from its Lakeshore Drive frontage to
Ryan Avenue, with a significant portion near the middle of the site rising upwards of forty (40) plus feet
due to the undulating terrain.
• The Project site elevation along its Lakeshore Drive frontage varies from approximately 1,273’ AMSL
at the northwest corner of the site, to ±1,277’ AMSL at mid site, to 1,284’ AMSL at the southwest
corner adjacent to Manning Street (Project Plans);
• The Project site elevation along its Ryan Street (narrow, partially graded, unmaintained dirt road) varies
from approximately 1,298’ AMSL at the northeast corner of the site, peaking at ±1,322’ AMSL adjacent
north of the future Building 2, to ±1,292’ AMSL at the southeast corner adjacent to Manning Street
(Project Plans).
The Project site’s sloping topography as well as the upsloping hillside topography contiguous northeast of
the Project site within the Country Club Heights neighborhood is depicted on Figure 3, Aerial Photograph,
provided in Section III of this Initial Study, and Figure VII-1, Surrounding Topography.
Based on the City’s General Plan, Figure 3.3-8, Percentage Slope, the City’s General Plan – Country Club
Heights District, and Riverside County’s General Plan/Elsinore Area Plan, Figure 13, Steep Slopes, most
of the hillside lands adjacent northeast of the Project site vary between 15% to 25% slope, with a moderate
amount of these lands with 25% - 35% slopes, and isolated pockets of hillside lands that exceed 35% slope.
FIGURE VII-1
SURROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY
Source: https://www.mytopo.com/maps/index.cfm
Lakeview Plaza
Page 70 of 163
SITE
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 71 of 165
Furthermore, the County’s General Plan/Elsinore Area Plan, Figure 14, Slope Instability indicates most of
the Country Club Heights District is classified as “Low to locally moderate susceptibility to seismically
induced landslides and rockfalls” with a smaller portion classified as “High susceptibility to seismically
induced landslides and rockfalls.” The Project site is located in the area depicted as having “low to locally
moderate susceptibility.”
A slope analysis by a qualified civil engineer was not available for review in conjunction with this Initial
Study; however, based on an analysis of Project site aerial photographs, Project Plans, and published
elevation estimates provided by Google Earth, the northwest half of the Project site is estimated to have
modest slopes ranging from 5-15%, while most of the southeast half is estimated to be in the 15% to 25%
range, with minor incised sloping areas over 30%. This is consistent with the Soils and Foundation Report,
which states: “Based on the ‘Topographic Plan’ outline, slopes of the ribs are inclined between 3.0:1
(horizontal to vertical) and 3.5:1; with the slope through the southwesterly part of the parcel inclined
between 8.0:1 and 14.0:1.”
The Project development plan proposes mass grading the Project site to create a single super-pad. Proposed
earthwork quantities set forth on the Project site Preliminary Grading Plan indicate the proposed Project
will require 85,019 cubic yards of raw cut, 109 cubic yards of raw fill, and 84,910 cubic yards of raw export.
Upon completion of grading activities, the improved Project site super pad will generally be at or up to
three feet above Lakeshore Drive street grade. Finished floor elevations range from 1,278.80 (Building 1;
N. End of Site) to 1,284.25 feet AMSL (Bldg. 4; SE. End of Site at Manning Street). A retaining wall (“pile
& lagging wall w/ tieback”) reaching a maximum height of 42 feet and concrete “V” ditch will be
constructed adjacent to the Ryan Avenue frontage at the rear (northeast) boundary of the Project site.
In comparison, the finished pad of the single-family residence (17271 Lakeview Ave) adjacent northeast of
the Project site has an elevation of approximately 1,355 feet AMSL (Google Earth); the elevation along
Skyline Drive generally ranges from 1,410 to 1,440 feet AMSL (the Water Tank between Skyline Dr &
Sunnyslope Ave is ±1,445’ AMSL); and the elevation proximate to the ridgeline of the Country Club
Heights neighborhood along Sunnyslope Avenue ranges from approximately 1,440 to 1,510 feet AMSL.
Both the Riverside County General Plan and the Elsinore Area Plan include maps showing areas of general
slope failure hazard. A ground acceleration of at least 0.10 g in steep terrain is necessary to induce
earthquake-related rock falls, although exceeding this value does not guarantee that rock falls will occur.
Since there are several faults capable of generating peak ground accelerations of over 0.10 g in the vicinity
of Lake Elsinore, there is a high potential for seismically induced rock falls and landslides to occur.
According to the City GP-EIR, landslide impacts would be concentrated in districts with steep slopes of
more than 30 percent and Hillside Residential land use designations. This includes portions of the
Northwest Sphere, Lake View Sphere, Lakeland Village, Alberhill, North Central Sphere, Meadowbrook,
Lake Elsinore Hills, and Riverview districts. General Plan policies for these districts include measures to
respect the natural topography of the area and require building practices suitable to the natural environment
to reduce landslide risks.
Based on the above, the Project site is located in an area identified as having “Low to locally moderate
susceptibility to seismically induced landslides and rockfalls.” The Project site design which incorporates
grading the entire site to an elevation at or within three-feet of the existing Lakeshore Drive street elevation
and the construction of a “pile & lagging” retaining wall and concrete “V” ditch along the site’s rear
(northeast) Ryan Avenue frontage, combined with building setbacks, structural building design
requirements in compliance with the CBC, and implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-GEO-1,
would reduce the impact of landslides to a less than significant level with mitigation incorporated.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 72 of 165
Sources: Map My County (Appendix A); Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report, Proposed Commercial
Buildings, Lots 14-17, APN Numbers 375-092-002, 003, 004, 005 & 006, Lakeshore Drive, Lake Elsinore,
CA, prepared by Soils Pacific Inc., 2-13-2019 (Soil and Foundation Report, Appendix F); Project Plans
(Appendix L); General Plan EIR, Section 3.11, Geology and Soils; General Plan, Country Club Heights
District; Riverside County General Plan, Elsinore Area Plan, Figure 13, Steep Slope; and Figure 14, Slope
Instability; and Google Earth.
b) Would the Project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant
Impact
Construction activities have the potential to result in soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. However, erosion
will be addressed through the implementation of existing State and Federal requirements and minimized
through compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System general construction permit
which requires that a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) be prepared prior to construction
activities and implemented during construction activities. The preparation of an SWPPP will identify Best
Management Practices to address soil erosion. Upon compliance with these standard regulatory
requirements, the proposed Project is not anticipated to result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Sources: Project Plans (Appendix L).
c) Would the Project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the Project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation
Incorporated
Impacts related to landslides are addressed in the response to Threshold VII.a.iv and impacts related to
liquefaction are addressed in response to Threshold VII.a.iii. This analysis addresses impacts related to
unstable soils, as a result of lateral spreading, subsidence, and/or collapse.
A subsurface exploration of the Project site was performed by Soil Pacific Inc. in September 2018. The
exploration involved the excavation of four exploratory borings (TP-1, TP-2, TP-3 and TP-4) and the
approximate locations of the exploratory borings are shown on the Exploration Location Map, Figure A-1-
1 of the Soil and Foundation Report.
Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading is a phenomenon in which soils move laterally during seismic shaking and is often associated
with liquefaction. The amount of movement depends on the soil strength, duration and intensity of seismic
shaking, topography, and free face geometry. According to the Soil and Foundation Report (p. 13), the
Project site is underlain by firm and dense bedrock and the potential for liquefaction susceptibility is null.
Based on the Project site’s underlying bedrock, the proposed grading plan, and the low liquefaction
potential, the likelihood of lateral spreading is low.
Subsidence
According to Map My County, the Project site is located in an area susceptible to subsidence. Seismic ground
subsidence (not related to liquefaction induced settlement) occurs when strong earthquake shaking results in
the densification of loose to medium density sandy soils above groundwater. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure MM-GEO-1, requiring the proposed Project to comply with all recommendations contained in
the Soil and Foundation Report, will reduce impacts related to subsidence to a less than significant level.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 73 of 165
Collapse
Similar to the risk associated with liquefaction and lateral spreading, collapse risk is typically associated a
combination of seismic activity and soil characteristics. The Project site is located in a seismically active
region; however, the underlying bedrock along with the low expansion index and depth to groundwater are
not characteristics conducive to a high risk of collapse. Nevertheless, in order to further reduce the risk
exposure to construction in terms of possible post-construction movement of the foundations and floor
systems, implementation of MM-GEO-1 is applied to further reduce anticipated expansion and collapse
potential. Implementation of MM-GEO-1, requiring the proposed Project to comply with all recommendations
contained in the Soil and Foundation Report, will reduce impacts related to collapse to a less than significant
level.
In addition, to lessen the potential impacts of subsidence and collapsible soils at the Project site, the
proposed Project will also be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the CBC. Adherence to
the CBC is a standard condition and is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Sources: Map My County (Appendix A); Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report, Proposed Commercial
Buildings, Lots 14-17, APN Numbers 375-092-002, 003, 004, 005 & 006, Lakeshore Drive, Lake Elsinore,
CA, prepared by Soils Pacific Inc., 2-13-2019 (Soil and Foundation Report, Appendix F); Project Plans
(Appendix L); General Plan EIR, Section 3.11, Geology and Soils; General Plan, Country Club Heights
District; Riverside County General Plan, Elsinore Area Plan, Figure 13, Steep Slope; and Figure 14, Slope
Instability; and Google Earth.
d) Would the Project 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? Less Than
Significant Impact
Expansive soils are composed of a significant amount of clay particles which can expand (absorb water) or
contract (release water). These shrink and swell characteristics can result in structural stress and place other
loads on these soils.
As set forth in the Soil and Foundation Report, an expansion index test was performed on a
representative sample of on-site soils at the Project site’s proposed grade in accordance with the
California Building Code. The soil expansion potential at proposed building areas was determined to
be very low or null (El=0).
Based on the above, impacts related to expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building
Code (1994), would not create substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property. Any impacts would be
less than significant.
Sources: Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report, Proposed Commercial Buildings, Lots 14-17, APN
Numbers 375-092-002, 003, 004, 005 & 006, Lakeshore Drive, Lake Elsinore, CA, prepared by Soils Pacific
Inc., 2-13-2019 (Soil and Foundation Report, Appendix F).
e) Would the Project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater? No Impact
The Project proposes to connect to the existing Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District sewer system and
will not require use of septic tanks. Therefore, this threshold is not applicable to the proposed Project. No
impact would occur.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 74 of 165
Sources: Project Plans (Appendix L).
f) Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
A literature review and museum record search were conducted by Rincon Consultants, Inc. in conjunction
with the proposed Project and used to assign a paleontological sensitivity classification to the geologic units
within the Project site. The potential for impacts to significant paleontological resources is based on the
potential for ground disturbance to directly impact paleontologically sensitive geologic units. According
to the published geologic mapping by Morton and Weber (2003), the Project site is immediately underlain
by Mesozoic phyllite (Mzp) and younger Quaternary (Holocene) alluvium (Qyva):
• The Mesozoic phyllite mapped within the eastern Project site is considered to have no paleontological
resource potential as its formation is not conducive to fossil preservation [Society of Vertebrate
Paleontology (SVP 2010)];
• The Holocene alluvium mapped within the Project site is derived as fluvial deposits along valley floors
and comprised of unconsolidated sand, silt, and clay. Intact Holocene alluvial deposits are too young
to preserve paleontological resources and are determined to have a low paleontological resource
potential. However, these younger sediments may grade downward into older deposits of late
Pleistocene age that could preserve fossil remains at an unknown but potentially moderate depth
(approximately 10 feet).
A search of the University of California Museum of Paleontology online database resulted in no previously
recorded vertebrate fossil localities within the Project vicinity.
The potential for encountering fossil resources during Project-related ground disturbance is low and
impacts to paleontological resources are not anticipated.
The Paleontological Evaluation findings are consistent with Map My County which states that the Project
site is located in an area classified as having a low potential for paleontological sensitivity.
Further paleontological resources management is not recommended by Rincon Consultants, Inc. at this
time; however, Mitigation Measure MM-PAL-1 is recommended by Rincon in the case of unanticipated
fossil discoveries during any Project ground-disturbing activities within Holocene alluvial deposits. This
measure would apply to all phases of Project construction and would provide that any unanticipated fossils
present on site are preserved and that potential impacts to paleontological resources would be less than
significant by arranging for the recovery, identification and curation of previously unrecovered fossils.
Sources: Map My County (Appendix A); and Paleontological Resources Evaluation for Lakeview Plaza,
City of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-26-2019
(Paleontological Evaluation, Appendix G).
Mitigation Measures:
MM-GEO-1 Compliance with Recommendations from the Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the proposed Project applicant/developer shall
comply with all recommendations contained within the Soil and Foundation Report.
MM-PAL-1 Unanticipated Discovery of Paleontological Resources In the event an unanticipated
fossil discovery is made during the course of Project development, then in accordance with
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (2010) guidelines, it is the responsibility of any worker
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 75 of 165
who observes fossils within the Project site to stop work in the immediate vicinity of the
find and notify a qualified professional paleontologist who shall be retained to evaluate the
discovery, determine its significance and if additional mitigation or treatment is warranted.
Work in the area of the discovery will resume once the find is properly documented and
authorization is given to resume construction work. Any significant paleontological
resources found during construction monitoring will be prepared, identified, analyzed, and
permanently curated in an approved regional museum repository.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 76 of 165
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Any Tables or Figures in this Section are from the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study,
unless stated otherwise.
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment? Less Than Significant Impact
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions for the Project were analyzed in the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Study (AQ/GHG Study) to determine if the Project could have a significant impact related to
GHG emissions. These impacts are analyzed on a cumulative basis, utilizing Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
(CO2e), measured in metric tons (MT) or MTCO2e. They are analyzed for both the construction and
operational phases of the Project. The City has an adopted Climate Action Plan (CAP) so the City’s CAP
thresholds and action measures were utilized to evaluate the Project.
Construction Emissions
Construction activities are short-term and will cease have any GHG emissions upon completion. In contrast,
operational emissions are continuous year after year until operation of the use ceases. Because of this
difference, SCAQMD recommends amortizing construction emissions over a 30-year operational lifetime.
This normalizes construction emissions so that they can be grouped with operational emissions to generate
a precise project-based GHG inventory.
The construction analysis included modeling of the projected construction equipment that would be used
during each construction activity. Construction activities include site preparation, grading, underground
utilities, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. For modeling purposes, it was assumed
construction activity would begin in 2021 and last approximately 14 months. The AQ/GHG Study
calculated construction of the Project would generate 806.7 metric tons of CO2 equivalents (MTCO2e) per
year but construction is planned for 14 months so a total of 896.7 MTCO2e would actually be generated by
construction activities. Amortized over 30 years, the proposed construction activities would contribute
approximately 29.9 MTCO2e emissions per year.
Operational Emissions
Operational sources of GHG emissions include: (1) energy use (electricity and natural gas); (2) area sources
(landscaping equipment); (3) vehicle use; (4) solid waste generation; and (5) water conveyance and
treatment. As shown in Table VIII-1, Project Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions, with reductions
associated with implementation of the Project including design features such as compliance with State
Green Building Code including energy conservation standards associated with the CAP (see discussion in
VII.b.). This regulatory compliance is not considered mitigation under CEQA.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 77 of 165
Table VIII-1
Project Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Emissions Sources Emissions (MTCO2e)
Area Sources <0.1
Energy Sources 344.3
Vehicular (Mobile) Sources 2,859.2
Solid Waste Sources 61.0
Water Sources 27.5
Operational Subtotal 3,292.1
Construction (Annualized over 30 years) 29.9
TOTAL EMISSIONS 3,322
Note: Totals may not add up exactly due to rounding.
Table VIII-1 shows the combined construction and operational GHG emissions associated with
development of the Project. It is estimated the annual emissions from the proposed Project would be 3,322
MTCO2e or approximately 0.3 percent of Lake Elsinore’s 2020 GHG emissions (1,064,565 MTCO2e) as
projected in the City’s CAP.
Based on the estimated number of Project employees, the Project would produce 22.6 MTCO2e per service
population per year, which is higher than Lake Elsinore’s city-wide efficiency-based target of 4.4 MTCO2e
per service population per year in the CAP. However, according to the CAP, if projects are consistent with
General Plan and CAP Consistency Checklist, then the project would be consistent with the CAP and the
environmental review pertaining to GHG impacts may be streamlined. As discussed below under
Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies (Section VII.b), the Project is consistent with the CAP
Consistency Checklist. In addition, mobile emissions account for 80 percent of total project emissions as
summarized in Table VIII-1. The Project would involve construction of neighborhood commercial
development intended to serve nearby residents of the surrounding community. The Project would
potentially reduce travel by these residents to further retail destinations, either elsewhere in Lake Elsinore
or in neighboring communities. As a result, mobile emissions generated by the Project would not
necessarily be new emissions, but rather existing emissions associated with travel to other, more distant
retail services that would instead be captured by the Project. Therefore, Project impacts are considered to
be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study, prepared by Rincon
Consultants, Inc., 7-28-2020 (AQ/GHG Study, Appendix B).
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases? Less Than Significant Impact
The principal state plan and policy adopted to reduce GHG emissions is AB 32, the California Global
Warming Solutions Act of 2006, and the follow up, SB 32. The quantitative goal of AB 32 is to reduce
GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and the goal of SB 32 is to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent
below 1990 levels by 2030. The 2017 Scoping Plan, which outlines a framework to achieve SB 32’s 2030
target, emphasizes innovation, adoption of existing technology, and strategic investment to support its
strategies. Statewide plans and regulations in support of these strategies, such as GHG emissions standards
for vehicles (AB 1493), the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, and regulations requiring an increasing fraction of
electricity to be generated from renewable sources, are being implemented at the statewide level so
compliance at a project level would occur as implementation continues statewide. As mentioned above,
Senate Bill 375, signed in August 2008, is a state-level policy directing each of California’s 18 major
Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) to prepare a Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS) plan that
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 78 of 165
contains growth strategies to meet emission targets for inclusion in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).
The applicable MPO for the project site is the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG),
and Project’s consistency with the goals contained in SCAG’s 2016-2040 RTP/SCS is discussed below.
SCAG 2016-2040 RTP/SCS
SCAG’s 2016-2040 RTP/SCS includes a commitment to reduce emissions from transportation sources by
promoting compact and infill development to comply with SB 375. The proposed Project would not conflict
with any of the SCAG’s 2016-2040 RTP/SCS goals, as outlined in Table VIII-2, Consistency with
Applicable SCAG RTP/SCS GHG Emission Reduction Strategies.
Table VIII-2
Consistency with Applicable SCAG RTP/SCS GHG Emission Reduction Strategies
Strategy/Action Project Consistency
Land Use and Transportation
Plan for growth around livable corridors. The Livable
Corridors strategy seeks to create neighborhood retail
nodes that would be walking and biking destinations by
integrating three different planning components:
1. Transit improvements
2. Active transportation improvements (i.e., improved
safety for walking and biking)
3. Land use policies that include the development of
mixed-use retail centers at key nodes and better integrate
different types of ritual uses.
Consistent. The Project site is located on the southern
end of a commercial corridor near existing single-
family, large lot neighborhoods. There is limited
commercial services in the area and this project would
provide additional local-serving commercial retail
options for nearby residents, which would shorten
vehicle trip lengths and reduce VMT. The Project
would also add a sidewalk and pedestrian facilities
along Lakeshore Drive which currently lacks these
improvements.
Provide more options for short trips. 38 percent of all
trips in the SCAG region are less than three miles. The
2016 RTP/SCS provides two strategies to promote the
use of active transport for short trips. Neighborhood
Mobility Areas are meant to reduce short trips in a
suburban setting, while “complete communities” support
the creation of mixed-use districts in strategic growth
areas and are applicable to an urban setting.
Consistent. As detailed above, the Project would
provide retail and food services closer to existing large
lot, single family residences. This would promote the
reduction in trips by providing services within walking
distance from these residences. In addition, the Project
is 0.3 miles from the Riverside FS Lakeshore Bus Stop,
which would allow for easy access to public
transportation for employees and other customers.
Transit Initiatives
Develop first-mile/last-mile strategies on a local level to
provide an incentive for making trips by transit,
bicycling, walking, or neighborhood electric vehicle or
other ZEV options.
Consistent. The Project would be developed
approximately 0.3 miles (walking distance) from the
Riverside FS Lakeshore Bus Stop on Riverside Transit
Agency Route 8. This would allow for easy access to
public transportation for Project customers and
employees to reduce VMT.
Other Initiatives
Reduce emissions resulting from a project through
implementation of project features, project design, or
other measures. Incorporate design measures to reduce
energy consumption and increase use of renewable
energy.
Consistent. The design and implementation of the
proposed Project would comply with all requirements
of the 2019 Title 24 standards, which include measures
to reduce emissions.
Source: SCAG 2016
City Climate Action Plan (CAP)
The City’s CAP, adopted in 2011, certified that the City’s target is consistent with AB 32’s 2020 goals.
The City CAP ensures that the City will provide local GHG reductions that will complement state efforts
to reduce GHG emissions to the AB 32 target by 2020 and the Executive Order S-3-05 target by 2030. The
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 79 of 165
Project would not conflict with the applicable CAP reduction measures, as shown in Table VIII-3,
Consistency with Applicable Lake Elsinore CAP Measures. The Project would not conflict with any of
the applicable CAP measures, as outlined in Table VIII-3.
Table VIII-3
Consistency with Applicable Lake Elsinore CAP Measures
CAP Measure Project Consistency
Measure T-1.2: Pedestrian Infrastructure. Through the
development review process, require the installation of sidewalks
along new and reconstructed streets. Also require new subdivisions
and large developments to provide sidewalks or paths to internally
link all uses where applicable and provide connections to
neighborhood activity centers, major destinations, and transit
facilities contiguous with the project site; implement through
conditions of approval.
Consistent. The Project would be required
to provide sidewalks along Lakeshore Drive
and Manning Street, which would be
reviewed by the City for compliance with
adopted standards and specifications.
Measure T-2.1: Designated Parking for Fuel-Efficient Vehicles.
Revise the Municipal Code to require that new nonresidential
development designate 10% of total parking spaces for any
combination of low-emitting, fuel-efficient and carpool/vanpool
vehicles (consistent with CalGreen Tier 1, Sections A5.106.5.1 and
A5.106.5.3), and implement through conditions of approval.
Parking stalls shall be marked “Clean Air Vehicle.”
Consistent. The Project would provide fuel
efficient parking spaces in compliance with
the Municipal Code and conditions of
approval applied to the Project.
Measure E-1.1: Tree Planting Program. Through the
development review process, require new development to plant at
minimum one 15-gallon non-deciduous, umbrella-form tree per 30
linear feet of boundary length near buildings, per the Municipal
Code. Trees shall be planted in strategic locations around buildings
or to shade pavement in parking lots and streets.
Consistent. The Project would comply with
all applicable Municipal Code policies
related to tree planting. The Project would
include a number of street trees and trees
throughout the parking lot and adjacent to
proposed structures.
Measure E-1.2: Cool Roof Requirements. Amend the City
Municipal Code to require new non-residential development to use
roofing materials having solar reflectance, thermal emittance or
Solar Reflectance Index (SRI) 3 consistent with CalGreen Tier 1
values (Table A5.106.11.2.1), and implement through conditions of
approval.
Consistent. The Project’s roofing material
would be reviewed and approved for
compliance with the City’s Municipal Code.
The proposed Project elements would be
required to comply with the City ordinances
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. 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 and implement through
conditions of approval.
Consistent. The Project would be required
to comply with the City’s conditions of
approval related to new streetlights.
Measure E-4.1: Landscaping Ordinance. Through the
development review process, enforce the City’s Assembly Bill
1881 Landscaping Ordinance; implement through conditions of
approval.
Consistent. The Project’s landscape plan
would be reviewed and approved by the
City’s Planning and Public Works
Department for compliance with Assembly
Bill 1881 and the City’s Landscaping
Ordinance.
Measure S-1.4: Construction and Demolition Waste Diversion.
Amend the Municipal Code to require development projects to
divert to recycle or salvage nonhazardous construction and
demolition debris generated at the site, resulting in at least a 65%
reduction by 2020 (consistent with CalGreen Tier 1, Section
Consistent. A Waste Management Plan
would be prepared for the Project, reviewed
by the City for consistency with the City’s
Municipal Code, and be subject to City
approval.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 80 of 165
CAP Measure Project Consistency
A5.408.3.1). Require all new projects to be accompanied by a waste
management plan for the Project and a copy of the completed waste
management report shall be provided upon completion.
Source: City’s CAP, adopted in 2011
Compliance with applicable CAP measures will reduce potential Project impacts to less than significant
levels. This compliance is not considered mitigation under CEQA. Therefore, the Project will not conflict
with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study, prepared by Rincon
Consultants, Inc., 7-28-2020 (AQ/GHG Study, Appendix B).
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 81 of 165
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
a) Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the
routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less Than Significant Impact
The proposed Project could result in a significant hazard to the public if it includes the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials or places housing near a facility which routinely transports, uses, or
disposes of hazardous materials. The following discussion includes an analysis of both construction and
operational impacts.
The Project site is located in the suburban City of Lake Elsinore, situated adjacent northeast of the lake on
the northeast side of Lakeshore Drive, approximately one-quarter mile southeast of SR-74 (Riverside Drive)
and 1¼ mile southwest of I-15. The Project site is further identified by its location within the Country Club
Heights District.
The 995.2-acre Country Club Heights District (CCHD) is largely comprised of moderate to steeply sloping
hillsides situated between the lake to the southwest and the City’s Business District and Interstate 15 (I-15)
to the northeast. The CCHD topography rises over 250 feet from Lakeshore Drive with predominantly
west/southwest facing slopes cresting just northeast of Sunnyslope Avenue before descending with mostly
northeast facing slopes to Strickland Avenue where it transitions to the Business District approximately
one-mile (1-mile) due east of the Project site and on the opposite side of the hill (Google Earth).
Most of the land within the CCHD is designated Hillside Residential (467.5 acres; 46.98%), followed by
Low Density Residential (301.0 acres; 30.25%). It is also noted that due to various development constraints
(i.e., topography, older legal-non-conforming lot sizes, obsolete street design, lack of infrastructure
including street improvements, wet and dry utilities, other), most of this residential acreage remains in a
vacant and undeveloped condition. There is no industrial land use component within the CCHD.
The Project site is zoned Neighborhood Commercial by the City of Lake Elsinore. Furthermore, the Project
site’s General Plan land use designation is Neighborhood Commercial. The Project is therefore consistent
with the site’s zoning and general plan land use designation.
The proposed Project has been designed in accordance with the existing Neighborhood Commercial zoning
and general plan land use designations. The proposed Project does not entail a request for a change in land
use.
The Project proposes the development of a four-building commercial retail center (Lakeview Plaza)
consisting of 36,120 square feet of general retail space (Buildings 1, 2 & 3) and 7,000 square feet of
restaurant space (1,760 SF Restaurant “A” and 1,760 SF Restaurant “B” in Building 3), and freestanding
Restaurant “C” (Building 4), concrete walkways, asphalt paved parking for 207 vehicles, and 29,009 square
feet (16%) of landscaping. In addition, the proposed Project requires street modifications along Lakeshore
Drive and Manning Street and wet and dry utility connections.
Implementation of the proposed Project would not place housing near any hazardous materials facilities as
the Project does not include a housing component.
The routine use, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials is primarily associated with industrial uses
that require such materials for manufacturing operations or produce hazardous wastes as by-products of
production applications. The proposed Project does not propose or facilitate any activity involving
significant use, routine transport, or disposal of hazardous substances as part of the proposed commercial
retail and restaurant use.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 82 of 165
Construction Impact Analysis
During construction, there would be a minor level of transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials
and wastes that are typical of construction projects. This would include fuels and lubricants for construction
machinery, coating materials, etc. Routine construction control measures and best management practices
for hazardous materials storage, application, waste disposal, accident prevention and clean-up, etc. would
be sufficient to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.
It is anticipated that the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prepared for the proposed Project
would reduce such hazards to a less than significant level through best management practices incorporated
into the SWPPP design. The City of Lake Elsinore Building and Safety Department has placed conditions
of approval on the Project, as they pertain to Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
The requirement for preparation of an SWPPP is a standard condition for the City of Lake Elsinore and it
is not considered mitigation for CEQA implementation purposes. With the inclusion of this standard
condition, any impacts from implementation of the proposed Project construction related to significant
hazards to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials, would be less than significant.
Operational Impact Analysis
With regard to Project operation, the Project’s proposed commercial retail center improvements include
four freestanding buildings for general retail and restaurant use. Buildings 1, 2 and 3 are general retail
structures (60’ & 68’ depths) offering in-line shop space with two-suites in Building 3 reserved for
restaurant use; and Building 4 is a stand-alone restaurant.
It is common for small amounts of materials that may be considered hazardous to be used daily in the
operation of a restaurant, and to a lesser degree, the general retail shop space. Widely used hazardous
materials used in the operation of similar retail centers include cleaners, pesticides, etc. The remnants of
these and other products are disposed of as commercial hazardous waste that are prohibited or discouraged
from being disposed of at local landfills. Regular operation and cleaning of the commercial uses would not
result in significant impacts involving use, storage, transport or disposal of hazardous wastes and
substances.
The use of these common commercial hazardous materials and their disposal does not present a substantial
health risk to the community and impacts associated with the routine transport and use of these
aforementioned hazardous materials or wastes would be less than significant.
Hazardous materials regulations are codified in Titles 8, 22, and 26 of the California Code of Regulations,
and their enabling legislation set forth in Chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code, were
established at the state level to ensure compliance with federal regulations and to reduce the risk to human
health and the environment from the routine use of hazardous substances. Compliance with these
regulations is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
In addition, businesses that sell and store hazardous materials are regulated by the Riverside County
Department of Environmental Health (RCDEH) as a part of its role as the Certified Unified Program
Agency. This program requires the preparation of a document that provides an inventory of hazardous
materials on-site, emergency plans and procedures in the event of an accidental release, and training for
employees and safety procedures for handling hazardous materials and what to do in the event of a release
or threatened release. These plans are routine documents that are intended to disclose the presence of
hazardous materials and provide information on actions to be taken if materials are inadvertently released.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 83 of 165
The RCDEH require that all businesses in the county file a Hazardous Material Business Plan which
includes a Business Emergency Plan with the RCDEH (Riverside County 2015).
Based on the general retail and restaurant uses that would be a part of the proposed Project, and the existing
regulatory structure related to both general retail and food service businesses, the proposed Project would
not cause a threat to public safety during its construction or operation phases.
Therefore, the transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials pertaining to the proposed Project
would be relatively minor and subject to extensive regulatory oversight so its impacts would be less than
significant.
Sources: Figure 3, Aerial Photograph, Figure 8, General Plan Land Use Map, and Figure 9, Zoning
Map, provided in Sections II and III of this Initial Study; Project Plans (Appendix L), General Plan EIR,
Section 3.10, Hazards and Hazardous Materials; and General Plan – Country Club Heights District Plan.
b) Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment? Less Than Significant Impact
The Project site is not on the state’s Cortese List which is a compilation of various sites throughout
California with soil or groundwater contamination from past uses. The Project site is vacant, undeveloped
land and there would not be any impacts related to demolition of structures with asbestos containing
materials or lead-based paint.
A Phase I ESA for the Project site was conducted by Rincon Consultants, Inc. in conjunction with the
proposed Project. Rincon performed a reconnaissance of the Project site on August 20, 2019. The purpose
of the reconnaissance was to observe existing conditions and to obtain information indicating the presence
of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Project site. During the site reconnaissance,
Rincon did not note any environmental concerns at the Project site.
Rincon contracted with Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) to provide a database search of public
lists of sites that generate, store, treat or dispose of hazardous materials or sites for which a release or
incident has occurred. The EDR search was conducted for the Project site and included data from
surrounding sites within a specified radius of the property. The Project site and adjacent properties were
not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR. Three nearby properties within one-half mile of the
Project site were listed on the Leaking Underground Storage Tank database, including, 1) Jess Rodriguez
Disposal Co., 2) Chevron #95543, and 3) Howard, Ken:
• All three sites were granted a Closure/No further Action letter – closed cases;
• The distance of these sites to the Project site varies from 0.20 miles to 0.32 miles;
• The only site of the three which was located upgradient to the water flow at the Project site was listed
as “Howard, Ken” which only had soil affected by the by the underground tank leakage; no groundwater
contamination was determined to be associated with the site;
• Due to the aforementioned reasons, none of three sites are expected to adversely impact the subject
property.
Historical sources reviewed as part of the Phase I ESA included aerial photographs and topographic maps.
The aerial photographs reviewed indicate that the Project site has been undeveloped land since at least 1935.
The historical topographic maps depict the Project site as undeveloped land from at least 1901.
The Rincon Consultants, Inc. concluded there are no recognized environmental conditions in connection
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 84 of 165
with the Project site.
As discussed in Threshold IX.a, implementation of the Project’s proposed commercial retail and restaurant
development would entail the limited use of common commercial hazardous materials during both the
construction and operational phases. However, their use and disposal would not present a substantial hazard
or public health risk to the community due to extensive regulatory oversight and the relatively minor number
of hazardous materials associated with these commercial uses.
Based on the above information, the proposed Project would not 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. Any impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment - Lakeview Plaza, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc.,
9-23-2019 (Phase I ESA, Appendix H); and Project Plans (Appendix L).
c) Would the Project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No
Impact.
There are no existing or proposed, public or private, schools located within one-quarter (¼) mile of the
Project site.
The Project site is located within the Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD):
• The closest public school is identified as LEUSD’s Machado Elementary School located approximately
three-quarters (¾) of a mile northwest of the Project site at 15150 Joy Street;
• The next two closest public schools are located approximately 1¼ mile southeast of the Project site and
are identified as:
1) LEUSD’s Elsinore Middle School at 1203 West Graham Avenue, and
2) LEUSD’s Ortega Continuation High School/Keith McCarthy Academy/Valley Adult School
campus at 520 Chaney Street.
No private charter or parochial schools were identified within a half-mile of the Project site.
Based on the above information, Threshold IX.c is not applicable to the proposed Project. There would be
no impact.
Sources: Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD); City of Lake Elsinore Website – Schools; and
Google Earth.
d) Would the Project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact
According to the Phase I ESA, the Project site is not included on the list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 (i.e., the Cortese List). As a result, the proposed
Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment as it pertains to this criterion.
There would be no impact. Reference Figure IX-1, GeoTracker and Figure IX -2, EnviroStor.
Sources: Figure IX-1, GeoTracker; Figure IX -2, EnviroStor; and Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
- Lakeview Plaza, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-23-2019 (Phase I ESA, Appendix H).
FIGURE IX-1
GEOTRACKER
Source: GEOTRACKER https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress=Search+GeoTracker
Lakeview Plaza
Page 85 of 163
SITES FOUND IN SEARCH RADIUS 3 SITES LISTED
SITE
FIGURE IX-2
ENVIROSTOR
Source: ENVIROSTOR https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?myaddress=lake+elsinore%2C+ca
Lakeview Plaza
Page 86 of 163
SITES FOUND IN SEARCH RADIUS 3 SITES LISTED
SITE
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 87 of 165
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the Project area? No Impact
The Project site is not located within an airport land use plan nor is it located within two miles of a public
use airport. The closest airport is the Perris Valley Airport located approximately 9¾ miles northeast of
the Project site. The closest private airstrip is the Skylark Field Airport (CA89) located approximately 4¼
miles to the southeast of the Project site.
Based on the above information, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any airport
related safety hazard impacts for people residing or working in the Project area. There would be no impact.
Sources: General Plan, Figure 2.7, Airport Influence Areas; and Google Earth.
f) Would the Project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact
Implementation of the proposed Project would replace vacant, undeveloped land with a four-building
commercial center providing restaurant and retail shop space. Primary and secondary access would be
provided to the proposed Project via two driveways along the Lakeshore Drive frontage, and a single
driveway along the Manning Street frontage.
A limited potential exists to interfere with an emergency response or evacuation plan during the Project’s
construction phase. Construction work in the street associated with the Project will include widening and
additional pavement along Lakeshore Drive, paving and realignment of Manning Street, and lateral utility
connections (i.e., water, sewer) that will require a modest level of potential traffic diversion. Control of
access will ensure emergency access to the site and Project area during construction through the submittal
and approval of a traffic control plan (TCP).
The TCP is designed to mitigate any construction circulation impacts. The TCP is a standard condition and
is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA. Following construction, emergency access to the Project
site and area will remain as it was prior to the proposed Project.
All Project elements, including landscaping, will be sited with sufficient clearance from the proposed
buildings so as not to interfere with emergency access to and evacuation from the site. The proposed Project
is required to comply with the California Fire Code as adopted by the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code.
The proposed Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or evacuation plan, because no permanent public street or lane closures are
proposed. Any impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: Project Plans (Appendix L); General Plan EIR, Section 3.10, Hazards and Hazardous Materials;
and Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), Chapter 15.56, Fire Code.
g) Would the Project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation
Incorporated
As depicted in the City’s GP-EIR, Figure 3.10-2, Wildfire Susceptibility, the Project site, along with the
entire Country Cub Heights District, and virtually all of the northeast portion of the City of Lake Elsinore
extending along Lake Street to Interstate 15 is classified as being in in a “Very High Wildfire Susceptibility”
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 88 of 165
area due to the relatively large expanses of open space, sloping topography, and periodic high-velocity wind
conditions through the Temescal Valley.
Increased development throughout the City and Sphere of Influence in accordance with the Land Use Plan
within each District Plan could expose people and future development to potentially significant hazards
from wildfires. Goal 4 and its associated policies under the Wildland Hazards section of the Public Safety
and Welfare chapter include measures that must be implemented to reduce the potential impact from
wildfires.
With the implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-HAZ-1, the proposed Project would reduce the risk
of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires to a less than significant level.
Sources: General Plan, Section 3.4 Wildland Hazards; General Plan EIR (GP-EIR), Section 3.10, Hazards
and Hazardous Materials; and General Plan EIR (GP-EIR), Figure 3.10-2, Wildfire Susceptibility.
Mitigation Measures:
MM-HAZ-1 Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan in each District and within
the 3rd Street Annexation Area will be required to demonstrate their avoidance of
significant impacts associated with wildfire hazards through implementation of all policies
under the Wildland Hazards section of the Public Safety and Welfare chapter.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 89 of 165
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
a) Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? Less Than Significant Impact
The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes the framework for regulating municipal storm water
discharges (construction and operational impacts) via the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) program. A project would have an impact on surface water quality if discharges associated with
the project would create pollution, contamination, or nuisance as defined in Water Code Section 13050, or
that cause regulatory standards to be violated as defined in the applicable NPDES storm water permit or
Water Quality Control Plan for a receiving water body.
Relative to this specific issue, a significant impact could occur if the Project discharges water that does not
meet the quality standards of the agencies which regulate surface water quality and water discharge into
storm water drainage systems. Significant impacts could also occur if the project does not comply with all
applicable regulations with regard to surface water quality as governed by the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB). These regulations include preparation of a Water Quality Management Plan
(WQMP) to reduce potential post-construction water quality impacts.
On January 29, 2010 the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) issued the 4th-
term area wide NPDES and Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permit (MS4 Permit) to the City of
Lake Elsinore and other applicable Permittees. All new development in the City of Lake Elsinore is
required to comply with provisions of the NPDES program, including Waste Discharge Requirements
(WDR), and the City’s Municipal Separate Sewer Permit (MS4), Order No. R8-2010-0033, NPDES Permit
No. CAS618033, as enforced by the SARWQCB.
A Project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP, Appendix I1) and a Preliminary Hydrology
Report (Hydrology Report, Appendix I2) have been prepared in conjunction with the Project site’s
development application.
The Project site is located in the Lake Elsinore/San Jacinto Sub-Watershed of the larger Santa Ana Region
Watershed (SARW). The SARW is one of nine watershed basins within the state and encompasses an area
of approximately 2,800 square miles. The SARW includes much of Orange County, the northwestern
corner of Riverside County, part of southwestern San Bernardino County, and a small portion of Los
Angeles County. The Lake Elsinore/San Jacinto River Watershed (Sub-Watershed) consists of
approximately 782 square miles located in Riverside County and with five (5) major waterbodies including
Canyon Lake and Lake Elsinore. Over 90 percent of the watershed (735 square miles) drains into Canyon
Lake while Lake Elsinore is the terminus of the San Jacinto River watershed. The San Jacinto River
originates in the San Jacinto Mountains and flows ±42 miles west to Lake Elsinore. During flooding and
heavy storms Lake Elsinore drainage overflows into the Temescal Wash via Temescal Creek (portion of
the Elsinore Sub-Watershed) which extends north/northwest to its confluence with the Santa Ana River at
the Prado Dam (adjacent to the northwest side of the City of Corona), and thence west/southwest within the
Santa Ana River across the Orange County coastal plain approximately 26 miles into the Pacific Ocean
northerly of the Newport Bay. An exhibit of the regional drainage flows relative to the Project site is
included on the following page as Figure X-1, Project Site – Receiving Waters Map.
FIGURE X-1
PROJECT SITE - RECEIVING WATERS MAP
Source: WQMP - (Appendix I1)Lakeview Plaza
Page 90 of 163
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 91 of 165
The entire Project site is a part of a southwest facing slope that descends toward the nearby lake. In its
current condition, the Project site topography generally rises approximately eight (8) to twenty-four (24)
feet from its Lakeshore Drive frontage to Ryan Avenue, with a significant portion near the middle of the
site rising upwards of forty (40) plus feet due to the undulating terrain. The Project site is further
characterized by its steeper sloping flank along the southeast half of the site that is bisected by an ephemeral
drainage, and a more modest slope gradient that comprises the northwest half of the site which becomes
increasingly gentle and flattened as shown on Figure X-2, Project Site Hydrology Map – Pre-Condition.
At present, the Project site is vacant, undeveloped land with a 100% pervious earthen surface.
Stormwater on the Project site currently flows from the higher elevations along the northeast boundary to
lower elevations along Lakeshore Drive. The WQMP indicates that Lake Elsinore, approximately 0.15 mile
southwest of the Project site, is the ultimate receiving water body for Project site runoff.
A single on-site drainage feature leads into a storm water inlet culvert at the southwest corner of the study
area adjacent to Manning Street and flows under Lakeshore Drive.
FIGURE X-2
PROJECT SITE HYDROLOGY MAP – PRE-CONDITION
Source: Hydrology Report - (Appendix H2)
Lakeview Plaza
Page 92 of 163
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 93 of 165
Construction Impacts
Three general sources of potential short-term, construction-related stormwater pollution associated with the
proposed Project include: 1) the handling, storage, and disposal of construction materials containing
pollutants; 2) the maintenance and operation of construction equipment; and 3) earth-moving activities
which, when not controlled, may generate soil erosion via storm runoff or mechanical equipment.
Implementation of the proposed Project would include mass grading the entire Project site. The Preliminary
Grading Plan indicate the proposed Project will require 85,019 cubic yards of raw cut, 109 cubic yards of
raw fill, and 84,910 cubic yards of raw export. Upon completion of grading activities, the improved Project
site super pad will generally be at or up to three feet above Lakeshore Drive street grade, see Figure X-3,
Project Site Hydrology Map – Post-Condition.
Operational Impacts
Construction of the proposed Project (neighborhood commercial retail center) would increase the
impervious area at the Project site by replacing vacant land with associated paving and the rooftops.
Landscaping is proposed as part of Project design in the form of landscaped planters containing various
trees, shrubs, and ground covers. The site currently has 100% pervious surfaces and the WQMP indicates
the site will have approximately 80% impervious surfaces in its post-development condition. Consequently,
the Project would reduce infiltration potential and increase surface runoff on the Project site. Post-
Development conditions would maintain site drainage to the south (southwest) toward Lakeshore Drive,
similar to existing conditions, and the increased runoff would be treated and controlled pursuant to the
WQMP.
Since the Project involves more than one acre of ground disturbance, it is subject to NPDES permit
requirements for the preparation and implementation of a project-specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP). Adherence to NPDES permit requirements and the measures established in the SWPPP are
routine actions conditioned by the City of Lake Elsinore and will ensure applicable water quality standards
are appropriately maintained during construction of the proposed Project.
The proposed Project development plan has been reviewed and conditioned by the City of Lake Elsinore
Engineering Department and Building & Safety Department, among others, to mitigate any potential
impacts as listed above through site design, the preparation of a WQMP, and adherence to the requirements
of the NPDES. These are standard conditions for the City and are not considered mitigation for CEQA
implementation purposes.
Upon completion, the Project site would be covered with four commercial retail building structures,
concrete walkways, asphalt paved access drives and automobile parking areas, an onsite
biotreatment/biofiltration basin system, and landscaping. This would also ensure that there would be no
erosion or siltation on- or off-site. In addition, all wastewater associated with the Project’s interior
plumbing systems will be discharged into the local sewer system for treatment at the regional wastewater
treatment plant.
Based on the above, implementation of the proposed Project would not violate any water quality standards
or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. Any
impacts would be less than significant.
FIGURE X-3
PROJECT SITE HYDROLOGY MAP – POST CONDITION
Source: Hydrology Report - (Appendix H2)
Lakeview Plaza
Page 94 of 163
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 95 of 165
Sources: Lakeview Plaza – Project-Specific Water Quality Management Plan, prepared by Blue Peak
Engineering, 3-24-2020 (WQMP, Appendix I1); Lakeview Plaza - Preliminary Hydrology Report,
prepared by Blue Peak Engineering, 7-22-2019 (Hydrology Report, Appendix I2); General Plan EIR,
Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality; 1995 Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin
(Region 8), Updated June 2019.
b) Would the Project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge, such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater management
of the basin? Less Than Significant Impact
The Project site is located within the water service boundary of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
(EVMWD). EVMWD is a public water agency formed in 1950 and annexed into the service area of the
Western Municipal Water District (WMWD), one of the 26 member agencies of the Southern California
Metropolitan Water District (MWD). The Project site development plan proposes the extension of a 12”
water main along the Project site’s Lakeshore Drive frontage and a series of eight laterals plus a 6” fire-
service line to serve the Project.
In 2018, the 96-square mile EVMWD service area had a population of more than 155,000 people.
EVMWD’s water supply is a blend of local groundwater, surface water from Canyon Lake, and imported
water. EVMWD owns Canyon Lake which impounds local runoff from the 750-square-mile San Jacinto
River watershed. Canyon Lake holds nearly 12,000 AF of water behind Railroad Canyon Dam. EVMWD
also imports treated water from Metropolitan’s Skinner Water Treatment Plan (WTP) and Mills WTP,
located in Temecula and Riverside, respectively. Approximately 59 percent of EVMWD’s supply was met
with imported water in 2015. In 2015, EVMWD purchased 15,318 AF of water from MWD. Ninety three
percent (93%) of the service connections within EVMWD are single-family residential connections. There
are no large commercial or industrial water consumers within EVMWD, and therefore the demand is almost
entirely dependent on residential connections.
EVMWD has three primary sources of potable water supply:
1. Imported Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA) and State Water Project (SWP) water purchased from
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) through Western Municipal Water District
(WMWD) (generally 57-65 percent of total supply);
2. Groundwater pumped from the Elsinore, Coldwater, Lee Lake, and Bedford groundwater basins
(generally 25-33 percent of total supply); and
3. Surface water stored in Canyon Lake Reservoir (generally 10 percent of total supply).
The Elsinore Basin (Project site is a part) is the major source of potable groundwater supply for EVMWD
and other private groundwater producers. The Elsinore Basin was created by two major fault zones, the
Glen Ivy Fault Zone to the northeast and the Wildomar Fault Zone to the southeast. The groundwater basin
encompasses approximately 25 square miles of valley fill including Lake Elsinore which covers about 5.6
square miles (3,600 acres) of the basin. The surface water drainage area tributary to the basin consists of
42 square miles of mountain and valley area. Major streams include McVicker Canyon, Leach Canyon,
Dickey Canyon, and the San Jacinto River, which drain into Lake Elsinore and provide a portion of the
basin recharge.
Water rights for the Elsinore Basin are not adjudicated. According to EVMWD’s Elsinore Basin
Groundwater Management Plan (GWMP), approximately 99 percent of groundwater produced by the basin
is pumped by EVMWD, which serves a 96 square mile area in western Riverside County. Local pumpers
with private wells only account for less than one percent of basin production. As stated above, groundwater
production generally accounts for 25-33 percent (25-33%) of EVMWD’s total supplies. In the Elsinore
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 96 of 165
Basin, EVMWD has 12 operating potable groundwater wells with a total production capacity of 20,808
acre-ft./yr.
According to the EVMWD 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the Elsinore Basin and
Coldwater Basin are well managed to limit withdrawals to the safe-yield of the basin. The State Department
of Water Resources (DWR) Bulletin 118 does not identify the Elsinore Basin to be in a state of overdraft.
This follows several years where water levels in the Elsinore Basin and Coldwater Basin were declining
due to over pumping in the late 1990s and early 2000s but remedied after the 2005 Ground Water Master
Plan (GWMP) and an agreement with the City of Corona were secured.
The Project site is located in the Elsinore Groundwater Management Zone (GMG) as depicted in the
General Plan EIR, Figure 3.9-2, Groundwater Management Zones. Beneficial uses have been identified
for the Elsinore GMZ including Municipal, Agriculture and Industrial Process Supply, as described in Table
3.9-2 of the GP-DEIR. Furthermore, as set forth in the WQMP, there is an approved downstream “Highest
and Best Use” (Lake Elsinore) for stormwater runoff, and, as such, Infiltration BMPs shall not be used for
the Project site. Chapter 2.4.4 of the WQMP Guidance Document states:
• Consideration of “highest and best use” of the discharge should also be considered. For example, Lake
Elsinore is evaporating faster than runoff from natural precipitation can recharge it. Requiring
infiltration of 85 percent of runoff events for projects tributary to Lake Elsinore would only exacerbate
current water quality problems associated with Pollutant concentration due to lake water evaporation.
• In cases where rainfall events have low potential to recharge Lake Elsinore (i.e., no hydraulic
connection between groundwater to Lake Elsinore, or other factors), requiring infiltration of Urban
Runoff from projects is counterproductive to the overall watershed goals.
• Project proponents, in these cases, would be allowed to discharge Urban Runoff, provided they used
equally effective filtration-based BMPs.
For these reasons, the WQMP for the Project site proposes a biotreatment/biofiltration system. The WQMP
delineates two on-site Drainage Management Areas (DMAs) including DMA-A and DMA-F; and four off-
site DMAs, including DMA-B, DMA-C, DMA-D, and DMA-E. A summary of the DMA’s is included in
Table X-1, Proposed Project Runoff Characteristics and the locations of the DMA’s are shown on Figure
X-4, WQMP Site Plan.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 97 of 165
Table X-1
Proposed Project Runoff Characteristics
Drainage Management Area Area Proposed BMP
Required
Design
Capture
Volume
(ft3)
Proposed
Capture
Volume
(ft3)
Minimum
Design
Capture
Volume
(ft3) Met? Sq. Ft. Acres
DMA-A (Roofs, concrete,
asphalt, and landscaping w/in
parking lot)
151,222 3.47
BMP-A
Biofiltration/
Biotreatment Basin
Modular Wetlands(1)
7,703 8,000(2) Yes
Off-site DMA-B(3) (Half-width
Ryan St; dirt) 5,315 0.12
Alt. Compliance
Treatment Control
Catch Basin
N/Ap N/Ap N/Ap
Off-site DMA-C (Half-width
Manning St; asphalt) 4,561 0.10
Alt. Compliance
Treatment Control
Catch Basin
N/Ap N/Ap N/Ap
Off-site DMA-D (Half-width
Lakeshore Dr; asphalt) 42,191 0.97
Alt. Compliance
Treatment Control
Catch Basin
N/Ap N/Ap N/Ap
Off-site DMA-E(4) (Half-width
Ryan St; dirt) 16,585 0.38
Alt. Compliance
Treatment Control
Catch Basin
N/Ap N/Ap N/Ap
DMA-F (Perimeter
landscaping; flows off-site to
Lakeshore Dr)
12,939 0.30 N/Ap N/Ap N/Ap N/Ap
Source: WQMP (Appendix I1)
Notes:
1. The Bio Clean Modular Wetlands system includes a series of catch basins, subsurface piping, and surface drainage swales that
will direct drainage flows from the impervious areas of DMA-A to a premanufactured biotreatment/biofiltration basin with a
surface area of 74 square feet that will be placed underground at the Project site’s proposed northwest access driveway off of
Lakeshore Drive.
2. See WQMP, revised March 24, 2020, Appendix 6 for flow rate calculations. The USS Study, dated September 2019, previously
indicated a design capture volume of 8,929 cubic feet.
3. DMA-B size per WQMP Site Plan (Table C.1 transposed DMA-B and DMA-E figures).
4. DMA-E size per WQMP Site Plan (Table C.1 transposed DMA-B and DMA-E figures); slight discrepancy of 16,790 SF v.
16,585 SF, noted (the 16,585 figure is relied on herein).
Key:
sq. ft. = Square feet
ft3 = cubic feet
BMP = Best Management Practice
DMA = Drainage Management Area
N/Ap = Not applicable
FIGURE X-4
WQMP SITE PLAN
Source: WQMP - (Appendix H1)Lakeview Plaza
Page 98 of 163
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 99 of 165
A summary of the DMAs is set forth below:
• DMA-A consists of 151,522 square feet (3.47 acres) including all four of the proposed building roof
covers (43,364 SF), concrete/walkways (29,506 SF), asphalt/paving (63,459 SF) and landscaped areas
within the parking lot (14,893 SF). DMA A will be served by Biofiltration Basin A (BMP-A);
• DMA-B consists of 5,315 square feet (0.12 acre) comprising the unimproved (partial cut-graded dirt)
half-width of Ryan Avenue contiguous to the southeast portion of Project site approaching Manning
Street. Stormwater surface flows from DMA-B would be captured in the concrete V-Ditch and carried
southeast to a Treatment Control BMP – Catch Basin Inlet located contiguous to Manning Street, thence
through two pipes under the sidewalk onto Manning Street (DMA-C);
• DMA-C consists of 4,561 square feet (0.10 acre) comprised of the proposed asphalt paved realigned
half-width of Manning Street. Stormwater surface flows from DMA-C (Manning Street), would gravity
flow downhill via concrete curb and gutter improvements southwest to Lakeshore Drive (DMA-D);
• DMA-D consists of 42,191 square feet (0.97 acre) comprising the proposed widened and asphalt-paved
half-width of Lakeshore Drive along the Project site’s frontage. Stormwater surface flows from DMA-
D (Lakeshore Drive) would gravity flow within concrete curb and gutter improvements northwest to a
Treatment Control BMP – Street Catch Basin Insert located in the Lakeshore Drive right-of-way
adjacent to the Project site’s proposed northwest access driveway, thence southwest via an 18-inch
HDPE pipe under Lakeshore Drive offsite towards the lake;
• DMA-E consists of 16,585 square feet (0.38 acre) comprising the unimproved (partial cut-
graded/mostly unimproved dirt) half-width of Ryan Avenue contiguous to a majority of the Project
site’s northeast boundary and bounded on the south/southeast by the smaller DMA-B, described above.
Stormwater surface flows from DMA-E would be captured in the concrete V-Ditch and carried
northwest to two (2) separate Treatment Control BMP – Catch Basin Inserts, thence southwest within
the proposed V-Ditch along the Project site’s northwest boundary to the third (3rd) Treatment Control
BMP – Catch Basin Inlet adjacent to proposed Building 1, thence via a subsurface pipe offsite onto
Lakeshore Drive, as depicted on Figure X-4, WQMP Site Plan;
• DMA-F consists of 12,939 square feet (0.30 acre) comprising the perimeter landscaping along the
Project site’s Lakeshore Drive frontage (southwest boundary). Ornamental landscaping has a 0.10
(10%) Effective Impervious Fraction rate. Therefore, on average, while most (i.e., 90%) of the
stormwater would infiltrate into the ground within the landscaped planter area, some (i.e., 10%, on
average) would runoff and flow onto the Lakeshore Drive right-of-way. There is a single Treatment
Control BMP – Catch Basin Insert serving DMA-F located adjacent to Building 4 (stand-alone
restaurant) and Manning Street with a subsurface pipe dispersing drainage flows onto Lakeshore Drive.
BMP-A Biofiltration Basin (Modular Wetlands)
The Project site development plan proposes the use of a Biotreatment/Biofiltration System (BMP-A) to
treat stormwater runoff associated with the 3.47-acre on-site Drainage Management Area “A” (DMA-A).
The Project proposes to use the Bio Clean “Modular Wetlands System Linear” biofiltration system for 1)
Pretreatment, 2) Biofiltration, and 3) Discharge, as summarized below:
Pretreatment
Separation
• Trash, sediment, and debris are separated before entering the pre-filter cartridges
• Designed for easy maintenance access
Pre-Filter Cartridges
• Over 25 sq. ft. of surface area per cartridge
• Utilizes BioMediaGREEN filter material
• Removes over 80% of TSS and 90% of hydrocarbons
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 100 of 165
• Prevents pollutants that cause clogging from migrating to the biofiltration chamber
Biofiltration
Horizontal Flow
• Less clogging than downward flow biofilters
• Water flow is subsurface
• Improves biological filtration
Patented Perimeter Void Area
• Vertically extends void area between the walls and the WetlandMEDIA on all four sides
• Maximizes surface area of the media for higher treatment capacity
WetlandMEDIA
• Contains no organics and removes phosphorus
• Greater surface area and 48% void space
• Maximum evapotranspiration
• High ion exchange capacity and lightweight
Discharge
Flow Control
• Oriface plate controls flow of water through WetlandMEDIA to a level lower than the
media’s capacity
• Extends the life of the media and improves performance
Draindown Filter
• The draindown is an optional feature that completely drains the pretreatment chamber
• Water that drains from the pretreatment chamber between storm events will be treated
The proposed system includes a series of catch basins, subsurface piping, and surface drainage swales that
will direct drainage flows from the impervious areas of DMA-A (3.47 acres) to a pre-manufactured
biofiltration basin with a surface area of 74 square feet that will be placed underground at the Project site’s
proposed northwest access driveway off of Lakeshore Drive. The WQMP provides details and
specifications for the biofiltration system.
The offsite drainage system for Lakeshore Drive. Manning Street, and Ryan Avenue (DMAs B thru E), and
the 12,939 square foot landscaped planter area along the Project site’s Lakeshore Drive frontage (DMA F)
entail a series of treatment control BMPs (catch basins) as an alternative compliance. These catch basins
will use filter inserts to meet biofiltration requirements. The WQMP provides details and specifications for
these inserts.
As set forth in the Hydrology Report, the onsite hydrology analyses and offsite street areas utilized
commercial land use for the calculations. The rational method hydrology analysis was performed for the
pre-Project and post-Project conditions for the 2-year, 10-year, and 100-year storm events. Peak flows
were determined using the Rational Method as described in the Riverside County Flood Control Manual.
Based on the above, 1) The Project’s proposed biotreatment/biofiltration system will adequately treat the
required BMP Design Volume (Flow Rate), 2) the proposed on- and off-site storm drain systems will
adequately convey the peak 2-year, 10-year, and 100-year flow rates; 3) implementation of the proposed
Project will not alter the drainage pattern of the Project site or surrounding area, and 4) the proposed Project
will not deplete groundwater supplies.
Based on this analysis, implementation of the proposed Project would not substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 101 of 165
have been granted). Any impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza – Project-Specific Water Quality Management Plan, prepared by Blue Peak
Engineering, 3-24-2020 (WQMP, Appendix I1); Lakeview Plaza - Preliminary Hydrology Report,
prepared by Blue Peak Engineering, 7-22-2019 (Hydrology Report, Appendix I2).
c.i) Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Less
Than Significant Impact
Please reference the discussion set forth in Threshold X.b, relative to the Project design which would not
substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or the area. There are no streams or rivers within,
contiguous to, or adjacent to the Project site. However, the Project site is located approximately 500 to 800
feet north of the northeast corner of Lake Elsinore (“the lake”). Potential drainage-related impacts include
both construction and operational phases of the Project.
During construction activities, the following potential impacts may occur: 1) soil would be exposed and
disturbed; 2) drainage patterns would be temporarily altered during grading and other construction
activities; and 3) there would be an increased potential for soil erosion and siltation compared to existing
conditions. Additionally, during a storm event, soil erosion and siltation could occur at an accelerated rate.
In comparison with existing conditions, the proposed Project development plan would cause the Project
site surface area to be more impervious than the current site condition. Under current conditions, the Project
site consists of 100% pervious surfaces. Implementation of the Project’s proposed neighborhood
commercial retail and restaurant development would reduce the pervious surface area from 100% to 20%
of the Project site area. Any decrease in pervious area would increase the volume of runoff during a storm,
which would more effectively transport pollutants to receiving waters.
On-site stormwater runoff currently surface flows in a southwest direction towards Lakeshore Drive. Most
of the stormwater runoff then flows northwest within the soft shoulder of Lakeshore Drive. At present, a
single on-site drainage feature leads into a storm water inlet culvert at the southwest corner of the study
area adjacent to Manning Street and flows under Lakeshore Drive.
As discussed in detail under Threshold X.b, the Project requires significant grading of the entire site to
create a single super pad which would generally preserve the current flow patterns. Furthermore, the Project
would provide drainage facility improvements that would minimize on- and off-site erosion and siltation
since no such facilities currently exist on the Project site.
Lake Elsinore is the receiving water body for the Project site, and it is identified as an approved downstream
“Highest and Best Use” for stormwater runoff. As such, infiltration BMPs are not appropriate for the
Project site development and biotreatment/biofiltration systems are recommended. The Project site
development plan proposes a biotreatment/biofiltration system for most of the on-site flows identified as
DMA-A (3.47 acres), and treatment control catch basins (with filtration inserts) for the off-site stormwater
within the street right-of-ways.
There are no streams or rivers within, contiguous to, or adjacent to the Project site, and through
implementation of the Project WQMP, which provides for an on-site biotreatment/biofiltration system, and
alternative compliance treatment control catch basins for off-site flows within the adjacent streets, the
proposed Project would not substantially increase runoff that could contribute to downstream erosion or
siltation.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 102 of 165
Therefore, implementation of the Project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Any
impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza – Project-Specific Water Quality Management Plan, prepared by Blue Peak
Engineering, 3-24-2020 (WQMP, Appendix I1); Lakeview Plaza - Preliminary Hydrology Report,
prepared by Blue Peak Engineering, 7-22-2019 (Hydrology Report, Appendix I2).
c.ii) Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff
in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite? Less Than Significant Impact
Implementation of the proposed Project would increase the Project site’s impervious surface area from 0%
at present up to 80% upon completion of construction. As set forth in the WQMP, the
Biotreatment/Biofiltration Basin (BMP-A) meets the Minimum Design Capture Volume for stormwater
runoff associated with the Project site. The Proposed Capture Volume of 8,000 cubic feet exceeds the
Required Capture Volume of 7,703 cubic feet. Furthermore, the biotreatment/biofiltration system has been
designed to accommodate post-Project conditions for the 2-year, 10-year, and 100-year storm events. With
implementation of the biotreatment/biofiltration system as part of the Project design, impacts related to the
alteration of the existing drainage pattern in a manner that would result in on- or off-site flooding would be
less than significant. Implementation of the Project would also result in a benefit to water quality, as no
such facilities currently exist on the Project site.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza – Project-Specific Water Quality Management Plan, prepared by Blue Peak
Engineering, 3-24-2020 (WQMP, Appendix I1); Lakeview Plaza - Preliminary Hydrology Report,
prepared by Blue Peak Engineering, 7-22-2019 (Hydrology Report, Appendix I2).
c.iii) Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff? Less Than Significant Impact
The Project site is located proximate near the northeast corner of the lake. The lake has been identified as
an approved downstream “Highest and Best Use” for stormwater runoff in the WQMP, and as such
Infiltration BMPs are not appropriate for use with respect to the Project site development plan. The WQMP
indicates the proposed “Modular Wetlands” Biotreatment/Biofiltration system designed for the Project will
adequately control the amount and rate of flow of the treated stormwater discharging from the Project site
in the Post-Development condition.
While development of the proposed Project would increase the impervious area on the Project site from 0%
to 80%, the Project WQMP hydrology improvements have been designed such that the Project, which drains
directly to Lake Elsinore, would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted
runoff. Any impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza – Project-Specific Water Quality Management Plan, prepared by Blue Peak
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 103 of 165
Engineering, 3-24-2020 (WQMP, Appendix I1); Lakeview Plaza - Preliminary Hydrology Report,
prepared by Blue Peak Engineering, 7-22-2019 (Hydrology Report, Appendix I2).
c.iv) Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would impede or redirect flood flows? Less Than Significant
Impact
In the existing Pre-Development condition, stormwater on the Project site currently flows from the northeast
boundary toward Lakeshore Drive. Lake Elsinore is southwest of the Project site and is the ultimate
receiving water body for Project site runoff. At present, a single on-site drainage feature leads into a storm
water inlet culvert at the southwest corner of the study area adjacent to Manning Street and flows under
Lakeshore Drive.
In the proposed Post-Development condition (upon completion of the Project site development plan in
accordance with the WQMP), the stormwater drainage pattern would be similar to the Pre-Development
condition with the majority of the Project site’s stormwater (3.47 acre DMA-A) directed via a system of
catch basins, subsurface piping, and surface swales toward the proposed Biotreatment/Biofiltration Basin
(BMP-A), where it would be treated and the flow rate reduced to 0.80 before discharging into a subsurface
storm drain extending under Lakeshore Drive. Similarly, an off-site drainage system of treatment control
catch basins would direct surface flows toward Lakeshore Drive, then northwest to curb and gutter
improvements within the Lakeshore Drive right-of-way, then finally to a catch basin near the northwest end
of the Project site into an 18” pipe carrying much of the off-site flow under Lakeshore Drive toward the
lake. Post-Development storm water run-off does not exceed pre-development storm water runoff, nor does
it impede or redirect flood flows. Any impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza – Project-Specific Water Quality Management Plan, prepared by Blue Peak
Engineering, 3-24-2020 (WQMP, Appendix I1); Lakeview Plaza - Preliminary Hydrology Report,
prepared by Blue Peak Engineering, 7-22-2019 (Hydrology Report, Appendix I2).
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to Project inundation?
Less Than Significant Impact
The Project site is not located within a FEMA designated flood hazard area or a local City/County
designated “Flood Hazard Area.” Reference Figure X-5, FEMA Firmette Map. The Project site is located
over 23 miles east/northeast of the nearest coastline (Pacific Ocean); therefore, there is no risk associated
with tsunamis. The Project site is located north of the northeast corner of the lake, and approximately 4.75
miles west of Canyon Lake. A seiche is a standing wave of water within a lake or enclosed water body
triggered by an earthquake or landslide. The Project sites Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report indicates
that, due to the distance and elevation differential between the Project site and the surface level of the lake,
the probability of flooding caused by a seiche is considered to be low.
Based on the above, the risk of pollutant release due to Project inundation caused by a flood, tsunami, or
seiche is negligible. Any impact would be less than significant.
Sources: Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report, Proposed Commercial Buildings, Lots 14-17, APN
Numbers 375-092-002, 003, 004, 005 & 006, Lakeshore Drive, Lake Elsinore, CA, prepared by Soils Pacific
Inc., 2-13-2019 (Appendix F).
FIGURE X-5
FEMA FIRMETTE MAP
Source: FEMA https://hazards-fema.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?
id=8b0adb51996444d4879338b5529aa9cd&extent=-117.4940282128904,33.59614824239965,-117.16169178710962,33.73901642919255
Lakeview Plaza
Page 104 of 163
SITE
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 105 of 165
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management plan? Less Than Significant Impact
The Project WQMP has been prepared specifically to comply with the requirements of the City of Lake
Elsinore. The Project site is located in the Santa Ana Region Watershed, within the jurisdiction of the Santa
Ana Regional Board, where discharges from Riverside County’s Phase I MS4s are regulated through the
Riverside County MS4 Permit (Order No. R8-2010-0033 NPDES No. CAS618033, as amended by Order
No. R8-2013-0024) pursuant to section 402(p) of the Federal Clean Water Act.
With adherence to, and implementation of the conclusions and recommendations set forth in the WQMP,
the Project site development plan will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control
plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. Any impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza – Project-Specific Water Quality Management Plan, prepared by Blue Peak
Engineering, 3-24-2020 (WQMP, Appendix I1).
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 106 of 165
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING
a) Would the Project physically divide an established community? No Impact
As shown on Table 2, Surrounding Land Uses, included in Section II of this Initial Study, the proposed
Project site is zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) and is surrounded by Hillside Single-Family
Residential (R-H), Lakeshore (L), General Commercial (C-2) and other C-1 zoning designations.
The Zoning Code divides the City into districts, or zones, and regulates land use activity in each district by
specifying the permitted uses of land and buildings, density, bulk, and other regulations. The proposed
Project is consistent with these and surrounding zoning and land use designations.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not physically divide an established community.
There would be no impact.
Sources: Figure 8, General Plan Land Use Map and Figure 9, Zoning Map, provided in Section III of
this Initial Study.
b) Would the Project 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 Impact
As shown on Table 2, Surrounding Land Uses, included in Section II of this Initial Study, the proposed
Project site is zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) and is surrounded by Hillside Single-Family
Residential (R-H), Lakeshore (L), General Commercial (C-2) and other C-1 zoning designations. The
Project site’s General Plan land use designation is Neighborhood Commercial and the surrounding land use
designations include Hillside Residential, Recreational, Neighborhood Commercial and General
Commercial. The proposed Project is consistent with these and surrounding zoning and land use
designations.
The Project site is not within a Specific Plan or Historic Preservation District, nor is it within a General
Plan Policy Overlay Area. Furthermore, the Project is not within an Airport Compatibility Zone or an
Airport Influence Area.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation. There would be no impact.
Sources: Figure 8, General Plan Land Use Map and Figure 9, Zoning Map, provided in Section III of
this Initial Study.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 107 of 165
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES
a) Would the Project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of
value to the region and the residents of the state? Less Than Significant Impact
Principal mineral resources within the County of Riverside include clay, limestone, iron ore, sand, and
construction aggregate. As of 2010, six mines were active in the Lake Elsinore area, producing clay,
stone/rock, and sand and gravel. Decomposed granite has also been mined in the Lake Elsinore area in
recent years.
The California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA) requires that general plans classify,
and map mineral resources designations approved by the State Mining and Geology Board. SMARA seeks
to promote conservation and protection of valuable lands within the State subject to urban expansion.
Guidelines for Classification and Designation of Mineral Lands, adopted by the State Mining and Geology
Board, require that the State Geologist classify areas into Mineral Resource Zones (MRZ).
According to Figure 3.12-1 of the City’s General Plan EIR, the Project site, along with most all of the City
of Lake Elsinore, is located in Mineral Resource Zone 3 Area (MRZ-3). MRZ-3 applies to areas containing
known or inferred mineral occurrences of undetermined mineral resource significance.
The Project site is currently in a vacant, undeveloped condition. Historical activities at the Project site are
documented in the Phase I ESA, based on aerial photographs and topographic maps:
• The aerial photographs reviewed indicate that the Project site has been undeveloped land since at least
1935; and
• The historical topographic maps reviewed depict the Project site as undeveloped land from at least
1901.
There have not been any documented mineral extraction activities at the Project site. Given the size,
location, and configuration of the Project site in relationship to surrounding land uses, it is highly unlikely
that any surface mining or mineral recovery operation could feasibly take place at the Project site.
It is further noted that mining operation areas within the City are delineated as such on the City’s General
Plan Land Use Map with an Extractive Overlay. The Project site is not located in or adjacent to an
Extractive Overlay area.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project will not result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the region or residents of the state. Any potential impacts would
be less than significant.
Sources: General Plan, Chapter 4.5, Mineral Resources; General Plan EIR (GP-EIR), Chapter 3.12,
Mineral Resources; Figure 8, General Plan Land Use Map, provided in Section III of this Initial Study;
and Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Lakeview Plaza, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-23-
2019 (Phase I ESA, Appendix H).
b) Would the Project result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact
As discussed in Threshold XII.a, the City’s General Plan Land Use Map delineates mining operation areas
by applying an Extractive Overlay. The Project site is not in or adjacent to an Extractive Overlay area as
depicted on the City’s General Plan Land Use Map.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 108 of 165
Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project will not result in the loss of availability of a locally-
important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use
plan. There would be no impact.
Sources: General Plan, Chapter 4.5, Mineral Resources; General Plan EIR (GP-EIR), Chapter 3.12,
Mineral Resources; Figure 8, General Plan Land Use Map, provided in Section III of this Initial Study;
and Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Lakeview Plaza, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-23-
2019 (Phase I ESA, Appendix H).
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 109 of 165
XIII. NOISE
Note: Any tables or figures in this section are from the Noise Study, unless otherwise noted.
a) Would the Project result in the 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? Less than
Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated
Overview
The Noise Study analyzes the Project’s noise and vibration impacts related to both temporary construction
activity and long-term operation of the Project. Construction of the proposed Project is anticipated to take
14 months and would involve site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural
coating.
Fundamentals of Sound and Vibration
Overview of Sound. Sound is a vibratory disturbance created by a moving or vibrating source, which is
capable of being detected by the hearing organs. Noise is defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant,
unexpected, or undesired and may therefore be classified as a more specific group of sounds. The effects
of noise on people can include general annoyance, interference with speech communication, sleep
disturbance, and, in the extreme, hearing impairment (Caltrans 2013a). Noise levels are commonly
measured in decibels (dB) using the A-weighted (dBA) sound pressure level (SPL). The A-weighting scale
is an adjustment to the actual SPLs to be consistent with that of human hearing response. Decibels are
measured on a logarithmic scale that quantifies sound intensity in a manner similar to the Richter scale used
for earthquake magnitudes. Thus, a doubling of the energy of a noise source, such as doubling of traffic
volume, would increase the noise level by 3 dB while a halving of the energy would result in a 3 dB
decrease.
Sound levels generally decrease as the distance from the source increases. Noise levels from a point source
typically attenuate at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance (e.g., construction, industrial machinery,
ventilation units, etc.) while noise from a line source (e.g., roadway, pipeline, railroad, etc.) typically
attenuates at about 3 dBA per doubling of distance. Noise levels may be reduced by intervening structures
and the amount of attenuation provided by this “shielding” depends on the size of the object and the
frequencies of the noise levels. Natural terrain features such as hills and dense woods, as well as man-made
features such as buildings and walls, can significantly alter noise levels. Generally, any large structure
blocking the line of sight will provide at least a 5-dBA reduction in source noise levels at the receiver.
Structures also can substantially reduce exposure to noise. Based on the Federal Highway Administration’s
(FHWA) modern building construction generally provides an exterior-to-interior noise level reduction of
20 – 35 dBA with closed windows.
Since noise that occurs at night tends to be more disturbing than that which occurs during the day,
community noise is usually measured using Day-Night Average Level (Ldn or DNL), which is a 24-hour
average noise level with a +10 dBA penalty for noise occurring during nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
hours, or Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), which is the 24-hour average noise level with a +5
dBA penalty for noise occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and a +10 dBA penalty for noise occurring
from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 110 of 165
Overview of Vibration
Groundborne vibration consists of the oscillatory waves that move from a source through the ground to
adjacent structures. The number of cycles per second of oscillation makes up the vibration frequency,
described in terms of hertz (Hz). The frequency of a vibrating object describes how rapidly it oscillates.
The normal frequency range of most groundborne vibration that can be felt by the human body starts from
a low frequency of less than 1 Hz and goes to a high of about 200 Hz. While people have varying
sensitivities to vibrations at different frequencies, in general they are most sensitive to low-frequency
vibration. Vibration in buildings, such as from nearby construction activities, may cause windows, items
on shelves, and pictures on walls to rattle. The primary concern from vibration is that it can be intrusive
and annoying to building occupants and vibration-sensitive land uses.
Vibration amplitudes are usually expressed in peak particle velocity (ppv) and are normally described in
inches per second (in./sec.). Damage to structures occurs when vibration levels range from 2 to 6 in./sec.
ppv. One half this minimum threshold, or 1 in./sec. ppv is considered a safe criterion that would protect
modern structures (i.e., post 1975 construction in California) against structural damage. As stated in the
Caltrans Vibration manual, the human response to transient vibration is 0.24 in./sec ppv, which is
considered “distinctly perceptible to a human.” This is approximately equal to 96 vibration decibels (VdB).
According to the FTA, more continuous vibration sources such as train pass byes are considered annoying
at 72 VdB. The 96 VdB is used in the assessment of transient sources of vibration and 72 VdB is used to
assess permanent and continuous sources associated with operation of projects.
Sensitive Receivers
Noise exposure goals for various types of land uses reflect the varying noise sensitivities associated with
those uses. Sensitive land uses are generally defined as locations where people reside or where the presence
of noise could adversely affect the use of the land. The City’s General Plan list of noise sensitive uses
includes schools, hospitals, residences, libraries, and recreation areas. Vibration sensitive receivers are
similar to noise sensitive receivers, such as residences and institutional uses (e.g., schools, libraries, and
religious facilities) but also include buildings where vibrations may interfere with vibration sensitive
equipment, affected by levels that may be well below those associated with human annoyance.
City of Lake Elsinore - Municipal Code
According to Section 17.176, Noise Control, of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), in order to
control unnecessary, excessive and annoying noise and vibration in the City, it is hereby declared to be the
policy of the City to prohibit such noise and vibration generated from or by all sources as specified in this
chapter. It shall be the policy of the City to maintain quiet in those areas which exhibit low noise levels
and to implement programs aimed at reducing noise in those areas within the City where noise levels are
above acceptable values. As set forth in LEMC Section 17.176.010 (Purpose), certain noise levels and
vibrations are considered detrimental to the public health, welfare and safety [Ord. 772 § 17.78.010, 1986.
Code 1987 § 17.78.010].
General Plan – Draft Environmental Impact Report
As set forth in Section 3.5, Noise, of the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan – Draft Environmental Impact
Report (GP-DEIR), “noise” is generally defined as unwanted sound, or audible energy waves received by
people and animals. As is the case with most developed and urbanized areas, the chief source of ambient
noise in the City and SOI is vehicular traffic. Two major roadways, I-15 and SR-74, traverse the area,
creating the greatest source of concentrated vehicular noise. Other major roadways within the City that
produce traffic noise include Riverside Drive, Lakeshore Drive (Project site is contiguous to Lakeshore
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 111 of 165
Dr), Grand Avenue, and Railroad Canyon Road.
Noise and Vibration Study – Lakeview Plaza
The dominant source of noise in the Project site vicinity is vehicular traffic from West Lakeshore Drive and
local residential roadways. The Project site is bordered on the north and northeast with residentially zoned
properties, neighborhood commercial zoning is located northwest, and southeast, and recreational use is
zoned across Lakeshore Drive to the southwest. The noise sensitive receivers closest to the Project site are
the single-family residences located to the northwest and north of the Project site. Existing commercial
land uses are located to the southwest, west of Iowa Street. All other surrounding properties are
undeveloped. The noise measurement locations and results of the noise measurements are summarized
below in Figure XIII-1, Project Vicinity Sound Level Monitoring Results.
FIGURE XIII-1 PROJECT VICINITY SOUND LEVEL MONITORING RESULTSSource: Noise Study - (Appendix I)Lakeview Plaza Page 112 of 163
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 113 of 165
Traffic Noise
Noise levels affecting the Project site would be primarily influenced by traffic noise from West Lakeshore
Drive. Traffic noise was modeled with the FHWA Traffic Noise Model (TNM). The Project’s trip
generation was estimated using the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Manual. Based on the
uses being a “Strip Mall” and “High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant), with total square footage of 43,120
consistent with the Project plans:
• The Strip Mall portion would generate 1,227 weekday trips;
• The restaurant portion would generate 628 weekday trips;
• The entire Project would generate a total of 1,856 weekday trips.
Based on the City traffic counts, West Lakeshore Drive has an existing average daily traffic (ADT) of
19,000 vehicles. This volume is used to determine the noise level increase associated with Project traffic
increases. The existing and Project ADT volumes are shown below in Table XIII-1, Traffic Volumes.
Table XIII-1
Traffic Volumes
Roadway Existing ADT Project ADT Existing with Project
ADT
West Lakeshore Drive 19,000 1,856 20,856
Construction Noise
As set forth in the Noise Study (p. 15), construction noise for the proposed Project was estimated using the
FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) (FHWA 2006). Construction activity would result
in temporary noise in the Project site vicinity, exposing surrounding sensitive receivers to increased noise
levels. Construction noise would typically be higher during the heavier periods of initial construction (i.e.,
site preparation and grading) and would be lower during the later construction phases (i.e., building
construction and paving). Typical heavy construction equipment during Project grading could include
dozers, excavators, loaders, and dump trucks. It is assumed that diesel engines would power all construction
equipment. Construction equipment would not all operate at the same time or location. In addition,
construction equipment would not be in constant use during the 8-hour operating day.
Over the course of a typical construction day, construction equipment would be located as close as 10 feet
from the adjacent properties and 100 feet from the closest residential properties and would typically be
located at an average distance of 50 feet or more due to the nature of construction and the size of the Project
site. Therefore, it is assumed that over the course of a typical construction day the construction equipment
would operate at an average distance of 50 feet from the closest residential property lines.
Three pieces of equipment, such as a dozer, an excavator, and a loader, would be used to grade and excavate
the Project site, pulling material away from the northern edge, and lowering the site to match the grade of
the southern portion of the site. To represent the worst case, a dump truck was also modeled at 200 feet,
the distance to Lakeshore Drive from the northeaster boundary of the Project. The grading equipment
would be constantly moving soil from the northeastern portion of the site towards the southwestern portion
of the site. The grading activities would generate the greatest noise levels of the identified activities with
a noise level of 81 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet. This results in a maximum hourly noise level of
approximately 81 dBA Leq (calculations are included in Appendix B of the Noise Study).
Following grading, the hillside would be stabilized by the use of soil nails which are placed by boring a
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 114 of 165
small diameter hole into the ground and securing it to the soil with grout. This is followed by applying a
mesh and concrete to the surface of the hillside forming a stable surface to construct a stepped wall. Noise
levels from this activity are expected to range from 75 to 79 dBA Lmax but with the fluctuations in power
the maximum hourly noise level would reach 74 dBA Leq at 50 feet.
Following the setting of the foundations it is anticipated only deliveries and minor equipment (e.g., forklifts,
man-lifts, and flatbeds with mounted cranes) would be used during building construction. A concrete truck
would also likely be used during the final driveway and curb pour. These activities are assumed to generate
noise levels on the same order as grading and excavation, i.e., 79 dBA Leq at 50 feet.
Groundborne Vibration
The proposed Project would not include any substantial vibration sources associated with operations. Thus,
construction activities have the greatest potential to generate ground-borne vibration affecting nearby
receivers, especially during grading and excavation of the Project site. The greatest source of vibration
during construction within the Project vicinity would be a dozer or the soil nail drilling. Neither blasting
nor pile driving would be required for construction of the Project. Typical vibration levels for various
pieces of construction equipment used in the proposed Project’s assessment of construction vibration (FTA
2018) is set forth below in Table XIII-2, Vibration Levels Measured during Construction Activities.
Table XIII-2
Vibration Levels Measured during Construction Activities
Equipment ppv at 25 ft. (in/sec)
Caisson Drilling 0.089
Large Bulldozer 0.089
Loaded Trucks 0.076
Small Bulldozer 0.003
Table XIII-2 demonstrates that vibration levels expected during Project construction would not exceed
identified Caltrans or FTA standards.
Operational Noise Sources
As set forth in the Noise Study, on site-noise sources at the Project site were modeled and include: 1) general
conversations; 2) landscape maintenance; 3) waste hauling; 4) parking activities; 5) loading activities, and
6) heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment. There are no large gathering areas on the
Project site and these sources would be transient in nature as people transit from vehicles to businesses.
Thus, general conversations would not represent a substantial noise source. Landscape maintenance and
waste hauling are regulated by the noise ordinance with allowable hours and other limitations when in
proximity to residential areas. Thus, the primary noise sources of concern would be associated with the
parking activities, loading activities, and HVAC units for the Project buildings as there is no specific
regulation beyond the limitation of noise levels.
Parking Activities
Parking activities are based on the number of parking spaces and the type of land use, for modeling
purposes, the parking lot has been divided into three areas. The main parking area along Lakeshore Drive
is modeled as a retail store parking lot with 171 spaces. The reaming area located on the northeastern end
of the Project near Building 4 was modeled as restaurant parking with 36 spaces.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 115 of 165
Loading/Delivery Activities
The Noise Study modeling assumes that two types of trucks would be used in conjunction with the proposed
Project operations including 1) refrigerated diesel trucks and 2) unrefrigerated diesel trucks. Furthermore,
the model provides for the potential to unload in the early morning or nighttime hours. Noise level data
used for modeling is shown below Table XIII-3, Equipment Sound Power Levels (dBA). Loading
activities would not generate substantial noise at surrounding residences regardless of the loading time due
to the shielding effects of the proposed buildings and the retaining wall, which provide up to a 20 dBA
reduction as well as the distances from the activity to surrounding receivers.
Table XIII-3
Equipment Sound Power Levels (dBA)
Sound Source 63 Hz 125
Hz
250
Hz
500
Hz 1 kHz 2 kHz 4 kHz 8 kHz
Sound
Power
Level
Trailer Refrigeration Unit 105.8 99.7 96.2 93.8 93.6 90.4 85.6 82.6 98
Truck Loading on Ramp 85.2 85.1 84.7 85.3 85.0 84.8 85.1 85.2 94
Diesel Truck Idling 67.7 59.6 57.8 61.4 60.5 54.3 47.0 46.3 75
HVAC Equipment
As set forth in the Noise Study (p. 18), a building typically requires one ton of HVAC per 600 square feet
of building space. Based on the size of each building, seventy-two (72) tons of HVAC would be required
to serve the proposed Project. For modeling, seventeen (17) 5-ton HVAC units (85-tons) (Carrier Model
48HC-A06) have been used for the proposed Project. All HVAC units would be located on the roof of the
proposed structures. The noise specifications for a Carrier 48HC-A06 are shown below in Table XIII-4,
HVAC Noise Levels.
Table XIII-4
HVAC Noise Levels
63 Hz 125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1 kHz 2 kHz 4 kHz 8 kHz Overall Noise Level in A-
weighted Scale (dBA)(1)
87.5 82.5 76.1 73.6 71.3 67.1 64.1 60.0 77.0
Significance Thresholds
Based on the Lake Elsinore noise thresholds and Appendix G of the CEQA guidelines, noise impacts would
be considered significant if:
• The Project would result in the 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 applicable standards of other agencies.
o Project related construction noise would be significant if it exceeds noise levels limits at
land uses identified in Section 17.176.080.F of the City’s municipal code.
o Based on the City Municipal Code, operational noise would be significant if:
Exterior noise levels exceed 56 dBA (50+6 dB) from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. or 46
dBA (40+6 bD) from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. at an adjacent single-family
residential land uses;
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 116 of 165
The Project exceeds 65 dBA during the daytime or 60 dBA at adjacent
neighborhood commercial and recreational land uses.
o Traffic-related noise impacts would be considered significant if project-generated traffic
would result in exposure of sensitive receivers to an unacceptable increase in noise levels.
For purposes of this analysis, a significant impact would occur if Project-related
traffic increases the ambient noise environment of noise-sensitive land uses by 3
dBA or more if the locations are subject to noise levels in excess of conditionally
compatible levels, or by 5 dBA or more if the locations are not subject to noise
levels in excess of the conditionally compatible levels identified in the City’s
General Plan.
Impact Analysis
Construction
As set forth in the Noise Study, construction would occur during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday and would not occur on Sundays and federal holidays. Therefore, construction noise was
analyzed against the daytime noise level limits. As nighttime construction has not been included in the
Project, a measure has been recommended that limits the hours of construction between the hours of 7:00
a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and would not allow construction on Sundays and federal
holidays. This is reflected in Mitigation Measure MM-NOI-1. The closest offsite residence is located to
the north of the Project site approximately 35 feet from the Project boundary. The dwelling unit is a single-
family home (Type I residential category) and thus the construction noise level limit is 75 dBA Leq.
Mobile Construction Activities
As previously described in the Methodology – Construction Noise section above, at a distance of 50 feet,
typical on-site construction activity would generate a maximum noise level of 81 dBA Leq. The Project site
at this distance is approximately 200 feet across, grading and excavation equipment would move up to the
northern boundary and pull away soil toward the south where it would be loaded onto trucks along the
frontage of Lakeshore Drive. With the equipment moving up to the northern property line and back away
toward the south, at the closest point, the center of this construction activity would be approximately 100
feet from the property line of the closest residence. However, as the grading progresses the equipment
would quickly be located at lower elevations and would be shielded by the hillside. Once graded, the site
would sit approximately 40 feet below the existing residence. All other phases of construction would be
shielded from the residence or it would be located at greater distances. Therefore, 100 feet is considered a
reasonable worst case for the majority of construction. At a distance of 100 feet, the estimated typical
construction noise levels of 81 dBA Leq at 50 feet would attenuate to 75 dBA Leq.
Stationary Construction Activities
During the retaining wall construction, equipment would be located approximately 50 feet from the northern
property line and 25 feet from the eastern property line. The closest receiver is 35 feet to the northeast of
the Project boundary across the Manning Street and Ryan Avenue intersection. The next closest receiver
is a residence located to the north of the Project site along Ryan Avenue approximately 50 feet from the
Project boundary across Ryan Avenue.
As previously described in the Methodology – Construction Noise section, at a distance of 50 feet, noise
from the installation of soil nails is anticipated to reach 79 dBA Leq. Assuming the wall construction
represents a stationary source and would not move away from this location, i.e., 65 feet from the residence,
for 10 days, the noise levels at this location would be approximately 77 dBA Leq, which would exceed the
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 117 of 165
City’s 60 dBA Leq limit for stationary construction activities.
Barrier Installation
To reduce soil-nail wall construction noise levels to comply with the City limit for stationary construction
sources, a barrier with a top of wall elevation of 18 feet above the on-site grade would be needed along
portions of the eastern and north property line for stationary construction occurring within 400 feet of the
eastern property line. The barrier along the eastern property line would need to extend southerly from the
north property line for 65 feet along the eastern property line. The eastern barrier is estimated to be 18 feet
high at the southern end and 15 feet high at the northern end. Finally, the barrier along the northern property
line would need to extend from the eastern property line westerly for 80 feet. Due to the slope of the
hillside, the northern barrier may vary in height from 14 feet in height at the eastern end, where the terrain
is similar to the existing ground elevation of 1,290, to zero feet high, where the existing terrain is 1,305
above mean sea level. The shielding along Ryan Avenue is estimated to reduce construction noise levels
at this receiver by 14 dBA. Barrier calculations are included in Appendix B of the Noise Study.
Due to the distance and the barrier effect of the hillside, the anticipated noise level at the receiver along
Ryan Avenue of 79 dBA Leq at 50 feet from the source, would attenuate to 60 dBA Leq. Therefore, impacts
from construction noise would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-
NOI-2.
Operation
Implementation of the proposed Project would introduce sources of operational noise to the site, such as
general conversations, landscape maintenance, waste hauling, parking activities, loading activities, and
HVAC equipment. Noise levels associated with general site activities, landscape maintenance, and waste
hauling activities are not anticipated to result in an exceedance of the noise level limits or substantially
increase noise levels in the Project area as these sources are regulated or exempted by the noise ordinance.
Therefore, the operational noise sources of concern would be parking activities, loading activities, and
HVAC units. Modeling assumptions for these sources were previously discussed above in the Methodology
– Operational Noise Sources section.
• Noise levels at the closest properties from the HVAC units, along with receiver locations and daytime
and nighttime noise level contours, are shown below on Figure XIII-2, Daytime and Nighttime Noise
Levels at Off-site Land Uses (dBA Leq). As shown on Figure XIII-2, combined operational activities
on the Project site would generate noise levels up to 48 dBA Leq at nearby residential properties during
the daytime (7 a.m. – 10 p.m.) and 46 dBA Leq during nighttime hours (10 p.m. – 7 a.m.). Receivers 1
through 4 and Receiver 7 and are exposed primarily to HVAC noise, ranging from 37 to 40 dBA Leq.
Receivers 8 and 9 are primarily exposed to parking lot noise, which averages 35 dBA Leq. Finally, the
primary noise source for Receivers 5 and 6 is the loading activities associated with the restaurant in the
early morning hours, which are on the order of 39 dBA Leq.
Source: Noise Study - (Appendix I)Lakeview Plaza Page 118 of 163FIGURE XIII-2DAYTIME AND NIGHTTIME OPERATIONAL NOISE LEVELS AT OFF-SITE LAND USES (DBA LEQ)DAYTIMENIGHTTIME
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 119 of 165
Regardless of the proposed Project’s individual contribution of various sources. The combined operational
noise from the parking lots, loading activities, and HVAC units would not exceed the City’s daytime or
nighttime exterior noise standards at the surrounding properties.
Based on the above, operational noise impacts associated with implementation of the proposed Project
would be less than significant.
Off-site Traffic Noise
The Project would generate new vehicle trips that would increase noise levels on nearby roadways, which
would occur primarily on West Lakeshore Drive. The increase in traffic volumes for existing and existing
plus project scenarios are shown below in Figure XIII-3, Modeled Façade Receivers and Traffic Noise
Level Contours.
Source: Noise Study - (Appendix I)Lakeview Plaza Page 120 of 163FIGURE XIII-3 MODELED FAÇADE RECEIVERS AND TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL CONTOURS
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 121 of 165
Due to the relatively small increase in overall ADT volumes from Project-generated traffic, the noise level
increase would be less than 0.5 CNEL. Therefore, Project traffic would not result in a substantial permanent
increase in noise levels and impacts would be less than significant.
Implementation of the proposed Project would generate both temporary construction-related noise and
long-term noise associated with operation of the Project. Construction noise associated with mobile sources
would not exceed Lake Elsinore Municipal Code daytime noise standards at the nearby residential land
uses and impacts from mobile construction equipment would be less than significant.
To avoid construction noise impacts at night, Mitigation Measure MM-NOI-1, is recommended to restrict
construction activities to Monday through Saturday, between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Furthermore, in order to comply with the City’s stationary construction noise limits associated with
construction of the retaining wall, Mitigation Measure MM-NOI-2, would be required. Additionally,
Mitigation Measure MM-NOI-2 would reduce construction noise associated with retaining wall
construction to comply with the City’s stationary noise level limit of 60 dBA Leq at the closest residences
to the north and northeast of the Project site. This would mitigate construction noise impacts to a less than
significant level. The operational noise from the onsite activities (most notably parking, loading and
HVAC) would not exceed City’s property line limits. Noise impacts from on-site sources would be less
than significant.
Project-generated traffic would include an increase of up to 0.5 Ldn along local roadways. This is below
the threshold of 3 dBA; therefore, the off-site traffic noise increase would be less than significant.
Based on the above analysis, with the incorporation of Mitigation Measures MM-NOI-1 and MM-NOI-
2, implementation of the Project would not result in the 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 applicable standards of other agencies. Impacts would be less than
significant with mitigation incorporated.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Noise and Vibration Study prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., 7-2020
(Noise Study, Appendix J); General Plan EIR, Section 3.5, Noise; and Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
(LEMC), Section 17.176, Noise Control.
b) Would the Project generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Less than Significant Impact
Construction activities known to generate excessive ground-borne vibration, such as pile driving, would
not be conducted in conjunction with development of the proposed Project. The greatest anticipated source
of vibration during Project construction activities would be from a dozer, which would be used during
grading activities and may be used within 25 feet of the closest off-site structure (the residence to the north
of the Project site). During grading, a dozer would create approximately 0.089 in./sec. ppv at a distance of
25 feet. This vibration level is well below the threshold of 0.24 in./sec. ppv (96 VdB).
The proposed soil nail installation would also have the potential to generate excessive ground-borne
vibration at the closest residence. As previously set forth in Table XIII-2, Vibration Levels Measured
during Construction Activities, nail drilling generates vibration levels on the same order as a dozer, i.e.,
0.89 in./sec. ppv. The closest building, Receiver 4 in the noise model, is located approximately 55 feet
from the closest excavated face. At this distance it is anticipated the drill at the end of the 25 foot hole
would generate a vibration level of approximately 0.73 in./sec. ppv. All other construction activities are
anticipated to be at greater distances, therefore, temporary impacts associated with construction would be
less than significant.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 122 of 165
The proposed Project does not include any substantial vibration sources associated with the operation phase.
Therefore, operational vibration impacts would be less than significant.
Based on the above, implementation of the Project would not generate excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels. Both short-term impacts during construction and long-term impacts during
Project occupancy would be less than significant.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Noise and Vibration Study prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., July
2020 (Noise Study, Appendix J).
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 Perris Airport is the closest public airport, located approximately 9.5 miles to the northeast of the
Project site. The Skylark Airport is a private airport located approximately 4.5 miles to the southeast of the
Project site. According to the noise compatibility contours figure for the Perris Airport in the Riverside
County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Document (Riverside County Airport Land Use
Commission 2004), the Project site is located outside the airport’s 60 CNEL noise contour. The Skylark
airport does is not included in the County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Document; however,
the airport is primarily used for recreational skydiving and has limited flights as it is not open to the public.
Both airports are located over 2 miles from the Project site.
Based on the above, no substantial noise exposure from airport noise would occur to construction workers,
users, or employees of the Project. There would be no impact.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Noise and Vibration Study prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., 7-2020
(Noise Study, Appendix J).
Mitigation Measures:
MM-NOI-1 Project construction will only be allowed during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.,
Monday through Saturday and would not occur on Sundays and federal holidays.
MM-NOI-2 Prior to initiating construction of the retaining wall along the northern edge of the Project
site, the Project applicant will erect barriers along the northern and eastern property lines
with a top of wall elevation of 18-feet above the on-site grade. The barrier along the eastern
property line will extend southerly from the north property line for 65 feet along the eastern
property line. The eastern barrier is estimated to be 18 feet high at the southern end and
15 feet high at the northern end. The barrier along the northern property line will extend
from the eastern property line westerly for 80 feet. Due to the slope of the hillside, the
northern barrier can vary in height from 14 feet in height at the eastern end, where the
terrain is similar to the existing ground elevation of 1,290, to zero feet high, where the
existing terrain is 1,305 above mean sea level. The noise barrier will be constructed of
material with a minimum weight of two pounds per square foot with no gaps or
perforations. Noise barriers may be constructed of, but not limited to, 5/8-inch plywood,
5/8-inch oriented strand board, and hay bales.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 123 of 165
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING
a) Would the Project 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)? Less than Significant Impact
According to State Department of Finance, the City of Lake Elsinore’s population was 62,949 as of January
1, 2019.
The City’s population is projected to increase to 111,400 persons in 2040, according to the Southern
California Association of Governments (SCAG), 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), Adopted Growth Forecast.
According to the 2016-2040 SCAG RTP/SCS, Lake Elsinore had an employment base of 11,200 in 2012
and it is projected to increase to 31,700 by the year 2040.
The modest increase in population as a result of the proposed Project is accounted for in the growth
assumptions estimated by SCAG which are based in part on the City’s General Plan land uses. It is noted,
the proposed Project is consistent with the existing General Plan land use designation (Neighborhood
Commercial) and Zoning classification (C-1 – Neighborhood Commercial).
No new expanded infrastructure is proposed in conjunction with the proposed Project that could
accommodate additional growth in the area that is not already possible with existing infrastructure. Any
potential impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: State of California, Department of Finance, E-1 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and
the State — January 1, 2018 and 2019; and Southern California Association of Governments, 2016-2040
Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS), Demographics &
Growth Forecasts Appendix.
b) Would the Project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact
The Project site is currently vacant, undeveloped land. There are no housing units or residents on the Project
site.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project will not displace substantial numbers of existing people
or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. There would be no impact.
Sources: Project Site Visit – May 4, 2020 by Matthew Fagan; and Google Earth.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 124 of 165
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? Less than Significant Impact
The City of Lake Elsinore contracts with the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD) for fire prevention,
suppression, and paramedic services. RCFD, in turn, operates under contract with the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire) for assistance with wildfire protection and
suppression. There are currently four (4) RCFD fire stations serving the City within the City limits (Station
#10, #85, #94 & #97), plus two (2) within the City SOI (Station #11 & #51), and a proposed future fire
station site at the northwest end of the City proximate to Lake Street.
The closest fire station serving the Project site is Fire Station #10 located at 410 West Graham Avenue
approximately 1¾ miles southeast of the Project site. CALFIRE and Lake Elsinore jointly operate three
fire engines and a squad from this facility through their cooperative-integrated system. Equipment located
at Station #10 includes paramedic Engine 10, Engine 3173, and Engine 3175, one of the CALFIRE wildland
engines, and Squad 10 which is largely operated by the Volunteer Firefighters. The CALFIRE engines and
a bulldozer operate during fire season.
The RCFD currently serves the Project site so construction of the proposed Project as a commercial retail
center would represent an incremental increase in RCFD fire services within the City. In recognition of the
increased demands new development places on the City’s existing capital improvements and operational
services, Chapter 16.74 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) establishes a program for the
adoption and administration of development impact fees (DIF) by the City. The purpose of the DIF program
is to defray the cost of public expenditures for capital improvements (and operational services to the extent
allowed by law) of which new development including the proposed Project is a beneficiary. Specifically,
LEMC, Section 16.74.049, “Fire facilities fee” has been established to mitigate the additional burdens
created by new development for City fire facilities [Ord. 1181 § 2, 2006]. This is a standard requirement
and not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Any incremental increase in fire protection services would be offset through the payment of the appropriate
DIFs. In addition, the proposed Project will be required to comply with all applicable City fire codes for
construction and access to the site and will be reviewed by the City’s Fire Department to determine the
specific fire requirements applicable to ensure compliance.
Based on the above, the proposed Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts related
to fire protection. Any impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: General Plan EIR (GP-EIR), Section 3.14, Public Services, and Figure 3.14-1, Police and Fire
Stations; City of Lake Elsinore, On-Line Services, Public Safety, Fire; LEMC, Chapter 16.74, Development
Impact Fees, and Section 16.74.049, Fire facilities fee; and Google Earth.
b) Police protection? Less than Significant Impact
Police protection services within the City of Lake Elsinore are provided by the Lake Elsinore Police
Department (LEPD) under contract by the Riverside County Sheriff's Department (RCSD). The Lake
Elsinore Police Department/Sheriff's Station is located at 333 West Limited Street approximately 1.85 miles
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 125 of 165
southeast of the Project site.
In recognition of the increased demands new development places on the City’s existing capital
improvements and operational services, Chapter 16.74 of the LEMC establishes a program for the adoption
and administration of DIFs by the City. The purpose of the DIF program is to defray the cost of public
expenditures for capital improvements (and operational services to the extent allowed by law) which
benefits new development including the proposed Project. The proposed Project would participate in the
DIF program to mitigate impacts to police protection resources. Any potential impacts would be
incremental and offset through payment of the DIF. This is a standard requirement and not considered
unique mitigation under CEQA.
Based on the above, the proposed Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts related
to police protection. Any impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: General Plan EIR (GP-EIR), Section 3.14, Public Services, and Figure 3.14-1, Police and Fire
Stations; City of Lake Elsinore, On-Line Services, Public Safety, Police; LEMC, Chapter 16.74,
Development Impact Fees; and Google Earth.
c) Schools? Less than Significant Impact
The proposed Project site is located within the Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD). The Project
would be required to pay school impact fees as levied by the LEUSD which would provide funding for school
facilities.
The proposed Project does not propose new housing which could generate new students who would require
LEUSD facilities and services. Therefore, any potential impacts would be considered incremental and
would be offset through the payment of the appropriate development impact fees for schools. This is a
standard requirement and not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Based on the above, the proposed Project will not result in substantial adverse physical impacts related to
schools. Any impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: LEUSD website.
d) Parks? Less than Significant Impact
The proposed Project does not propose residential uses so it would not generate additional residents who
would need park facilities or services. Therefore, a direct increase in park usage is not expected as a result
of Project implementation. New commercial development may cause incremental indirect impacts to park
facilities from the occasional use of a park by employees during a lunch or dinner break.
Section 16.34.060 in Chapter 16.34 (Required Improvements) of the LEMC requires that prior to the
issuance of a building permit, the applicant pay fees for the purposes set forth in that section:
• Paragraph D of Section 16.34.060 pertains to the City’s Park Capital Improvement Fund and describes
how the City Council has the option to request dedication for park purposes or in lieu thereof, request
that the applicant pay a fee for the purpose of purchasing the land and developing and maintaining the
City park system.
As a commercial project, the proposed Project would be required to pay park fees to the City for the purpose
of establishing, improving and maintaining park land within the City.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 126 of 165
Since the Project does not propose new housing so any potential impacts would be considered incremental
and would be offset through the payment of the appropriate park fees. This is a standard requirement and
not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Based on the above, the proposed Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts related
to parks. Any impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: General Plan EIR (GP-EIR), Section 3.14, Public Services; and LEMC Chapter 16.34, Required
Improvements.
e) Other public services/facilities? Less than Significant Impact
Libraries
The City of Lake Elsinore is part of the Riverside County Library System. The closest City of Lake Elsinore
library to the Project site is the Lake Elsinore Branch Library at 600 West Graham Avenue, approximately
1¼ miles southeast of the Project site.
Section 16.34.060 in Chapter 16.34, Required Improvements, of the LEMC requires that prior to the
issuance of a building permit, the applicant pay fees for the purposes set forth in that section:
• Paragraph B of Section 16.34.060 describes the City’s Library Mitigation Fee and states that an in-lieu
fee for future construction of library improvements shall be paid to the City to assure the necessary
library facilities are provided the community.
The proposed Project does not include any housing that could generate additional residents who would use
library services. Therefore, any impacts to library services would be incremental and would be offset
through the payment of the appropriate library mitigation fee. This is a standard requirement and not
considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Therefore, impacts related to libraries would be less than significant.
Other Public Services
Chapter 16.74 of the LEMC establishes a program for the adoption and administration of DIFs by the City
for the purpose of defraying the costs of public expenditures for capital improvements and operational
services to the extent allowed by law which will benefit such new development:
• Section 16.74.048 includes an “Animal Shelter Facilities Fee” to mitigate the additional burdens created
by new development for animal facilities.
• In addition, the proposed Project will be required to pay City Hall & Public Works fees, Community
Center Fees, and Marina Facilities Fees prior to the issuance of building permits. Payment of the above
fees is a standard requirement and not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Based on the above, any impacts related to other public services and facilities would be less than significant.
Sources: General Plan EIR (GP-EIR), Section 3.14, Public Services; LEMC, Chapter 16.34, Required
Improvements, and Chapter 16.74, Development Impact Fees; and Google Earth.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 127 of 165
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? Less than Significant Impact
The City of Lake Elsinore Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2008 – 2030 establishes a goal of providing
five acres of park space per 1,000 residents. The proposed Project does not include residential development
that would add residents who would substantially increase demands for neighborhood or regional parks or
other recreational facilities. Indirect impacts to park facilities from commercial development would be the
occasional use of a park during a lunch or dinner break. Based on a review of Google Maps, there are no
parks located within a half mile of the Project site. Therefore, it is unlikely that the proposed Project would
substantially increase the use of existing parks.
As previously described in Threshold XV.d, the proposed Project would be required to pay park fees to the
City for the purpose of establishing, improving, and maintaining park land within the City (LEMC, Sec.
16.34.060). Since the proposed Project does not include a housing component, any impacts would be
incremental and would be offset through the payment of the appropriate park fees. This is a standard
requirement and not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Based on the above, implementation of the proposed Project would not increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration
of the facility would occur or be accelerated. Any impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: General Plan EIR (GP-EIR), Section 3.14, Public Services; City of Lake Elsinore, Parks and
Recreation Master Plan 2008-2030; LEMC, Chapter 16.34, Required Improvements; Project Plans
(Appendix L); and Google Earth.
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? Less
Than Significant Impact
The Project proposes the development of a 43,120 square foot four-building commercial retail center
(Lakeview Plaza) and does not include any recreational facilities.
As set forth in Threshold XV.d and Threshold XVI.a, the proposed Project would be required to pay park
fees to the City for the purpose of establishing, improving, and maintaining park land within the City. This
is a standard requirement and not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
The proposed Project does not include recreational facilities and does not require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Any
impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: General Plan EIR (GP-EIR), Section 3.14, Public Services; City of Lake Elsinore, Parks and
Recreation Master Plan 2008-2030; LEMC, Chapter 16.34, Required Improvements; and Project Plans
(Appendix L).
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 128 of 165
XVII. TRANSPORTATION
Any Tables or Figures in this Section are from the Traffic Impact Analysis, unless stated otherwise.
a) Would the Project conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation
system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Less Than Significant
Impact
Overview
A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was prepared in conjunction with the proposed Lakeview Plaza Project
(Project) development. The TIA analyzes the projected traffic operations associated with the Project. One
purpose of the TIA is to evaluate potential circulation system deficiencies that may result from development
of the proposed Project, and to recommend improvements to achieve acceptable operations, if applicable.
The analysis has been prepared pursuant to applicable City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside, and
Caltrans traffic impact analysis guidelines.
Another purpose of the TIA is to evaluate the Project relative to established circulation plans and programs,
the primary one being the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Transportation Section. The Project is located
on the edge of the Country Club Heights District of the General Plan and has its own policies regarding
transportation. As required by the General Plan, the objectives of the TIA include determining if the Level
of Service (LOS) required by the County of Riverside, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans,
for I-15), and the City will be maintained within the Project study area, and if not, determine what
improvements are necessary in order to maintain the required LOS.
The TIA focuses on LOS changes at local intersections and on local roadways as a result of Project-
generated traffic, however, the CEQA thresholds of significance for transportation and traffic impacts have
shifted in recent years. In the past, the CEQA analysis focused on LOS which measures congestion at local
intersections and roadway segments. The emphasis of these past studies was to assure the street grid
network functioned well and allowed for efficient movement of vehicles. The current focus is to encourage
active transportation (e.g., pedestrians, bicyclists, etc.) and transit, and to limit increases in Vehicle Miles
Travelled (VMT). A key part of this analysis is to determine if a proposed action is consistent with both
the vehicular and non-vehicular aspects of the General Plan.
The Project site is 4.0 acres located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and
Manning Street. The Project proposes commercial development with 36,120 square feet of retail space and
7,000 square feet of restaurant space. Access on Lakeshore Drive is planned via one signalized full-access
driveway and one right-in right-out driveway. Access on Manning Street is planned via one full access
driveway. The proposed Project is anticipated to be built and generating trips in 2021.
The proposed Project is projected to generate 240 AM peak hour trips, 324 PM peak hour trips and 3,793
daily trips. Pass-By reductions of 10% (AM), 25% (PM), and 10% (Daily) were used for the retail space
and pass-by reductions of 20% (AM), 25% (PM), and 20% (Daily) were used for the restaurant space. The
proposed Project is projected to generate 208 AM peak hour trips, 242 PM peak hour trips and 3,335 daily
trips after pass-by reductions are applied. In addition to the three (3) proposed Project driveways, six (6)
intersections in the vicinity of the Project site (Study Area Intersections) have been included in the
intersection level of service (LOS) analysis as shown in Table XVII-1, Study Area Intersections.
Each of the study area intersections are located within the City of Lake Elsinore, as shown on Figure
XVII-1, TIA Study Area Map.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 129 of 165
Table XVII-1
TIA Study Area Intersections
1. Machado Street / Lakeshore Drive 6. Chaney Street / Lakeshore Drive
2. Gunnerson Street / Lakeshore Drive 7. Project – Proposed Right-In Right-Out Driveway
3. Riverside Drive1 / Joy Street 8. Project – Proposed Full-Access Driveway (signalized)
4. Riverside Drive1 / Lakeshore Drive 9. Project – Proposed Full-Access Driveway
5. Manning Street / Lakeshore Drive
FIGURE XVII-1
TIA STUDY AREA MAP
Source: Traffic Impact Analysis - (Appendix K1)Lakeview Plaza
Page 130 of 163
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 131 of 165
The TIA intersections were analyzed for the following four (4) study scenarios based on traffic generated
by the proposed Project: (1) Existing Conditions; (2) Existing Plus Project Conditions (EP); (3) Existing
Plus Ambient Plus Project (EAP) Conditions; and (4) Existing Plus Ambient Plus Project Plus Cumulative
(EAPC) Conditions. However, the City of Lake Elsinore considers the Existing Plus Ambient Plus Project
(EAP) scenario to be the most relevant to potential impacts under CEQA and the standards of the General
Plan. The other scenarios are important for planning purposes and the timing of funding improvements
(e.g., EAPC for fair share for cumulative impacts) but are no longer considered environmental impacts
under CEQA.
The TIA provides detailed information on traffic conditions with and without the Project under these other
scenarios. Relative to the following tables, Level of Service (LOS) is commonly used to describe the quality
of flow on roadways and at intersections using a range of LOS from LOS A (free flow with little congestion)
to LOS F (severely congested conditions). The definitions for LOS for interruption of traffic flow differ
depending on the type of traffic control (traffic signal, unsignalized intersection with side street stops,
unsignalized intersection with all-way stops). The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology
expresses the LOS of an intersection in terms of delay time for the intersection approaches. The City of
Lake Elsinore traffic study guidelines require signalized intersection operations to be analyzed utilizing the
HCM methodology. The City has established level of service “D” or better as acceptable LOS for all
intersections along the designated street and highway system in the General Plan.
Existing Conditions
The existing conditions AM and PM peak hour intersection analysis is shown in Table XVII-2,
Intersection Analysis – Existing Conditions. The study intersections are currently operating at an
acceptable LOS (LOS D or better) during the AM and PM peak hours for existing conditions except for
Riverside Drive / Joy Street (LOS F AM/PM Peak Hour).
Table XVII-2
Intersection Analysis – Existing Conditions
# Intersection Control
Type Peak Hour Existing Conditions
Delay(1) LOS
1. Machado Street / Lakeshore Drive Signal AM
PM
26.6
32.5
C
C
2. Gunnerson Street / Lakeshore Drive OWSC AM
PM
20.9
22.3
C
C
3. Riverside Drive / Joy Street TWSC AM
PM
235.4
533.9
F
F
4. Riverside Drive / Lakeshore Drive Signal AM
PM
30.3
36.0
C
D
5. Manning Street / Lakeshore Drive OWSC AM
PM
11.7
14.7
B
B
6. Chaney Street / Lakeshore Drive Signal AM
PM
5.3
5.9
A
A
Notes: XX = Exceeds established standards
1. Per the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition, overall average delay and LOS are shown for signalized intersections.
TWSC = Two-Way Stop Control, OWSC = One-Way Stop-Control; Delay shown in seconds per vehicle.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 132 of 165
Cumulative Traffic
CEQA guidelines require that other reasonably foreseeable development projects which are either approved
or are currently being processed in the study area also be included as part of a cumulative analysis scenario.
A list of cumulative projects was developed for the TIA through consultation with City of Lake Elsinore
staff, and obtainment of current development status reports. A portion of cumulative traffic volumes were
obtained from recent nearby traffic impact reports. Figure XVII-2, Cumulative Projects, includes a list
and location of the identified projects.
Lakeview Plaza Page 132 of 163FIGURE XVII-2 CUMULATIVE PROJECTSSource: Traffic Impact Analysis - (Appendix K1)
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 134 of 165
Existing Plus Ambient Plus Project Conditions (EAP)
The existing plus ambient plus project (EAP) conditions analysis is intended to identify the Project-related
impacts on both of the planned near-term circulation system by comparing EAP conditions to existing
conditions. EAP analysis is intended to identify “opening year” impacts associated with the development
of the proposed Project based on the expected background growth within the study area.
The EAP conditions AM and PM peak hour intersection analysis is shown in Table XVII-3, Intersection
Analysis – EAP Conditions. The study intersections are projected to continue to operate at an acceptable
LOS (LOS D or better) during the AM and PM peak hours for EAP conditions with the exception of
Riverside Drive / Joy Street (LOS F AM/PM Peak Hour) which was also identified as exceeding standards
under Existing Conditions as well. The TIA recommended the Project signalize this intersection to meet
City standards outlined in the City General Plan. With this recommended improvement, the intersection
will operate at LOS B in the AM and PM peak hours (see “Recommended Conditions of Approval”).
Table XVII-3
Intersection Analysis – EAP Conditions
# Intersection
Control
Type
Peak
Hour
Existing Conditions EAP Conditions
Delay(1) LOS Delay(1) LOS Change Impact?
1. Machado Street /
Lakeshore Drive
Signal AM
PM
26.6
32.5
C
C
28.5
37.1
C
D
1.9
4.6
No
No
2. Gunnerson Street /
Lakeshore Drive
OWSC AM
PM
20.9
22.3
C
C
27.6
29.1
D
D
6.7
6.8
No
No
3. Riverside Drive /
Joy Street
TWSC AM
PM
235.4
533.9
F
F
470.2
1059.6
F
F
234.8
525.7
Yes
Yes
4. Riverside Drive /
Lakeshore Drive
Signal AM
PM
30.3
36.0
C
D
34.0
40.9
C
D
3.7
4.9
No
No
5. Manning Street /
Lakeshore Drive
OWSC AM
PM
11.7
14.7
B
B
15.2
19.7
B
C
3.5
5.0
No
No
6. Chaney Street /
Lakeshore Drive
Signal AM
PM
5.3
5.9
A
A
5.6
6.3
A
A
0.3
0.4
No
No
7. Project Dwy 1 /
Lakeshore Drive
OWSC AM
PM
-- -- 10.8
14.0
B
B
10.8
14.0
No
No
8. Project Dwy 2 /
Lakeshore Drive
Signal AM
PM
-- -- 17.6
25.0
B
C
17.6
25.0
No
No
9. Project Dwy 3 /
Manning Street
OWSC AM
PM
-- -- 8.4
8.5
A
A
8.4
8.5
No
No
Notes: XX = Exceeds established standards
1. Per the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition, overall average delay and LOS are shown for signalized and all-way stop-controlled
intersections. For intersections with one-or-two-way stop-control, the delay and LOS for the worst individual movement is shown.
TWSC = Two-Way Stop Control, OWSC = One-Way Stop-Control; Delay shown in seconds per vehicle.
Local and Regional Funding Mechanisms
Transportation improvements throughout the County of Riverside are funded through a combination of
direct project mitigation, fair share contributions, or development impact fee programs such as the City’s
adoption of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program and the City of Lake Elsinore
Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) program. It is anticipated that the proposed Project will be subject to the TUMF
and the City’s TIF. Identification and timing of needed improvements is generally determined through
local jurisdictions based upon a variety of factors. The Project’s contribution to the aforementioned
transportation impact fee programs or as a fair share contribution towards a cumulatively impacted facility
not found to be covered by a pre-existing fee program should be considered sufficient to address the
Project’s fair share to alleviate the cumulative impact. Discussion of the relevant pre-existing transportation
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 135 of 165
impact fee programs is provided below. The City Engineer will ultimately determine the improvements
required at off-site intersections.
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program
The TUMF program is administered by the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) based
upon a regional Nexus Study completed in early 2002 and updated in 2005, 2009, 2015 and 2017 to address
major changes in right of way acquisition and improvement cost factors. The TUMF program identifies
network backbone and local roadways that are needed to accommodate growth through 2035. The regional
program was put into place to ensure that developments pay their fair share, and that funding is in place for
the construction of facilities needed to maintain an acceptable level of service for the transportation system.
The TUMF is a regional mitigation fee program and is imposed and implemented in every jurisdiction in
Western Riverside County. TUMF fees are imposed on new residential, industrial and commercial
development through application of the TUMF fee ordinance and fees are collected at the building or
occupancy permit phase. The current fee for retail use is $7.50 per square foot. The Project will participate
in the cost of off-site improvements through payment of TUMF fees based on the current fees at the time
of construction of the proposed Project.
City of Lake Elsinore Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Program
The proposed Project is located within the City of Lake Elsinore and will therefore be subject to the City’s
Traffic Impact Fees (TIF) and a fair share contribution to Project impacts. The City’s TIF program includes
facilities that are not part of the regional TUMF program. The proposed Project (Lakeview Plaza) will
participate in the cost of off-site improvements through payment of City TIF fees based on the current fees
at the time of construction of the proposed Project.
Fair Share Calculations
The proposed Project will participate in the cost of off-site improvements through payment of City TIF fees
based on the current fees at the time of construction of the proposed Project. The proposed Project’s
contribution to the aforementioned transportation impact fee programs or as a fair share contribution
towards a cumulatively impacted facility not found to be covered by a pre-existing fee program should be
considered sufficient to address the Project’s fair share towards mitigation measure(s) designed to alleviate
cumulative Project impacts. The proposed Project’s fair share percentage at impacted intersections is set
forth in Table XVII-4, Fair Share Calculations.
Table XVII-4
Fair Share Calculations
# Intersection
Existing AM &
PM Peak Hour
Volume (A)
EAPC AM &
PM Peak Hour
Volume (B)
Project AM &
PM Peak Hour
Volume
Fair Share (C)
/ (B – A)
2. Gunnerson St / Lakeshore Dr 2699 3430 113 15.46%
3. Riverside Dr / Joy St 4293 5118 113 13.70%
4. Riverside Dr / Lakeshore Dr 5881 7511 292 17.91%
Implementation of the proposed Project would entail payment of applicable regional (TUMF) and local
(TIF) transportation impact fees to offset the impacts the proposed Project would have on the transportation
system, as described herein. Payment of TUMF and TIF fees are not considered unique mitigation under
CEQA. Furthermore, the proposed Project has been designed to accommodate the requirements associated
with the Class II bikeway classification along its Lakeshore Drive frontage (sidewalks, curb ramps, and
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 136 of 165
bike lane) and the proposed Project will not interfere with pedestrian or public transit access which is
available within one-quarter mile northwest of the Project site at the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and
Riverside Drive.
Terminology for Recommended Improvements and Fees
It should be noted the TIA recommends a number of improvements and fair share contributions to
improvements that were all labeled as “mitigation measures.” However, these are no longer considered
mitigation under CEQA because SB 743 changed the significance criteria of traffic impacts from LOS to
VMT. Therefore, the measures recommended in the TIA will instead be made Conditions of Approval for
the Project to address the planning (rather than the CEQA) impacts of the Project.
Temporary Truck Trips for Grading
The analysis and conclusions outlined so far in this section have been for operations of the Project.
However, the Project will also have short-term, temporary traffic impacts that are not related to any adopted
plan or program but should be disclosed in this document for transparency. In terms of construction traffic
associated with soil movement, the Project Plans (grading plan) indicates that there will be 85,019 cubic
yards (CY) of cut, 109 CY of fill, and 84,910 CY of net soil export although 90,000 CY is assumed as a
conservative “worst case” estimate. This soil movement would have the following temporary traffic
impacts on local roadways and intersection:
• 90,000 CY / 16 CY per double truck load x 2 trips per truck (round trip) = 11,250 total truck trips;
• 11,250 trips / 66-day hauling phase (3 months) = 170 truck trips per day;
• 170 truck trips per day / 8-hour workday = 21 truck trips per hour; and
• 21 truck trips per hour X 3.0 passenger car equivalent (PCE) factor = 63 PCE trips per hour.
This additional temporary traffic is not expected to have any significant long-term impacts on the Project
study area and no mitigation is required.
To assure that long-term Project impacts on local roads and intersections do not exceed City LOS standards
and fair share requirements identified in the General Plan, the Project is also required to pay the County’s
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) and the City’s Development Impact Fees (DIF) related to
traffic impacts. Compliance with standard conditions is considered regulatory compliance and not separate
mitigation under CEQA.
Consistency with Circulation Plans
Table XVII-5, General Plan Consistency Analysis, analyzes the Project relative to the City’s General Plan
transportation goals and policies. As shown in Table XVII-5, the Project is consistent with applicable
transportation goals and policies of the City General Plan including those for providing non-vehicular
circulation opportunities such as bicycle lanes/routes, trails, and public transit. It also demonstrates the
Project will be consistent with the General Plan and LOS standards of the City, County, and Caltrans
relative to I-15. Emphasizing non-vehicular transportation are key elements of Senate Bill (SB) 375 and
the Southern California Association of Government’s Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Community Strategy. Non-vehicular transportation includes pedestrians (sidewalks, trails), bicycles (on-
road lanes or off-road paths), bus transit, and train transit as discussed following Table XVII-5.
The proposed Project is non-residential in nature so it will not directly generate new residents who will
want to take regular advantage of non-vehicular transportation. However, employees of the proposed
Project will be able to take advantage of these non-vehicular transportation options (i.e., sidewalks, bicycle
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 137 of 165
lanes, or transit) in the future if they so choose, although using them as a replacement for commuting will
only be possible if an employee lived within a convenient distance to the Project site.
Table XVII-5
General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Transportation and Circulation Goals,
Policies and Implementation Programs
Project Consistency
Chapter 2.0 – Community Form (Section 2.4 - Circulation)
Goal 6: Optimize the efficiency and safety of the
transportation system within the City of Lake Elsinore.
Consistent. The Project will take advantage of
existing streets for access on a site that is planned
for commercial uses.
Policy 6.1: The interconnection and coordination of traffic
signals shall be achieved through two processes, namely the
requirements in the conditions of approval on development
projects and/or through the implementation of Capital
Improvement Program projects.
Consistent. The Project TIA recommends a number
of signal improvements including fair share
contributions to help fund the planned
improvements.
Policy 6.2: Enforce and comply with proper intersection
“sight distance” requirements as described by the
Engineering Division.
Consistent. Manning Street at both Lakeshore
Drive and Ryan Avenue intersect at right angles and
the site driveways will all have adequate sight
distances.
Policy 6.3: Maximize the use of shared driveways and on-
site circulation to minimize conflicts at access points to the
roadway network.
Consistent. There are no existing retail commercial
uses adjacent to the Project that could share parking
or driveways. The Project will have new 2
driveways on Lakeshore Drive and one on Manning
Street.
Policy 6.4: Maintain the system of bike lanes and multi-use
trails throughout the City. Encourage the implementation of
the network of Class I, II, and III bike lanes on all
development projects through construction of the facility as
described in the Bike Lane Master Plan and/or the Trails
Master Plan.
Consistent. The Project is consistent with the
planned Class II bike lane and Lake Loop Trail
plans along Lakeshore Drive.
Policy 6.5: The City will monitor traffic and congestion on
Grand Avenue and Corydon Street through the review of
project-specific traffic studies, and apply mitigation
measures to ensure that projected traffic does not exceed
daily capacities as new development occurs in the area.
Not Applicable. This intersection is southeast of
the lake and not within the TIA study area for the
Project.
Chapter 2.0 – Community Form (Section 3.4 – Transportation and Circulation)
Policy 6.6: As appropriate, coordinate City improvements
with the efforts of the County and adjacent cities that
provide a circulation network which moves people and
goods efficiently to and from the City.
Implementation Program: Through the development
review and CEQA processes the City shall ensure the
efficiency and safety of roadways, implement the Bike
Lane Master Plan and Trails Master Plan, and consider
innovative on-site circulation to minimize conflicts with the
roadway network.
Consistent. The Project will comply with all the
requirements of the City’s development review and
CEQA processes regarding roads, intersections, and
coordination with adjacent jurisdictions. The
Project is consistent with the established or planned
circulation network, including the Bike Lane Master
Plan and Trails Master Plan.
Chapter 2.0 – Community Form (Section 2.7 – Parks and Recreation)
Goal 9: Establish a primary trail network for equestrians
and hikers.
Consistent. The Project is adjacent to the Lake Loop
Trail along Lakeshore Drive which connects to other City
and regional County trails.
Policy 9.1: Encourage public and private systems that
interface with other existing and proposed trails (i.e.,
bikeways) assuring links with the City, County of
Riverside, and state recreational facilities.
Consistent. The Project is consistent with the
planned Class II bike lane and Lake Loop Trail
plans along Lakeshore Drive.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 138 of 165
General Plan Transportation and Circulation Goals,
Policies and Implementation Programs
Project Consistency
Implementation Program: The City shall implement
strategies for the Trails Master Plan when feasible.
Country Club Heights District – Transportation Goals and Policies
Goal 4: Provide a safe and comprehensive roadway
network for vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic within
the Country Club Heights District, with additional access
points into/out of the area.
Consistent. The Project is on the edge of the
Country Club Heights District and adjacent to the
Lake Edge District. It is located along an arterial
roadway (Lakeshore Drive) and Manning Street is
also adjacent to the site which provides direct
access between the two Districts. Sidewalks and
bike lanes are provided on Lakeshore Drive.
Policy CCH 4.1: Consider road cross-sections that are
unique to the Country Club Heights District as necessary
and used for local roadways in areas south of Riverside
Drive to Chaney Street and the areas enclosed between
Gunnerson and Riverside Drive.
Not Applicable. The Project relative to District
access is addressed in Goal 4 above. The area
referenced in the policy does not affect the Project
site.
Policy CCH 4.2: Consider a new special roadway cross
section for Lakeshore Drive between Riverside Drive and
Chaney Street and locate intersections at Manning Street,
Lawrence Way, and Wilson Way.
Consistent. The Project will help improve the
intersection of Lakeshore Drive/Manning Street.
Policy CCH 4.3: Consider a pedestrian sidewalk along
Lakeshore Drive that integrates a multi-purpose trail along
Lakeshore Drive.
Consistent. The Project will make various roadway
and intersection improvements and will pay DIF
fees to help fund future construction of the Lake
Loop Trail along Lakeshore Drive adjacent to the
site.
Policy CCH 4.4: Encourage a minimum sight-distance of
250 feet within the Country Club Heights District.
Consistent. Manning Street at both Lakeshore
Drive and Ryan Avenue intersect at right angles and
the site driveways will all have adequate sight
distances.
Policy CCH 4.5: Consider the roadway network to include
one-way streets where ROW or buildable widths are
limited.
Consistent. The Project is located along an arterial
roadway (Lakeshore Drive) and Manning Street is
also adjacent to the site which provides direct
access to Lakeshore Drive (both roads are two-
way).
Policy CCH 4.6: Through the project and CEQA processes
Integrate roadway and other public services infrastructure
as development occurs to create efficient use of land.
Consistent. The Project will comply with all the
requirements of the City’s development review and
CEQA processes regarding roads, intersections, and
infrastructure coordination. The Project site is
designated for the planned retail commercial uses.
Policy CCH 4.7: Consider the feasibility of assuming
control of the entire segment of State Route 74, located
within the Country Club Heights District.
Implementation Program: The City shall utilize the
development review and CEQA processes to study
alternative designs for roadways in the Country Club
Heights District that may provide safer streets, pedestrian
walkways, and bikeways. Additionally, access points into
and out of the District shall be reviewed and implemented
where feasible.
Not Applicable. This roadway is northwest of the
lake and not within the TIA study area for the
Project. The Project is located along an arterial
roadway (Lakeshore Drive) and Manning Street is
also adjacent to the site which provides direct
access to Lakeshore Drive.
Source: Lake Elsinore General Plan
Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
Within the TIA study area, Class II on-street bicycle lanes exist on Riverside Drive and Lakeshore Drive.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 139 of 165
Sidewalks and curb ramps at intersections are generally present where development has occurred within
the study area but is absent where development has not yet occurred.
Existing Trails
The Lake Loop Trail is proposed along Lakeshore Drive adjacent to the Project site. This trail will
eventually connect to the other local City trails and the County regional trail system.
Existing Public Transit Services
The City of Lake Elsinore is served by the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) which provides local and
regional bus service throughout Riverside County. There are existing transit services within a one-quarter
mile walking distance of the Project site. The nearest transit service is RTA Route 8 with a stop at the
Riverside Drive/Lakeshore Drive intersection. Route 8 runs in a loop between the City of Lake Elsinore
and the City of Wildomar with headways of approximately 60 minutes on weekdays, and 70-75 minutes on
the weekend.
Summary of Impacts
With the improvements recommended in the TIA as conditions of approval, and the availability of non-
vehicular transportation options, this analysis demonstrates that the proposed Project will not conflict with
any applicable program, plan, or ordinance on the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle,
and pedestrian facilities. Therefore, the Project will have less than significant impacts in this regard and no
mitigation is required.
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
The following Conditions of Approval (COAs) are recommended based on the results of the TIA so the
Project will comply with the LOS and traffic safety requirements of the City General Plan. These are
recommended as COAs because the CEQA threshold for transportation impacts is now VMT instead of
LOS.
Direct Project Impacts (EAP Conditions 1)
TR-COA-1 Prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall signalize the
existing intersection of Riverside Drive/Joy Street.
Cumulative Impacts (EAPC2 Conditions)
TR-COA-2 Prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall make a fair share
contribution toward the following improvements at the cumulatively impacted study
intersections to reduce peak hour delay and improve the intersections to LOS D or better
(TIA EAPC Recommended Improvements 1 through 3) per the City’s General Plan –
Transportation requirements:
• Gunnerson Street / Lakeshore Drive (signalize existing intersection)
• Riverside Drive / Joy Street (signalize existing intersection)
• Riverside Drive/Lakeshore Drive
1 Existing Plus Ambient Plus Project (EAP) Conditions
2 Existing Plus Ambient Plus Project Plus Cumulative (EAPC) Conditions
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 140 of 165
o Improve westbound Lakeshore Drive to include 2 left turn lanes, 2 through lanes,
and 1 shared through/right lane;
o Improve eastbound Lakeshore Drive to include 2 left turn lanes, 2 through lanes,
and 1 right turn lane;
o Improve northbound Riverside Drive to include 2 left turn lanes, 1 through lane,
and 1 share through/right lane.
o Improve southbound Riverside Drive to include 1 left turn lane, 2 through lanes, 1
shared through/right lane, and 1 right turn lane.
o Re-time existing signalized intersection to include a right turn overlap phase for
eastbound Lakeshore Drive.
TR-COA-3 Prior to each certificate of occupancy, the applicant to make a fair share contribution for
Project traffic impacts (Existing Plus Project Conditions) as follows:
• Intersection 2 – Gunnerson St / Lakeshore Dr.
• Intersection 3 – Riverside Dr / Joy St.
• Intersection 4 – Riverside Dr / Lakeshore Dr.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project - Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by TJW Engineering, Inc., 1-7-2020
(TIA, Appendix K1); General Plan; and Project Plans (Appendix L).
b) Would the Project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)? Less than Significant Impact
Senate Bill (SB) 743 was adopted in 2013 requiring the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR)
to identify new metrics for identifying and mitigating transportation impacts within the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). For land use projects, OPR has identified Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT) as the new metric for transportation analysis under CEQA. The regulatory changes to the CEQA
guidelines that implement SB 743 were approved on December 28th, 2018 with an implementation date of
July 1st, 2020 as the new metric. The City of Lake Elsinore adopted its revised Traffic Impact Analysis
Guide on June 23, 2020. The document outlines guidelines for CEQA analysis including screening criteria
and requirements for VMT assessment of land use projects based on the Western Riverside Council of
Governments (WRCOG) Implementation Pathway Study issued in March 2019. To assist with this
analysis, the Project’s Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study estimated that the proposed Project
operations would generate approximately 6,634,051 unmitigated and 6,239,325 mitigated annual VMT
based on the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) v2016.3.2.
A site-specific Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis was prepared for the Project based on the WRCOG
screening tool. The Project does not fall within a Transit Priority Area (TPA) and also does not fall within
a low VMT generating TAZ based on total VMT, residential home-based VMT, and home-based work
VMT. Based on the screening tool, the proposed Project does not screen out using these metrics. However,
additional screening criteria is identified in the City’s TIA Guidelines which indicate projects serving the
local community less than 50,000 square feet may be presumed to have a less than significant impact. It is
anticipated that the proposed Project will serve local residents within the vicinity providing enhanced
convenience. This additional convenience would reduce the need for residents to travel longer distances.
Therefore, trip lengths within the region would be reduced, and vehicle travel would decrease. Thus, the
Project can be considered a local serving retail and will not have a significant VMT impact. As outlined in
the City’s newly adopted TIA Guidelines, land use projects serving the local community less than 50,000
square feet may be presumed to have less than a significant impact on VMT and does not require additional
VMT analysis.
Based on the above, implementation of the proposed Project would not conflict or be inconsistent with
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 141 of 165
CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)(1). Any impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by TJW Engineering, Inc., 1-7-2020
(TIA, Appendix K1); Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis, City of Lake Elsinore, prepared by TJW
Engineering, Inc., 8-26-2020 (Appendix K2); and Lakeview Plaza Project Air Quality and Greenhouse
Gas Emissions Study, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., 7-28-2020 (AQ/GHG Study, Appendix B).
c) Would the Project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? Less than
Significant Impact
The Project site is located along the northeast side of Lakeshore Drive, extending approximately 921 feet
northwest of Manning Street, in the City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside. The Project site is
proximate 500-800 feet north of “the lake” and surrounding land uses include mostly vacant lands zoned
Hillside Single-Family Residential (R-H) to the northeast across Ryan Avenue (partially cut graded “paper
street), Lakeshore (L) southwest across Lakeshore Drive, Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) and General
Commercial (C-2) to the northwest along Lakeshore Drive, and Hillside Single-Family Residential (R-H)
southeast across Manning Street. Reference Table 2, Surrounding Land Uses and Figure 5, Aerial Photo,
provided in Section I of this IS.
The Project has been reviewed by City Traffic Engineering Staff, and as designed, will not substantially
increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment). The Project site development plan proposes three driveway access points including
a signalized full-access driveway midway along the Lakeshore Drive frontage, a right-in right-out driveway
near the northwest end of the Lakeshore Drive frontage, and a non-signalized full-access driveway along
the Manning Street frontage. Project driveway intersections and internal circulation have been designed
pursuant to City standards and are deemed safe. Adequate sight distance has been provided. Driveway
widths will accommodate Project traffic, and traffic control devices (signals and stop signs) are provided
where necessary for entering and exiting the site. No incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment) are located
in proximity to the Project site.
In addition, detailed street improvement plans will be subject to further City review and approval which
will ensure that Project driveway intersections and internal circulation meet the City’s strict safety
requirements, with adequate sight distance, driveway widths and stop signs where necessary for entering
and exiting the site. This will eliminate any Project impacts due to a design feature. Any impacts would
be less than significant.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by TJW Engineering, Inc. 1-7-2020
(TIA, Appendix K1); Table 2, Surrounding Land Uses and Figure 5, Aerial Photo, provided in Section I
of this IS; and Project Plans (Appendix L).
d) Would the Project result in inadequate emergency access? Less than Significant Impact
A limited potential exists for the Project to interfere with an emergency response or evacuation plan during
construction. Construction work in the street associated with the Project includes: 1) widening the existing
Lakeshore Drive right-of-way by 15 feet; 2) additional paving and street frontage improvements (i.e.
concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk) along the Project site’s Lakeshore Dive frontage; 3) realignment and
street improvements along the Project site’s Manning Street frontage; 4) extension of a 12” water line within
the Lakeshore Drive right-of-way; and 5) sewer lateral connections from the existing 8” sewer main in
Lakeshore Drive. Construction of these off-site street and utility improvements presents a moderate
potential for traffic diversion. Control of access would ensure emergency access to the Project site and
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 142 of 165
surrounding area during construction through the submittal and approval of a traffic control plan (TCP).
The TCP is designed to mitigate any construction circulation impacts. The TCP is a standard condition and
is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA. Following construction, emergency access to the Project
site and area will remain as it was prior to the proposed Project.
The proposed Project is required to comply with Fire Department requirements for adequate access both
during construction and operation. Project site access and circulation will provide adequate access and
turning radius for emergency vehicles, consistent with the Fire Department’s requirements. Any impacts
during construction would be less than significant.
Sources: General Plan EIR, Section 3.4, Transportation and Circulation; and Project Plans (Appendix L).
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 143 of 165
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). Less than
Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated
A Project-specific Cultural Resources Assessment (CRA, Appendix D) including a records search, Sacred
Land File search, Native American outreach, historic archival research, and a field survey was conducted
for the Project area. The CRA details the methods and results of the cultural resources survey and has been
prepared to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The records search conducted at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) at the University of California,
Riverside on August 29, 2019 indicated that six previously identified cultural resource studies completed
within 0.5 mile of the Project site between 1991 and 2016. None of these previous studies include portions
of the current Project site. The EIC records search identified 11 previously recorded resources situated
within a 0.5-mile radius of the project site. These resources include one prehistoric archaeological site, three
prehistoric isolated artifacts, one multi-component (prehistoric and historic period) archaeological site, one
historic period archaeological site, and five historic period buildings. None of these previously documented
cultural resources are located within or immediately adjacent to the Project site.
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was contacted on August 19, 2019 to request a Sacred
Lands File search of the Project site and a 0.5-mile radius surrounding it. The NAHC responded on
September 11, 2019; the results of the Sacred Lands File search were negative.
On September 5, 2019, Melissa Jenkins (Rincon Consultants) conducted a cultural resources field survey
of the Project site. The archaeologist surveyed the area using transects spaced no more than 10 meters apart.
The survey transects were oriented generally in a northeast-southwest direction. The archaeologist
examined all exposed ground surface for the following: artifacts (e.g., flaked stone tools, toolmaking debris,
stone milling tools, ceramics, fire-affected rock), ecofacts (marine shell and bone), soil discoloration that
might indicate the presence of a cultural midden, soil depressions, and features indicative of the former
presence of structures or buildings (e.g., standing exterior walls, postholes, foundations) or historic debris
(e.g., metal, glass, ceramics). Ground disturbances such as burrows and drainages were inspected visually.
Results of the field survey identified no evidence of archaeological remains or historic built environment
resources within the Project site. Ground visibility was excellent (70 to 90 percent) with vegetation
consisting of small patches of grasses and weeds with isolated trees.
Results of the CRA identified no cultural resource within the Project site. Although the findings of the CRA
were negative, a multi-component archaeological site has been identified within the general vicinity of the
Project that contains a prehistoric artifact scatter with an associated historic period refuse deposit, lies along
the Lake Elsinore shoreline approximately 400 feet southwest from the Project site boundary. All of the
other known cultural resources are located at least 0.2 mile from the Project site. Based on these findings,
Rincon recommends a finding of no impact to historical resources and less than significant impact with
mitigation for archaeological resources under CEQA.
Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), signed into law in 2014, amended CEQA and established new requirements for
tribal notification and consultation. AB 52 applies to all projects for which a notice of preparation or notice of
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 144 of 165
intent to adopt a negative declaration/mitigated negative declaration is issued after July 1, 2015. AB 52 also
broadly defines a new resource category of tribal cultural resources and established a more robust process for
meaningful consultation that includes:
• Prescribed notification and response timelines;
• Consultation on alternatives, resource identification, significance determinations, impact
evaluation, and mitigation measures; and
• Documentation of all consultation efforts to support CEQA findings.
On January 29, 2020, the City provided written notification of the Project in accordance with AB 52 to the
following Native American tribes:
• Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians;
• Morongo Band of Mission Indians;
• Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians;
• Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians;
• Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians; and
• Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians.
Of the tribes notified, the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians, the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians, and the
Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians requested formal government-to-government consultation under AB 52.
The City concluded consultation with the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians on April 24, 2020. The City has
not yet concluded consultation with the Pechanga Band and the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians. It is
anticipated that consultation will conclude upon review of this Initial Study and preparation of a Final Initial
Study.
With the incorporation of mitigation measures MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-7, the Project will not cause
a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource, defined in Public Resources
Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms
of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native
American Tribe, and that is: Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources,
or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1 (k). Impacts
will be less than significant with the incorporation of mitigation.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, prepared by Rincon Consultants,
Inc., 9-2019 (Appendix D).
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. Less than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated
Please reference the discussion in Item XVIII.a. With the incorporation of mitigation measures MM-CUL-
1 through MM-CUL-7, the Project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
Tribal Cultural Resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred
place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is: A resource
determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. Impacts will be
less than significant with the incorporation of mitigation.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 145 of 165
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Project Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, prepared by Rincon Consultants,
Inc., 9-2019 (Appendix D).
Mitigation Measures:
MM-CUL-1 Unanticipated Resources. The developer/permit holder or any successor in interest shall
comply with the following for the life of this permit. If during ground disturbance activities,
unanticipated cultural resources are discovered, the following procedures shall be
followed:
1. All ground disturbance activities within 100 feet of the discovered cultural resource
shall be halted until a meeting is convened between the developer, the Project
Archaeologist, the Native American tribal representative(s) from consulting tribes (or
other appropriate ethnic/cultural group representative), and the Community
Development Director or their designee to discuss the significance of the find.
2. The developer shall call the Community Development Director or their designee
immediately upon discovery of the cultural resource to convene the meeting.
3. At the meeting with the aforementioned parties, the significance of the discoveries
shall be discussed, and a decision is to be made, with the concurrence of the
Community Development Director or their designee, as to the appropriate mitigation
(documentation, recovery, avoidance, etc.) for the cultural resource.
4. Further ground disturbance shall not resume within the area of the discovery until a
meeting has been convened with the aforementioned parties and a decision is made,
with the concurrence of the Community Development Director or their designee, as to
the appropriate mitigation measures.
MM-CUL-2 Archaeologist/CRMP. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant/developer shall
provide evidence to the Community Development Department that a Secretary of Interior
Standards qualified, and certified Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA) has been
contracted to implement a Cultural Resource Monitoring Program (CRMP) that addresses
the details of all activities that must be completed and procedures that must be followed
regarding cultural resources associated with this project. The CRMP document shall be
provided to the Community Development Director or their designee for review and
approval prior to issuance of the grading permit.
The CRMP provides procedures to be followed and are to ensure that impacts on cultural
resources will not occur without procedures that would reduce the impacts to less than
significant. These measures shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following:
Archaeological Monitor - An adequate number of qualified monitors shall be present to
ensure that all earth-moving activities are observed and shall be on-site during all grading
activities for areas to be monitored including off-site improvements. Inspections will vary
based on the rate of excavation, the materials excavated, and the presence and abundance
of artifacts and features. The frequency and location of inspections will be determined by
the Project Archaeologist, in consultation with the Tribal monitor.
Cultural Sensitivity Training - The Project Archaeologist and a representative designated
by the consulting Tribe(s) shall attend the pre-grading meeting with the contractors to
provide Cultural Sensitivity Training for all Construction Personnel. Training will include
a brief review of the cultural sensitivity of the Project and the surrounding area; what
resources could potentially be identified during earthmoving activities; the requirements of
the monitoring program; the protocols that apply in the event unanticipated cultural
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 146 of 165
resources are identified, including who to contact and appropriate avoidance measures until
the find(s) can be properly evaluated; and any other appropriate protocols. This is a
mandatory training, and all construction personnel must attend prior to beginning work on
the Project site. A sign-in sheet for attendees of this training shall be included in the Phase
IV Monitoring Report.
Unanticipated Resources - In the event that previously unidentified potentially significant
cultural resources are discovered, the Archaeological and/or Tribal Monitor(s) shall have
the authority to divert or temporarily halt ground disturbance operations in the area of
discovery to allow evaluation of potentially significant cultural resources. The Project
Archaeologist, in consultation with the Tribal monitor(s) shall determine the significance
of the discovered resources. The Community Development Director or their designee must
concur with the evaluation before construction activities will be allowed to resume in the
affected area. Before construction activities are allowed to resume in the affected area, the
artifacts shall be recovered, and features recorded using professional archaeological
methods.
Phase IV Report - A final archaeological report shall be prepared by the Project
archaeologist and submitted to the Community Development Director or their designee
prior to grading final. The report shall follow County of Riverside requirements and shall
include at a minimum: a discussion of the monitoring methods and techniques used; the
results of the monitoring program including any artifacts recovered; an inventory of any
resources recovered; updated DPR forms for all sites affected by the development; final
disposition of the resources including GPS data; artifact catalog and any additional
recommendations. A final copy shall be submitted to the City, Project Applicant, the
Eastern Information Center (EIC), and the Tribe.
MM-CUL-3 Cultural Resources Disposition. In the event that Native American cultural resources are
discovered during the course of grading (inadvertent discoveries), the following procedures
shall be carried out for final disposition of the discoveries:
One or more of the following treatments, in order of preference, shall be employed with
the tribes. Evidence of such shall be provided to the Community Development Department:
1. Preservation-In-Place of the cultural resources, if feasible. Preservation in place means
avoiding the resources, leaving them in the place where they were found with no
development affecting the integrity of the resources.
2. Relocation of the resources on the Project property. The measures for relocation shall
include, at least, the following: Measures and provisions to protect the future reburial
area from any future impacts by means of a deed restriction or other form of protection
(e.g., conservation easement) in order to demonstrate avoidance in perpetuity.
Relocation shall not occur until all legally required cataloging and basic recordation
have been completed, with an exception that sacred items, burial goods and Native
American human remains are excluded. Any reburial process shall be culturally
appropriate. Listing of contents and location of the reburial shall be included in the
confidential Phase IV report. The Phase IV Report shall be filed with the City under a
confidential cover and not subject to Public Records Request.
3. If relocation is not agreed upon by the Consulting Tribes then the resources shall be
curated at a culturally appropriate manner at a Riverside County curation facility that
meets State Resources Department Office of Historic Preservation Guidelines for the
Curation of Archaeological Resources ensuring access and use pursuant to the
Guidelines. The collection and associated records shall be transferred, including title,
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 147 of 165
and are to be accompanied by payment of the fees necessary for permanent curation.
Evidence of curation in the form of a letter from the curation facility stating that subject
archaeological materials have been received and that all fees have been paid, shall be
provided by the landowner to the City. There shall be no destructive or invasive testing
on sacred items, burial goods and Native American human remains. Results
concerning finds of any inadvertent discoveries shall be included in the Phase IV
monitoring report.
MM-CUL-4 Tribal Monitoring. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall contact
the consulting Native American Tribe(s) that have requested monitoring through
consultation with the City during the AB 52 and/or the SB 18 process (“Monitoring
Tribes”). The applicant shall coordinate with the Tribe(s) to develop individual Tribal
Monitoring Agreement(s). A copy of the signed agreement(s) shall be provided to the City
of Lake Elsinore Community Development Department, Planning Division prior to the
issuance of a grading permit. The Agreement shall address the treatment of any known
tribal cultural resources (TCRs) including the Project’s approved mitigation measures and
conditions of approval; the designation, responsibilities, and participation of professional
Tribal Monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; Project
grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation for the monitors; and
treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human
remains/burial goods discovered on the site per the Tribe(s) customs and traditions and the
City’s mitigation measures/conditions of approval. The Tribal Monitor will have the
authority to stop and redirect grading in the immediate area of a find in order to evaluate
the find and determine the appropriate next steps, in consultation with the Project
archaeologist.
MM-CUL-5 Phase IV Report. Upon completion of the implementation phase, a Phase IV Cultural
Resources Monitoring Report shall be submitted that complies with the Riverside County
Planning Department's requirements for such reports for all ground disturbing activities
associated with this grading permit. The report shall follow the County of Riverside
Planning Department Cultural Resources (Archaeological) Investigations Standard Scopes
of Work posted on the County website. The report shall include results of any feature
relocation or residue analysis required as well as evidence of the required cultural
sensitivity training for the construction staff held during the required pre-grade meeting.
MM-CUL-6: Discovery of Human Remains. In the event that human remains (or remains that may be
human) are discovered at the Project site during grading or earthmoving, the construction
contractors, Project archaeologist and/or designated Native American Monitor shall
immediately stop all activities within 100 feet of the find. The Project applicant shall then
inform the Riverside County Coroner and the City of Lake Elsinore Community
Development Department immediately, and the coroner shall be permitted to examine the
remains as required by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b).
Section 7050.5 requires that excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human
remains and that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has
made the necessary findings as to origin. If human remains are determined to be Native
American, the applicant shall comply with the state law relating to the disposition of Native
American burials that fall within the jurisdiction of the NAHC (PRC Section 5097). The
coroner shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours and the NAHC will make the
determination of most likely descendant. The most likely descendant shall then make
recommendations and engage in consultation concerning the treatment of the remains as
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 148 of 165
provided in Public Resource Code Section 5097.98. In the event that the applicant and the
MLD are in disagreement regarding the disposition of the remains, State law will apply,
and the mediation process will occur with the NAHC, if requested (see PRC Section
5097.98(e) and 5097.94(k)).
According to the California Health and Safety Code, six or more human burial at one
location constitutes a cemetery (Section 81 00), and disturbance of Native American
cemeteries is a felony (Section 7052).
MM-CUL-7 Non-Disclosure of Reburial Location. It is understood by all parties that unless otherwise
required by law, the site of any reburial of Native American human remains or associated
grave goods shall not be disclosed and shall not be governed by public disclosure
requirements of the California Public Records Act. The Coroner, pursuant to the specific
exemption set forth in California Government Code 6254 (r), parties, and Lead Agencies,
will be asked to withhold public disclosure information related to such reburial, pursuant
to the specific exemption set forth in California Government Code 6254 (r).
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 149 of 165
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
a) Would the Project 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? Less
than Significant Impact
Water
The Project site, along with the entire City of Lake Elsinore, is located within the water service district
boundary of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). The Project site is not currently
connected to the EVMWD water supply system given its vacant, undeveloped condition; however, as
shown on the Project Plans (Appendix L), EVMWD has an existing 12” water service line west of the
Project site in Lakeshore Drive.
The Project site’s development plan proposes to connect to the EVMWD water supply system. In
conjunction with the Project site engineering effort to date, the Project proponent has contacted EVMWD
and EVMWD has issued a Will Serve Letter (Appendix I3) for the Project dated 12-19-2019.
Connections to local water mains will involve temporary and less than significant construction impacts that
will occur in conjunction with other on-site improvements. In addition, the Project will be required to pay
water connection fees and comply with Water Efficient Guidelines.
Implementation of the proposed Project will not require, or result in, the construction of new water treatment
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant
environmental effects. Given the proposed Project’s relatively small size, any impacts are considered
nominally incremental and less than significant.
Wastewater/Sewer
The Project site is located within the wastewater/sewer service boundary of the EVMWD. The Project site
is not currently connected to the EVMWD wastewater/sewer system given its vacant, undeveloped
condition. However, as shown on the Project Plans, EVMWD has an existing 8” sanitary sewer line located
adjacent to the Project site in Lakeshore Drive.
The Project site’s development plan proposes to connect to the EVMWD wastewater/sewer system. In
conjunction with the Project site engineering effort to date, the Project proponent has contacted EVMWD
and EVMWD has issued a Will Serve Letter for the proposed development dated 12-19-2019.
According to the Will Serve Letter for the Project site, Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District is willing
to provide water & sewer services to the subject Project. It is noted, EVMWD’s ability to serve the Project
site is subject to limiting conditions, such as regulatory requirements, legal issues, or conditions beyond
EVMWD’s control and the “will serve” determination will expire two years from the date of issue (12-19-
2019).
Connections to local sewer mains will involve temporary and less than significant construction impacts that
will occur in conjunction with other on-site improvements. In addition, the Project will be required to pay
sewer connection fees.
Implementation of the proposed Project will not require, or result in, the construction of new wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 150 of 165
environmental effects. Any impacts will be less than significant.
Stormwater/Drainage
As set forth in Section X of this Initial Study (Hydrology and Water Quality), all new development in the
City of Lake Elsinore is required to comply with provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) program, including Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR), and the 2010 Santa Ana
Municipal Separate Sewer Permit (MS4) Permit, as enforced by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality
Board (SARWQCB).
The Project site, in its undeveloped state, has a steady, but steep slope from the southwest to the northeast,
rising from an elevation of 1277’ to 1322’ above sea level.
At present, the Project site is vacant, undeveloped land with a 100% pervious earthen surface. On-site
stormwater runoff currently surface flows in a south-southwest direction towards Lakeview Drive where
an on-site channelized drainage (dirt) carries flows west of the site.
The Project will construct buildings, parking lots, and utility infrastructure. Ultimately, the Project site will
discharge into pipes within Lakeshore Drive.
Pursuant to the City’s Municipal Code, all construction projects shall apply Best Management Practices
(BMPs) to be contained in the Project applicants submitted Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP). The proposed Project will also be required to submit a Water Quality Management Plan
(WQMP) in identifying post-construction BMPs that include drainage controls such as infiltration pits,
detention ponds, bioswales, berms, rain gardens, and pervious pavement. Also, the proposed Project will
be required to submit a drainage study to ensure onsite and offsite drainage is accurately assessed and
sufficient infrastructure is required for construction of the Project. During the grading and construction
phase, the applicant will need to comply with the conditions of approval placed on the Project.
With adherence to the Project-specific WQMP, the proposed Project will not substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area, nor will it require new or expanded off-site storm drain facilities the
construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. Any impacts would be
less than significant.
Electricity
There is no electricity connection currently serving the Project site in its vacant and undeveloped condition.
The Project site development plan which proposes construction of a commercial center that will require
electrical service.
The electrical service provider for the Project site and the greater City of Lake Elsinore is Southern
California Edison (SCE). Overhead electrical service lines are currently in place adjacent to the Project
site along the east side of the Briggs Road right-of-way. Furthermore, electrical services are currently in
place serving the new Heritage High School campus located directly south of the Project site across
Highway 74, at the southwest corner of Briggs Road and Highway 74.
SCE is responsible for providing power supply to the City of Lake Elsinore and the greater Riverside County
area while complying with county, state, and federal regulations. SCE’s power system is one of the nation’s
largest electric and gas utilities and serves approximately 15 million people in 180 incorporated cities and
15 counties, in a service area of approximately 50,000 square miles in size. SCE maintains 12,635 miles of
transmission lines, 91,375 miles of distribution lines, 1,433,336 electric poles, 720,800 distribution
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 151 of 165
transformers, and 2,959 substation transformers.
In 2017, SCE’s power mix consisted of 32% renewable resources, including wind, geothermal, biomass,
solar, and small hydro, 20% natural gas, 8% large hydroelectric facilities, and 6% nuclear. An estimated
34% of SCE’s power mix consisted of unspecified sources of power in 2017, which is referred to by SCE as
electricity from transactions that are not traceable to specific generation sources.
Operation of the proposed Project would consume electricity for building power, lighting, and water
conveyance, among other operational requirements. The Project has been designed to comply with various
federal, state and local energy use regulations including Title 24.
Because the Project has been designed to meet all applicable local and state requirements and represents an
incremental and relatively nominal increase in area wide electrical consumption, the Project would not
result in potentially significant environmental effects from wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy.
Adequate commercial electricity supplies are presently available in Southern California to meet the
incremental increase in demand attributed to the Project. The proposed Project will not require new or
expanded electric power facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects. Impacts will be less than significant.
Natural Gas
There is no natural gas connection currently in place serving the Project site in its vacant and undeveloped
condition. The natural gas provider for the Project site and the greater City of Lake Elsinore is the Southern
California Gas Company (SoCal Gas), also known as The Gas Company.
The proposed Project will be connected to The Gas Company’s natural gas distribution system.
Connections are available in the vicinity and natural gas service is in place to the new Heritage High School
campus located directly south of the Project site across Highway 74, at the southwest corner of Briggs Road
and Highway 74.
Adequate natural gas supplies are available to meet the incremental increase in demand attributed to the
Project. The proposed Project will not require new or expanded natural gas facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. Any impacts will be less than significant.
Telecommunications
Telephone service to the Project site and the greater City of Lake Elsinore is provided by Verizon. Verizon
is a private company that provides connection to the communication system on an as needed basis. No
expansion of facilities will be necessary to connect the Project to the communication system located
adjacent to the Project site. The proposed Project will not require new or expanded telecommunication
facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. Any
impacts will be less than significant.
Based on the above data and analysis, implementation of the proposed Project would not 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. Any impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: Water Quality Management Plan Lakeview Plaza, prepared by Blue Peak Engineering, Inc., 3-
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 152 of 165
24-2020 (WQMP, Appendix I1); Lakeview Plaza Preliminary Hydrology Report, prepared by Blue Peak
Engineering, Inc., 7-22-2019 (Appendix I2); Southern California Edison website; EVMWD Will Serve
Letter, prepared by EVMWD, 12-19-2019 (Will Serve Letter, Appendix I3).
b) Would the Project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Less than
Significant Impact
As previously discussed in Section XIX.a, the Project site is located within the water service district
boundary of the EVMWD which has an existing 12” water line located west of the Project site in Lakeshore
Drive. The Project’s water service plan proposes to connect to the existing 12” zone 1434 waterline west
of the site within Lakeshore Drive and constructed east to Manning Street, then north within Manning Street
to connect to an existing 8” zone 1571 waterline at Ryan Avenue. The proposed on-site water distribution
system includes a series of lines ranging from 2” to 8” serving the proposed commercial uses. No additional
off-site water infrastructure is anticipated in conjunction with the Project site development, as proposed.
EVMWD provides water service to the City of Lake Elsinore, and beyond. The water agency prepares an
Urban Water Management Plan every five years, which identifies historical and projected water usage and
existing and future water supply sources, describes purveyors’ demand management programs, and sets
forth a program to meet water demands during normal, dry, and multiple dry years.
The EVMWD water supply/demand analysis within its service area is set forth in the EVMWD 2016 UWMP
which assesses the District’s ability to satisfy demands during three (3) hydrologic scenarios, including: 1)
a normal water year, 2) single-dry water year, and 3) multiple-dry water years. The supply-demand balance
for each of the hydrologic scenarios within the EVMWD service area was projected for the 20-year planning
period 2015 to 2040. Based on the analysis and conclusions set forth in the EVMWD 2016 UWMP (Sec. 6
System Supplies and Sec. 9 Demand Management Measures), EVMWD will be able to meet 100% of its
demand under all three hydrologic scenarios through the year 2040.
Therefore, sufficient water supplies are available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Any impacts are considered less than significant.
Sources: Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Urban Water Management Plan, prepared by MWH,
7-2016.
c) Would the Project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves
or may serve the Project that it has adequate capacity to serve the Project’s projected demand in
addition to the provider’s existing commitments? Less than Significant Impact
As previously discussed in Section XIX.a, the Project site is located within the wastewater/sewer service
district boundary of the EVMWD. According to the Will Serve Letter for the Project site EVMWD is
willing to provide water and sewer services to the subject Project.
Wastewater from the Project site would be delivered through EVMWD sewer lines to Western Municipal
Water District (WMWD)’s Western Riverside County Wastewater Treatment Plant in Corona.
Sufficient wastewater treatment capacity is available to serve the Project from existing resources and
EVMWD has issued a signed Will Serve Letter for the Project site. As the existing wastewater treatment
provider, EVMWD has adequate capacity to serve the Project’s projected demand in addition to serving its
existing commitments. Connections to local sewer mains will involve temporary and less than significant
construction impacts that will occur in conjunction with other on-site improvements. Impacts will be less
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 153 of 165
than significant.
Sources: EVMWD Will Serve Letter, prepared by EVMWD, 12-19-2019 (Will Serve Letter, Appendix I3).
d) Would the Project 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? Less than Significant Impact
Municipal waste collection services in the City of Lake Elsinore, inclusive of the proposed Project, is
provided by Waste Management, Inc.
The Riverside County Waste Management Department (RCWMD) is responsible for the efficient and
effective landfill disposal of non-hazardous county waste. To accomplish this, the RCWMD operates six
active landfills and administers a contract agreement for waste disposal at the private El Sobrante Landfill.
The Department also oversees several transfer station leases, as well as a number of recycling and other
special waste diversion programs.
As set forth in the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan EIR (December 2011), the solid waste generated
within the City during 2011 was deposited in two landfills: El Sobrante Landfill in unincorporated
Riverside County south of the City of Corona, and Badlands Sanitary Landfill near the City of Moreno
Valley. The El Sobrante Landfill is significantly larger than the Badlands Landfill in terms of size and
capacity. A summary of the two landfill facilities is included in Table XIX-1, Landfills Serving Lake
Elsinore.
Table XIX-1
Landfills Serving Lake Elsinore
Landfill Location
Permitted
Throughput
Capacity, Tons
per Day
Average
Disposal,
Tons per Day1
Remaining
Capacity, Cubic
Yards [Tons]
Estimated
Closing
Date
Badlands Sanitary Moreno Valley 4,000 1,651 14,730,025
[7,851,103] 2024
El Sobrante Corona 16,054 7,260 145,530,000
[77,567,490] 2045
1 Calculated from annual totals (from CalRecycle 2012d) based on 300 operating days per year. Badlands Sanitary Landfill and
El Sobrante Landfill are each open six days per week, Monday through Saturday, except certain holidays.
El Sobrante Landfill
The Project site is located within the service area of the El Sobrante Landfill, a service area that typically
includes the cities/communities within southwestern Riverside County, as well as multiple jurisdictions
within the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino and San Diego.
The El Sobrante Landfill is located approximately twenty (20) miles west/northwest of the Project site in
the unincorporated Temescal Canyon area of Riverside County between the City of Lake Elsinore and the
City of Corona, east of Interstate 15 and Temescal Canyon Road, and south of Cajalco Road, at 10910
Dawson Canyon Road.
The landfill, which is owned and operated by USA Waste of California (a subsidiary of Waste Management,
Inc.) started disposal operations in 1986. From 1986 to 1998, the landfill was operated pursuant to the
original El Sobrante Landfill Agreement, its Amendments and one Addendum.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 154 of 165
On September 1, 1998, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors (BOS) approved the El Sobrante Landfill
Expansion Project, a vertical and lateral expansion of the landfill, and entered into a Second Agreement,
which became effective on September 17, 1998.
The Second Agreement represents a public/private relationship between the owner/operator of the landfill
and the County of Riverside and provides for the Riverside County Department of Waste Resources
(RCDWR) to operate the landfill gate, to set the County rate for disposal at the gate with BOS approval,
and to operate the Hazardous Waste Inspection Program.
The El Sobrante Landfill Expansion Project included the following major elements:
• An increase in landfill disposal capacity to approximately 196.11 million cubic yards or approximately
109 million tons of municipal solid waste;
• An increase in the daily disposal capacity up to 10,000 tons (pursuant to the Second Amendment of the
Expansion Agreement, approved by the BOS in March 2007, and subsequently implemented on August
31, 2009, the daily capacity was increased to 70,000 tons per week, not exceeding 16,054 tons per day
[limited in part due to the number of vehicle trips per day], and a continuous 24-hour disposal);
• An increase in the landfill area to a total of 1,322 acres;
• An increase in the landfill footprint to 495 acres;
• An increase in the hours of operation, allowing 24-hour continuous operations, 7 days a week, for non-
waste functions (i.e., application of daily cover, stockpiling of daily cover, site maintenance, grading,
and vehicle maintenance) and allowing disposal operations from 4:00 a.m. to Midnight.
The El Sobrante Landfill facility currently comprises a total area of 1,322 acres which includes a 495-acre
footprint permitted for landfill operations, and a 688-acre wildlife preserve. The landfill is open 24 hours
per day, six days a week (closed Sundays and Major Holidays). Commercial customers have access 4:00
a.m. to 6:00 p.m., while the general public hours are 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
The operating permit allows a maximum of 16,054 tons per day of waste to be accepted at the landfill, due
to limitations on the number of vehicle trips per day.
In 2010, the El Sobrante Landfill accepted a total of 694,963 tons, or approximately 0.695 million tons of
waste generated within Riverside County. The daily average for in-County waste was 2,235 tons during
2010.
As of January 2011, the landfill had a remaining in-County disposal capacity of approximately 38.506
million tons.
During calendar year 2016, a total of 2,652,941 tons of municipal solid waste was disposed at the El
Sobrante Landfill. Of this amount, 852,987 tons originated from Riverside County sources, and 1,799,954
tons originated from out-of-County sources. El Sobrante received 123,068 tons of Alternate Daily Cover
in the form of cement treated incinerator ash.
Based on 309 working days (362 days minus Sundays and Major Holidays), an average of 8,596 (rounded
to the nearest whole number) tons of waste were received at the landfill on a daily basis in 2016.
The estimated 2017 total tonnage figure is projected to have increased slightly over the 2016 figure, to
approximately 2,700,000 tons or an average amount of approximately 8,738 tons per day (2,700,000 tons
÷ 309 days). This indicates a year over year increase of 1.65% and is substantially below the allowable
disposal capacity of 16,054 tons per day permitted pursuant to the current agreement/operating permit, as
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 155 of 165
amended.
As of the 2007 Second Amendment date, the landfill had a projected 50-year remaining life through 2036;
however, based on 2016 figures, there was 141,192,896 tons of remaining capacity, indicating an
approximate 54-year remaining life before the facility reaches capacity. According to the City GPEIR, the
El Sobrante facility is estimated to have sufficient capacity until 2045.
The State of California evaluates solid waste generation for proposed development projects based on a per
capita generation rate. Accordingly, there are four generation categories depending on land use; Residential
(including both single-family and multi-family projects), Commercial (Retail and Non-Retail),
Industrial/Manufacturing Land Use (Light and Heavy), and Service Sector. The generation factors are set
forth in Table XIX-2, Solid Waste Generation Factors.
Table XIX-2
Solid Waste Generation Factors
Land Use Generation Factor
Commercial Retail 2.5 lbs./ 1,000 square foot (SF)/Day
Source: CalRecycle
Based on the above factors, the Project site development plan is projected to generate an average of 107.8
pounds of solid waste per day, or 39,373.95 pounds of solid waste per year.
Individual development projects within the City of Lake Elsinore are required to comply with applicable
State and local regulations reducing landfill waste by at least 50%; therefore, the Project site is forecast to
contribute 53.9 lbs. (0.027 ton) of solid waste per day for disposal at the El Sobrante Landfill or the
Badlands Sanitary Landfill. This represents a nominal amount of approximately 0.0003% (0.027 ton ÷
8,738 tons) of the estimated average daily solid waste disposed at the El Sobrante Landfill during 2017.
Therefore, development of the Project site, as proposed, would not 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. Impacts will be less than significant.
Sources: City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Environmental Impact Report, (Section 3.16), December
2011; CalRecycle website.
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related
to solid waste? Less than Significant Impact
All land uses within the City of Lake Elsinore that generate waste are required to coordinate with the City’s
contracted waste hauler (CR&R, Inc.) to collect solid waste on a common schedule as established in
applicable local, regional, and state programs.
Additionally, all development within the City of Lake Elsinore is required to comply with applicable
elements of AB 1327, Chapter 18 (California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991), AB
939 (CalRecycle), and other local, state, and federal solid waste disposal standards.
The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) requires every city and county in the
state to prepare a Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) to its Solid Waste Management Plan,
that identifies how each jurisdiction will meet the mandatory state diversion goal of 50% by and after the
year 2000. The purpose of AB 939 is to “reduce, recycle, and re-use solid waste generated in the state to
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 156 of 165
the maximum extent feasible.”
All solid waste disposals within the City of Lake Elsinore are subject to the requirements set forth in Title
8, Health and Sanitation, Chapter 8.28 Litter, and County Ordinance 657, Solid Waste Collection (by
adoption) as provided in the City’s Municipal Code. Ordinance 657 provides integrated waste management
guidelines for service, prohibitions, and provisions of service. The provisions of service require that the
City of Lake Elsinore shall provide for or furnish integrated waste management services relating to the
collection, transfer, and disposal of refuse, recyclables, and compostables within and throughout the City.
The Project site’s development plan would be required to comply with applicable elements of AB 1327,
Chapter 18 (California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991), AB 939, County Ordinance
657 (by adoption), and other applicable local, state, and federal solid waste disposal standards as a matter
of regulatory policy, thereby ensuring that the solid waste stream to the waste disposal facilities is reduced
in accordance with existing regulations.
The proposed Project is required to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local management and
reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste as a standard Project condition of approval. Impacts
will be less than significant.
Sources: City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 157 of 165
XX. WILDFIRE
a) Would the Project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
A wildfire is an uncontrolled fire spreading through vegetative fuels, posing dangers to life and property.
Wildfires can occur in undeveloped areas and spread to urban areas where structures and other human
development are more concentrated. Much of the area to the southwest, west, and northwest of the site is
within the City of Lake Elsinore Sphere of Influence (SOI). These areas support coastal shrub and chamise
redshank chaparral which are prime fuel sources for wildfire. The Project site is located in the suburban
City of Lake Elsinore, situated adjacent northeast of the lake on the northeast side Lakeshore Drive,
approximately one-quarter mile southeast of SR-74 (Riverside Drive) and 1¼ mile southwest of I-15. The
Project site is further identified by its location within the Country Club Heights District. As depicted in the
City’s General Plan EIR, Figure 3.10-2, Wildfire Susceptibility, the wildfire susceptibility of the City and
its SOI ranges from moderate to very high. The steep terrain in areas within the City at its SOI also
contributes to rapid spread of wildfire when one occurs. Based on a review of Figure 3.10-2, Wildfire
Susceptibility, the Project site along with the entire Country Cub Heights District, and virtually all of the
northeast portion of the City of Lake Elsinore extending along Lake Street to Interstate 15 is located in a
Very High Fire Hazard Zone. This is consistent with the findings set forth in the County of Riverside’s
Map My County which states the Project site’s Fire Hazard Classification (Ord. 787) is Very High and that
it is located in a state identified Fire Responsibility Area. The Project site’s high fire hazard classification
is due to the relatively large expanses of open space, sloping topography, and periodic high-velocity wind
conditions through the Temescal Valley.
The 995.2-acre Country Club Heights District (CCHD) is largely comprised of moderate to steeply sloping
hillsides situated between the lake to the southwest and the City’s Business District and Interstate 15 (I-15)
to the northeast. The CCHD topography rises over 250 feet from Lakeshore Drive with predominantly
west/southwest facing slopes cresting just northeast of Sunnyslope Avenue before descending with mostly
northeast facing slopes to Strickland Avenue where it transitions to the Business District approximately
one-mile (1-mile) due east of the Project site and on the opposite side of the hill.
Most of the land within the CCHD is designated Hillside Residential (467.5 acres or 46.98%), followed by
Low Density Residential (301.0 acres or 30.25%). It is also noted that most of this residential acreage
remains vacant and undeveloped due to various development constraints (i.e., topography, older legal-non-
conforming lot sizes, obsolete street design, lack of infrastructure including street improvements, wet and
dry utilities, etc.).
The City of Lake Elsinore contracts with the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD) for fire prevention,
suppression, and paramedic services. RCFD, in turn, operates under contract with the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE). The closest fire station serving the Project site is
CALFIRE Fire Station #10 located at 410 West Graham Avenue approximately 1¾ miles southeast of the
Project site. CALFIRE and the City jointly operate three fire engines and a squad from this facility through
their cooperative-integrated system. Equipment located at Station #10 includes paramedic Engine 10,
Engine 3173, and Engine 3175 (the CALFIRE wildland engines), and Squad 10 (mostly operated by the
Volunteer Firefighters). The CALFIRE engines and a bulldozer operate during fire season.
The City of Lake Elsinore is responsible for developing emergency plans and actions in response to actual
or potential disasters which may impact residents and businesses in the City including but not limited to
earthquakes, wildfires, flooding, and hazardous material spills. The City has recently updated both its
Emergency Preparedness Plan and Local Hazard Mitigation Plan to deal with various emergency situations.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 158 of 165
Construction of the proposed Project has a limited potential to interfere with an emergency response or
evacuation plan during construction. Control of access will ensure emergency access to the site and Project
area during construction through the submittal and approval of a traffic control plan (TCP). The TCP is
designed provide appropriate measures to reduce any construction circulation impacts. The TCP is a
standard condition and is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA. Following construction,
emergency access to the Project site and area would remain as it is in the pre-Project condition.
Once the Project is constructed, permanent emergency access to the Project site will be maintained via two
(2) driveway curb-cut aprons along Lakeshore Drive (including main access point w/ proposed traffic
signal) and a single driveway curb-cut apron along Manning Street, consistent with the City’s traffic
engineering requirements. Additionally, the proposed Project is consistent with the City’s Neighborhood
Commercial land use and zoning requirements. Therefore, the proposed Project would have a less than
significant impact on implementation of the adopted emergency response plan.
All Project elements, including landscaping, will be located with sufficient clearance from the proposed
buildings so as not to interfere with emergency access to, and evacuation from, the site. The proposed
Project is required to comply with the California Fire Code as adopted by the City of Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code.
The Project will comply with all applicable state, regional, and local wildfire safety regulations inclusive
of the California Fire Code, the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, and the City’s Emergency
Preparedness Plan, and will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or evacuation plan, because no permanent public street or lane closures are proposed.
While the Project site is located in a Very High Fire Hazard Zone as depicted on Figure 3.10-2, Wildfire
Susceptibility of the City’s General Plan EIR, based on the preceding analysis, potential impacts related to
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan will be less than significant with the
implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-WILD-1.
Sources: Map My County (Appendix A); Project Plans (Appendix L); General Plan, Section 3.4 Wildland
Hazards; General Plan EIR, Section 3.10, Hazards and Hazardous Materials; General Plan EIR, Figure
3.10-2, Wildfire Susceptibility; City of Lake Elsinore Website – Public Safety, Emergency Preparedness;
and City of Lake Elsinore Website – Public Safety, Fire.
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? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
As set forth in Threshold XX.a, the Project site is located in a Very High Fire Hazard area recognized at
the city, county, and state levels. The wildfire susceptibility of the City and its SOI ranges from moderate
to very high. The steep terrain in areas within the City at its SOI also contributes to rapid spread of wildfire
when one occurs. The Project site is located along Lakeshore Drive at the base of a series of mostly vacant
southwest facing hillsides within the Country Club Heights District, proximate north/northeast of the lake.
The Project site development plan has been designed in compliance with the existing Neighborhood
Commercial zoning and underlying general plan land use designation. A change in land use is not being
requested or applicable. However, the Project will result in the construction of additional structures in a
high fire hazard area. To protect new structures, the proposed Project will be required to comply with all
applicable City fire codes (inclusive of Title 24) for construction and access to the site, and as such, will be
reviewed by the City’s Fire Department to determine the specific fire requirements applicable to ensure
compliance.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 159 of 165
Based on the above, implementation of the proposed Project in accordance with all applicable fire codes
and implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-WILD-1, would not, 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. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant
with mitigation incorporated.
Sources: General Plan, Section 3.4 Wildland Hazards; and Project Plans (Appendix L).
c) 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? Less Than Significant
Impact
Implementation of the proposed Project would widen Lakeshore Drive, reconfigure Manning Street,
provide a new six-inch (6”) fire-service line, and install fire hydrants at locations within the Project area
per City Fire requirements. These improvements would provide increased fire suppression and would not
exacerbate fire risk compared to the existing conditions. The Project would include the installation of
electric power to serve the Project, as well as other utilities (sewer, water, gas, cable), which would be
underground and installed pursuant to the city and utility provider regulations. Underground utilities would
not exacerbate fire risk. Based on this information, impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: Project Plans (Appendix L).
d) 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? Less Than Significant Impact
The Project site is located at the base of a southwest facing hillside along the northeast side of Lakeshore
Drive just north/northeast of Lake Elsinore (the “lake”). In its current vacant condition, the Project site
topography generally rises from its Lakeshore Drive frontage to Ryan Avenue, with a significant portion
near the middle of the site rising upwards of forty (40) plus feet due to the undulating terrain. Upon
completion of grading activities, the improved Project site will have one super pad which will generally be
at or up to three feet above Lakeshore Drive street grade, and a retaining wall will be constructed adjacent
to the Ryan Avenue frontage at the northeast boundary of the Project site.
Lake Elsinore is the largest natural lake (i.e., it does not have a dam) in Southern California with a surface
area varying from approximately 2,790 to 3,000 acres. The lake’s primary water source includes the San
Jacinto River and underground springs, and it is drained by the Temescal Wash and Temescal Creek to the
north. As set forth in the Section 3.9 (Hydrology and Water Quality) of the City’s General Plan, FEMA
prepared a study in 1980 (revised in 1987) that identified potential flood sources in the City including Lake
Elsinore, the Elsinore Spillway Channel, and Temescal Wash. Figure 3.9-1, Hydrologic Resources
indicates the Project site is not adjacent to any of these features. In addition, the Riverside County General
Plan-Elsinore Area Plan (RivCo GP-EAP) states that Temescal Wash, Murrieta Creek, the San Jacinto
River, and Lake Elsinore pose significant flood hazards within the Elsinore Area Plan. Dam failure of the
Railroad Canyon Dam at Canyon Lake would cause flooding in the plan area. The Project site’s finished
elevation would average approximately 1,281 feet AMSL after grading operations are completed. This
compares to an optimum surface level elevation of 1,240 feet AMSL for the lake under the Lake Elsinore
Management Project. This is also the minimum lake elevation goal under a comprehensive supplemental
water agreement between Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District and the City. At 1,255 feet AMSL, the
lake begins to discharge through the outflow channel (located downtown along Spring Street), where it
reaches the Temescal Wash, a tributary of the Santa Ana River Basin. No permanent development
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 160 of 165
(including fences) is permitted below this elevation. Based on the above figures, the Project site’s proposed
finished pad elevation (average ±1,281 feet AMSL) would be approximately forty-one feet (41’) above the
lake’s optimum surface level of 1,240 feet AMSL, and approximately fifteen feet (15’) above the level
where the lake begins to discharge into the outlet channel and Temescal Wash.
As depicted on Figure 3.9-1, City of Lake Elsinore – Hydrologic Resources, of the City’s General Plan and
Figure 10, Flood Hazards, of the RivCo GP-EAP, the Project site is not in a Dam Inundation Area due to
the rising hillside topography associated with the Country Club Heights District neighborhood.
Furthermore, the Project site is not located in a 100-year or 500-year flood hazard zone.
Finally, the Project will create a large superpad with manufactured slopes which would not be expected to
exhibit instability even if the general area experienced a wildfire event. Construction of the Project would
reduce the overall risk of wildfires and related hazards to the site by improving the property, eliminating
weedy vegetation, and installing fire protection improvements including water lines and emergency vehicle
access to all portions of the site.
Based on the information provided in this analysis, the Project would not 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. Impacts would be less than significant.
Sources: Map My County (Appendix A); Project Plans (Appendix L); Figure X-1, FEMA Firmette Map,
provided in Section X of this Initial Study; General Plan, Section 3.0, Public Safety and Welfare; General
Plan EIR, Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality; General Plan EIR, Figure 3.9-1, Hydrologic
Resources; County of Riverside General Plan – Elsinore Area Plan, Hazards – Flooding and Dam
Inundation; City of Lake Elsinore Website – Lake Level; and Google Earth.
Mitigation Measures:
MM-WILD-1 Individual projects implemented pursuant to the Land Use Plan in each District and within
the 3rd Street Annexation Area will be required to demonstrate their avoidance of
significant impacts associated with wildfire hazards through implementation of all policies
under the Wildland Hazards section of the Public Safety and Welfare chapter of the City
General Plan.
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 161 of 165
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following are Mandatory Findings of Significance in accordance with Section 21083 of CEQA and
Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines.
a) Does the Project have the potential to 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? Less than
Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
As discussed throughout the Initial Study, the proposed Project area contains some sensitive biological
resources under the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan for western Riverside County that could
potentially be affected by the proposed Project. All potentially significant impacts to biological resources
would be avoided or reduced to less than significant levels with the implementation of Mitigation
Measures MM-BIO-1 and MM-BIO-2 identified in this initial study as well as design features already
incorporated into the Project.
No previously recorded or potential cultural, tribal cultural, or paleontological resources were found on the
proposed Project site. Further, the site has been previously disturbed, and it is highly unlikely that any such
resources exist. However, in order to provide protection in the unlikely event that cultural, tribal cultural,
or paleontological resources are unearthed during Project construction, implementation of Mitigation
Measures MM-CUL-1 though MM-CUL-7 for cultural/tribal resources and MM-PAL-1 for
paleontological resources will reduce potential impacts to less than significant.
Thus, the proposed Project will not 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, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or an endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory. Therefore, impacts are less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Initial Study
b) Does the Project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a Project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects,
and the effects of probable future projects)? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation
Incorporated
As demonstrated by the analysis in this Initial Study, the proposed Project will not result in any significant
environmental impacts. The Project is consistent with local and regional plans, and the Project’s air quality
emissions do not exceed established thresholds of significance. The Project adheres to all other land use
plans and policies with jurisdiction in the Project area. With implementation of mitigation, the Project will
not cause a significant increase in traffic volumes within the Project area. Therefore, the proposed Project
will not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. Impacts will be less
than significant with mitigation incorporated to address Project-level impacts.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Initial Study
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 162 of 165
c) Does the Project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation
Incorporated
Effects on human beings were evaluated as part of this analysis of this Initial Study and found to be less
than significant with implementation of the following mitigation measures:
• Geological and Soil Constraints MM-GEO-1
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials MM-HAZ-1
• Noise and Vibration MM-NOI-1 and MM-NOI-2
• Wildfires M-WILD-1
Based on the analysis and conclusions in this initial study, the proposed Project will not cause substantial
adverse effects directly or indirectly to human beings. Therefore, potential direct and indirect impacts on
human beings that result from the proposed Project are considered less than significant with mitigation
incorporated.
Sources: Lakeview Plaza Initial Study
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 163 of 165
V. PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED
This section identifies those persons who prepared or contributed to the preparation of this document. This
section is prepared in accordance with Section 15129 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Damaris Abraham, Senior Planner, City of Lake Elsinore
Nick Lowe, Consultant Traffic Engineer, City of Lake Elsinore
Matthew Fagan Consulting Services, Inc.
Blue Peak Engineering, Inc.
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
RK Engineering Group, Inc.
Soil Pacific, Inc.
TJW Engineering, Inc.
VI. REFERENCES
The following documents were used as information sources during preparation of this document. Except
as noted, they are available for public review at the City of Lake Elsinore, Community Development
Department, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530, ph. (951) 674-3124 and on the City’s
website: http://www.lake-elsinore.org/city-hall/city- departments/community-development/planning/ceqa-
documents-available-for- public- review.
1995 Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin (Region 8), Updated June 2019
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/water_issues/programs/basin_plan/index.html
CalRecycle website
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/General/Rates
City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/LakeElsinore/
City of Lake Elsinore, On-Line Services, Public Safety
http://www.lake-elsinore.org/city-hall/public-safety
City of Lake Elsinore Website – Lake Level
http://www.lake-elsinore.org/city-hall/city-departments/community-services/lake-and-aquatic-
resources/lake-level
City of Lake Elsinore Website – Schools
http://www.lake-elsinore.org/residents/places-schools-facilities/schools
Department of Finance
http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/
Elsinore Area Plan
http://planning.rctlma.org/Portals/0/genplan/general_Plan_2017/areaplans/ELAP_041117.pdf?ver=2017-
10-06-094258-763
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD)
http://www.evmwd.com/
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 164 of 165
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Urban Water Management Plan
http://leapshydro.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Urban-Water-Management-Plan-2016.pdf
General Plan EIR
http://www.lake-elsinore.org/city-hall/city-departments/community-development/planning/lake-elsinore-
general-plan/general-plan-certified-eir
General Plan
http://www.lake-elsinore.org/city-hall/city-departments/community-development/planning/lake-elsinore-
general-plan
Google Earth
https://www.google.com/earth/
Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC)
http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/LakeElsinore/
Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD)
https://www.leusd.k12.ca.us
Lakeview Plaza Energy Conservation Analysis, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., 2-11-2021
(Appendix E)
Lakeview Plaza Preliminary Hydrology Report, prepared by Blue Peak Engineering, Inc., 7-22-2019
(Appendix I2)
Lakeview Plaza Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Study, prepared by Rincon
Consultants, Inc., 7-28-2020 (Appendix B)
Lakeview Plaza Commercial Development Utilities and Service Systems Study, prepared by Rincon
Consultants, Inc., 9-2019 (Appendix M)
Lakeview Plaza Project Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by TJW Engineering, Inc.1-7-2020 (Appendix
K1)
Lakeview Plaza Project MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment, prepared by Rincon
Consultants, Inc., 9-25-2019 (Appendix C)
Lakeview Plaza Project Noise and Vibration Study, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., 7-9-2020
(Appendix J)
Lakeview Plaza Project Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-
2019 (Appendix D)
Map My County 3-10-2020 (Appendix A)
Paleontological Resources Evaluation for Lakeview Plaza, City of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County,
California, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-26-2019 (Appendix G)
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Lakeview Plaza, prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., 9-23-2019
Lakeview Plaza – Initial Study/MND
Page 165 of 165
(Appendix H)
Project Plans, 12-2019 (Appendix L)
Public Resources Code
https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/public-resources-code/
State of California, Department of Finance, E-1 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State
— January 1, 2018 and 2019
http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-1/
Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report, prepared by Soil Pacific, Inc., 2-13-2019 (Appendix F)
Southern California Association of Governments Final 2016 RTP/SCS, Demographics & Growth
Forecasts Appendix
http://scagrtpscs.net/Documents/2016/final/f2016RTPSCS_DemographicsGrowthForecast.pdf
Southern California Edison website
https://www.sce.com/about-us/who-we-are
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis, City of Lake Elsinore, prepared by TJW Engineering, Inc.8-26-
2020 (Appendix K1)
Water Quality Management Plan Lakeview Plaza, prepared by Blue Peak Engineering, Inc., 3-24-2020
(Appendix I1)
LAKESHORE DR RYAN AVE
SKY LINE DR
LAKE VIEW AVERIVERSIDE DRSUNNY SLOPE AVE
KANSAS STIOWA STLASH AVE
DEMPSEY AVER
O
S
E A
V
E
ILLINOIS STNEBRASKA STFOSTER ST
COWELL STLOCUST AVEWASHINGTON ST HOWL
ETT AVEG E N T Z S TWISCONSIN STBEVERLY AVE
BUTTERS AVEMANNING STIOWA STILLINOIS STLAKESHORE DR RYAN AVE
SKY LINE DR
LAKE VIEW AVERIVERSIDE DRSUNNY SLOPE AVE
KANSAS STIOWA STLASH AVE
DEMPSEY AVER
O
S
E A
V
E
ILLINOIS STNEBRASKA STFOSTER ST
COWELL STLOCUST AVEWASHINGTON ST HOWL
ETT AVEG E N T Z S TWISCONSIN STBEVERLY AVE
BUTTERS AVEMANNING STIOWA STILLINOIS STPlanning Application No. 2019-63APNs: 3 75-092-002 thru 00 6VICINITY MAP
PROJECT SITE
´
RYAN AVE
LAKESHORE DR
LAKE VIEW AVE SKY LINE DR
MANNING STIOWA STBEVERLY AVENEBRA SKA STMANNING STIOWA STSource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, U SDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS UserCommunity
RYAN AVE
LAKESHORE DR
LAKE VIEW AVE SKY LINE DR
MANNING STIOWA STBEVERLY AVENEBRA SKA STMANNING STIOWA STSource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, U SDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS UserCommunity
Planning Application No. 2019-63APNs: 3 75-092-002 thru 00 6AERIAL MAP
PROJECT SITE
´
U/
g
132' "
T.
I
. TE
PARCEL
0.79 AC
RETAIL -1
10,000 S.F.
FF= 279.50
I
The Lakeview Plaza
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 378544
LOT 14-17 APN NO. 375-092-002,003,004,005 &006
LAKESHORE DRIVE
LAKE ELSINORE, CA
P R. R0. LA LAGUNA
(PO . SEC. 1 T.6S. R.F
N52 25'44"W 913'
310' m
RETAIL -2 I Q
301'
RYAN NE --
T. E, I
V-
~ 0 W
Q (0I
15,600 S.f. (total building) oo D a 00 RETAIL -3 � m 0000 I
FF -281.00 V- Q N 14,040 S.F. (total building) = `V M
V) L FF=284.00 L� g I
aI D'
tA EL
® ® 1.49 AC �®
_► I � � � � � � � , Tei. .iTr .. .
gFsm i I
I 1 1 t lMENT woo
\SIGNU(TYP.)
"
MOW
'doom 0010
_ —
293, _ _
N —
z _
40 20 0 40 80
SCALE. 17-40'
0
0
�I I
g PARCEL 4 "
® 0.48 ACRETAIL-4 0'
RESTAURANT "D"
® 3,480 S.F.
FF= 285.50 ® I
was _
15
_ _
_
amp 40000
—� mop
— =--
5'
_
— 4- DOtr
f
s ON
z I�I
o _-- — ADD
�o —
�'Z
O7 RE D
E SH
9/65,6
AX
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
_ R
M V THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS.
PARCEL NO. 1.
THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 14 OF LAKESHORE DRIVE ADDITION, IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 9, PAGES 65, 66 AND 67 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS.
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK, 227.99 FEET NORTHWESTERLY OF THE MOST
EASTERLY CORNER THEREOF, THENCE SOUTH 26. 45' WEST, 123.88 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE COUNTY
ROAD AS NOW LOCATED THROUGH SAID BLOCK, THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ON THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID COUNTY
ROAD, HEAD TO NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ON SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE TO THE
MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK, THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY 72.18 FEET, ON 7HE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID
BLOCK TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL NO. 2.
THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 15 OF LAKESHORE DRIVE ADDITION, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE 1N BOOK 9, PAGES 65, 66 AND
67 OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS, LYING NORTHEASTERLY OF 7HE COUNTY ROAD AS NOW LOCATED THROUGH SAID
BLOCK,
PARCEL NO. 3.
THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 16 OF LAKESHORE DRIVE ADDITION, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 9, PAGES 65, 66 AND
67 OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS, LYING NORTHEASTERLY OF 7HE COUNTY ROAD, AS NOW LOCATED THROUGH SAID
BLOCK,
PARCEL NO. 4.
THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 17 OF LAKESHORE DRIVE ADDITION, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE 1N BOOK 9, PAGES 65, 66 AND
67 OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS, LYING NORTHEASTERLY OF 7HE COUNTY ROAD AS NOW LOCATED THROUGH SAID
BLOCK,
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTHWEST 250 FEET THEREOF; AND
PARCEL NO. 5.
THE SOUTHEAST 100 FEET OF THE NOR7HWEST 250 FEET OF BLOCK 17 OF LAKESHORE DRIVE ADDITION, AS SHOWN BY MAP
ON FILE IN BOOK 9, PAGES 65, 66 AND 67 OF MAPS, 1N THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
PARCEL NO. 6.
THE SOUTHEAST 100 FEET OF THE NOR7H WEST 150 FEAT OF BLOCK 17, OF LAKESHORE DRIVE ADDITION, AS SHOWN BY
MAP ON FILE IN 800K 9, PAGE 65, 66 AND 67 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
TE
LAKE ELSINORE
VICINITY MAP
N.T.S
EASEMENTS:
EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL
THERETO AS RESERVED IN A DOCUMENT,°
RESERVED BY 7EMESCAL WATER COMPANY
PURPOSE: ALL DITCHES PIPELINES AND OTHER APPARATUS FOR THE
DISTRIBUTION OF WATER FOR DOMESTIC AND IRRIGATION.
RECORDING DAIS: JUNE 11, 1908
RECORDING NO.: IN BOOK 263, PAGE 282, OF DEEDS
AFFECTS. SAID LAND
TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS
375-092-002
375-092-003
375-092-004
375-092-005
375-092-006
OWNER
AB GROUP
70 QUARTER HORSE
IRVINE, CA 92602
DEVELOPER
AB GROUP
70 QUARTER HORSE
IRVINE, CA 92602
Cl VIL ENGINEER
BLUE PEAK ENGINEERING
18543 YORBA LINDA BLVD. 1235
YORBA LINDA, CA 92886
714-749-3077
SOURCE OF WATER SUPPLY
A 12" WATERLINE WILL BE CONNECTED TO EXISTING 12" ZONE 1434
WATERLINE WEST OF THE SITE WITHIN LAKESHORE DRIVE AND
CONSTRUCTED EAST TO MANNING STREET, THEN NORTH WITHIN MANNING
STREET TO CONNECT TO AN EXISTING 8" ZONE 1571 WATERLINE AT RYAN
AVENUE.
METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL
SEWER LATERALS FROM THE SITE WILL BE CONNECTED TO AN EXIS71NG 8"
SEWER MAIN ALONG THE SITE FRONTAGE ON THE SOTHERLY SIDE OF
LAKESHORE DRIVE.
GROSS AREA
AREA (AFTER STREET WIDENING) 174,162 S.F.
ZONING
PRESENT ZONING
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (C-1) ZONE
COMMERCIAL OFFICE (C-0) ZONE
PROPOSED ZONING
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (C-1) ZONE
LAND USE
PRESENT LAND USE
VACANT LAND
PROPOSED LAND USE
RETAIL, RESTAURANT
DRAWING ISSUE RECORD
DATE DESCRIPTION
REVISION RECORD
NO. DATE DESCRIPTION
PROJECT NAME
PROFESSIONAL SEAL
SHEET TITLE
TEN TA TI VE
PARCEL MAP
SHEET NUMBER
1 of 1
DATE. 12/1/19
N
f--
0
g
132' "
T.
I
. TE
PARCEL
0.79 AC
RETAIL -1
10,000 S.F.
FF= 279.50
I
The Lakeview Plaza
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 378544
LOT 14-17 APN NO. 375-092-002,003,004,005 &006
LAKESHORE DRIVE
LAKE ELSINORE, CA
P R. R0. LA LAGUNA
(PO . SEC. 1 T.6S. R.F
N52 25'44"W 913'
310' m
RETAIL -2 I Q
301'
RYAN NE --
T. E, I
V-
~ 0 W
Q (0I
15,600 S.f. (total building) oo D a 00 RETAIL -3 � m 0000 I
FF -281.00 V- Q N 14,040 S.F. (total building) = `V M
V) L FF=284.00 L� g I
aI D'
tA EL
® ® 1.49 AC �®
_► I � � � � � � � , Tei. .iTr .. .
gFsm i I
I 1 1 t lMENT woo
\SIGNU(TYP.)
"
MOW
'doom 0010
_ —
293, _ _
N —
z _
40 20 0 40 80
SCALE. 17-40'
0
0
�I I
g PARCEL 4 "
® 0.48 ACRETAIL-4 0'
RESTAURANT "D"
® 3,480 S.F.
FF= 285.50 ® I
was _
15
_ _
_
amp 40000
—� mop
— =--
5'
_
— 4- DOtr
f
s ON
z I�I
o _-- — ADD
�o —
�'Z
O7 RE D
E SH
9/65,6
AX
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
_ R
M V THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS.
PARCEL NO. 1.
THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 14 OF LAKESHORE DRIVE ADDITION, IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 9, PAGES 65, 66 AND 67 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS.
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK, 227.99 FEET NORTHWESTERLY OF THE MOST
EASTERLY CORNER THEREOF, THENCE SOUTH 26. 45' WEST, 123.88 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE COUNTY
ROAD AS NOW LOCATED THROUGH SAID BLOCK, THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ON THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID COUNTY
ROAD, HEAD TO NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ON SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE TO THE
MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID BLOCK, THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY 72.18 FEET, ON 7HE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID
BLOCK TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL NO. 2.
THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 15 OF LAKESHORE DRIVE ADDITION, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE 1N BOOK 9, PAGES 65, 66 AND
67 OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS, LYING NORTHEASTERLY OF 7HE COUNTY ROAD AS NOW LOCATED THROUGH SAID
BLOCK,
PARCEL NO. 3.
THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 16 OF LAKESHORE DRIVE ADDITION, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 9, PAGES 65, 66 AND
67 OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS, LYING NORTHEASTERLY OF 7HE COUNTY ROAD, AS NOW LOCATED THROUGH SAID
BLOCK,
PARCEL NO. 4.
THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 17 OF LAKESHORE DRIVE ADDITION, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE 1N BOOK 9, PAGES 65, 66 AND
67 OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS, LYING NORTHEASTERLY OF 7HE COUNTY ROAD AS NOW LOCATED THROUGH SAID
BLOCK,
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTHWEST 250 FEET THEREOF; AND
PARCEL NO. 5.
THE SOUTHEAST 100 FEET OF THE NOR7HWEST 250 FEET OF BLOCK 17 OF LAKESHORE DRIVE ADDITION, AS SHOWN BY MAP
ON FILE IN BOOK 9, PAGES 65, 66 AND 67 OF MAPS, 1N THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
PARCEL NO. 6.
THE SOUTHEAST 100 FEET OF THE NOR7H WEST 150 FEAT OF BLOCK 17, OF LAKESHORE DRIVE ADDITION, AS SHOWN BY
MAP ON FILE IN 800K 9, PAGE 65, 66 AND 67 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
TE
LAKE ELSINORE
VICINITY MAP
N.T.S
EASEMENTS:
EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL
THERETO AS RESERVED IN A DOCUMENT,°
RESERVED BY 7EMESCAL WATER COMPANY
PURPOSE: ALL DITCHES PIPELINES AND OTHER APPARATUS FOR THE
DISTRIBUTION OF WATER FOR DOMESTIC AND IRRIGATION.
RECORDING DAIS: JUNE 11, 1908
RECORDING NO.: IN BOOK 263, PAGE 282, OF DEEDS
AFFECTS. SAID LAND
TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS
375-092-002
375-092-003
375-092-004
375-092-005
375-092-006
OWNER
AB GROUP
70 QUARTER HORSE
IRVINE, CA 92602
DEVELOPER
AB GROUP
70 QUARTER HORSE
IRVINE, CA 92602
Cl VIL ENGINEER
BLUE PEAK ENGINEERING
18543 YORBA LINDA BLVD. 1235
YORBA LINDA, CA 92886
714-749-3077
SOURCE OF WATER SUPPLY
A 12" WATERLINE WILL BE CONNECTED TO EXISTING 12" ZONE 1434
WATERLINE WEST OF THE SITE WITHIN LAKESHORE DRIVE AND
CONSTRUCTED EAST TO MANNING STREET, THEN NORTH WITHIN MANNING
STREET TO CONNECT TO AN EXISTING 8" ZONE 1571 WATERLINE AT RYAN
AVENUE.
METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL
SEWER LATERALS FROM THE SITE WILL BE CONNECTED TO AN EXIS71NG 8"
SEWER MAIN ALONG THE SITE FRONTAGE ON THE SOTHERLY SIDE OF
LAKESHORE DRIVE.
GROSS AREA
AREA (AFTER STREET WIDENING) 174,162 S.F.
ZONING
PRESENT ZONING
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (C-1) ZONE
COMMERCIAL OFFICE (C-0) ZONE
PROPOSED ZONING
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (C-1) ZONE
LAND USE
PRESENT LAND USE
VACANT LAND
PROPOSED LAND USE
RETAIL, RESTAURANT
DRAWING ISSUE RECORD
DATE DESCRIPTION
REVISION RECORD
NO. DATE DESCRIPTION
PROJECT NAME
PROFESSIONAL SEAL
SHEET TITLE
TEN TA TI VE
PARCEL MAP
SHEET NUMBER
1 of 1
DATE. 12/1/19
NORTH375-092-002-6, 375-092-003-7, 375-092-004-8, 375-092-005-9 and 375-092-006-0 Lot 17
Updated 12/01/2019
° ° °
°
5
5
223
223
223 6
SECTION 9.0, TABLE 18, (MIN. REQ.)...........222 STALLS
16
207 STALLS
Updated 12/31/2019
S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N THELAKEVIEWPLAZAS I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N S I G N
The Lakeview Centre LLC
LAKEVIEW PLAZA
Corner of Lakeshore Drive. & Manning Street, Lake Elsinore, California
Lake Elsinore, California
2019.12.18
LAKEVIEW Centre LLC LAKEVIEW PLAZA Site Context
0 50 100
Graphic Scale
200FT
North
Lakeshore DriveLakeshore Drive Manning StreetManning Street
Lake Elsinore, California
2019.12.18
LAKEVIEW Centre LLC LAKEVIEW PLAZA Aerial View
Lake Elsinore, California
2019.12.18
LAKEVIEW Centre LLC LAKEVIEW PLAZA View At
Lakeshore Drive
Looking East
Lake Elsinore, California
2019.12.18
LAKEVIEW Centre LLC LAKEVIEW PLAZA View At
Lakeshore Drive
New Intersection
Lake Elsinore, California
2019.12.18
LAKEVIEW Centre LLC LAKEVIEW PLAZA View At
Lakeshore Drive
Looking East
Lake Elsinore, California
2019.12.18
LAKEVIEW Centre LLC LAKEVIEW PLAZA View At Top
Rayan Ave R.O.W.
Looking South