Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT RAMSGATE f 1 I �l FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL I IMPACT REPORT FOR THE RAMSGATE SPECIFIC PLAN FIRST AMENDMENT l I IPrepared for: City of Lake Elsinore 1 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, California 92330 l Contact: Gary Thornhill Prepared by: Michael Brandman Associates, Inc. 2530 Red Hill Avenue ` l Santa Ana, California 92705 J (714) 250-5555 Contact: Dan Bott Tom E. Fitzwater, AICP - � December 1989 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-1 1.1 Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-1 1.2 Project Environmental Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-2 1.3 Project Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-7 2 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2-1 2.1 Purpose of the Supplemental EIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2-1 2.2 Supplemental EIR Focus and Effects Found Not to Be Significant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2-2 2.3 EIR Participants . . . . . . . .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2-3 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-1 3.1 Location and Boundaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-1 3.2 Project Background and Previous Approvals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-1 3.3 Project Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .3-1 3.4 General Plan Consistency . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-2 3.5 Phasing . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-6 3.6 Mitigation Monitoring Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .3-7 3.7 Discretionary Actions. . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-7 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS, PROJECT IMPACTS, MITIGATION MEASURES, CUMULATIVE IMPACTS, AND UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS .. . .. . . . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-1 4.1 Earth Resources . . . .. .. . . . . . . .4-1 4.2 Hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... .. . . . . . 4 . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .4-5 4.3 Biological Resources. . . .. . .... .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .4-10 4.4 Traffic .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ... . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-19 4.5 Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... .... . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-34 4.6 Population and Housing . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-42 4.7 Cultural Resources . . . . .. ... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-44 4.8 Aesthetics and Open Space Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-47 4.9 Public Services and Utilities .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .4-50 5 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-1 5.1 No Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-1 5.2 Primary Alternative . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-2 5.3 Reduced Residential Density. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-9 5.4 Increased Residential Density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-11 i JBX/709EIOlA2t TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Section Page 6 LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT . . . . . . .6-1 6.1 The Relationship Between Local Short-Term Uses of Man's Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-T,-.m Productivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6-1 6.2 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes That Which Would Be Involved in the Proposed Action Should It Be Implemented . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6-2 6.3 Growth-Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Project. . . .. . . . . . . .6-2 7 ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .7-1 7.1 Lead Agency . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7-1 7.2 Public Agencies . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7-1 7.3 Private ^Danizations . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .7-1 8 LIST OF EIR PREPARERS. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . .8-1 9 REFERENCES CITED. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9-1 Appendices A. Notice of Preparation and Responses; Initial Study B. Soils and Geology Report C. Hydrology Report D. Stephens' Kangaroo Rat Report E. Federal and State Regulatory Process F. Traffic Report G. Noise ii JBX/709EI01A2t LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1-1 Project Land Use Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-1 4-1 Active/Inactive Faults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-3 4-2 Existing Hydrological Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > . . . . . . . > . , . —. 4-7 4-3 Hydrological Conditions With the Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-8 4-4 Cumulative Hydrological Impacts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-10 4-5 Existing Intersection Capacity Utilization and Lane Geometries. . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-22 4-6 Traffic Generation Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-23 4-7 Project External Traffic Generation . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-24 4-8 Daily Link Volume Calculations for the Project . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . .4-25 4-9 Existing-Plus-Project Intersection Capacity Utilization and Lane Geometries, Without Improvements .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-27 4-10 Existing-Plus-Project Intersection Capacity Utilization and Lane Geometries, With Improvements. . ... . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-28 4-11 External Trips Generated by Other Developments. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .4-30 4-12 Future Intersection Capacity Utilization and Lane Geometries, WithImprovements. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-32 4-13 Existing Roadway Noise Levels . . . . ... . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .4-37 4-14 Existing-Plus-Project Roadway Noise Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-38 4-15 Cumulative Roadway Noise Levels. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-41 4-16 Existing Fire and Emergency Medical Services 4-52 4-17 Daily Water Usage . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-54 4-18 Lake Elsinore Unified School District Generation Rates . . . . . . . . . . .4-60 4-19 Electrical Demands. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-63 4-20 Natural Gas Demands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .4-65 5-1 Daily Water Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-6 5-2 Electrical Demands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .5-8 5-3 Natural Gas Demands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-8 JBX/709EI01A2t LIST OF EDITS Follows Exhibit Page 3-1 Regional Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-2 3=2 Adopted Statistical Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-2 3-3 Revised Statistical Summary. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-2 3-It Adopted Land Use Plan . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-2 3-5 Land Use Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .3-2 3. 8 Adopted Circulation Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-2 3-7 Circulation Plan . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-2 3-8 Phasing Map .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-6 4-0 Grading Concept.. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-4 4-1 Hydrology Map. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-6 4-2 Stephens' Kangaroo Rat Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-14 4-3 Ramsgate Circulation Map . . . . . . . . .4-20 4-4 Existing Number of Through Travel Lanes and Intersection Controls. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-20 4-5 Existing Daily Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-20 4 3 Level of Service Description .. . . . ... . .. . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .4-20 4-7 Existing Evening Peak-Hour Turning Movement Volumes . . . . . . . . .4-22 4-8 City of Lake Elsinore General Plan . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-22 4-9 Riverside County General Plan Circulation . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-22 4-10 Typical Cross Sections, Riverside County Plan of Streets and Highways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-22 4-10a Link Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . ... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-24 4-11 Project External Traffic Distribution . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-24 4-12 Existing-Plus-Project Daily Traffic Volumes . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .4-26 4-13 Cumulative Project Map . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-30 4-14 El Toro East External Traffic Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-30 4-15 Canyon Lake Hills External Traffic Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-30 4-16 Lake Elsinore Heights External Traffic Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-30 4-17 Dexter Avenue/Central Avenue Retail Site External Traffic Distribution . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-30 4-18 Dexter Avenue/Second Street Industrial Site External Traffic Distribution . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .4-30 4-19 Collier Avenue/Chaney Street Industrial Site External Traffic Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-30 4-20 Collier Avenue/Central Avenue Industrial Site External Traffic Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-30 4-21 Collier Avenue/Riverside Drive Industrial Site External Traffic Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-30 4-22 Spyglass Ridge Tract 22905 External Traffic Distribution . . . . . . . .4-30 4-23 Future Daily Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-30 4-24 Circulation Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-34 4-25 Noise-Land Use Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-34 4-26 65 CNEL Contours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-38 4-27 Aesthetic Treatments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-48 4-28 Water Concept Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-54 4-29 Sewer Concept Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-58 iv JBX/709EI01A2t i rl ~� SECTION 1 1.1 PROPOSED E%ECUTIVE SUMMARY PROJECT The proposed project is the first amendment to the adopted Ramsgate Specific Plan. The Ramsgate Specific Plan area is loca'::d in the City of Lake Elsinuf e, on the south side of State Route 74, 1 mile east of Interstate 15. ` The proposed amendment involves a reconfiguration of existing land uses, a decrease of residential units, an increase of open space, a redistribution of planning area acreages, a refinement of the existing circulation plan, and a clarification of policies contained within the currently adopted specific plan. The proposed land use plan for the site consists of the uses outlined in Table 1-1. The proposed amendment proposes to decrease the project's overall density from the existing 2.5 units to 2.4 dwelling f units per acre. TABLE 1-1 PROJECT LAND USE SUMMARY Acre (AC)/ Proposed Use Dwelling Units (DU) jResidential 896 AC/2,850 DU Commercial 39 AC (net 37 AC) Parks/Open Space 205 AC Schools 20 AC Roads 30 AC Total: 1,190 AC/2,850 DU Previous approvals for the site allowed for 2,975 residential units, 39 gross acres of commercial use, and 205 acres of open space and recreational use. This amendment would reduce the number of allowable dwelling units by 125. .J J13X/709EI01A2 An initial study for the proposed project was prepared in August 1988. This study identified earth resources, hydrology, biology, noise, population and housing, cultural resources, aesthetics, and public services as issues with potential significant impacts. Th:�,a issues are addressed in this environmental impact report (EIR). 1.2 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL SUMMARY The following table is a summary of the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project, a summarization of measures that would mitigate project impacts to the extent feasible, and the unavoidable adverse impacts of the project after the application of mitigation measures, including significant unavoidable impacts, if any. A complete inventory of mitigation measures for the project follows the environmental summary. The significance of each impact before mitigation is indicated by the following abbreviations that parenthetically follow the summary description of impact: S = significant impact after implementation of mitigation measures, as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15382 and NS = impact that is not significant according to the State CEQA Guidelines. An asterisk (*) follows mitigation measures that have been proposed by the applicant for incorporation into the project. 1-2 JBX/709EIO1A2 G O O 4- O CO) bo f O > 4' O rc, .E7E wo � Y � ocoE-a CD cis d aJ px ° 47aC , 'o r �+" vl O > +' U y d > �+ � Cl ° 'd Cd G 4U1 E •v 0 ,ao ooN 'naiocao e0 ul Cl Ca ci C� OWN C1 r '" .r0, r +. ad ° aJ C— C .— w O 0 cq �i r C• c>d aJ E +� ° C 3 r E ea a0 C E a > O � cti ° Ld EV. a � � .o E to a ax ZCL.� bo Q'+ Octianwa. 3 ... o w O .� 'O a7 �' ad C >, C O d O cti C� w ov E EEC, CL E `� ° n, ° acd,d 1' +' oUc a`i °'� a, 0 _E � rn G,'� w d OM bo0 G � n .0 >,Q C.° co E a O � c � 3 � ao aw � � E3 � C yr E N n � �E E ao ° ao� 3o co a) ow � ,�4M 1-4°°nv ° U `� co� v o ox ° CD 4-4 cn O O �°+ 'O v G G o o .E v o a v v o > ° coo 0 o > ,? °an � .0 > .j N ° � � CO 3 � oa A ° 4' ao .o + E a) � fa, -E, 4.4 -. o C r = o ac > ° ca .- NrA 0 00 Oy � aai pC� E CL,huD 3 "" ti cn vOi r .`� C 094 C p, bO EroE r CL r �o W Q°i r E-4 N rn .n w co 0 fs, G W o 3 C2 r e. GC C r cwF, I G� 1" 4-4 `n A ad rn v va .,. mow ° (D moo ° � a a� .E � .., � Z ra 2 E ro ro bow a � , , •o •E � boo � mac °' �, .oa O b4 O ado O •O O 4-4 cd 'a ° 4-A O a O O .o o e. rn n+ a 4 to U • '-E rtia •�, 4 i U4 oa a va 5 -r, °� Egt aM , o ad aho � CdCLr «, ad ° a� • oF, > p ,n E 14 gl ... > 0 0 ° •p O w F O v Rc7 E +0, r cti •^ a) O 0 ° ° 0 O OHN CL w cd C N 'w w o '3 wC7 ter' o w °' o � �; c ud C> d ,o C A r0Or •0u a rN ad W 0 0 ra 41 ' 0 o � i�1 @ E an ad A Z a c cO rn d �v 1 r 1 1 .-a w w i w O 'C a) 'O O O •C O O W by W O cd Fes' Qi y ,� Wr dy W 3w y W E 3 '0 v y 'C •p 0 cd y v y r O � G' C > c .a', � a ° � � .E v A ... b E rn :a a p, bo 0 4-4 c. ... O C 'd cd °� v C w W PC • vw 3 °' � C v o . eW. Co ��a � par•1 r � 34-6 02 0 � C � •�� 0 ,� .°i ° Cv W a O A' cd 0 0 O C 0 C C cd N •N 0 eO, 0) 'G •f. C V Ga� �+ AV O W — a s Ga E-4 a G y r a s. cd Ca.— r w r 0 ° GC1 O � 9 ° °C C p E y fl y0E U C V > � c E bn C > ° G v — O C •� W W cd O ` y p y Cd U 0 W � E y Cs W W v, °� � � by r a+ pia P4 ad Os Wwrn W. NW +�' E �� .- D &E aa) ba O � 3 �� � ,d y 0 0 ° .c wy 0Ei °ul oraw nF•� Wr� ry 3 E a) .- C w O g- a O tiO co Oai d °r ty W ^ O 0 �C W 4-1 [-1 aoFbo0 cd Sp � 'd� waiI cN G y N O c aW W rl r � , 'd W M� .. y W O 'o W y ,a),•s. da W C 07 W y W c, > 0 C �' C O O • W r r .� O y b0 R. r C. W r 10 F .0y o' eQ cr who Fo � aaCde°� a ox c 0 ,. a o. W W E � •a0ba eo m � W Ea aCi �>°c. a �c � ra0e) ° b to c!� . ra � °w � 1-4v d a .d �"' w d aim 0 V •.- O W a °v '° cn E a c •d y C 3 +-' b0 O p Z a> r ad W W 3 d, � e� " > q 0 w M da O C c, 0 y W ems. '0 W N a O � � � w ,k) 134- '3 aCi � �w co a Qi ... U W 9-4 •� O d: y a N O a' k r rn p a) a) W W eq bo b .,. y v aCd [ Wo4-6 a+ 0 00 .oa ... E ' oopOE oo i y a p W W ... a) ,W y k o o r3RW,, � 'v '® v� Z =-.4 0 h° 3 � 'vim a°' a � W •o w y w 0 .3 O — y �r r �' W w M \ ° O cn W.� r C $ .. O �W, C C " 0 C 'JC V .� C ° > O E ai C CL a W Cd p cd iC y 44 °F. 0 � N W N W .? W a W CL > o •a a) a) W > W �, C4 0 E .� v F EEF 010 3y 00,448 4- G I C 1 .•+ C 1 1 to c ° a O o (1.9 o Ey v.. O � a. 3 3 •p +' c a'of a� E °' � °' cd U O eo r 'o bo cd iW.l F `� ,n,w c �,:,, m o,w w m +°•' ;d w bo pA o • o a V E c w •v u o �' 93U ac4r � � °� acdc ° '" o0 c 0V ccrE war_ .. ... c °' E .•, cd oy cd C 0 _N ° 0 y W c tw Q, 0 0 E �+ C.c. C. O CL O 'd O O a) a c o � � �; ° o •v E o a) U o � CL C) ^ N ti �'N W U O cam. w y n E- x E ep W N N p C O .Cd acla C a+ v S b E'' .•°-' +a•d `oU•° d E •^ i ° o a, a OV > c c � Cd a�ov > ° a0� oa do cd ° � � � o u>i c ' 94 � o ' er � o c Cla E Now v 4 w C 3 c cd 0 Ei o ^ c r r 0 4- 'c c 0 Cao p,� m E ad4--Ca Ca ya 4) Cd y E ° o jai o � m .- rn4) yaI. zEA p. EEac.' � to) Ems ' .4ca gg rrn �O 4- .., 'rn V1 ClJ E c0 y w � •p � � � cd V y O O y � ° o ca � c4na 3 Aad acdo p a a) N a+ J � a) QQ (n C ^ >+ o sE. c '(U a °cd o W c. > C: aU bD rnOa � cm o oan � � andw °y W � p � w Ey rn aU Z p v 30 � z > �cdUcd rw mow O O O 00 � O > O tip > a w #� d 0 ad 0 ;- , V � w, [ Z ai oF (U aobo °r. A c. ° y � cd0 rn o 0 •� c. � y y a o • ; }' •E a' (U V 'd '° v- E n en �, z y a� .E ... p�, o 0 U c E-1 CL y w E v a� c) au E ° o F a � C) a ca (u co x E� o o .- 0 a °p, U Ems- 3: (D "a � F v > wF a Cd m ° m cd ° bo m ° � 4-4 PC Q �� � cis Z� �1 (� �. •y °eo 90 •y a0 a � Ey p, as a, u w A ` ad � it ca z Cd + O '0 F-4 +'0 0 cd 'p Lei r p Rom. .�d+ cd y 0 y CIScti y A ' p4 r- 0 � O c 44 C >+4� f+ >> d 4+ •O O C O b0 4) w N 4a 0 1 O R C . 0 .c cd 0 y .p w eN•d �° a Q' O O y r U A. Cl 1 �i r G c. O , a0 U C b r O `� 3 cd y Qp v y .�, � boo. 4� q �•� y � y ;; w Cd �. •o c �» 4.. A 0) °° 3 > ° E'' `� W � C .c .0 4) 4) y y 0 � � O •.- > 0 0 •p O> .0 `z y rn r Go r w a '. r .- C+ r d O N c e. r .� 94 4) A CL +j p, 4) �, ,� W 3 ° E~ cd �0 p Q '� C7 .� O O r c r .0 cd G'r d r v r 3 4) � O N .- cd d 4� N a. O O v m E E 4) r E..D A r w r CL N 04 V 3 U ca ' 'd ad .d. E. a9 x a a� cd ° o ... a) o '> y E» 'v 94 a� ° CL r y tw .. r cd ,.a Q W 0 4-4N o. C W v Q' " a. ... a •i4 4- 0 0 4.. C O •a' >% O � t., G V or- R. O v � 0 0) ,= v E .., e. v E� wE a ` ° "= oe � Ad ao. � ° E- 4�4 y E•4 wa", aed E a ° did ° 4o ° cam o �+ a O ti o 0 o r +� O � cd 'd a°. tri o 4) � eO, p, Oo .0 y r 'p 4) 4-; cd ad a ° � °o cL aw 4"i as m°o 0 0 C :.. ... o cq Aw ad a� �' cd 0y Ei r Cd >, 04 °' ` $ p� rr �' � •3 err '� , y 0 CO a>i � �' ay ° fir. � v •v P7 y Es' cd 0.0 4) °� E; cd y yti .o ad c� a w ° c a ° > � ad F. � a > 'a o c o b o b may° z [ GJE � lead aVEy � ac y ac •y ac A � I � � ° ai .o Co ° ac�'i, 0ad ° ac�'i ' G ep, r p ti a p V. 4 a C c� > ao (uc > adaaicd > w o 04y � � y � y d O °' a c O °' °' c O a' °' c z .R A r z E . + z .e .E r —4 .4 O a, 0 O � Ox O Nr b0C o 4 a V] > y y M Lbw 'O r.. P 3 r LL C]e O Y c. r O ~° d a� r 41 N 94 E o O b 7, a C � oa) o 0400 � �. � .G � 7 > E-F M 3 °� °� E p CL e. CL a+ a7 N N z ul N G Qe O : ° CL d � ~" — rA �+ p m N p a � E a > to 0 aQ � r�o, � aoi - Cr G_air > � a � ~'", ppq� 0 r E '0 .p Ni p a G °^ •a 0 •� .W cd:° rx a) ,EarE-4 co o a > E b a 8 a > > v c p r p o M C'lCd ad o cd ba CO N N °0,a G ,d 0 cd a, � a a0V aio d Ec +� a a Cd Cd ° - a a o o e� E4 ad a3 o Wp 7 p+ bo o � q cry 'read C7 y ° cao ei 1-4 cd ; �, CL'a r p 04 0." r 5 ° w 'c .4a o mar. CD ... co C Ld a) w +� 303 W ,� Lam. .V r y an C ° w � ti U � coo a p r-+ C 'O a P.� o > V d a a oF 04 Vo. o. E .. A 7 , 7 0 U U a) C ..., .ca C 7 C O O �' d .r, cti W 4— cb z m yv 0 v s >+ Rai C y Z a) U O ai O In a o Via c . 0 O O ° ' a � •y orrCR C�aiy o � 3 >� 0oEC? • a 0 �' aO0 . wa+ a � cy .G —4 E" Q'i 4-4 � o 96-4 O C � 0.4 Cd a pN ° •a c, p�,a �l u, •y �° 'v3wa.3n,o � vwcad - E W F, . U2 x ,r° a0 W Or O C. .O 0 U =�, 'L. w •o 94 CL a) cd O C4.0 r r r Co dp W , s, a) C U E Cd •.• Cd 02 a V a) G y bo o r°, aJ C y v 'C a y ay v Ncj r v W .0 C •� U d •� CO x O -4 a "a wU •0a� eyNCdV oa ° � � a ate' � '� o > W 3 a $, 4.0 c , r ° 'o 3yE &4a > Cd E acdUO O y'd °xco °a `~ yo wo r U ° cd d cv eC, 41 O O �' N co cd m' y > O a O CO C w (D co r r O �' � 3 �' a) a a) > — c� Gacrd •3w +j 94-4 O G 4� 4r Qa O r ^ U 0-4 O a) �� Er n w LO O o V) . CL� r. O W U CL z V3 a ebb p�7 o c E-F Q a� 0 U r9 x a U, > w � •> oWo v� - a� Cr7 C7 R' r G V e, I. o 'a ^" c0 rn C 'C C ;n f. >e'C V >+ U, >+ W C N �+ C� a O O +-' c' bf) C '0 • > bo O d O O C � O O o ^' E .� �; O v > 7 O v3OOE •0rnco CAS U w N �0 d o y N y O F E w vCL Oi L 'G v°, y `d z cco ti W 7 >, o 3 y r '� O w r >' e0. a) C C `n cn R3a a� y °o v � a) � U2 a� Er C ' N w 3 c» o ` v�1 c, �; � °',° ocv3 �, � °' oov .dya0ovv, � o3 �a3 '� y Up,vE'' Opw+, •p�. �°, � y °3 a E94 0cd ' CNdvOa a•Ca>° ) - v 94 aCviPa � 'cNd °a a b0 ao aCEw� aCC� •'voav) c � o o o e 0 `dC w3 oo3 �o Od q-0 Cc� ^, ° c U) " ) � O C, C) O ., > S. a)e. � a a) E •p c. a) 4) N 3 3 3 r c• 'C a) r E i a) bo o � � ° ECa, rW ) aF ado ° °o a a) ° M14 3 0 (U cd 0 � v v v`di ° r a v o o .� ''' °�' ar' � ° � E � � .� '`�' M S4.coao � E u vea o � M E w r w a O O � O 4 y y ° c ti V E bo 3 > V O C O O C w 0+ N94 e9 •d ai nr Cd a c, cr' eq 4-1 ,O V W v, M ° () C A bo x 4 a) � y w V 7 0 C � aE a' Coo ID cd s� C a r r, b •r-, 'ova ° >94 A CL q-, C 0 � a 'C7 0 .o o 4) 3 0 Cd a) cd ri A'. 'a E a) y >+ C4- r 'ovr-, •y OCd ° cd �� O v 'v bo 0 C.O Cl. va, O r O °d 4) O a = 00 O C ao a) a. CoLo E 3 E ai •°CM v, a E y rn r .'�. N N O F •30CE aV- u � o � ocaw Car w o b w �+ v O C, a) � a) a F o C o E4 r C o0 U x o b cd O ai •d '� W � v rs a C b Ew � N r ^ C) N (D t� N >>"a I c '--I >> R. N w O c. V a a 0) 4c� p VC > r � ry > Ova ° 4 C N ad ��x1 rix�d � ° r— :° r� � •� ovy °V 'c .�O co1= Eo � 3 - � O4 � r O M 4) � o ° C N 3 �� ci vE oc V4) >� 3 C p V o O N �p oN C > O rE > g. V N QE,aSimoc.' Ri a o CdE Nvi N y r prv) v arC 4l d v 03 �co cCd O� rdA — N .0 OCd 0)y r C N CL 4) C C ad 'C N ti C ~ N C N ... F+ .0 Ua OC4 c�yL .G•. .�° "p � caNa13 0 ya" 4) +� �F;, E+•~ N a N co F cr 3 V ' a>>•ti o °vOCi4) . v N S. - C mOE o ° N4) ry co ho O �° O C a) e. Cr 4M a V C CL y w p r x Cd r. r O V ,� O N a CO 0 10 V y e. >+ E 'd O a C [- r 'O N C +' Q C C V +-' O VaV VyNCO •O•E.'o r., .N GL N C E O eN G p�'�3 N 3p -0d) ti •d) CO . Ca r°Nv '� rV MV 41 d) ' O .2v t. y N , NR C d C t Op p_,y > y • Cypp p p 9.4 CD 9Cd 0 V O 04 0l >$ p V V �, C 4 + Ui- CN4 C N vN >f 4-4 o 3 °od e0 o am Cam.) 0 CL C N y N baW a M O p, +� .. r4-1 C � a 0 ch pac� N 'O e, bo pct � o a � A - r 3 C corA y Ea) p Ea) •° 5-4y 4- � M V Cd O a O O a C. .0 r V N d r �r O .�i i.r r •C A F c �i [-4 O OE�•� 'a P-2 V rl � 7, yrrr -- w r e, w r C C .0 cd c C Z C O cd " 0a o y C a� C� O C eOn cVCn] ,ad .� , .= .y c E- OO 4- C W C4 a o �O U 3 .,.•C°.a.i O N b0 r O O r Cd++ W r Cr �7 a0 Q � r45 cd Cd 7+,��' eC�� cti O y 0 a^ O r C G � a ,G 0 0 0 ba y � � NE" G � � b � � r � C a a .CCL ry+ cd 0aay � Cdeo °� cc 00 r 0 o '� 'r>O Cd0 ..0 �o t '�+ a r. �••� E � •�~O� `�' v �• x� d�d roC ++ .CN y •vCO- O t4 sr pm 'O Cd rd z, pd v O C W .�N _� E �b0 O (D Cd C O V ' Cd _ ° �> � rco a " vaO3 0o v 4 C Q -4 v4-4) iM ° ° 0-W o e n °V C) 0' � . 41 'G aa sO aad � r 0 O °d O o z o0 O a� r y a C1 r •^ A � 0 � ay W O O cd O N bo rn a O d r C7 0 v 9 Fa O � ti d 4 a to a °o E C E bl) U x r aa x H r a °' a r SECTION 2 INTRODUCTION 2.1 PURPOSE OF Aril: SUPPLEMENTAL EIR This supplemental EIR has been prepared to address the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed first amendment to the adopted Ramsgate Specific Plan (June 1984). In conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA Public Resources Code 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Administrative Code 15000 et seq.), as amended, this EIR considers individual and collective impacts related to the City of Lake Elsinore approval of the proposed project. This document analyzes the environmental effects of the project to the degree of specificity appropriate to the current proposed actions, as stated in Section 15146 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Additionally, the analysis considers the series of actions that may occur over the project's lifetime, to determine the immediate and long-range impacts associated with its implementation. Previous documentation related to the proposed project includes the Ramsgate Specific Plan Final EIR, April 1984 (SCH No. 83071309). That EIR is hereby incorporated into this EIR, as allowed by Section 15149 of the State CEQA Guidelines. The EIR process requires the preparation of an objective, full-disclosure document to: (1) inform agency decision makers and the general public of the direct and indirect environmental effects of a proposed action, (2) provide mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate potential adverse impacts, aid (3) identify and evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed project. An effort has been made during the preparation of the draft EIR to contact affected agencies, organizations, and persons who may have an interest in this project. This included the circulation of a notice of preparation (Appendix A) on August 21, 1988, that began a 30-day public comment period. Agencies who did not respond to the notice of preparation will have an opportunity to respond during the review period for the draft EIR. 2-1 JBX/709EI01A2 2.2 SUPPLEMENTAL EIR FOCUS AND EFFECTS FOUND TO NOT BE SIGNIFICANT An Initial Study of the proposed project was prepared by_the City of Lake Elsinore in accordance with Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Appendix A). The Initial Study identifies environmental issues that would, or could, be significantly affected by the proposed project, and those that would not be affected. Several of the environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project pose no greater level of impact than those identified in the adopted specific plan or those addressed and mitigated in the previously prepared EIR. Therefore, these issues and impacts require no further analysis. Environmental issues determined to not be significant by the city as a result of the Initial Study, and therefore in need of no evaluation in this EIR (consistent with Section 15063(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines, as amended), include: • Air. The previously prepared EIR for the adopted Ramsgate Specific Plan adequately addressed and mitigated air quality impacts. The proposed project would not increase the overall intensity of the adopted project. Air quality impacts are anticipated to remain the same level of significance. • Land Use. The proposed project would not increase the Ramsgate current overall intensity, or introduce any new types of land uses. The proposed project is consistent with the city's General Plan and with the intent of the currently adopted specific plan. No land use impacts are anticipated other than those considered and mitigated in the previously prepared EIR. • Natural Resources. The previously prepared EIR adequately addressed and mitigated natural resource impacts. The proposed project would not result in an increase in natural resource impacts. • Risk of Upset. The project's Initial Study does not identify the risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident as a potential impact. The previously prepared EIR considered risk of upset impacts. • Human Health. The human health impacts of the adopted project were adequately addressed in the previous EIR. The proposed project would not result in an increase in human health impacts. 2-2 JBX/709EIO1A2 The Initial Study for the project did identify potential significant impacts associated with earth resources, hydrology, biological resources, traffic, noise, population and housing, aesthetics and open space resources, cultural resources, and public services vnd utilities. Impacts were also identified for recreation and light and glare. Recreation (parks) impacts are discussed in the public services and utilities section, and light and glare impacts are discussed in the aesthetics and open space resources section. 2.3 EIR PARTICIPANTS The analysis in the EIR has been prepared in conformance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines (as amended). The City of Lake Elsinore is the lead agency for the EIR; the project applicant is L.D. Johnson Company. Project engineering was provided by Webber Land Engineering. Environmental consultation for the EIR was provided by Michael Brandman Associates and the traffic analysis was conducted by Kunzman Associates. 2-3 JBX/709EIOlA2 SECTION 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 LOCATION AND BOUNMI.-Mir S The Ramsgate Specific Plan area is located in the City of Lake Elsinore in Riverside County, California. Lake Elamore is approximately 25 miles south of the City of Riverside, and 40 miles east of the Los Angeles metropolitan area. The project is located on the south side of State Route 74 and is 1 mile east of Interstate 15. The regional vicinity of the project site is shown on Exhibit 3-1. 3.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS APPROVALS The proposed project is the first amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan. The e11Trent Ramsgate Specific Plan was adopted by the Lake Elsinore City Council in June 1984. An EIR (SCH No. 83071309) was prepared to address the environmental impacts related to implementation of the specific plan. The area covered by the adopted Ramsgate Specific Plan consists of 1,190 acres and provides for 2,975 dwelling units, 37 acres of commercial use, and 114 acres of open space. The project's overall density is 2.5 dwelling units per acre. 3.3 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS The proposed specific plan amendment involves a reconfiguration of existing land uses, a decrease of residential units, an increase of open space, a redistribution of planning area acreages, a refinement of the existing circulation plan, and a clarification of policies contained within the currently adopted specific plan. Additionally, the proposed amendment would decrease the overall density of the project to 2.4 dwelling units 'per acre. Exhibits 3-2 and 3-3 provide statistical summaries of the adopted and amended specific plan. 3-1 JBX/709EIO1A2 The proposed amendment requires modifications to the project's land use and circulation plans. Portions of the land use plan have been redesignated, with changes in land use configurations and intensities of development. Exhibits 3-4 and 3-5 show the adopted and amended land use plans. Except for the adjustment of existing alignments, the revised circulation plan maintains the arterial highway, secondary highway, and commL:..ty collector alignments indicated in the adopted circulation plan. However, a proposed second crossing of Wasson Canyon has been added to provide an additional means of access to Neighborhood 3 and allow the elimination of utility services from the Wasson Canyon open space area. The proposed crossing would be in a portion of Wasson Canyon planned for drainage improvements. These drainage improvements were accounted for in the adopted Ramsgate Specific Plan. Other revisions to the circulation plan occur within the southern portion of the site where the residential loop roadway has been expanded. Exhibits 3-6 and 3-7 show=tb- adopted and amended circulation plans. 3.4 GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY The Ramsgate Specific Plan implements applicable sections of each of the Lake Elsinore General Plan elements within the project site. The specific plan is intended to be supportive of, and consistent-with, the goals and policies of the General Plan. The following is a discussion of the relationship of the Ramsgate Specific Plan to the various General Plan elements. General Plan Policies Specific Plan Conformance Land Use Element • To establish and maintain a • A mix of residential, commercial, balance of land uses throughout recreation, and open space uses the community. has been planned. • To recognize the importance of • The land use mix recognizes the land uses in determining the importance of an enhanced quality quality of life and its effect on of life and its effect on the the environment. environment. 3-2 JBX/709EI01A2 LOMA BER NARDINO INDA REDLANDS YUCAIPA Z GRAND COUNTY Q� TERRACE RIVERSIDE RIVERSIDE COUNTY, A Ac O �o a NORCO FW m m yec5`�e SUNNYMEAD BEAUMONT P` to CORONA HOME Lake GARDENS GLEN °'a Perris VALLEY 0 V 'gay� Lake LAKE VIE W °0 Mathews Ct� ,N PERRIS JA NT PROJECT SITE O Florida Ave HEMET Canyon TRASUCO JP Lake OAKS 'Lj� Lake Elsinore P.N.7NE101 Regional Map Ramsgate Specific N,nh Q 2.5 5 MILES Plan First _`4tmend ment Exhibit 3-1 f STATISTICAL SUMMARY un USE NEISI110RN001 OW 111� a11 no NEIaa m ran W" PlIA1114 hum ►W.IN am WAW 1 2 1 TOTAL 4 3 TOTAL A 7 1 TOTAL TOTAL ®IDWAL (OU/AC.1 RESIDENTIAL (0.0-2.01 OU 0 0 .100 -.0 200 730 730 RANCNES/ESTATES AC 0 0 143 2A8 227 /11 W RESIDENTIAL (2.1-A.O1 OU 100 IN 123 323 0 ISO ISO 477 HILLSIDE AC 32 27 9I 144 0 43 43 1" RESI'MITIAL (4.1-12.01 0J 20 AO 31 140 423 SAS 0 890 SAROEN MOUES AC 33 17 32' 29 SO 79 0 131 IIIESIMITIAL (12.l-20.0! OU 0 A00 A00 0 A410 VIUaGEHOMES AC 0 59 39 0 S7 RESIDENTIAL (12.1-32.01 00 24 2A0 0 C 2A0 APAIIINEMTB/COM005 AC U. 12 0 0 12 TOTAL RESIDENTIAL OO An IAO 123 910 740 427 1163 200 500 200 900 21" AC 79 44 93 211 n 30 131 143 313 227 WS 1039 COrQCIAL COI NTV CENTM AC 1 7 7 7 0 14 NEWWORHOOD CENM AC 23 .23 0 0 23 TOTAL COINKIAL AC 7 23 0 30 7 0 7 0 0 » 0 0 37 WVA SPACE .—�-- PUBLIC COM1110-i11AN AC I l9 20 24 11 37 37 37 114 TOTAL OPEN SPACE AC 0 1 19 20 24 11 37 37� 0 0 37 114 TOTAL PIWECT ACM AC 41 Al 114 218 119 U 182 200 313 S7 740 1190 OR$ SMOOL AChEABE TO IE OE7W1K11 DN AN AS NEEDED NIL F.N.7MI01 Adopted Statistical Summary (IIJNL7 Midr1 Ber��A��e Ramsgate Specific Plan First Amendment Exhibit 3-2 TABLE 2 RAMSGATE SPECIFIC PLAN-FIRST AMENDMENT STATISTICAL SUMMARY Gross Dwelling Average Acreage Units Density RESIDENTIAL Very Low Density 0.5 du/ac and greater 222 ac 20 du 0.1 du/ac Low Density 72 ac 59 du 0.8 du/ac 0.5 - 3.7 du/ac Hillside Med. Low Density 293 ac 950 du 3.2 du/ac 3.8 - 6.0 du/ac Medium Low Density 104 ac 390 du 3.8 du/ac 3.8 - 6.2 du/ac Medium Density 187 ac 1,181 du 6.3 du/ac 6.3 - 12 du/ac High Density 12 ac 168 du 14.0 du/ac 12.1 - 20 du/ac Apartment Density 6 ac 82 du 13.7 du/ac 12.1 - 24 du/ac Total residential 896 ac 2,850 du 3.2 du/ac NONRESIDENTIAL Commercial 39 ac Park/Recreation 30 ae . Open Space 175 ac School 20 ac Roads (Ramsgate Dr.) 30 ac Total nonresidential 294 ac GRAND TOTAL 1,190 ac 29850 du 2.4 du/ac Revised Statistical Summary Ramsgate Specific Plan LM01 First Amendment '"'�E bi ADOPTED M.NOt�AY V I '+_' .:�i..�.l PARK +Yc�sor s**r>r. i A C_ PARK IQ1^� LEGEND I iY .:.................::.•. ;:�. S �i RESIDENTIAL o.o-zo Du/acnE RESIDENTIAL 1 — 21.60 DU/•1CRE I II QRESIDENTIAL / 6.1.12.0 DU/%CRE FA RESIDENTIAL I �\ 121.200 DU/ACRE I I B 1 RESIDENTIAL I I II II 12.1-12.0 CWrct• NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL I fly F �-NOT ------------ 1 I L/ I GENERAL COMMERCIAL "a'OrdT------------ E � 7--7 .1V/ REFERS TO PLANNING AREA NUMBER hL. 1 I PU PIIS BLIC/SEMa- LJC OPEN SPACE ASSOCIATED WITH STATISTICAL SUMMARY ; 1 . POTENTIAL SCHOOL SITE THE COMMUNITY OF PAMSGATCEXHIBIT H- 1 BUTTERFIELD DEVELOPMENT CORP P.N.709E101 3/2 9/8 4 Exhibit 3-4 RIVERSIDE REE ••�;• : •r.F•. Ff •,`_':::::•• . .'� .• .I r C r f• f i C• • • • •I _ rs�: • ...�. i . � y`. r tiY� r `..f f•�. I ,M LEGEND RESIDENTIAL 0.5- GREATER DU/AC RESIDENTIAL 0.5-3.7 DU/ACRE RESIDENTIAL 3.8 DU/AC 0 RESIDENTIAL 3.8-6.0 DU/AC . • . • • • . .:'.l`;:''..:,'. 8 . . . . . . . . '\ . . . . . I ::'•:::_..' RESIDENTIAL 6.1-12.0 DU/ACRE i RESIDENTIAL. 12.1.20.0 DU/ACRE I` RESIDENTIAL 12.1-24.0 DU/AC ® PUBLIC PARK © COMMERCIAL J OPEN SPACE RIDING AND HIKING TRAIL t-�• '-• 1 ® SCHOOL SITE 1 ]"NEI PN.709SP01 �lidud&vdmanAnnaavta Land Use Plan Amended Ramsgate Specific Plan N,�h - 0 800 1600 FEET 1 Exhibit 3-•5 ADOPTED_ i I I , I ! ILp' � r- I I ' ` I I I , , I ' I , , , I �1 I LEGEND I I ARTERIAL HIGHWAY I O+ywwr 14) SECONDARY IKfWAY 0'Nwmm erwtl COWAAC Y COLLECTORAwn"m Wye) I I RESDEMTIAL COLLECTOR ' Momfe Loop) ! I , I iESDEMIAL STREETMA"UfMY I I I ' TYPICAL RESDEMIAL ACCESS —'-----'_--'—" 1 THE COTM OF EXHIBIT J PAMSGATE: E9 BUITERFIELD DEVELOPMENT CORP '�.,...o• ,.... F P.N.709E101 Exhibit 3-6 I�) I � 74 i RIVERSIDE ST 5 P ' 4 2 I 7 Legend \,j Arterial Highway I _J Secondary Highway with Median I 8 Secondary Highway Residential Collector _- P.N.709E101 �❑�� �tid�acl HranJman.�rkiam Circulation Plan Ramsgate Specific .„rii, 0 9 0 1800 FEET Plan First Amendment Exhibit 3-7 General Plan Policies Specific Plan Conformance Land Use Element (continued) • To ensure that adequate public 0 Public services and facilities are services are provided in a timely planned to support the community and adequate manner. in a timely manner. Ci.aulation Element To provide for safe, fast, and • The circulation plan is consistent efficient movement of people and with the city's circulation plan goods within Lake Elsinore and and the county's Master Plan of between Lake Elsinore and other Arterial Highways providing an parts of the region by an inte- appropriate transportation net- grated system of streets, free- work for development in the ways, public transit, and other specific plan area. transportation facilities. IEnvironmental Resources Management Element • To ensure the long-term viability The significant drainage courses of the community's natural and habitat areas will be pre- biological environment. served as open space, promoting long-term viability of the community's natural, biological environment. • To preserve the sense of open • The significant drainage courses space and important scenic and and hillsides that will be pre- visual resources. served as open space will ensure the continuance of important scenic and visual resources. • To enhance the economic poten- * This is not applicable to the tial of the area's natural specific plan area. resources. e To protect and preserve existing a This is not applicable to the agricultural activity and areas specific plan area. with prime agricultural lands. A To protect and enhance natural • Wasson Canyon, the site's primary resources having recreational drainage course, is planned as an value to the planning area. open space corridor with a trail providing access for recreational purposes. 3-3 JBX/709EIOlA2 General Plan Policies Specific Plan Conformance Environmental Resources Management Element (continued) • To provide a system of public • A system of public and private parks, riding and hiking trails, and parks, riding and hiking trails, and outdoor recreational facilities natural open space areas provide a the` not only preserve significant diversity of recreational opportu- areas of natural beauty for citizen nities for the community, and the enjoyment, but also serve the city will ensure the preservation needs of the citizens in their im- of significant environmental mediate environments. This sys- resources. tem is to be augmented by private outdoor recreation facilities that are compatible with the goals and objectives of the public system. • To provide incentives for the • This is not applicable to the maintenance and restoration of specific plan area. -t-Itural and historic resources in the city and planning area. • To prohibit construction of • This is not applicable to the intense urbanized uses in areas of specific plan area. geologic or seismic hazard. • To prohibit construction of • The specific plan responds to the intense urbanized land uses in topography by providing lower areas of moderate to steep slopes. density and open space uses in the hilly areas, and more intense uses in the gentler terrain. • To prohibit construction of • Wasson Canyon, the primary intense urbanized uses in areas of drainage course, has been planned potential hydrologic hazards. as open space. • To restrict construction of strut- • Fuel modification zones with ap- tures in areas susceptible to wild- propriate fire protection measures land fires, while assuring the are planned for all sections of the availability of adequate fire pro- specific plan area that abut devel- teetion in existing and newly opments. urbanized portions of the planning area. • To assure the availability of • Adequate police protection has adequate police protection. been planned. 3-4 JBX/709EIOlA2 General Plan Policies Specific Plan Conformance Noise • To establish and support a coordi- • Setbacks and other noise mitiga- nated program to protect and tion techniques are planned to improve the noise environment in respond to development in the the city. specific plan area. Community Design Element • To create the highest order of • The specific plan components are visual continuity and functional provided to further enhance the compatibility among the various visual aspects, and are functional physical and historic components and compatible with the physical of the Lake Elsinore community. and historical components of the Lake Elsinore community. • To protect the scenic character- • Development along Highway 74 is is-tics of local roads, especially planned to respond to its scenic scenic routes. highway designation on the county's Master Plan of Arterial Highways. Housing Element • To recognize the existing housing • - The specific plan provides a vari- needs of current residents. ety of residential types responding to the housing needs of the community. • To actively assist private devel- • The specific-plan is a cooperative opers in identifying and preparing effort between the city and L.D. land suitable for housing develop- Johnson Companies to provide ment. suitable housing to the community. • Maximize use of all housing • This is not applicable to the speci- rehabilitation programs. fic plan area. • To encourage energy conservation • The specific plan promotes energy and environmentally sensitive site conservation and environmentally planning, construction, and rehab- sensitive site planning, construc- ilitation techniques. tion, and rehabilitation techni- ques. 3-5 JHX/709EI01A2 General Plan Policies Specific Plan Conformance Housing Element (continued) • To encourage public and private • The diversity of housing types efforts to eliminate all forms of proposed in the specific plan will discrimination in housing. meet the various needs of the community residents, encouraging the elimination of all forms of discrimination in housing. 3.5 PHASING The Ramsgate Specific Plan shall be implemented in two phases (see Exhibit 3-8). The timing of the two phases are dependent upon future areawide needs and market conditions. Therefore, the phasing plan for Ramsgate will be phased with required entitlements rather than specific dates. PHASE 1 Phase 1 of Ramsgate consists of two'construction parts. Part One involves the grading of Planning Areas 1 and 2, and the partial grading of Planning Area 3. Planning Area 3 will be partially graded in this first part to serve as a construction staging area.for heavy equipment. The portion of Highway 74 fronting Ramsgate will be improved along with the required undergrounding of public utilities. Ramsgate Drive and required associated public utilities will be improved from the entrance of Ramsgate through Planning Area 2. No certificate of occupancy permits will be issued in Planning Areas 1 and 2 without the above stated improvements to Highway 74 and Ramsgate Drive in conjunction with the required public utilities to adequately service proposed uses in both planning areas. Part Two involves the grading of the remainder of Planning Area 3 and all of Planning Areas 4 and 5. Ramsgate Drive and its required underground public utilities will be improved from Planning Area 3 through Planning Area 5. 3-6 JBX/709EIO1A2 lA y RIVERSIDE STREE i :'iiY? I � •:l :Ff rri: c+t ;i?r ?t 1 riftfie : ::i::•iYff ?ia�++�tf r� la 7.. rir: F: :r`•.Ctf+:u:. .Hrti?'if: jif.;;riftigrtri ??+ii i?++f:7? ••:::::::: i l ::r• �.t.� ::i ?riff.«7ti%• :.:.:..:ir+i `. ...• : r r•t '•ry++iu:'�$:fti5i'r•r.: rff..Z.....�?+':! 37ffe 3k'.•'•'yf?e:: :t§a. •;yuf,4:furf: lfrac •::i f. �� �it7..?rr?` ::L':::::::::::::::: • ?:?i+�u•::•i Hif:fr ••r... :•u:• .rrtra r• :�,F u r ••.•.••.••.•.• ...F..u•,?ri.+Y rr;.;ir .'.;..a?:?:ifr ,h Fa�. r„�.y :•�•.• %off+ff^3 yy::•.ff .•u 3.'r ..:+. :fur}'z'• u• :r•'?.'ii:�?.?:4:r:':7�• ,it;+i..•.:•,:•,.•t ;inyY,...?.,�,7tui{i' N�F,a??°::"• fh`�f?ff,,.+ui ;:fri: •.:::::'� :�:: ;.:r. ';hF rrffti%! r 7y + '• :�:� .r1f.� g•zf. ..r. ..:.. ;ru:33f?S.f:::'fifri":het.+fffrf:n�:?r.�'t�'r+ih. ? •f:f ::a'f r t,)�d7.7fe .:.�:c+�-. tt'::;r2f::ar:Iy.:.?.r?aa`yr:'•:;fl...y:.�$r ,'rff.7.•f,• •:' flr�:``,i'��•:+:N:�'r?i" ..t.•:rft.?h�'`?fi;:::?+.,;H..frrt i'•h+� r::f+•2• Ii:c,A'? ••::: ::::.•: .;ifi+::�3tit•irrfytyrfa:ir,:'+jhy+t+u�.t.fi+u•, f?f+lt,•�fh ,i ::i%✓ ':f"..pf y y:+.•r..`r•::'+ti+u 2•u rt.:"ri y?:y #'?•�`'�:; ......... :.'r: f +•y+:f�:•r• ?•r rf t yr?::i:.:•,�:::::•.• tiff?+hyfefit.:f3,::fft.:?uf+f;:rprtiir+ifY:ifff�7j :fi+,+. '.'r•ti�Y' :�T.:::: ::h•?:yy;7h•;i+M,..:.., •.a:r?a: '• ,y�t�h:rt?::i"::':.•7r''• ••�•• :::::'::••: {fr??Eh:fyfr•.:a+?r.;rr.::;;.tfjfrf.:r r..• '• ,tf$r�i,+7f :::?:: :':!•H:f+: Tom.:.::.• •••• 72iik:•:�l S?::??:: ::: ::�:: r.•''•" .rii+ff,'Frt::fu�'rr ,u•::r ••.:� :::::::::: file�frf?:"+?f:•.,,"• :i:Yf• r �fNr`' ••• • : ::::::::::• • ::::�:��:::�:���: •'7u?':t�;r'ru:tla•;::+?;7?f,7,4•'ft'i :r•':ufrfffJf,jtrr.f rr t • .•• f?�+rir�•:lrirfleet �r+i+�;f '�'t-rr•r;ruy.3 �,r� :• ..• +f:'7:7i2$r�'.Hrr'Gilf+irt:'e-•::-5 rfl�(u:�ittr::R7�if+aZf •. ::•.•' .},tt rr ar.'t3 i• �frh'uu.' frrlfu)h:f•.h:::r rffi?ut •• ::::::::::::::::�::::::•;.r..trf?t•u;:h::tir ;rr •r!?R?r. '•r.:+?yJ:.. .••..•...... rfrlyr.:irtjfNr:f$°�fr.+f. •` e�;,i:? i •Li:r?rrL'::• ............ ...................:::::::::�: %r. :FK:t.++i �� .3��teftifi ::?+}7;:i'::: ::...:•...•.•.....•... 7;Hi +� i.•il+r rt ft..•+,:er?ii:? : ::F.... ..........•..•........:: . zrtra:u ru":•?r.'iii ..:...••........••........ �:i }�rrrrfr;M1frt,77E�-y.. 'Sh'r4•:???�':i:•'.•'::r:::;::,;, .............. _::.. .........•.•.•• .:::::r ••:::::::�..:::: ...:.:•...... HUZ LEGEND ......... r'si PHASE 1 .........:::::::".:. :e PHASE 2 :::^f:'.:::::::::' 2 l: ::::::::::.�•�.::::'::�::::: I'.22:::::�:::::::::L'. ................• ...::::::. ...... I� P.N.709E101 1111%A Nonh \tided&andman rM•onarn Phasing Map Ramsgate Specific Plan First Amendment 0 800 1600 FEET Exhibit " No certificate of occupancy permits will be issued in Planning Area 3 without the required public utilities. No certificate of occupancy permits will be issued for Planning Areas 4 and 5 without required public utilities and the improvement of Ramsgate Drive to Riverside Street and the improvement of Riverside Street to Highway 74. No certificate of occupancy permits will be issued for Planning Area 5 without required public utilities and the extension of Ramsgate Drive. PHASE 2 Phase 2 of the project involves the grading of Planning Areas 6, 7, and 8, and the construction of the upper and lower crossings of Wasson Canyon. The Phase 2 loop road and its associated underground public utilities will be provided as construction and demand proceeds. No certificate of occupancy permits will be issued for a planning area without the improvement of required infrastructure and that portion of the loop road that traverses that planning area. 3.6 MMGATION MONITORING PROGRAM The project proponent will provide a mitigation monitoring program to ensure the implementation of the mitigation measures provided within this EIR. The mitigation monitoring program shall be approved by the city concurrent with certification of this EIR. 3.7 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS The City of Lake Elsinore will be the lead agency for the proposed project, as defined by Section 15051(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines, with discretionary authority over the primary project approvals. Project approval by the Planning Commission and City Council will be required prior to project implementation. Proposed discretionary actions for the project include an amendment to the adopted Ramsgate Specific Plan. This EIR will also serve as a Program EIR for subsequent tentative tract approvals and design review approvals. 3-7 JBX/709EIO1A2 SECTION 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS, PROJECT IMPACTS, MITIGATION MEASURES, CUMULATIVE IMPACTS, AND UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS 4.1 EARTH RESOURCES The following summarizes the findings of a geotechnical investigation preformed for l the first amendment to the Ramsgate Specific Plan. The investigation was pre- formed by Soils and Testing Engineering, Inc., and the report is located in Appendix B. 4.1.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 1 T_�raphical Setting I The project site is an irregular-shaped portion of land, approximately 1,190 acres, located northeast of Lake Elsinore. Topography onsite can be divided into three general provinces. The northern portion of the site contains moderate to low relief (30± feet) topography with gentle slopes. The central and southern portions of the I site contain moderate to high relief (150± feet), with natural slope gradients up to 1:1. The southeast area lies east of the ridge that trends south from Meadow Drive I and Little Valley Road. This area contains moderate to high relief (100± feet), with I slope gradients being less than the central area and greater than the northern area. 1 Geologic Settin The project site is located on the west-central edge of the Perris Block and east of the Lake Elsinore Fault zone. Lake Elsinore is considered a sag pond and is bounded by the Glen Ivy and Grand Avenue faults. The site occupies the zone between the lower lake elevations and the upper peneplain (plateau) elevations. In a regional sense, the area could be considered a resequent fault scarp, similar to a highly eroded bluff. Such an area would be expected to, and does, contain deeply incised drainage (Wasson Canyon), ancestral drainage deposits, generally steep terrain, and remnants of the peneplain in the upper main drainage. J 4-1 JBX/709EI01A2 J The dominant rock type onsite is metamorphosed pelitic sediments, quartzites, lime- stones, and conglomerates of the Bedford Canyon Formation. Low-grade metamor- phism (greenschist facies) has been caused by intrusion of tonalite (granitic), which is currently exposed in the northern portion of the site. The resulting metamorphic rocks onsite include phyllite, schist, slate, metaquartzite, and metaconglomerate. The metamorphic rocks and tonalite have been intruded by aplitic and granodiorite dikes, which are associated with vein gold deposits east of the =cite (Good Hope Mining District). Groundwater Groundwater was encountered within 20 feet of existing grade in the northern portion of the site and in Wasson Canyon. Seismicity The subject site is situated between 1 and 2 miles northeast of the Glen Ivy Fault, which is a branch of the Elsinore Fault. In addition, other active or potentially active faults are known to exist within a 60-mile radius of the site. Table 4-1 shows identified faults, site distance from the faults, and maximum probable magnitude. The Southern California region is an area of moderate to high seismic risk; it is not considered feasible to make structures totally resistant to seismic-related hazards. The design acceleration should be determined by the structure consultant, and be reflective of the type of structure proposed. 4.1.2 PROJECT IMPACTS Implementation of the proposed project would result in the ,modification of existing landforms. Alterations will be directed toward the creation of developable surfaces suitable for the construction of residential units, commercial structures, recreational areas, and onsite roads. 4-2 JBX/709EIO1A2 TABLE 4-1 ACTIVE/INACTIVE FAULTS Maximuma Distance Probable Probable Peak From Site Magnitude Bedrock Fault Zone (miles) (Richter) Acceleration (g) Newport-Inglewood 24.0 6.7 0.26 Elsinore 1.0 6.7 0.35 San Jacinto 20.0 7.0 0.33 San Andreas 27.0 8.1 0.40 Banning Branch 27.0 8.1 0.40 (All classified as active) a From Table 25, Professional Paper 1360, U.S. Geological Survey, 1985. Exhibit 4-0 illustrates the conceptual grading plan for the project. The proposed grading will be balanced onsite. Cut material will be used for designated fill areas and for road base, in order to balance earthwork quantities onsite, thereby elimi- nating importation and exportation of earth materials. A limited amount of grading will occur in Wasson Canyon for construction of drainage facilities and roadway improvements. Several grading concepts will be utilized to minimize grading impacts. The Ramsgate Specific Plan provides several grading design guidelines to mitigate potential impacts associated with implementation of the project. These guidelines should be reflected in subsequent grading plans. Final grading plans should reflect the extent of grading in open space areas. Because of grading activities, there will be a greater potential for underlying soils to be exposed to wind and water erosion. This impact will be short term, occurring at each area of the site until construction of the area is completed. After construction of each area, a storm drain system will provide proper drainage for runoff and landscaping will curtail erosion. No groundwater-related problems are anticipated either during or after construction, except possibly during alluvial cleanouts in Wasson Canyon. Based on the geotechnical study prepared for the Ramsgate project, it was determined that the site is suitable for the proposed development. 4-3 JBX/709EIOlA2 4.1.3 MITIGATION MEASURES 1. The project shall adhere to the site grading recommendations pi.-uvided in the Soil and Testing Engineers Geotechnical Investigation in Appendix B. Applicable site grading recommendations shall be incorporated into project grading plans. 2. The project shall adhere to the foundation recommendations provided in the Soil and Testing Engineers Geotechnical Investigation in Appendix B. Applicable foundation recommendations shall be incorporated into project grading and building plans. 3. Subdrains are recommended at the bottom of all canyons (drainage swales) to be filled. Proposed subdrains shall be reflected in project grading plans. 4. All surface drainage should be directed away from the tops of slopes and/or building foundations. Ponding of water in these areas should not be allowed. Proposed surface drainage concepts shall be reflected in project grading plans. 5. All structures should be designed in accordance with the current Uniform Building Code and the seismic design parameters of the Structural Engineers Association of California. 6. When applicable, grading design guidelines specified in the Ramsgate Specific Plan should be reflected on project grading plans. 7. All grading and earthwork should be performed under the observation of a geotechnical engineer, to ensure proper subgrade preparation, selection of satisfactory materials, and placement and compaction of all structural f ill. 8. Frequent in-grading inspections should be conducted during the construc- tion of slopes, particularly during the construction of cut slopes and the keys for fills. These inspections are necessary to substantiate previous geologic findings and to discover unforeseen conditions that may be exposed during grading. Any unanticipated adverse conditions encoun- tered should be evaluated by the project engineering geologist and the soils engineer, and the appropriate recommendations should be made and followed. 9. To the extent possible, areas to be graded should be cleared of existing vegetation immediately prior to actual grading activities. The areal extent of grading should be limited to that necessary for the creation of pads for the immediate development area. Where mass grading is neces- sary for balanced earthwork, areas not immediately developed should be stabilized with plantings as soon as feasible. 4-4 JBX/709EIO1A2 �n l RIVERSIDE STREET Py 9 I I I I LEGEND FILL \ I ® I CUT �� I aNATURAL P.N.709E 101 ..t North Michael Brand-an A—iawn Grading Concept Ramsgate Specific Plan First Amendment 0 600 1600 FEET Exhibit 4-0 10. Erosion of manufactured slopes should be minimized by such measures as planting of vegetation as early as possible and by the use of jute mats or similar treatments. 4.1.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS A substantial amount of landform alteration is being carried out to facilitate development in the relatively hilly project region, and the proposed project would add to this regional alteration. The- proposed project would contribute to the cumulative alteration of regional landform and topography that is considered a significant, adverse, cumulative impact. Geology and soils impacts are site specific and are not affected by cumulative development. Therefore, the project would not contribute to cumulative geology and soils impacts. 4.1.5 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS Implementation of the project would result in landform alterations for a portion of the Ramsgate site. This alteration is considered a significant, unavoidable, adverse impact. The impact is partially mitigated through contour grading and aesthetic features incorporated into the project design. Project impacts related to erosion and sedimentation are mitigable to a level that is less than significant through the measures listed in Section 4.1.3. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in any significant, unavoid- able, adverse soils and geology impacts. } 4.2 HYDROLOGY The following is a summary of the hydrological analysis prepared by Webber Engineering in August 1988. The complete report can be found in Appendix C. J 4-5 JBX/709EIO1A2 J 4.2.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS The project site is located in the extreme southern portion of the 2,800-square mile Santa Ana River Basin. The Santa Ana River Basin is subdivided into three watersheds: the Upper Santa Ana, the Lower Santa Ana, and the San Jacinto. The project site is located on the boundary dividing the Upper Santa Ana and the San Jacinto watersheds. The majority of the project site is within the Upper Santa Ana Watershed sand drains directly into Lake Elsinore via Wasson Canyon. Eastern por- tions of the project site are within the San Jacinto Watershed, which drains east into Railroad Canyon Reservoir. The San Jacinto Watershed enters the Upper Santa Ana Watershed after flows leave the reservoir, draining into Lake Elsinore. In recent years, Lake Elsinore has experienced well-publicized flooding problems. This has been caused primarily by larger-than-expected flows from the San Jacinto River; Wasson Canyon is considered a secondary flow into the lake and therefore a contributor to the lake's flooding problems. According to the city's Master Environmental Assessment, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is preparing a plan for the long-term protection of properties surrounding the lake. In addition, the city is implementing programs for flood protection, and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is planning a debris basin in Wasson Canyon, approx- imately 5,000 feet south of the Ramsgate project limits. The majority of the project drains to Wasson Canyon or its tributaries. Exhibit 4-1 shows the relationship of the property line to the Wasson Canyon Watershed, the major subareas, and the j proposed development limits utilized for preliminary hydrologic analysis to determine project impacts. Table 4-2 indicates the existing hydrological conditions occurring on the Ramsgate site. 1 _ J ,I 4-6 JBX/709EIOlA2 ',•C'!�'c a J � JIt ai,LLW// !' , yti � ,`I •• 1�(�v-- ••�,l►r..^.A,'�r�i••. '!�"9 ;"h: t:\v r 1 f•' \. �/ '. i ^� -11+�5i11.' l�` I Vi J V .t✓ ` - 1>q.'°It' : .� � f. ,� r• r. � • �./'' `�:T""1� t `.�`'i{'�1::�.•/�.;��.•+•; •r 1r � + 2.�, rr?}r`')h: �. �, �r• A� r:(r„ N. - j _ •;-� r 11 \(�.,� /) 1,.. 1� ,G - ,t .1•:+; i l-O ���(/J/,� v •l�•C• 1-•h � S' fi-� _ .r ,• 1 i a�{,r,j 1,`r1 •n.�l! e{•''r., f �\ ,f- rj/' .r, ./ :,lr ftr S` t• •:`9�� !r-�- 1,%� y �0.9� - ��p {1:•-NV111OCR'.a _P.�q ll.;� �•,•• •� C 1 ..ti. :;•• �L ,J r� `r.y 0. ^ -4dr ` i '1 �► •� .. r �a�a•j G' � - r;t J.J1./ll( If• t �•. 4� l '' l�l it 21`s� 1 ,`4V n. ;.,' s I ` l Gl •-�' • .. �„ ,l'''�''� :':� SED.' ET•ENT1ON .SIT£5. Z. r _ 'i'' 1 '�.l•� ., ;lip' l ., t..,..•• /T�1•., _ t �1 "�•. v.{ur ��• , =i ` ---- 'f♦R�O/�pp E 2'.C'^ ''. JVrYS •l,• v.��E J '�Me�' '{.'�i��1 r• 1��. -JI.' �fi . il) IT •�-M /.._ `'C Y rl ��r�.L ..�,Jr}�r.-. `i''r rCf�[" ��• 'aw'a.' e � j•ti� f^"'I ��r-�j:l{I.t.�l, .�l�`•� i t 'i c' ,r`--;` • e-� •t •, 1 - 'i•7.)w'�C�a• i l �\• •1 N! i 'h _ J• 1'„Jl`.1% L- r!✓'-IC .•,1 •• _�� �Y + �i``:1 p ) l t`ti :.y 1 •f±R+C ' y.tr, "�'l• 1 � �� �!' ;,. /Nr 1 'r\�, i! /?.r 1� i��f:, "/►.�' .. Got ' off ,• , ,�r �� 1��..�1 t� >,� 1 ' � �'' �' t�j7t � `; (� l= J�p �J ��� _�'Lt _���'a a.l.' ! � _ ,��� '`. �• • 1' '+� .-'_ �'Y t. .// :��p. �+, <y l!J• r�fr^`v tt J`iy • • p, (} } .1// a• •.l•S ,. rll •--� � 4 ' � _'!1" ,r ir: - s':fo'" .`Jr`� '. a .... ^ _ f"' � � ° - - _--''s-__•---_•K � +;;��•;-. ''{..{ r 1;� It'', � n�q I .fir. a'��I.1 al ('•4 "� l• .�i .�'� '17 !'• � ` r t 1 I .! y •,.... e:L::,'• •/ ��~. A �•1 1 C' 1 .t :� .'11 •.��t •. :d /��t t/ �� ` ,1!q�i;' :,��.�: � Yl :. ���.•� /` �3iD - ___-_T rr ;i;�-!�1 't ; - �> I .� .C'� �Y�j�`Z / ( 1 _: �S''•i.• �7 r• F v ;'_ ,OwIA�PwP�ReOX. 45 ACRES .i.1..1 •1 "'.1 '' -� ♦ : n �w',7• .h,J�,.. \J t - - `1% • 'Ty-oC 'DIVE'ff Ep .-�. :�•;� .!•w ( t? r. S(� ( r • r' i M \' f 1'.t' }r_tl�'� ir.. 'la''Il t d,;ujl ` •nt',_ ..i••W SWARE B/ =3. l�rl,^�•��_/lm �:. ir• L� 7Z(:'1 /•/y/1�(( �. • IL. ,)��VS :! 4• th•� 5 1 Q 1tT� 11 -.::. /o - _ :1 +�( 1/� �"/��J \._ l I .U.•i,!..� �` ` .\ } E'';,r q ..; }7 ,/ �'''� „' /.L 1 `, ,^l t 1i� I_�• - .L•• •«tt:__ .t �t '�. - J`.'�� ! t_� �� • •1 '};.; �{�. `�1.\ i i 1 \, , r •l '`.'a�r:.i„� 'di ! i 'r'J•�J' V�'ti !'Fr.r.A Lµ �; _ T._.- �- :Esr• =11, _ t I + IN\ /I' '�1t a i• +� r •�• .�; .,' -.ice, A ) �^ �Jltip, -.:�-. ,�-i :•x�- - -- E/P ,1:-ti '.r, \. �;r it o ,l• .� la:�� .•l..t ,r t� �1. .J�it�'-,1 O fL.! rs�.� ��:� �i� a.. a,,.1• - _- �,:� 'mac'�:� �: + a..__ _r u T r 'V :J 7 .,1 "�,' ;iit'.-�tl:;a+',!��� yE R�• _ r .+..:t��. i�•.�_•-�:>�•.� a r 7I i♦ \' tr.�f � `1� 0 !�_ip'... •0 /-''., _S T. E .•' ' M�ewl t,,. i..��- ' -_= �._�EO. Y ' l,l• -V 7. I 1 r '� i (` �tl`{r. 's!' 1 ` l f J S�'r�!'1 ,r�� �: ��/((� ){{ �u`' }f��� 1 `? -i 'i'' • - s=-_ _ r r n - G (i a _ �• • H�N�.rj.��w/{I •d♦•, •• //�� �•+.S'• �i++:..'wc _....L Z •'i!: �':,1 .epp `.y": w/LD�(+. )' Ir I, ��� 1 _•l1 :iw�''1. !� r]1 •1 Y'. C. '��� -.i' \ -_.� ,t Jf!/• fir .V.7'AY/fG,.71 ,(. {' ~4i�1C1'i7r ,'•1"1 l 7•.Vim- •-t. :�'�. l- .r ;- +' - \ +•j1i ��� ~ ��J .. 9 i:' •'4 -_-�.. •.. .ByE���/Y£R,.T/f��O._ A,' ` ` V''.f.e f r J� J .t..:i:..** r<Jf/ao•iR ;wi / �1 1' '•�11L ilS7dy. � �,1 J � 1 ,J tif�J e �.. .l,; .0'•.t� i i 1. .r1'AJMB ���� 'tl'�/ j� �;') 1 1.'1:LJLV�l7 1 y�^ n :. �.r!`'•v. _ _ C�+t.•:_::-. {{ti J!�\ `J p� i''t 1�+�{I7y;•;7011(Il�j�./j51 T , \. wl r f MAP 'k.111{�„ .i�� .� E _ N''���' �f• - r�t ry��•:1 QI '� S ••S _ _1 I 't ''=r.♦, "', :1. '1. �L,t-r1' «'T�_:_-_'"_-'�. :v�: _�"'.^S,� � c' vl ,Yl� .ry(J11{t DS `�, �� � '� c+'`� �f Y'.. ( r S.. _ ,_ �„ h, ••/� `�� i� t l _ _ /' , t �nZ��'J i,!7��1 !ra �6' l,r... .i .! U� i ~-• :.•,�•��7�'� .,•{► _ 'I 'i' �,M -_•,��•• + / r��'r�f�i! 1 `�^, t^'IrsSy� o •••..o�.:" •;�Tr *, vir J- _ - U �. SJ,• 1 v1:= a tr ,' - c �.. 1 F ' J •••tr r IA I� " �1.1 •i<�. (� I �t, "•U-:1K �"'!- �1. J y � .� M � .10 •� :.,�'��{ .:P:.t�.��>y J+:l1�G;'." / _.. � •��), ti � Au"iCr�.� �1f. ••eh •i _ •♦ 1 1/ t 1 .q'_ - .. I .•_ t`A.v-tY I •�.1_ f`w.w.l V"' 1•!�,1, -' ilia �::' 17 w 4 i 1, t-,' : t �� . .r=���'•1 �♦ •'.� }i.: i.. �r'�• rv' - 1CI••`t i'• ar �,�r., d>,rw ,/"' • �, � _ t .'�> -��'t '�] ^�.��'•�a � '�.. I:,r.�.. :,. C�1' 1t, r��t1 t �1.�.. ,.� -��/{� ,�4J _ •lr�L. : 01,IApR17X. IS fCA!! �Ii ' o.�i ( ( � !J. �ev .1 1, •M . e. .. •i;;1 .1r».0 C+ 7/f.�J': J.�nrl i ^7�i�.:< r� Y:✓lift I 1� D!Vl�TTED - 4vL• ! � +l •• W-= -1 `.�/: `JN A �. �Ca' B/. •�20 �S{ '"-, �� aL�L- A[1�..W'ACR >• 'J' � + '�; Hydrology .? Ram sgate Specific =cit Lit Plan First Amendment t•.z..-..�-- �6.1•r�5'�•_ f';ij• Vic; 1, r�.+ �... "~r< ' .,^�' .• r J° � 'o rill _bf • .. �. - �, �.,., '�' .7a`(�}S, •°yl ' (- �, Alt -1 _I ' ^I� t 9.' SOURCE:WEBBER ENGINEERING 0 2564 5126 FEET P.N.709E101 NNN% a�a North Mish..S B.welhre A�ela� Exhibit 4-1 TABLE 4-2 EXISTING HYDROLOGICAL CONDITIONS Subarea Area (Acres) 100-Year Peak (efs) C2 4,209 4,024 C3 489 791 B1 345 564 cfs = cubic foot per second. Source: Webber Engineering. 4.2.2 PROJECT IMPACTS Development of Ramsgate will increase the surface water runoff from the project site, because of the construction of buildings, roadways, sidewalks, and other impervious surfaces. Additionally, the Ramsgate site will be impacted by runoff from upstream properties. Preliminary hydrologic analyses have been conducted for a 100-year storm for the major subareas shown on Exhibit 4-1, and the results are tabulated in Table 4-3. Figures shown_are for a 3-hour storm, which is the controlling duration that will would generate the maximum flows for the subareas studied. Based on these analy- ses, some developments along Wasson Canyon may be affected by a 100-year storm. These affected developments, along with the boundary of the 100-year storm, should be identified on associated tract maps parcel maps. Those areas that are affected by the 100-year storm will have two routes of ingress and egress through the Wasson Canyon roadway crossings. 4-7 JBX/709EI01A2 TABLE 4-3 HYDROLOGICAL CONDITIONS WITH THE PROJECT Increase Over Subarea Area (Acres) 100-Year Peak (cfs) Existing Conditions C2 4,209 4,334 7.7% C3 552 940 5.3% B1 390 684 7.3% Source: Webber Engineering. As shown in Table 4-3, the proposed development will increase the 100-year peak flow for subarea C2 by 7.7 percent. The increase in subareas C3 and B1 will be 5.3 and 7.3 percent. A comprehensive system of drainage facilities has been proposed for Ramsgate. These facilities will provide conveyance of runoff from onsite development as well as offsite areas that drain to the project. In addition, these facilities shall be designed to accommodate interim drainage conditions as a result of phasing considerations. Three detention basins are proposed to mitigate project impacts on downstream properties. A detention basin will be provided adjacent to the public park and school site in Planning Area 2. This facility will be constructed as development proceeds in Phase I. The second detention basin will be provided at the lower Wasson Canyon Road crossing connecting Ramsgate Drive to Planning Areas 6, 7, and 8. This facility will be constructed along with the road infrastructure for Phase 2. The third detention basin will be provided in Planning Area 7, near the southwest corner, and will be constructed along with the road infrastructure for Phase 2. As an alternative, it may be possible to eliminate the third basin by using the second basin to mitigate all flow increases from the Phase 2 development. The proposed retention basins will require a limited amount of grading. These grading impacts are perceived to be insignificant. Final grading plans shall indicate the extent of any grading that may occur in open space areas. 4-8 JBX/709EIOlA2 Interim storm drain pipe connections will be constructed along the backbone storm drain system to convey runoff from areas that have not yet been grade; luring the construction phasing. Inlets to these temporary facilities will be constructed to provide for temporary trapping and-storage of sediment, and to provide small tempo- rary detention areas until the permanent detention facilities are constructed. 4.2.3 MITIGATION MEASURES 1. Retention basins shall be provided onsite to mitigate surface water runoff from the project as well as from upstream properties. The proposed retention basins shall be reflected on final grading plans. 2. Where drainage is concentrated and discharged to natural drainage courses, energy dissipation should be provided to reduce potential erosion. Additional protection should be provided in areas where drainage is planned to run over slo_oes. Erosion control practices shall be reflected on grading plans. 3. Subsequent hydrology studies shall be prepared prior to the issuance of grading permits, indicating how project grading in conjunction with the drainage conveyance system (including applicable swales, channels, street flows, catch basins, storm drains, and floodwater retarding) will allow building pads to be protected from inundation from rainfall runoff that may be expected from all storms up to and including the theoretical 100- year flood. 4. All developments along Wasson Canyon affected by a 100-year storm shall be identified on subsequent tract/parcel maps. 5. Any proposed channelization or culverting plans for Wasson Canyon shall be approved by the Director of Community Development. 4.2.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Using information provided by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, preliminary hydrologic analyses were also conducted for the three subareas, assuming ultimate development (including Ramsgate) in the watersheds. The results are tabulated in Table 4-4. The contributing drainage areas shown include the proposed increase previously discussed. For subareas C2, C3, and B2, flows will be increased by 9.6, 18.8, and 21.3 percent. 4-9 JBX/709EIOIA2 TABLE 4-4 CUMULATIVE HYDROLOGICAL IMPACTS Subarea Area (Acres) Ultimate Development 100-Year Peak (cfs) C2 4,209 4,411 C3 552 940 B1 390 684 Source: Webber Engineering. 4.2.5 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS I Implementation of the proposed project would increase surface water runoff. However, these increased flows can be effectively mitigated through onsite retention 9 basins. A portion of Wasson Canyon will require channelization. A box culvert will I be provided where Ramsgate Drive crosses Wasson Canyon. Additional design-level analysis will be required to determine level of impact and mitigation measures for individual projects. 4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Two general surveys for biological resources were conducted on the Ramsgate project site. The first survey was conducted by Interdisciplinary Systems, Inc. in September 1981, and covered the core of the site. The second survey was performed J in August 1983 by Karlin Marsh, a biological consultant, and covered an additional 80-acre parcel in the northwestern portion of the site that was not reviewed in the 1981 biological assessment. These biological assessments are summarized in the EIR (SCH No. 83071309) that was issued in 1984 for the adopted Ramsgate Specific Plan and are included in the Technical Appendices of the EIR. The following subsections summarize the previous surveys for biological resources, as updated by the Michael Brandman Associates study of the current status of Stephens' kangaroo rat on the site. Complete Stephens' Kangaroo Rat studies prepared by Michael Brandman Associates and O'Farrell Biological Consulting is contained in Appendix D. 4-10 JBX/709EI01A2 The Ramsgate site also includes watercourses and stream-related (riparian) habitat falling under the regulatory jurisdiction of two -gencies. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has certain jurisdiction under Section 4u4 of the federal Clean Water Act of 1972, as does the California Department of Fish and Game under Section 1603 of the state Fish and Game Code. These biological-related issues are also briefly summarized in =his section. A full dise43sion, prepared by Michael Brandman Associates regulatory experts, appears in Appendix E. 4.3.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS The Ramsgate project site is located between Perris Valley to the northeast and Lake Elsinor-3 to the southwest. The terrain over the majority of the site is hilly, with steep slopes ranging from 15 to 50 percent grade. There are also relatively level dry-land rngadows, narrow valley floors, and narrow ridgetops on the site. Vegetation The primary vegetative community on the site is inland sage scrub, dominated by California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum). California brittlebush (Encelia farinosa) and California sagebrush (Artemisia californica) are also present, but are not dominant. Grasslands on the site are dominated by non-native species such as red brome (Bromus rubens) and slender wild oat (Avena barbata). The most common native grass onsite is fescue (Vulpia megalura). Other herbaceous species include short-podded mustard (Brassica geniculata), tarweed (Hemizonia sp.), and red- stemmed and broad-lobed filaree (Erodium cicutarium and E. botrys). Several intermittent streams occur on the project site. Wasson Canyon supports the greatest amount of riparian vegetation and has apparent perennial seeps in its middle reaches. The amount of water in these seeps is small, but represents an important resource in this dry region. Wetter drainages support sparse to locally abundant willows (Salix spp.) and Fremont's cottonwoods (Po ulus fremontii). Drier drainages are dominated by mulefat (Baccharis lutinosa). 4-11 JBX/709EIOlA2 A number of rare and endangered plants have been recorded in the vicinity, including the slender-horned spineflower (Centrostegia leptoceras), a federally and state-listed endangered species. A population of slender-horned spineflowers has been reported approximately 7 miles northwest of the site. Although no focused survey for this species was conducted, it is not expected to occur on the site due to the lack of appropriate habitat. The San Fernando Valley spineflower (Chorizanthe ap rryi var. fernandina), a Category 1 federal-candidate specie. (sufficient data are available to support federal listing as threatened or endangered), once widely distributed over Southern California, has not been recorded since 1940. Therefore, this sensitive plant is not expected to occur on the project site, although appropriate habitat does exist onsite. Several other plants that are federal-candidate apecies or are considered rare by the California Native Plant Society occur in the vicinity of the project. These include Munz's onion (Allium fimbriatum var. munzii) !Category 2 candidate), Payson's caulanthus (Caulanthus simulans) (Category 2 candidate), and the Fallbrook spineflower (Chorizanthe procumbens var. albiflora) (California Native Plant Society List 41 considered limited in distribution). Two additional rare plant species that were not listed in the 1984 EIR may also occur on the site--the many-stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis), a Category 2 federal candidate, and Palmer's grappling-hook (Harpagonella palmeri var. palmeril, considered rare by the California Native Plant Society. Although some potential habitat for several of the sensitive plants listed here occurs onsite, the biological surveys were conducted too late in the year (August and September) to locate them. Wildlife A variety of bird, mammal, reptile, and amphibian species reside on the site, utilizing it for foraging and breeding. Several -important raptor species (birds of prey) have been recorded in the vicinity, including the golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). Mammals observed or expected onsite include many species of rodents such as the San Diego pocket mouse (Perognathus fallax), cactus mouse (Peromyscus eremicus), California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi), and desert cottontail 4-12 JBX/709EIOlA2 (Sylvilagus audubonii). Carnivores include the bobcat (Felis rufus), coyote (Canis latrans), long-tailed weasel (Mustela frenata), and badger (Taxidea taxus). Common reptiles and amphibians. include the side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), red- diamond rattlesnake (�roLalus ruber), common kingsnake (Lampropeltis getulus), Pacific slender salamander (Batrachoseps pacificus), and western toad (Bufo boreas). Several sensitive wildlife species have either been recorded onsite, or are expected to occur onsite. These include the federally listed endangered species, the Stephens' kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephensi), which is also listed by the state as "threatened," with a proposed change to "endangered." The wildlife also include four species that are candidates for federal listing: the orange-throated whiptail lizard (Cnemidophorus hyperythrus), the San Diego coast horned Iizard (Phrynosoma I coronatum blainvillei), the arroyo toad (Bufo microscaphus californicus), and the California black-tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila melanura californica). Other sensitive species occurring in the vicinity of the project that may occur onsite l include several birds listed by the California Department of Fish and Game as Bird Species of Special Concern (Remsen 1978). These include the Cooper's hawk (Accipiter coo erii), the long-eared owl (Asio otus), the golden eagle, the prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus), and the California black-tailed gnatcatcher. Initial studies by MBA (August 21, 1988) for the proposed project identified impacts on the Stephens' kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephensi). At that time, the Stephens' kangaroo rat was listed only by the State of California as a threatened species. The general decline of Stephens' kangaroo rat habitats later resulted in the species being listed as endangered by the federal government, effective October 31, 1988. Discus- sions in the 1984 Ramsgate EIR do not adequately address impacts on Stephens' kangaroo rat habitat, nor are they consistent with federal environmental review requirements for endangered species. Therefore, additional field surveys for the Stephens' kangaroo rat and its habitat were conducted between May 25-28, 1988, by fMichael Brandman Associates. The results of this survey appear in Appendix D. The federal listing of the Stephens' kangaroo rat, pursuant to Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, prohibits the "take" (killing, wounding, trapping, harassing, possessing, or adversely modifying habitat) of an endangered species. Section 10 of the Act estA.blishes the means for obtaining permits for "incidental 4-13 JBX/709EIO1A2 take" (taking that results from, but is not the primary purpose of, an otherwise legal activity such as an approved development project). Under Section 10(a), a permit for "incidental take" may be issued on a region-wide basis or for individual projects by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service if a number of co«uiuons are met, and an acceptable "habitat conservation plan" (HCP) accompanies the permit application. Besides the population biology of the species, the HCP must discuss a number of other elements, including dc�ails of finance and legal at,.-angements for the conserved habitat. To facilitate ongoing land use planning before a final HCP can be prepared and formally adopted, the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors adopted, on October 25, 1988, an emergency ordinance establishing an interim Stephens' kangaroo rat HCP study area and set an interim mitigation fee for the purpose of purchasing Stephens' kangaroo rat habitat to be set aside within nine areas now being studied. This ordinance, will,serve -9 the core of the County of Riverside's application to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for a Section 10(a) permit, to be submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in spring 1989 along with the preserve study areas designated by the county. This issue is discussed in more detail in Appendix D. 4.3.2 PROJECT IMPACTS Several direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts to biological resources are expected to occur if the Ramsgate project site is developed, including impacts on the Stephens' kangaroo rat, a state- and federally listed endangered species. Exhibit 4-2 shows the locations of Stephens' kangaroo rat habitat. Project impacts include the following: • Project implementation would result in the direct loss of streambed habitat, including that which falls under U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit and California Department of Fish and Game 1603 agreement jurisdictions. This constitutes a direct impact. A detailed discussion of the jurisdictions of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the California Department of Fish and Game is found in Appendix E. • Development of the Ramsgate project site would result in direct and cumulative impacts on the Stephens' kangaroo rat. Direct, significant impacts include the loss of several populations of Stephens' kangaroo rat, which are interconnected on the site by a network of dirt roads (dirt 4-14 JBX/709EI01A2 :_—�—..�• . --'::�«� aa:ci• t��: - ----'' - Legend SITE BOUNDARY ' ® EXISTING HABITAT ( OCCUPIED BY SKR ) ----- �a<,:d •: 1 :;ice`, SUITABLE HABITAT ( UNOCCUPIED BY SKR ) t .fi.. ` r. - ,•• • ' •� •'� fr . � CREEK CHANNEL r asp .,y ..- f '' p RIPARIAN VEGETATION i `�1 :�7�`�'!� �,,.!� 1 if„x ��'-!�^;1 —' — � , `�\ 2 - ....wrsrr.l�.�f-��-�■Ei-if r SKR PRESERVE STUDY AREA Nc r Ramsgate Specific Plan r•1 29 First Amendment Ramsg ate Development Proj ect Stephens' Kangaroo I y '��' �� :..... . \• „ Rat Study � y� ��ss'' /,,• � Michael B—dnun Associates P N.7NE101 FMI 1 — a - - 1 North 0 548 1096 FEET E xhlbl� 4-2 roads serve as movement corridors for the Stephens' kangaroo rat and allow genetic interchange among these populations), and the loss of 137 acres containing Stephens' kangaroo rat habitat currently inhabited by this endangered species. Such a loss would not be allowed without a Section 10(a) permit proviO ng for incidental take on this project site. 1 The maximum amount of riparian habitat on the project site is approxi- mately 14 acres. Impacts to a small portion of these acres will occur; the specific amount will be delineated during the permitting process. Development of the project would also eliminate 18 acres of potential unoccupied Stephens' kangaroo rat habitat. Some of this habitat (on the western part of the site) is discontinuous with the presently occupied habitats on the site and hypothetically provides habitat for the Stephens' kangaroo rat. Based on the. present distribution of Stephens' kangaroo rats on the project site, the loss of this discontinuous portion of habitat is not perceived to be a taking or a significant impact. • Project implementation may result in direct and cumulative impacts to populations of three Category 2 federal-candidate plant species and two species considered rare by the California Native Plant Society. These species are Munz's onion (Category 2 federal candidate), Payson's caulanthus (Category 2 federal candidate), many-stemmed dudleya (Category 2 federal candidate), Fallbrook spineflower (California Native Plant Society List 4), and Palmer's grappling-hook (California Native Plant Society List 2). Potential habitat for these species exists on the site, and a spring survey for sensitive plants may reveal populations or individuals on the site. If substantial populations of any of these species are discovered on the site, the project may result in their complete or I partial destruction. If so, this would constitute a direct, significant impact. A focused spring survey is needed to determine the potential and extent 1 of impacts the project may have on these species. No impacts to two other sensitive species reported in the vicinity, the slender-horned spineflower, a state- and federally listed endangered species, or the San Fernando Valley spineflower, a Category 1 federal candidate--are anticipated, because these species are not expected to exist onsite. Project implementation may also result in the loss of potential habitat for the above-mentioned sensitive plants. The loss of habitat for the I federal-candidate species would also constitute a direct, significant impact. J • Project implementation would result in direct, significant impacts to four Category 2 federal-candidate animal species: the San Diego coast horned lizard, the orange-throated whiptail, the arroyo toad, and the black-tailed gnatcatcher. These impacts include the loss of populations of these species on the project site, and the loss of habitat for these species. 4-15 JBX/709EIO1A2 I 4.3.3 MITIGATION MEASURES Several mitigation measures that will reduce project impacts to levels that are not significant are available: 1. Loss of streambed, wetland, or riparian habitat shall be mitigated per the requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Section 404 of the Clean Water Act) and the California Department of Fish and Game (Fish and Game Code, Section 1603). It is anticipated that these agencies will require replacement of lost wildlife habitat or the creation of new areas of such habitat. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project proponent shall obtain any required Section 404 and/or Section 1600 permits. 2. Stephens' kangaroo rat habitat has been identified on the project site. The taking of Stephens' kangaroo rat or its habitat is prohibited by the federal endangered species act. The act does recognize a category of incidental take and a procedure for issuing accidental take permits if certain requirements are met. A number of requirements are now being discussed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, the County of Riverside, the City of La'.ce Elsinore and other parties that may result in permits for the incidental taking of Stephens' kangaroo rat as provided in Section 10(a) of the federal Endangered Species Act. It is anticipated that a short-term permit for incidental take of Stephens' kangaroo rat may be established by the end of July 1989. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project proponent shall demonstrate proof of a Section 10(a) Permit for the incidental take of Stephens' kangaroo rat. 3. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a focused survey for sensitive plants shall be conducted by a qualified botanist during the appropriate time of the year in order to determine the extent and location of onsite species. In the event that sensitive plant species are located, the following mitigation measures, in order of preference, shall be considered: • Protection of existing populations and their habitat by altering project plans where feasible to avoid impacts to areas involved, including suitable buffering zones around populations. • Possible acquisition and preservation of offsite land (in conjunction with Ordinance 659), which supports viable populations of any species discovered and that is under threat of future development. • Transplantation or revegetation of any species involved with a protected area. Each of the above methods will be considered for any of the sensitive plant species that are subsequently discovered, except the Munz's onion 4-16 JBX/709EI01A2 for which only the first and second methods will be considered because of its inability to be transplanted or revegetated. Preference in all cases will be given to the first and second measures, as they are considered to be most effective by biological resource agencies and most experts. 4. Impacts on sensitive upland species and raptor foraging areas shall be partially mitigated by contributions to the Conservation and Open Space Land Bank Fee Plan. Contributions to the Conservation and Open Space Land Bank shall be provided prior to the recordation of maps that contain sensitive upland species or raptor foraging areas. 5. Impacts on wildlife movement corridors will be partially mitigated through the California Department of Fish and Game 1603 Agreement process. Additional mitigation should include the establishment of Wasson Canyon as a preserved, uninterrupted movement on this and adjacent sites. To avoid impacts on Wasson Canyon by construction activities and development, appropriately designed culverts shall be incorporated into any roads that cross the canyon, so as to allow movement of wildlife under the roads. Blocking of wildlife movement by building structures such as fences or soil berms perpendicular to or along roads and along the edges of the canyon shall be avoided. The wildlife movement corridor approved as part of the Canyon Lake Hills development project, which is presently proposed to terminate at the Ramsgate boundary, should be continued onto the project site. The wildlife corridor including underground culverts shall be reflected on grading plans. J6. Cumulative impacts on wildlife and plant communities caused by Ramsgate could be mitigated by establishing a resource management plan to be administered by a homeowners' association for Ramsgate. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the resource management plan should be approved by the director of community development. 4.3.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Cumulative impacts to Stephens' kangaroo rat resulting from project implementation and from other projects in the vicinity include an incremental addition to losses of Stephens' kangaroo rat habitat in the region. The proposed project and other projects in the vicinity would result in an indirect, significant impact to sensitive plants, due to the incremental addition to cumulative losses of habitat for the sensitive plants in the region. In addition, project implementation would result in an incremental addition to cumulative losses of habitat for sensitive animals in the region, constituting a significant cumulative impact. 4-17 JBX/709EIO1A2 Development of the project site would result in the loss of raptor foraging area, including foraging habitat for two State Bird Species of Special Concern--the gn11&.n eagle and the prairie falcon. Additionally, project implementation would result in lost potential winter habitat for the peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), a federally and state-listed endangered species. This constitutes a significant cumulative impact. Cumulative impacts to common, native flora and fauna would occur as a result of this project and other adjacent projects. These impacts include a reduction in the area of individuals and populations of native plant and animal species, a reduction of 7 genetic diversity for species in the region, and a general reduction of habitat for animal and plant species now occurring in the-area. i Project implementation would eliminate or adversely alter animal movement on the I site through the loss of movement corridors, especially along streambeds. Impacts to movement corridors on the site would add to the cumulative impacts to movement corridors in the project area by this and other adjacent projects. - 1 The development of this and other projects in the area would increase the potential 1 for additional development, which would increase the adverse impacts of urbaniza- tion on the remaining open space. These indirect impacts include additional losses of habitat for the Stephens' kangaroo rat and the other sensitive species previously mentioned. Direct and indirect impacts caused by the increased urbanization of the area as a result of this project also include disturbance to wildlife and plant communities because of increased trash dumping, use of firearms, predation by pet dogs and cats, and destruction of wildlife and habitat by off-road vehicle activity. Projects currently adjacent to Ramsgate include the those of the Canyon Lake Hills Specific Plan and Missing Link Specific Plan. All of the open space now surrounding the Ramsgate project site has been allocated to low-density development by the Lake Elsinore 1992 General Plan. 4-18 JBX/709EI01A2 J 4.3.5 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS Removal of 1,111 acres of relatively undisturbed habitat and wildlife, including grasslands, inland sage scrub, and riparian, is an unavoidable impact of the project. The cumulative impacts resulting from habitat loss for common and sensitive wildlife species and from disturbance of wildlife movement corridors are also unavoidable cumulative impacts of the project. 4.4 TRAFFIC The traffic analysis for Ramsgate was prepared by Kunzman Associates in October 1 1988. The traffic analysis contains documentation of existing traffic conditions, project-related traffic, existing-plus-project-related traffic, and future traffic conditions. The traffic analysis was prepared based upon the proposal for 2,975 dwelling units. Therefore, project-related traffic, existing levels of traffic pk.a I project traffic, and future traffic conditions would be slightly higher compared with the proposed project. The traffic analysis is summarized in the following sections and can be found in its entirety in Appendix F. l 4.4.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS I The project site is located in the northeast section of the City of Lake Elsinore. The 1 site is south of State Route 74, in the vicinity of Riverside Street. Exhibit 4-3 shows the internal circulation proposed for Ramsgate. As shown, the circulation plan provides a network of arterial highways, secondary highways, and community If collector roads. The traffic analysis for these roadways was based on County of Riverside and City of Lake Elsinore roadway standards. For aesthetic reasons, the developer of Ramsgate is proposing that Ramsgate Drive (a secondary highway) consist of a 102-foot right-of-way rather than the 88-foot right-of-way provided within the Riverside County and Lake Elsinore General Plans. The increased right-of-way will permit a 14-foot-wide landscape median. Parkway scrips, roadway shoulders, and travel lanes are still consistent with county and city standards. 4-19 JBX/709EI01A2 Offsite roadways that will be utilized by the development include Interstate 15, State Route 74, and Riverside Street. In the vicinity of the project site, the following roadway conditions exist: • Interstate 15: The Corona Freeway extends from San Diego northward to Corona. Freeway interchanges near the site include grade-separated interchanges at Nichols Road, State Route 74, and Main-Street. 0 State Route 74: This east-west roadway extends from San Juan Capistrano tc the west, to the Perris/Hemet area to the east. It is designated on the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan as an arterial roadway in the vicinity of the site. It is currently a two-lane roadway with numerous horizontal curves adjacent to the site. • Riverside Street: This roadway is designated as a secondary roadway on the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan. It is currently a two-lane roadway in the vicinity of the site. Existing Level of Service Exhibit 4-4 identifies the existing conditions for arterials near the project site. The number of through-lanes for existing roadways and the existing intersection controls are identified. The average two-way traffic volumes for these roadways are shown on Exhibit 4-5. These average two-way volumes determine the level of service for roadways. Level of service is used to describe the quality of traffic flow. Levels of service A, B, and C operate quite well. Level of service C is typically the standard to which rural roads are designed, and level of service D is the standard to which urban roadways are typically designed. Level of service D is characterized by fairly restricted traffic flow. Level of service E is the maximum volume a facility can accommodate, and will result in possible stoppages of momentary duration. Level of service F occurs when a facility is overloaded, and is characterized by stop-and-go traffic with stoppages of long duration. A description of the various levels of traffic service are indicated on Exhibit 4-6, along with the relationship between Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) and level of traffic service. All onsite and offsite roadways within the vicinity of Ramsgate are currently operating at a level of service B. 4-20 JBX/709EIO1A2 I 74 I 5 RIVERSIDE ST P� 4 I I , 1 r I I I O I 2 ! J s -- 3 -- - / Legend ® Arterial Highway I J ® Major Highway with Median I 8 with Median I Secondary Highway --/ 1 I Residential Collector I P.N.709SP01 Michael Bondman Associates Circulation Plan Amended Ramsgate Specific Plan ,North OLI&900 BET Exhibit 4`- m e � I Orec r+ r ui a -ft-.00 000 N ` / 00 N Greenwald N Avenue, CD 00, roc N ; ;N to 7 IOle � i N I / I W 'low NUN `` c E l `\✓ I �ot�a O Q N " bJ aa�� N O P� N '�` �3f�n0 'rr a�` ul to N N �c G 0 L. J GO N F N N PJGC U LL _ st N >� N F- 4-1 a Jc= O. 0 -� O j GG� N P°` N \ L' C V CZ r E O ' �y I u) Ja� z a LL t N I � w, J J N ,$ G N vA d I Z W Co CD J Cc CM CD CC > E Wco cc Ztt o L $ W 0 N ` Greenwald Avenue e O ' y O I ----J �' cc 1 r , E 41) ♦ � / rr ♦ 1♦ N , ' o �_---1` ----_---J G I ` 1 I 1 I , I I TQ 1 � fn P, C5 �%o .� O C G P ec In 1 o O et c CL . 1 � eel 0 C V 1h N I J (U COcr G° aA a cc J O •X cc I W Cc Ener Intersection Capacity. Level of Utilization ti Service i Description (seconds) (Percent) A Level of Service A occurs when 0 to 5.0 0 to 60 progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during the t phase Most vehicles do not top at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. B Level of Service B.generally occurs 5.1 to 61 to 70 with good progression and/or short 15.0 cycle lenqths. More vehicles stop than for LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay. C Level of Service generally results when 15.1 to 71 to 80 there is fair progression and/or longer 25.0 cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear in this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, althoughmany still pass through the intersection without stopping. D Level of Service D generally results in 25.1 to 81 to 90 noticeable congestion. Longer delays 40.0 mav result from some combination of unfavorable pp Sion, long cycle lengths, or hiirvolume to capacity ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. E Level of Service E is considered to be . 40.1 to 91 to 100 the limit of acceptable delay. These 60.0 high delay values generally inc di poor progression long cycle lengths, and hicjh volume �o capacity ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent F Level of Service F is considered to be 60.1 + 100 + unacceptable to most drivers. This condition often occurs with over- saturation, i.e. , when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the inter- section. It may also occur at high volume to capacity ratios below 1.00 with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing causes to such delay levels. SOURCE:KUNLMAN ASSOCIATES Source: "Highwa CapacityManual" Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, Lticnal Research Council, Washington, D.C. , 1985, Pages 9-4 to 9-5. P.N.709EI01 %%V% Level of Service Description 11%1 N Ramsgate Specfic Plan First Amendment `X 6 Existing Intersection Capacity Utilization The technique used to assess the operation of an intersection is the ICU. To. calculate an ICU, the volume of traffic using the intersection is compared to the capacity of the intersection. ICU is usually expressed as a percent. The percent represents t:.at portion of the hour required to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate all intersection traffic, if all approaches operate at capacity. The ICUs for existing intersections in the vicinity of the project are shown in Table 4-5. Existing ICUs are based on manual peak-hour turning movement counts made by Junzman Associates in October 1988. An ICU of 0.90 represents the maximum desirable traffic volume, and at 1.00, the theoretical capacity of the intersection is reached. As Table 4-5 shows, all roadways within the vicinity of Ramsgate are operating well below the maximum desirable traffic volume. Exhibit 4-7 depicts the existing eve-ing peak-hour turning movement volumes for intersections within the vicinity of Ramsgate. Existing City and County Circulation Elements Exhibit 4-8 illustrates the current City of Lake Elsinore Land Use Plan (circulation plan). Exhibit 4-9 illustrates the current Riverside County Circulation Element. Both of these exhibits depict the nature and extent of arterial highways that are needed to adequately serve future development. Exhibit 4-10 shows the arterial highway cross sections for Lake Elsinore and Riverside County. 4.4.2 PROJECT IMPACTS Project-Related Traffic To estimate project-related traffic volumes at various points on the street network, a three-step process is utilized. First, the traffic that will be generated by the proposed development is determined. Second, the traffic volumes are geographically 4-21 JBX/709EI01A2 Table 4-5 EXISTTNG I TIE SDC'TIM CAPACITY LTII T7.ATTCN AND LANE GDMMMICS Intersection Approach lanes (1) Even'-n4 Pe ur North- South- Fast- West- IQJ (2) brnmd bouuxd bound botuxi Intersection T Rt Lt T Rt It T Rt It T Rt It PM 15 FreewaySB Ramos State Rote 7 (EW) ( ) at 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 66 15 FreewayB State Route NB 744 (m�s) (NS) at 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 59 Dexter Avenue NS I at State Route 7 (�W) 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 67 Conard Avenue (NS) at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 60 Riverside Street (NS) at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 52 Greenwald Avenue (NS) at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 60 (1) When a right turn lane is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes. (2) lion Capacity Utilization (IcU) T = Through Rt = Right It = Left SOURCE:KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES _ 1 P.N.709SP01 U O � � Z W pN0 `70 E �[SmLO -20 c J + L f-- 60 Greenwald Avenue Y. 40-j w m 10 20; 0�c $ a to 0 0'7 0 t-10 i-20 Riverside Street ' r co N 00 LO « in 0 z u M N O 1 l 0mo — NC'f� 0 J l L r-10 Conard Avenue W 10-1 "1 1 f E 10- 000 -� 40- MOM E 1 0 t-20 Ovo --10 J - r-10 Dexter Avenue ♦"� 1 to-t 000 L .L 1 40-1 (n 0 u. E J : mle =-190 co a. l J ! (-210 .i � w 0) (D V I-15 FreewayE CL .� > ch 00 > Q ,J �7 W +� lL � 150-J 1 0) 0) CD 130-j oo � C_ �^ n E woo J 1 t r•,. 1 - 11 Lao ' waiermmnl� '' , nmimuuunuwmunwmnnuuu "� ' y'' ram:..>,::-•,:,::;. e;=� - r : I .1 � �----/ \ a�_�� rrr_.•i� .yr.-._�s_.irrts � i �i / � I � I / _ 1 .:,.�. 11 Site I. RAMSGATE 1111�1 ,7, to SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 1 �••. 9"'L.! ���. I L.�D.U. / ACRE s,\14A�` 14B , ;ram�} :'�11SSING UA1K EC IF7�1 PLAN`!AREA FREEWAY ARTERIAL MAJOR ® SECONDARY MODIFIED SECONDARY E:ooloMODIFIED COLLECTOR P.N.709E101 Source: Clty of Lake Elsinore City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Ramsgate Specfic Plan First Amendment M E hblt 8 I 1 � w I `r'1 = J ca 1 I- ai 1 • > i 1 J W W H ETHANA( Z ;d I WI 7 , I LI • `oELFOR� AV L I RCS % 9 � • w'>Of Cr 0. N�r ,O�''• RIVERRSSI0E- ST li�� ao _ s<�F� 74 ViON qLF ' == r' � Site Pg CITY OF LAKE ELSiNORE LEGEND CLASSIFICATION RIGHT OF WAY SYMBOL SECONDARY BB' •mmmme MAJOR 100' ARTERIAL 110' �+ MOUNTAIN ARTERIAL 1 10' URBAN ARTERIAL 134' EXPRESSWAY VARIABLE FREEWAY VARIABLE - SPECIFIC PLAN ROAD VARIABLE BRIDGE U /1 P.N.7096101 SOwoe : Riverside County Riverside County General Plan Circulation Midud Bndnvn Aroavoe Ramsg ate Specfic Plan First Amendment Exhibit 4-9 134 K'W 110, 12 2 —12 12 w /e}-.le—olA—n 1. 12 a�I —u—+ 7 12— L/tBIW ARTERWL HIGHWAY 110 R:W ee 12 e 13 12' 2 �10 22—{i12 2 /2 1Y—{—e 12 ARTERIAL HIGHWAY 100 WIN se 12 1 12 1 •Wlwa"/MW11o*MWrmISO" loll FMA=HIGHWAY e/' R/W 64' 'T SECONDARY HIGH WAY N•R'W 4 4' It' 0—{-12�1Z•�• tI' 1 COLLECTOR HK3HWAY P.N.709EI01 Source: Riverside County Typical Cross-Sections NNNN Riverside County Plan of Streets and Highways AIN3 �I R�amsgate Specfic Plan First Amendment Exhibit 4-10 distributed to major attractions of trips, such as employment centers, commercial centers, recreational areas, or residential areas. Finally, the trips are assigned to specific roadways and the project-related traffic volumes are determined on a route- by-route basis. Traffic Generation The traffic generated by the project is determined by multiplying an Appropriate trip generation rate by the quantity of land used. Trip generation rates are predicted on the assumption that energy costs, the availability of roadway capacity, the availability of vehicles to drive, and our life-styles remain similar to what we know today. A major change in these variables may affect trip generation rates. Trip generation rates were determined for daily traffic, morning peak=hour inbound and outbound traffic, and evening peak-hour inbound and outbound traffic for -the proposed land uses. Traffic volumes were determined by multiplying the traffic generation rates by the land use quantities. Table 4-6 exhibits the traffic generation rates and Table 4-7 exhibits the peak-hour and daily traffic volumes for the Ramsgate development. A total of 42,480 vehicle trips will be generated by the project. TABLE 4-6 TRAFFIC GENERATION RATES Morning Evening Peak Hour Peak Hour Land Use Units* In Out In Out Daily Ranches/Estates DU 0.30 0.70 0.80 0.40 12.00 Hillside/Garden DU 0.20 0.55 0.64 0.37 10.06 Village DU 0.17 0.50 0.47 0.36 8.00 Apartments DU 0.11 0.41 0.41 0.22 6.60 Commercial Retail TSF 1.04 0.45 2.51 2.62 64.48 DU = Dwelling Unit TSF = Thousand Square Feet ' Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, Fourth Edition, 1987, Land Use Categories 210, 231, 221, and 820. 4-23 JBX/709EI01A2 TABLE 4-7 PROJECT EXTERNAL TRAFFIC GENERATION 1 Trips Generated Time Period By Project Morning Peak-H(.;:r Inbound 810 Outbound 1,480 Total: 2,290 Evening Peak-Hour Inbound 2,230 Outbound 1,640 Total: 3,870 Daily 42,480 Note: Trips generated are rounded to nearest 10. Source: Kunzman Associates. Traffic Distribution and Assignment l Traffic distribution is the determination of the directional orientation of traffic. It J is based on the geographical location of employment centers, commercial centers, recreational areas, or residential area concentrations. Exhibit 4-10a presents the link locations analyzed for project-related impacts. Exhibit 4-11 contains the directional distribution and assignment of the project traffic. As shown, 65 percent r of the project-generated traffic will be entering and exiting from Ramsgate Drive. Approximately 10 percent of the project traffic will be entering and exiting from ` Riverside Street. r 4-24 JBX/709EI01A2 m = e ep 'Sir a o 0 Owl � a zip �` I LLJ 'Nom1� I II " Greenwald Avenue - I 1 � Q 1 V :R ` `1 ) � � I 1000 o ,N ' ♦ II 4-0 ` I C OD I ' I � --------------- Q I aot CO)e\ I` O 1 P'' Ln A ��S So LL . c / Lc' GaF a " _1 p� cc�a�1 P,cc 1 CI) C. 1< 0 " o U cc Ic► �,�� a�, 0 tm b Y E _C cc co (X' e c cK — " o Z�� ' a Yj wl uj d N ��_. c Y ` m U Greenwald Avenue ` / I o i N_ o_ 01u. ed O Cc Go�a� P°�cJ` �cJG G N •= 0. CIO CL u � � V c L 0 0+ e o 4-6w�` W f+ I a u N G` C y u� �'� a /0 J N I P1 1 J'� cr Summation of Project-Related Traffic Based on the identified traffic generation and distribution, project-related traffic volumes were calculated for the project link locaL1011S shown on Exhibit 4-10a. Table 4-8 presents the link calculations for the project. Internal Circulatio« The internal circulation system for Ramsgate will be comprised of a network of local neighborhood streets. The local neighborhood streets will provide access to the onsite arterial system. At this time, the internal circulation plan for Ramsgate is not available. Subsequent internal circulation analyses should occur at the tentative tract level of design. TABLE 4-8 DAILY LINK VOLUME CALCULATIONS FOR THE PROJECT Percent Link Daily Link Location Using Link Traffic Volume Location 1 20% 6,800 Location 2 70 23,790 Location 3 70 23,790 Location 4 70 239790 Location 5 70 23,790 Location C 58 19,710 Location 7 20 6,800 Location 8 20 6,800 Location 9 15 5,100 Location 10 25 8,500 Location 11 25 8,500 Location 12 25 8,500 Location 13 25 &,500 J Location 14 0 0 Location 15 0 0 Location 16 13 4,420 Location 17 58 19,710 . Location 18 10 3,400 Location 19 5 1,700 Location 20 10 3,400 Location 21 0 0 Location 22 5 1,700 J 4-25 JBX/709EI01A2 . J Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions Exhibit 4-12 shows the daily traffic volumes for existing traffic conditions plus project traffic conditions without other planned development. As shown, traffic volumes south of Ramsgate Drive would increase from 30,000 daily trips to 36,000 daily trips. Traffic trips north of Ramsgate Drive would increase from approxi- mately 16,000 daily trips to approximately 18,000 daily trips. Existing Plus Project Intersection Capacity Utilization The ICUs for the existing plus project traffic conditions have been calculated and are shown in Table 4-9 without improvements. As indicated, several intersections in the project area would operate at undesirable levels. Table 4-10 shows existing traffic conditions plus project intersection capacity utilization and lane geometries with improvements. As shown, all project area intersections would operate at acceptable i levels. I Traffic Signal warrants Traffic signal warrants have been adopted by the Federal Highway Administration and Caltrans. These warrants are based the eighth highest hour volumes in a day. It is assumed by Caltrans that the eighth highest hour is 62.5 percent of the peak hour, 4 and the peak hour is generally 10 percent of the daily traffic. Thus, the signal warrants can also be expressed. in terms of daily traffic volumes. Rural traffic volume warrants are utilized when the 85th percentile speed of the major street traffic exceeds 40 miles per hour, or when the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000. Traffic signals will be warranted at the intersections of Ramsgate Drive/State iRoute 74, I-15 Northbound Ramps/State Route 74, and I-15 Southbound Ramps/State Route 74 for existing plus project traffic conditions. J 4-26 JBX/709EIOlA2 J of N m C � � U � O t, V! w �_ L a. N W ------------ 0000 ` Y U 0000� N Greenwald Avenue ` f I , I 1 '0 0 -• N , 04 I I _ � ' 1 -- ------ I I ��� �. Cl 9a�`s f �a� r ti 1 •a I � a O' I �o1�a CZ -s�"/� CI) \\ �J Je i woo /d Ogg l— vI a.� d ♦ ,pG JCS `�o o�a�a c.) Ii, lb N G, cl c rn Ca OOe+�� .J v .a� CL L e P ' CIS Ic dLn 0 G aq d x � w � 1 Table 4-9 EXIS'I*ING PLUS PR0.7ECT INPIItSECIUM CAPACITY UI'ILI=CN AND LANE GOU10MICS, Wr2H0 r Intersection Approach Laijes (1) Evening Peak Hour North- South- East- West- ICJ (2) bound bound bound bound TnteYseotioa� T Rt Lt T Rt Lt T Rt It T Rt It PM 15 Freeway SB Ramps State Route 74 ( (NS) at 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 166 1 15 Freeway NB Ramps (NS) at State Route 74 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 130 Dexter Avenue (NS) at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 165 Canard Avenue MS) at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 157 Riverside Street (NS) at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 76 Greenwald Avenue (NS) at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 88 (1) When a right turn lane is designated, .the lane can either be striped f or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes. (2) Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICJ) T = Rt = Right It x _ Lett SOURCE: KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES J J J J P.N.709SP01 Table 4-10 AIM PUM PRW= INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTI'ILS=ON AND LANE GMEIRIC.S, WITH Intersection Approach TA (1)(1) aken irq Hour North- South- Fast- West- ICU (2) bound bound bound bound f Intersection T Rt Lt T Rt Lt T Rt Lt T Rt Lt PM 15 Freeway SB Ramps (N5) at State Route 74 ( ) 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 76 15 FreewayNB Ramps State Roe 744 ( ( ) at 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 1 0 61 Dexter Avenue (NS) at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 72 Canard Avenue ((NS) at State Route 74 ( ) 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 89 (P�roj e t Westerly Entrance State to Route 74 (EW) 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 2 0 0 50 Ramsgato Drive (NS) at l State Rohe 74 (EW) 0 1 2 0 0 0 2 1 0 2 0 1 65 El Toro Fast Project Westerly Entrance (NS) at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 42 Riverside Street (NS) at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 76 Pro'ect Northerly Entrance (NS? at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 83 Greenwald Avenue (NS) at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 88 (1) When a right turn lane is designated, .the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the . l lanes. (2) Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) T Rt = Riqht h _l Lt = Leerft SOURCE:KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES �1 P.N.709SPOI Signals should be installed only when warranted. Installation of unwarranted signals can increase accident potential, energy consumption, and air pollutant emissions, while costing governmental jurisdictions approximately $500 per muuth for maintenance and utilities. Future Traffic Conditions Future traffic conditions, reflecting 1988 land use conditions, were analyzed for areawide growth with the proposed project and surrounding development. Exhibit 4-13 shows surrounding developments within the proximity of the project site. These developments were identified by the City of Lake Elsinore in October 1988. The following is a cumulative list of surrounding developments. • El Toro East--approximately 4,330 dwelling units • Canyon Lake Hills--2,000 dwelling units • Lake Elsinore Heights--277 mobile home units • Dexter Avenue/Central Avenue--12,8 5 9-square foot retail site • Dexter Avenue/Second Street--33,530-square foot industrial site • Collier Avenue/Chaney Street--284,100-square foot industrial site • Collier Avenue/Central Avenue--158,000-square foot industrial site • Collier Avenue/Riverside Drive--76,100-square foot industrial site • Canyon Lake Hills--2,000 residential units (proposed) • Spyglass Ridge (Tract 22905)--598 residential units; 100,000 square foot commercial, 150-room hotel The City of Perris was contacted (Mazley, pers. comm., 10/88) regarding potential 74 corridor. The city representative indicated that the majority of the city's new development is occurring within the north-central and eastern portions of the city. The majority of these developments would not utilize State Route 74 as their primary offsite access route, thus not significantly affecting the circulation system for the Ramsgate project area. The representative indicated that the city was not ` aware of any proposed development occurring between Perris and Lake Elsinore. To ` 1 account for any future developments, an areawide annual growth rate of 2.5 percent Iover a 10-year period was incorporated into the traffic analysis. 4-29 JBX/709EIO1A2 "1 Surrounding Development I 1 Table 4-11 shows daily and peak-hour vehicle trips generated by the surrounding planned or anticipated development. Exhibits 4-14 to 4-22 show the distribution 1 patterns assumed for each of the cumulative projects shown on Exhibit 4-13. These distribution patterns are generally used directly as shown to estimate future daily traffic volumes on streets in the study area. Future Daily Traffic Volumes i Exhibit 4-23 shows the daily traffic volumes that can be expected for 1998 traffic conditions with the project other known developments, and areawide growth. As the table indicates, a total of 73,940 daily trips would be generated by other develop- ments in the area. Combining the 42,480 trips generated by the Ramsgate project with the trips generated by other projects, a total of 116,420 trips woul%'. occur within the project area. TABLE 4-11 EXTERNAL TRIPS GENERATED BY OTHER DEVELOPMENTS Morning Evening Peak Hour Peak Hour Project In Out In Out Daily El Toro East 810 1,720 2,300 1,730 42,960 Canyon Lake Hills 320 880 1,020 590 169100 Lake Elsinore Heights 20 70 80 50 1,060 1 Dexter/Central 20 20 70 60 19970 Dexter/Second 20 Noma 10 20 190 Collier/Chaney 210 50 50 210 1,910 Collier/Central 100 20 30 100 880 Collier/Riverside 50 10 10 50 420 Spyglass Ridge Tract 22905 170 280 420 350 8 450 Total: 1,720 3,050 3,990 3,160 73,940 Note: Trips generated are rounded to nearest 10. I a Nom = Nominal; less than 5 vehicles per hour. JSource: Kunzman Associates. 4-3 0 JBX/709EIOlA2 J Legend EL TORO EAST ----� ---h--------�.,,."- -a---=�e *1 -�- t ----- -------------}--------�?-- 1• ----- -- -<..---="---- ----------- I Ii I I 1 •I"• g I I SPYGLASS RIDGE LAKE ELSINORE HEIGHTS c __ I 1 1 � <-_E-- I DEXTER AVENUE/ CENTRAL AVENUE RETAIL SITE I ;;` {: <; �j'= i + use —+ _-_____'�• S , DEXTER AVENUE/ 2nd STREET INDUSTRIAL SITE � I i�i°2e�5_�s4z_•Y � 3__-- COLLIER AVENUE/ CHANEY `�,,! ti9 c.•...�3,_ I s!L`te•u�� 1 �' �a„,s f!-, r <iEY I — I I STREET INDUSTRIAL SITE tg _) C.•nJ•'•! _ {`r- E' •1 = sauase.ft. a _ ♦ I �•� t , � p^ I t COLLIER AVENUE/ CENTRAL —T-- (�--------1------- --- -;-c•.. T -=-S- -----------� ---------- 1 AVENUE INDUSTRIAL SITE + - • 2t�� 1` \ —— I• `: 1.'• Ci'' I \ 1 •tR � 4i<_<SR F.�T'. <I .< I R I ♦ i e. ' I ''' a'G i' I 1 �D 1 !! 1 F8 COLLIER AVENUE/ RIVERSIDE _ �Ioi DRIVE INDUSTRIAL SITE iI� _<uitx ' I . _ i 1 ZF J -- " I-- —•*': 1 1 4 < PROJECT SITE `'.=; _ ' •G " �.` .t+ ! • CQ I .` ; I F 1 --� ,In <;' I 9 CANYON LAKE HILLS G NN �Sp4Q-' .r+�R t �k cp :..sr•� �L •`�i I e s>•s>• i i �L�, �Fr •, f s� ilk - { _ I - -- I - ---- --- --- 11 - `_ i I 9 cZ. -------1--- - --+-- •�•- i- -++- --------- --- A. r .•o: i - 10Cumulative Project Map ------ { �.- �....' • ,,'�L.. •-----iT�----- _ I t��<<` ' ' J Rcamsgate Specfic -------1--�f------------ 1}-----------f ----- -�-- - � s r?4 yu'�wl+il�ln'n1 Plan First Amendment LAKE OO ELSINORE1 • .a a < ¢ • •• ~ C�R :_�llw!IIIRI I_ I I I L ce;,�•°r' z �< I , t . I -------- --J_---- 1. -- —i• P.N.709E101 N OT TO SCALE Nonh Michael Br•ndman AaNxute. Exhibit 4-13 co � -- L �♦ E �.1 it w C ♦� LLI Z LC) ` ,` 0-0 a Ncs Greenwald Avenue 1 000, ftw- Lo { N , I I ` i I `v Pie°J Add�S �o O N .V L LL. cz a G� a AL o . l WCL 0 co IV co o I W t' J N G dA�s d'' w� .o O d 0 N I-- E W a: 'A U � O � = x O c � � z ♦ � a a , an � o a / 0 ue I I 1 �A IN ` ♦ '/ I � � I I -- ♦ I o N � I ----�� ---------------� I o � co WE CD CC P� X ci/ w opccJ �� CL J0 a, J N co co Ca Irc N U O � N � � t — N C `�! o w 0 Z f a N ` /���� GreenwalO Avenue ` � , I 'c v ♦ ♦ O > / I v 2 ILn 11000 cn E 1 - -------------- .- co E f ate / 1 J I � I � 1 O W � ♦./ co c` / a O -� Goya �cJG 0 Ps a Oe+ O GCJ ` i L o Ps J U V ♦� � a C4 o I W Qp C � `41 N 0 a � o � L _ c co LU E x � N Y � � m g �. z � a M ` � Greenwald Avenue r I ` I I I I I I I I � s I ' N , 1 OOOP _ 1 tJ IN 000 1 I Ile ` I I I I tG c•��J cJc i Mo. 1 e a •�0 CLM o c' GaF N C ..� c2�a P,�cJ �cJ� � o L�..G° GaF% CO �•+ E: a. � C � d oG* o Q .� w oCL 1 G I N c � C u , 0. C4 I Q J n sue° 'O co Q� X X M J oWCc Cz�� .. C W - —�-lip ' � Y ` w ` m o U ` Z a Greenwald Avenue ly I lop mm I i ♦ I t- I I 7c N �07 ` +� �• , I v I u � I: I ♦ I 1 I cn ae 'i o ++ p LL to cJt ♦ c' Ga � Q� +� 0 Pie In cJo e� U) C: CL J ; UO " V NO oe o \ •9 c�J ` P' 1 C W I ' ( L .J ' , ♦+ C u'U w cv Q 0 u X — Cc cr d 0 G a a I L J n X 0 LU X � CCA r Z� s Z — � W �` o w 0 'Z ` 2 a Greenwald Avenue ` r 1 -- I ` 1 I I � I I r I I ' ��o ♦ -MOM I 1 L-_-� O I ` S L----` / I --- ----`Jei/ 1 J � � CZ • I .�. -J CJc r _�d Oc\ L f%O N cz � G°ca p c ccJc / � Q. J / CIO o L X w u U W a �c+`c L N o Q Jc � o � ate+ c U) PJc U _J � u in i Qczcc C N o� 4-4 Cal (D to G JDi J7 I N J N m� ��O 0 Jed' N -O cc J 0 _ x N O t O m � 3 N � W c - _ � o ` Y _ m � z a .000 o � r ` Greenwald Avenue r ------- 000, � I I I � d "► .v I Ln •� , ' I co --------------- I �- MO. use/ � I .0 U. Ln ryCN — .J co oc�` P.4 coo L— " a G Pie N T I E co u v J .2 n I L c I In Go E J N �� 'O C4 0 X Cc U W cr J m N O 3 Z: "i co W ` C � o ` Y w t ftftft` o ♦ a Greenwald Avenue ` / I r � � I ;v NNW! (!J v ♦ *10 S � i i 1 ♦ 'i r. ♦ J � O 1 to E I � ----------- ' ' _ __J f r__J � ww`` iMM r J E ' CD V a°� > N � � CG\ L � Ls .1G ,� q +�s a�n� N L CZ LL O G a) �.._ C a �f JG -� cn d OG* \ W W lo GCJG CL ch I 4) c V N Q cz m Cl) _ =; U Sc: cr cis m N Uz��� v H y ' U N � W c `� Y LU v � z a // Greenwald Avenue r Vor 1 co CD I I I � I L �ry I I � I _ _ ' E I 1 II 1 ' I O% J L r m E � I x a LO PyG�J A°'d�s o O LL CIA G°�`� Poe GcJc N F Po Cc GaF% U ( . u vCO (J Qc 4) rJc ` o) CL ch p PoG 1 C u a c4i Go\\`c� J I c c C" J � d y Q Cc cc Ziff� - om= L ♦ K W cc ` w 0 r� Greenwaid Avenue a I I c 0002 "oft Y i ♦ +'' --------------- i I •— ` �yc� cl LO •v�J Jt �� fd OCN ff\ YI co CD C "' Co. U G J0 c CL ce�a� PJGc N Ikt N ' C 2 1y ' •/1 L '7 G JA J I LL � Along I-15, 40,000 vehicles per day are added to the future daily traffic volumes to account for regional growth outside of the study area. Future Intersection Capacity Utilization Future ICUs for buildout for the General Plan network, including the proposed project, other developments, and areawide growth, are shown in Table 4-12. The ICU calculations are based on geometrics with improvements. As shown in Table 4=12, for 1988 conditions, the intersections in the vicinity of the site will operate at ICUs ranging from 0.49 to 0.87 with recommended improvements. Those intersections with higher ICUs (above 0.80) are located south of the project site near the I-15 interchange. Traffic Signal Warrants For future traffic conditions with areawide growth, traffic signals will be warranted at the intersections of: Collier Avenue/State Route 74 I-15 Freeway Southbound Ramps/State Route 74 I-15 Freeway Northbound Ramps/State Route 74 1 Dexter Avenue/State Route 74 1 Cambern Avenue/State Route 74 Conard Avenue/State Route 74 Ramsgate Drive/State Route 74 El Toro East Project Westerly Access/State Route 74 Riverside Street/State Route 74 Project Northern Access/State Route 74 Greenwald Avenue/State Route 74 ..1 4.4.3 MITIGATION MEASURES The following measures are recommended to mitigate the impact of the j roect on p �I traffic circulation: i 4-31 JBX/709EIOlA2 Table 4-12 FTJILktE IN TERSEGTICN CAPA= LTMIZATICIN MAID LANE GDCL=C5, WIM ntersecticin APPrtach Zwies (1) Evening Peak our North- South- East West- ICU (2) bound bound bound bound Intersection T Rt It T Rt Lt T Rt It T Rt Lt PM lFreewayaUte 74 Ram}�s (N5) at (M 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 1 0 3 0 2 87 15 FreewayNB State Roe 7� a ) 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 0 1 3 1 0 69 Dexter Avenue NS at State Route 7 ( 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 89 Cunard Avenue (NS) at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 86 Pro'ect Westerly Entrance (NS3 at 1 State Route 74 (EW) 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 3 0 0 55 Ramsgate Drive (NS) at State Route 74 (EW) 0 1 2 0 0 0 3 1 0 3 0 1 73 El Toro East Project I Westerlyy Entrance (NS) at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 1 1 1 1 3 0 2 3 0 1 69 Riverside Street (NS) at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 71 Project Northerly Entrance (NS3 at State P"ite 74 (EW) 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 1 49 Greenwald Avenue (NS) at State Route 74 (EW) 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 71 (1) Tien a right turn lane is designated, ,the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the 4 through lanes. (2) Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) I T = s Rt = Right tt Lt = Left SOURCE: KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES I P.N.709SP01 1.. The project should participate in an areawide circulation improvement program that is anticipated to upgrade State Route 74 to an urban arterial (134-foot right-of-way) and provide a coordinated set of traffic signals as indicated on Exhibit 4-24. A portion of the right-of-way for the urban arterial shall be reflected on subsequent tentative tract maps. 2. Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy Permits, the project proponent shall improve Highway 74 to a major arterial highway (110-foot right-of-way) between Riverside Street and Ramsgate Drive. 3. Prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy permits for Planning Areas 4 and 5, the project proponent shall improvs Riverside Street to a secondary arterial highway (minimum 88-foot right-of-way) between Ramsgate Drive and Highway 74. 4. Prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy permits, the project proponent shall improve Ramsgate Drive to a secondary highway (minimum 88-foot right-of-way) between Highway 74 and the northern boarder of Planning Area 3. 5. Prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy permits for Planning Areas 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, the project proponent :7"sll improve Ramsgate Drive to a secondary highway (minimum 88-foot right-of-way) between Planning Area 3 and the northern boundary of Ramsgate. 6. Subsequent tentative tract maps and site plans shall maintain and reflect a high level of service along arterials by restricting parking and controlling roadway access. 7. When warranted and required by the city traffic engineer, traffic signals should be installed at the intersections of Ramsgate Drive/State Route 74, I-15 northbound ramps/State Route 74, and I-15 southbound ramps/State Route 74. 8. Intersection geometries as provided in Table 4-12 within Section 4.4.2 shall be implemented. 9. Landscape plantings and signs should be limited in height within the vicinity of project roadways to ensure good visibility. Such plantings shall be reflected on subsequent landscape plans. 10. The project proponent should comply with the project circulation design recommendations contained in Appendix F and incorporated herein by reference. 4-33 JBX/709EIO1A2 4.4.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS When built out, Ramsgate will generate an additional 42,480 daily vehicle trips on the regional circulation system servicing the Ramsgate area. When combined, l Ramsgate plus other regional developments will generate a total of 73,940 daily vehicle trips. Intersections in the vicinity of the Ramsgate site will operate at level of service D or better for future traffic conditions with improvements. 4.4.5 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS f Implementation of the proposed project would increase daily traffic volumes along arterials within the vicinity of Ramsgate. Implementation of the mitigation measures provided in Section 4.4.3 will mitigate onsite intersections to level of service C. Offsite intersections near I-15 will operate near or at level of service D. 1 4.5 NOISE Noise is defined as "unwanted sound" that is annoying and/or harmful because of its loudness, pitch, or duration. Noise is commonly measured in decibels (dB). The A-weighted decibel scale (dBA) is a measure of loudness to give more "weight" to sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. Land uses that are typically sensitive to noise impacts include residential areas, schools, hospitals, churches, libraries, and outdoor recreation areas. "Sensitive" land uses are generally defined as those that are highly susceptible to environmental conditions which diminish the livability and utility of the area. Exhibit 4-25 reflects the compatibility of specific land uses with various ranges of noise. Noise pollution is measured using criteria related to annoyance and environmental health. Excessive noise levels not only cause annoyance, but can also cause both physical and psychological damage. Noise impacts are commonly evaluated in the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) noise index. CNEL represents, in a single number, the combined effect of noise exposure averaged over 24 hours. The CNEL methodology applies weightings for time of day. Weighting factors of 3 and 10 are p.m.) and nighttime (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) periods. 1 4-34 JBX/709EIOlA2 U�U N Z w Z96— ♦ LLJ z N��� a A ` N / ,5� f Greenwald N Avenu V S\09 I D _ rn I I f U Q 40- L. --1 I �' /' o ` o L____J ♦/ ` / / I Q L---� s E dolS � r� � E I Opq �P �� N L---- l�N �$ ---------------J !n I I I 1 N -_�� -----eJ�Nr--J `_�a��• y�do N ' I � JJ�1 v J .� eta U Oe (n vI I Im Q Pie ,° '�S So C L 0 LL c G°ca M C a c m a E o pe E Q V v a o� e� P� •Q Q� ` in Fie ' C .` C V U 1ID-GO I C 1° « so ou o o cc J a W 0 O 'S,�'. co Qm 75 cc COMMUNITY NOISE EXPOSURE INTERPRETATION LAND USE CATEGORY Ldn OR CNEL,d8 55 60 65 70 75 80 NORMALLY ACCEPTABLE RESIDENTIAL — LOW DENSITY i I Specified land use is satisfactory,based SINGLE FAMILY, DUPLEX, upon the assumption that any buildings MOBILE HOMES involved are of normal conventional construction,without any special noise RESIDENTIAL —MULTI. FAMILY I insulation requirements. 1 TRANSIENT LODGING— I CONDITIONALLY ACCEPTABLE MOTELS, HOTELS 7 1 77 New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is ma& SCHOOLS, LIBRARIES, and needed noise insulation features included CHURCHES,HOSPITALS, in the design. Conventional construction,but NURSING HOMES with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally AUDITORIUMS,CONCERT suffice. HALLS,AMPHITHEATRES NORMALLY UNACCEPTABLE SPORTS ARENA,OUTDOOR SPECTATOR SPORTS New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed,a detailed analysis PLAYGROUNDS, of the noise reduction requirements must be NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. GOLF COURSES. RIDING _ STABLES,WATER RECREATION, "EARLY UNACCEPTABLE CEMETERIES New construction or development should OFFICE BUILDINGS,BUSINESS generally not be undertaken. i COMMERCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL INDUSTRIAL,MANUFACTURING I` UTILITIES,AGRICULTURE �• CONSIDERATIONS IN DETERMINATION OF NOISE—COMPATIBLE LAND USE A.NORMALIZED NOISE EXPOSURE INFORMATION DESIRED munity,Noise Exposure Areas greater than 65 d8 should be discour. l Where sufficient data exists,evaluate land use suitability with respect aged and considered located within normally unacceptable areas. to a "normalized" value of CNEL or Ldn. Normalized values are obtained by adding or subtracting the constants described in Table 1 C.SUITABLE INTERIOR ENVIRONMENTS 1 to the measured or calculated value of CNEL or Ldn. One objective of locating residential units relative to a known noise source is to maintain a suitable interior noise environment at no B.NOISE SOURCE CHARACTERISTICS greater than 45 dB CNEL of Ldn. This requirement, coupled with The land use noise compatibility recommendations should be viewed of the measured or calculated noise reduction performance of the type in able relation to the specific source of the noise. For example,aircraft structure under consideration, should govern the minimum accept- able distance to a noise source. and railroad noise is normally made up of higher single noise events than auto traffic but occurs less frequently. Therefore, different sources yielding the same composite noise exposure do not necessarily D.ACCEPTABLE OUTDOOR ENVIRONMENTS create the same noise erwiroomenc The State Aeronautics Act uses I 65 d8 CNEL as the criterion which airports must eventually meet to Another consideration,which in some communities is an overriding protect existing residential communities from unacceptable exposure factor, is the desire for an acceptable outdoor noise environment. to aircraft noise. in order to facilitate the purposes of the Act,one of When this is the case, more restrictive standards for land use com- which is to encourage land uses compatible with the 65 dB CNEL patibility, typically below the maximum considered "normally criterion wherever possible, and in order to facilitate the ability of acceptable" for that land use category,may be appropriate. airports to comply with the Act,residential uses located in Cons. l Source:California Department of Health, Guidelines for the Preparation and Content of Noise Elements of The General Plan, February, 1976. P.N.709E101 Noise -Land Use Compatibility Ramsgate Specific Plan First Amendment _ I Mtaea e.r,b,re A,.n..�ve J Exhibit 4 �; i The State of California has adopted noise standards in areas of regulation not.pre- empted by the federal government. State standards regulate noise levels of motor vehicles, freeway noise-affected classrooms, avund transmission, occupational noise control, and airport noise. The sound transmission control standards apply to the proposed project. lThe California Sound Transmission Control Standards are found in the California Administrative Code, 'Title 24, Building Standards, Chapter 2.5, as adopted March 1, 1986. The purpose of the standards is to establish minimum noise insulation 1 performance standards to protect persons within new hotels, motels, apartment houses, and dwellings other than detached single-family dwellings. The standards state that, with windows closed, interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed an annual noise level of 45 dB CNEL in any habitable room. In addition, residential buildings or structures within 60 dB CNEL from airport, vehicular, or industrial noise sources shall require an acoustical analysis indicating that the proposed building has been designed to limit intruding 1 noise to the allowable 45 dB CNEL, interior noise level. The City of Lake Elsinore has adopted a noise element of the General Plan to protect and maintain those areas having acceptable noise environments, and provide for the reduction of noise where the noise environment is unacceptable. The objective of the goals and policies is to protect and enhance the city's noise environment by simultaneously controlling noise at its source, along its transmission paths, and at the site of the ultimate receiver. Residential uses and land uses are compatible in areas of 65 dB CNEL or less. 4.5.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS I The acoustic environment of the project area is typical of rural residential areas. I The principal noise sources within the area consist of traffic along State Route 74 and other local roadways. _J 4-3 5 JBX/709EIOlA2 Traffic Noise Levels Existing traffic along the major roadways was computer models"' with the Federal Highway Administration's Highway Noise Prediction Modei, FHWA-RD-77-108 i (December 1978). This model was modified to generate CNEL values. Model input data included average daily traffic levels; day/evening/night percentages of autos, and medium and heavy trucks; .chicle speeds; ground attenuation factors; and road- way widths. Appendix G contains the noise modeling assumptions for each roadway segment. These assumptions are based on the traffic study and inspection of the site. The distances from the existing roadway centerlines to the 60, 65, and 70 dB CNEL contour lines are provided in Table 4-13. The noise contours depict worst-case conditions since they do not account for any obstructions (i.e., walls, buildings, etc.) to the noise path. The existing 55 dB CNEL contour from State Route 74, where the 1 project site borders the highway, extends approximately 59 feet from the roadway I centerline. The 65 dB CNEL contour for Riverside Street does not extend onto the project site. I 4.5.2 PROJECT IMPACTS Traffic Noise Levels The development of the project would introduce additional traffic into the area. I Table 4-14 quantifies the distances to the 60, 65, and 70 dB CNEL noise contours and compares the CNEL value at 50 feet from the centerline of the near travel lane to existing conditions. The contours do not assume any barriers to the noise path. The 65 dB CNEL for State Route 74, where the project site borders the highway, extends approximately 166 feet from the roadway centerline. The 65 dB CNEL contour for I Ramsgate Drive extends from less than 50 feet to 112 feet from the roadway J centerline, onto the project site. The 65 dB CNEL contour for Riverside Street does Jnot extend onto the project site. 4-36 I JBX/709EIO1A2 J TABLE 4-13 EXISTING ROADWAY NOISE LEVELSa Distance to CNEL CNEL atb From Roadway Centerline 50 feet Roadway Segment 60 65 70 State Route 74 East of Greenwald 124 58 <50 65.2 Greenwald to Ramsgate 123 58 <50 65.2 Ramsgate to Riverside 121 56 <50 65.0 Riverside to Southern Ramsgate 123 57 <50 65.1 Ramsgate to Conard 126 59 <50 65.3 Riverside Street l State Route 74 to Greenwald <50 <50 <50 52.2 Ramsgate State Route 74 to Riverside 58 <50 <50 60.2 Southern Section 184 86 <50 67.8 1 a Does not consider any obstructions to the noise path. b CNEL measured in feet from the centerline of the near travel lane. Source: Michael Brandman Associates 1988. The specific plan proposes residential and commercial uses. According to the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan noise element, residential land uses are normally acceptable in areas of 65 dB CNEL or less, and commercial uses are normally 1 acceptable in areas of 75 dB CNEL or less. For residential uses, if noise levels exceed 65 dB CNEL, interior and exterior noise levels must be reduced through mitigation to 45 dB CNEL and 65 dB CNEL, respectively. Project noise-sensitive jland uses should not be located in areas exposed to 65 dB CNEL or greater, without noise mitigation measures designed to reduce exterior noise exposure to less than 65 dB CNEL. Exhibit 4-26 identifies the 65 dB CNEL contour for State Route 74 for existing, existing plus project, and cumulative conditions. As long as noise-sensitive land uses are located outside the 65 dB CNEL, no exterior or interior noise mitiga- tion measures are necessary. If a noise-sensitive use is located in areas greater than 65 dB CNEL, noise-mitigating site planning, building construction measures, or other actions should be incorporated into the project design to achieve exterior and `j 4-37 I JBX/709EIO1A2 J TABLE 4-14 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT ROADWAY NOISE LEVELS Increase Over Distance to CNEL a CNEL at b Existing From Roadway Centerline 50 feet CNEL Roadwav Segment 60 65 70 1 State Route 74 East of Greenwald 375 175 84 71.0 5.7 Greenwald to Ramsgate 373 175 84 71.0 5.7 Ramsgate to Riverside 322 151 73 70.0 4.9 1 Riverside to Southern Ramsgate 349 163 79 70.0 5.3 Ramsgate to Conrad Riverside Street State Route 74 to Greenwald <50 <50 <50 57.5 5.4 6.7 1 Ramsgate Drive f State Route 74 to Riverside Street 76 <50 <50 60.7 -- 1 Riverside Street to"A" Street 152 72 <50 65.4 -- "A" Street to "B" Street 239 112 55 68.4 -- I 'B" Street to - State Route 74 237 111 54 68.4 a Does not consider any obstructions to the noise path. b CNEL measured in feet from the centerline of the near travel lane. I -- No existing roadway. Source: Michael Brandman Associates 1988. . 1 . I `I J JBX/709EIO1Jlx J .......... .... .. ....... ....... IVERSIDE SIRE El C . .......... 3. ............ .......... . ..........L R Q #4 6 1 y L. Ori- R3� t1 � r S,, LEGEND 7 . . . . . RESIDENTIAL 0.5- GREATER OU/AC RESIDENTIAL 0.5-3.7 DU/ACRE RESIDENTIAL 3.8 DU/AC . . . • RESIDENTIAL 3.8-6.0 DU/AC \ O RESIDENTIAL 6.1-12.0 DU/ACRE RESIDENTIAL. 12.1-20.0 DU/ACRE I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RESIDENTIAL 12.1-24.0 DU/AC I Oily PUBLIC PARK CUMULATIVE COMMERCIAL EXISTING OPEN SPACE SCHOOL SITE PROJECT 65 C N E L Contours P.N.709E101 Michael B—i...,'� Ramsqate Specific Plan VN First Amendment North 0 800 1600 FEE Exhibit 4-26 interior noise compatibility criteria. Single-family detached dwellings within the 60 dB CNEL also require mitigation measures to achieve interior noise levels of less 1 than 45 dB CNEL. Possible actions to mitigate the exterior noise level to 65 dB CNEL or less might include: I 0 Construction of walls or berms. • Acoustical site planning, such as orienting noise-sensitive areas away from roadways and locating non-noise sensitive structures between the noise source and noise-sensitive area. Construction Noise Construction noise will temporarily increase background noise levels. Construction activities are carried out in stages, each of which has its own mix of equipment and, I consequently, its own noise characteristics. During these stages, the character of noise levels surrounding the construction site will change as work progresses. 1 Despite the variety in type and size of construction equipment, similarities in the dominant noise sources and patterns of operation do exist. 1 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has found that the noisiest equipment types operating at construction sites typically range from 88 to 91 dBA at 50 feet. Typical operating cycles may involve 2 minutes of full power, followed by 3 or 4 minutes at lower settings. Typical noise levels at the site during construction would range from 75 dBA to 89 dBA (energy average) at 50 feet. Construction noise could result in short-term annoyance, depending on the proximity of nearby noise- sensitive land uses. l4.5.3 MITIGATION MEASURES Dwelling units within the 65 dB CNEL contour should require mitigation measures to achieve both acceptable interior and exterior noise levels. Possible action to mitigate potential increases in noise levels might include the following: l 4-39 JJBX/709EIO1A2 1. Prior to the issuance of building permits, an acoustical analysis report shall be prepared that analyzes exterior areas of residential uses that are affected by noise levels in excess of 65 dB CNEL. Additionally, the acoustical report shall include mitigation measures to reduce exterior noise impacts to levels less than 65 dB CNEL. 2. Dwelling units within a 65 dB CNEL contour, except detached single- family dwellings should be designed to meet the California Sound Transmission Control Standards, which requires interior noise levels from exterior noise sources to not exceed 45 dB CNEL in any hAL:table room. 4.5.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Cumulative traffic noise impacts along noise sensitive project roadways are } quantified in Table 4-15. The 65 dB CNEL contour for cumulative conditions State Route 74 is shown in Exhibit 4-26. With cumulative traffic volumes, noise levels J would increase a maximum of 9.4 dB CNEL beyond existing conditions. Where the I project site is located adjacent to State Route 74, the 65 dB CNEL contour extends 1 362 feet from the highway centerline. I . l . l J l l J 4-40 JBX/709EI01A2 TABLE 4-15 CUMULATIVE ROADWAY NOISE LEVELS Increase Over Distance to CNEL a CNEL at b Existing From Roadway Centerline 50 feet CNEL I ' Roadway Segment 60 65 70 ` State Route 74 East of Greenwald 586 274 132 72.9 7.6 Greenwald to Ramsgate 549 257 125 72.4 7.3 Ramsgate to Riverside 507 238 116 71.9 6.9 Riverside to Southern Ramsgate 565 265 128 72.6 7.5 Ramsgate to Conard 777 362 172 74.7 5.4 Riverside Street State Route 74 to Greenwald 86 <50 <50 61.6 9.4 Ramsgate State Route 74 to Riverside Street 76 <50 <50 60.7 -- Riverside Street to "A" Street 152 72 <50 65.4 -- ` "A" Street to "B" Street 239 112 55 68.4 1 Southern Section 250 117 57 68.7 a Does not consider any obstructions to the noise path. b CNEL measured in feet from the centerline of the near travel lane. -- No existing roadway. Source: Michael Brandman Associates 1988. 4.5.5 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS JImplementation of the project with proposed mitigation measures, where required, l would result in no unavoidable adverse impacts. ..I . l 4-41 I JBX/709EIOlA2 J 4.6 POPULATION AND HOUSING 4.6.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS For consistency among the various planning programs administered by regional and local agencies (e.g. development policies, wastewater management, transportation strategy, and air quality management), it-is -�.ecessary to have a consist-,nt set of growth projections utilized in the programs. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the responsible agency for developing and adopting growth forecasts for Riverside County, including those for the City of Lake Elsinore. The SCAG growth forecast is revised every 2 to 4 years, with the most recent revi- sion being the SCAG-87 Draft Growth Fcrecasts. As part of the revision process, SCAG solicits input from county and city governments. The SCAG-87 Draft Growth Forecasts are currently used by the City. of. Lake Elsinore (Boland, pers. comm., 1 10/7/88). The growth forecasts represent expected occurrences, given existing city policies, development patterns, and demographic trends. Therefore, the forecast is constrained by the level of development that may occur under the city's existing General Plan. I Population l According to the SCAG-87 Draft Growth Forecasts, the population of Lake Elsinore f is expected to grow approximately 5.4 times (540%) between 1984 and 2010, from 8,472 residents to 45,194 residents. This represents a population increase of 36,722, or approximately 7 percent annually. 1 Housin } According to the SCAG-87 Draft Growth Forecasts, occupied dwelling units within Lake Elsinore are expected to grow approximately 6.0 times between 1984 and 2010, I from 4,213 dwelling units to 25,160 dwelling units. This represents a dwelling unit increase of 20,947. �l .J 4-42 JBX/709EIO1A2 J 4.6.2 PROJECT IMPACTS Population The City of Lake Elsinore currently utilizes a population generation factor of 2.67 residents per household (Boland, pers. comm., 10/7/88). Based on the project proposal to build 2,850 dwelling units, the total buildout population of Ramsgate would be 7,609. Build out for Ramsgate is anticipated to occur by the year 2010. The projected population for Ramsgate is well within the 36,722 population increase expected to occur within Lake Elsinore by the year 2010. The Ramsgate develop- ment represents approximately 20 percent of Lake Elsinore's forecasted population increase. No significant adverse population impacts are anticipated. Housing The proposed Ramsgate development will provide a total of 2,850 dwelling units when built out. Buildout for Ramsgate is anticipated to occur by the year 2010. The proposed dwelling units for Ramsgate is well within the 20,947 dwelling unit increase forecast for Lake Elsinore. The Ramsgate development represents approximately 14 percent of Lake Elsinore's forecast dwelling unit increase. No significant adverse housing impacts are anticipated. The project will increase the available housing stock for the City of Lake Elsinore, and will generate property tax revenues. 4.6.3 MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are necessary. 4.6.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS- The proposed project would contribute to the cumulative increase of housing and Ipopulation within the City of Lake Elsinore. The project represents 22 percent of the total population increase and 14 percent of the dwelling unit increase forecasted ` for the city. The city is currently planning various improvements to accommodate the forecasted growth. No significant, adverse, cumulative impacts are anticipated. 4J� 4-43 JBX/709EIO1A2 J 4.6.5 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS No unavoidable adverse impacts to population or hoasiug are anticipated from the proposed project. 4.7 CULTURAL R=3URCES 4.7.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS Cultural resource investigations for Ramsgate were completed by Adella Schroth and Marie Cottrell of Archaeological Resource Management Corporation in September 1981. Their asses--ment is included within Appendix A of the previously prepared Ramsgate EIR (SCH No. 83071309). The cultural resource assessment for Ramsgate included a records search and a field ( survey. The records search revealed two previously recorded sites and two previously conducted field surveys in the study area. l The first recorded site is CA-Riv-712, recorded by P. Chance in 1963. The site is 1 located in the northeastern portion of the project area, and is described as a prehistoric campsite. Several manos and metates (portable hard-seed grinding tools) were identified. The second site within the project area, CA-Riv-2173, was located by J. Salpas in 1981. It was described as a "series of 10 bedrock grinding slicks on 5 separate boulders." No cultural materials, such as manos and flakes, were found in the vicinity. 1 During the onsite survey, sixteen locations were found that exhibited sufficient evidence of prehistoric land use to qualify them as sites. These included 14 milling slick locations, 1 special purpose site (termed Site A), and the previously recorded site, CA-Riv-712. In addition, 10 items, termed single-surface finds, were found in isolation. Previously recorded site CA-Riv-2173 could not be located in the location noted in the records. However, a milling slick did approximate its location. 4-44 JBX/709EIO1A2 CA-Riv-712 was found in the area designated in the records. Artifacts located at l this site include milling slick components, flakes, two whole manos. a metate fragment, several indeterminant groundstone fragments, hammerstoitrs, scraper- planes, cores, and debitage. Site A, designated a special purpose siiCey was located in the souther,. section of the survey area along the southernmost tributary of Wasson Canyon. The site consists of three man-made rock piles and two pits. Several flakes, a hammerstone, and a scraper also appear to be present. Seven interrelated areas of historical interest were located in the southern portion of the project area. Two of these were substantial enough to be termed historical sites for official recordation. Two kilns, remnants of buildings, and five mining shafts were identified. The site appears to have been constructed in 1889 and 'was involved I with the processing of limestone. The buildings located on the site probably provided both storage for the processed lime as well as living quarters for the workers. A review of the National Register of Historic Places and California Historic Landmarks indicates that there are no historical sites of national or state importance previously identified on the project site. Historical sites regionally include the Crescent Bathhouse (State), located in Lake Elsinore, and Old Temescal Road (Federal Register No. #638)9 located 11 in:les south of Corona along I-15. 4.7.2 PROJECT IMPACTS All of the milling slick locations have been 'measured, photographed, and plotted on both the U.S Geological Survey Topographic Map, Elsinore Quadrangle, and the project map. In addition, site forms were submitted to the Archaeological Research Unit at University of California, Riverside. Because the significance of these locations does not lie in the artifacts themselves but rather in the relationship to each other and to habitation sites, as well as their concentration into defined ecological zones, recordation, photography, and measurement are considered complete mitigation. Therefore, project development will have no significant impact i on these locations. 4-45 JBX/709EI0lA2 As with the milling slick locations, the two historical sites were photographed and recorded. Any potential adverse impacts of project development have already been fully mitigated. It is also possible that buried cultural deposits could be encountered during site grading activity. Unless proper measures are taken, these potential artifacts could be destroyed. The two identified historical sites were photographed and recorded. Any potential adverse impacts associated with project development have already been fully mitigated. I4.7.3 MITIGATION MEASURES 1 1. The previous recordation, photographing, and measurement of the milling ` slick locations within the project site is adequate mitigation. No further mitigation is necessary. 2. Since CA-RIV 2173 could not be located in the field, no further mitigation is possible for this site. 3. If prehistoric deposits are discovered during grading operations, operations in the area should be halted, and a qualified archaeologist should be consulted to determine their significance. 4. The photography and recordation of known sites constitute full mitigation for the historic site within the project boundaries. Any entrances to mine shafts should be properly sealed and unsafe structures should be removed 1 before public access to the area of the historic sites is permitted. } 5. Prior to development in the vicinity of the portion of CA-Riv 712, which was not previously tested, this area should be systematically surface collected and tested for subsurface deposits. If no subsurface deposits are encountered, then the investigation can be considered salvage. However, if significant subsurface deposits are encountered, the appropriate mitigation (preservation or salvage) should be provided as recommended. Similar mitigation should be provided for Site A. 6, In the event that grading activities uncover cultural resources, all grading activity for that area shall cease and a qualified archaeologist shall be notified. A _1 4-46 JHX/709EIO1A2 J 4.7.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Impacts to cultural resources are specific to the development of each site. As such, development of sites in the project region wo4i,A riot have a cumulative impact on archaeological, historical, and paleontological resources. 4.7.5 UNAVCAL�_"BLE ADVERSE IMPACTS Implementation of the mitigation measures previously listed would reduce impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources to a level that is less than significant. Significant adverse impacts could potentially occur to CA-Riv-712 and to Site A, the special purpose site. Unless further testing of these sites occurs prior to project development, they could be inadvertently destroyed, and their cultural values could be lost. 4.8 AESTHETICS AND OPEN SPACE RESOURCES 4.8.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS The proposed project site is an irregular-shaped parcel of land located northeast of Lake Elsinore. The 1,190-acre site is topographically- diverse, consisting of flat plains, rolling hills, and rugged canyons. The dominant onsite landforms are Wasson Canyon, riparian corridors, and various rock outcroppings. Views within the project site are expansive and afford vistas of the foothills of the Lake Elsinore area. Views to the north and northwest include the foothills of Steel Peak and Estella Mountains; to the south and east are additional views of valleys and 1 foothills. The evaluation of visual quality is highly subjective and is based on the opinion of the person viewing the subject area. The aesthetic value of the Ramsgate site is season- ally determinate. During the rainy months and spring, the onsite vegetation is mostly green and flowers are blooming. Offsite views may include the snowtop ridgelines of distant mountains. During this period, the project site can be described as having high aesthetic value. During the dry months, however, the majority of the . i 4-47 JBX/709EI01A2 _ 1 project site is barren and dusty. The onsite vegetation is mostly dry and brown. During this period, the project site can be described, as having low to moderate aesthetic value. 4.8.2 PROJECT IMPACTS Grading operations associated with the proposed project would modify existing ridgelines, canyons, and viewsheds, and would require the removal of existing vegetation. In general, grading operations would mostly occur in the northern portion of the site, with a significant amount of the southern portion being retained in its natural state. Areas of the site that are graded would undergo a significant adverse change in visual character. Development of the project site would result in viewshed impacts along State Route 74 and Riverside Street. Existing rural viewsheds from these arterials would be replaced with urbanized landforms. State Route 74 is designated as a scenic highway on the Lake Elsinore General Plan. Because of the lack of proximity to exterior roads, most of the project's other visual impacts would be viewed at relatively great distances where they should be at insignificant levels. The proposed project would also introduce light and glare to the project site. Street and night lighting of commercial facilities would introduce sources of light to the existing rural site. In comparing the proposed project with the previously approved Ramsgate project, it was found that aesthetic impacts would be similar. However, in an effort to lessen visual impacts, several types of aesthetic treatments are proposed. Exhibit 4-27 shows the various aesthetic treatments proposed for Ramsgate. The Ramsgate Specific Plan provides and implements an open space concept plan. The plan provides for the preservation of onsite natural features such as Wasson Canyon and riparian corridors. Additionally, the Specific Plan provides architectural, landucape, and site planning design guidelines and scenic highway treatments. These programs will reduce aesthetic impacts. 4-48 JBX/709LiU1A2 �A I P I HIGHWAY O RIVERSIDE STREET 1 I I � I I I I , 0 Q o ' I I P � I I e i I LEGEND © PUBLIC PARK - ® SCENIC HIGHWAY TREATMENT COMMUNITY COLLECTOR -- ® RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR ® GREENBELT v ® MAJOR LANDSCAPE FEATURE ® SECONDARY LANDSCAPE FEATURE -- __ INTERSECTION TREATMENT P.N.709E101 ,Mkhxl Bnrwl-k im- a Aesthetic Treatments - Ramsgate Specific Plan First Amendment ,,- , 0 60o 1600 FEET Exhibit 4-27 4.8.3 MITIGATION MEASURES To help mitigate aesthetic impacts to the project site, the proposed project includes an elaborate open space and landscape treatment program. 1. Approximately 176 acres of the proposed project will consist of open space. Scenic or resource easements shall be provided for city approval on subsequent~ tract maps for the preservation of resource conservation corridors. These open space corridors will largely remain in their natural condition, enhancing the aesthetic appearance of the project site. 2. To enhance the aesthetic appearance of development areas within Ramsgate, an extensive landscape treatment program has been developed. The landscape treatment program for the project incorporates the use of gateways, slopebanks, and vegetation. The program focuses on the enhancement of highways, development areas, and transitional areas from development edges to open space. Such treatment shall be reflected on subsequent site plans and tentative tract maps for city approval. 3. Development areas within Ramsgate shall incorporate the communitywide design guidelines contained in the Ramsgate Specific Plan. Communitywide design treatment shall be reflected in subsequent site plans and tentative tract maps for city approval. i 4. Street lighting shall be designed and located so that direct rays are confined to the roadway. All other lighting shall be designed so as to confine direct rays to the premises. Such lighting treatment shall be reflected on subsequent site plans. 5. When feasible, natural viewsheds within the project area shall be maintained. Such treatment shall be reflected on subsequent tentative tract maps and site plans. 6� A comprehensive set of communitywide architectural design guidelines shall be approved for Ramsgate prior to the recordation of the first tentative tract map. 4.8.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Implementation of the proposed project would contribute to the urbanization of the foothills of the Lake Elsinore area. Other land use approvals in the immediate vicinity will also contribute to regional landform alterations and aesthetic impacts. Cumulatively, these impacts will alter the natural character and visual appearance of the Lake Elsinore foothill area. 4-49 JBX/709EI01A2 4.8.5 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS Jrr`.'.ementation of the proposed project would result in the permanent modification of existing land formations, features, and natural open space. Viewsheds within and without the project site will be permanently, altered with urbanized forms. The overall natural character of the site will be transformed into an urbanized setting. This is a significant, unavoidable, adverse impact of the project. 4.9 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES 4.9.1 SHERIFF SERVICES Existing Conditions Police services for Ramsgate will be provided by the County of Riverside Sheriff's Department. Ramsgate is located within the Meadowbrook Area-Elsinore Valley station's jurisdiction. This sheriff station is located at the intersection of State Route 74 and Riverside Street, approximately 10 minutes from the Ramsgate project site. One sheriff deputy is currently assigned to the Ramsgate study area. Response times to emergency calls range from 10 minutes to several hours. This large range is due to the extensive size of Riverside County; response time depends on the location and availability of the deputy. The Riverside County Sheriff's Department has indicated that existing emergency response time for the area is adequate. However, existing manpower is less than at a desirable ratio. (Reynolds 1988). Project Impacts Development of the Ramsgate Planned Community will generate approximately 7,609 new residents. In order to minimally service this population, the Sheriff's Department estimates 11 additional deputies are necessary (1.5 deputies per 1,000 persons) (Reynolds 1988). Development of the Ramsgate project without the 11 additional deputies will adversely affect response time and sheriff services. 4-50 l JBX/ 109EIO1A2 �1 Mitigation Measures 1. The project proponent shall enter into an agreement with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department establishing the need for and fare-share funding amount to provide sheriff services to Ramsgate. This agreement shall occur prior to the recordation of any tract. 2. At design review the developer will consult with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department for advice on crime prevention features appropriate to the design of the Ramsgate development. 3. Every property owner within Ramsgate will be responsible to pay assessed property taxes. A portion of their taxes shall go toward general services, including county sheriff and fire. i Cumulative Impacts Cumulative development within the project area would ultimately affect police 1 services. The Riverside County Sheriff's Department has indicated that manpower in the project area is at an undesirable level of service. Increased development in the area, at current manpower levels, would further reduce-the level of service. IUnavoidable Adverse Impacts If the mitigation measures are adopted, project-related impacts to sheriff services will be reduced to an insignificant level. Buildout of Ramsgate without the necessary projected sheriff's services could result in an unavoidable adverse impact. �I 4.9.2 FIRE SERVICES AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES I Existing Conditions 1 The Ramsgate Planned Community is located within the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection/Riverside County Fire Department's service area. Stations primarily serving the project area are listed in Table 4-16. In addition to the stations' response times, the department's standard response time to the project site is 6 minutes (2 minutes per mile). 4-51 JBX/709EIO1A2 Project Impacts Existing equipment and manpower will not be adequate to service the Ramsgate project and adjacent projects. The Fire Department has critical concerns regarding wildland/urban interface, adequate circulation, and fire defense/infrastructures (Regis, pers. comm., 11/88). TABLE 4-16 EXISTING FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES Station/Location Personnel/Equipment Response Time 10-Lake Elsinore/ 1 full-time person 6 minutes Graham Street and augmented by paid call/ Poe Street 2 class "A" pumpers, 1 squad 60-Canyon Lake/ 1 full-time person 7 minutes Vacation Drive augmented by paid call/ 1 class "A" pumper, 1 squad 11-Lakeland Village/ 1 full-time person 9 minutes Brightman Street and augmented by paid call/ Blockwell Street 2 class "A" pumpers, 1 squad Source: Riverside County Fire Department. Mitigation Measures 1. The project proponent shall enter into agreement with the Riverside County Fire Department establishing the need for and amount of fare- share funding to support a new fire station located at I-15 and Railroad Canyon Road. 20 Prior to the issuance of building permits, a fuel modification plan shall be approved by the Riverside County Fire Department. 4-52 JBX/709EIOlA2 Cumulative Impacts Development within the study area of the proposed project would contribute to the cumulative need for an additional fire station at the I-15' .a ,road Canyon Road intersection. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts If the mitigation measure is adopted, the project impacts to fire service would be reduced to an insignificant level. 4.9.3 WATER Existing Conditions The Ramsgate development lies within the service area of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). The EVMWD obtains a portion of its water supply from the Western Municipal Water District. The remaining water supply is received from 10n active wells. Based on the EVMWD 1986 study of water consumption, the City of Lake Elsinore has an average daily water consumption rate of 8.4 million gallons, and a maximum daily water consumption rate of 15.6 million gallons. The project site is currently undeveloped. The site has no current water consumption rate. There are no onsite water distribution systems. However, a 10-inch water main does run along State Route 74. Project Impacts Development of the proposed project will increase onsite water consumption. The project, when built out, will require 1,444,400 gallons of water daily. Table 4-17 indicates the breakdown of water consumption for Ramsgate. The EVMWD has indi- cated that no adverse impacts associated with providing water service to the project site for both domestic use and fire-flow requirements are anticipated. 4-53 JBX/709EIOlA2 TABLE 4-17 DAILY WATER USAGE Consumption Rate Dwelling Units Daily Usage Land Use (gal/unit or sq ft) or Square Footage (gallons) Residential Single Family 500/unit 2,600 1,300,000 Multiple Family 400/unit 250 100,000 Subtotal 2,850 1,400,000 Commercial 120/1,000 sq ft 370,OOOa 44,400 I Total: 1,444,400 a Assumes 10,000 square feet of floor area per acre. Source: Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. The proposed water concept plan for Ramsgate is shown on Exhibit 4-28. The plan involves a combination of onsite and offsite facilities. Offsite facilities for the project include the upgrade of the existing 10-inch line along State Route 74 to 20 inches, and the expansion of Meadowbrook pumping stations 1 and 2. The upgrade of the State Route 74 line is planned to occur between I pumping stations 1 and 2. These offsite improvements have been recommended by the EVMWD. jOnsite facilities for Phase I of the project involve the construction of a water line along Ramsgate Drive, varying in size from 10 inches to 15 inches, and a 6-inch line `1 along Riverside Street. Both of these lines are planned to connect with the proposed 20-inch line along State Route 74. Onsite facilities for Phase 2 of the j roect p involve the construction of a water line along the Phase 2 looped road, varying in size from 8 inches to 10 inches. This line is J 4-54 JBX/709EIOlA2 00 eee+++ eeeee `�` • +++• +e EXISTING eeee WATERMAINS I •• y +e+ .• RIV RSIDE ST �� .. ..... ........f•........ OF e++ 4 •'' ee I 1600 r I • r • e i �' • t ♦ • ( . •• • • l • I • -- 3 1800 • 1700Legenci • —�_- •. 7 20"TRUNKLINE ••, 12•TO 15"WATERLINE •• J , E ..•• 12'WATERLINE -\ 1 , • 8 • EXISTING PUMPING STATION •�•• I PROPOSED RESERVOIR SITE 1900 EXISTING RESERVOIR SITE O ' I ® SERVICE LEVEL BOUNDARY 1600 HYDRAULIC GRADE ELEVATION P.N.709E101 Midud Ba�mn Ar•i.m Water Concept Plan Amended Ramsgate Specific Plan North 0 s00 JFIET Exhibit 4-28 planned to tie into a 12-inch line along Ramsgate Drive. Additionally, a ± one million-gallon ± reservoir with connections will be provided in Planning Area 7, to supplement water service for Phase 2. The Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District and Ramsgate will be responsible for providing all necessary improvements for water service to Ramsgate. The final water concept plan for R..nsgate will be approved by :he Elsinore Valley Municipal lWater District prior to recordation of a final map. Implementation of the proposed water conveyance system will have short-term con- struction impacts to the environment. Visual impacts may be incurred from machinery, trenching, and dirt piling. Noise levels will be increased during construction including noise from trenching and posting, pipe installation, and l backfill. Equipment generating noise could include jackhammers, backhoes, cranes, generators, compressors, and construction vehicles. Construction operations will also generate temporary increases in exhaust and fugitive dust emissions in the immediate vicinity. The construction impacts mentioned above will be short term, and are not considered to be significant. The construction impacts will occur prior to completion of the proposed residential uses, and thus will not affect any onsite residents. Mitigation Measures A final water service plan for Ramsgate shall be approved by the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District and the city prior to recordation of a final map. • The project shall comply with the water conservation method provided in Health and Safety Code Sections 17921.3 and 4047. i The project shall comply with the water conservation methods provided within Title 20, California Administrative Code Sections 1606(b) and 1604(f). I0 The project shall comply with the water conservation met_�iods provided within Title 24, California Administrative Code Sections 2-5307(b) and 2-5352(i) and (j). 4-55 JBX/709EIO1A2 J • The project shall comply with the water conservation methods provided within Government Code Section 7800. Implementation of the following additional mitigation measures where applicable, are recommended. 1. Water supply line pressure: reduce water pressure pp y p p greater than 50 pounds ;er square inch (psi) to 50 psi or less by means of a pressure-reducing I valve. 2. Drinking fountains: Equip drinking fountains with self-closing valves. 1 3. Laundry facilities: Use water conserving models of washers. 1 4. Ultra-low-flush toilets: Install 1.5-gallon-per-flush toilets in all new construction. 5. Exterior: t e Landscape with low-water-using plants wherever feasible. • Limit use of lawn to uses that are lawn-dependent, such as playing fields. When lawns are used, require warm-season grasses. 1 Group plants of similar water-use, to reduce over-irrigation of low- water-using plants. 1 Provide information to occupants regarding benefits of low-water- using landscaping and sources of additional assistance. • Use mulch extensively in all landscaped areas. Mulch applied to top of soil will improve the water-holding capacity of the soils by reducing evaporation and soil compaction. 1 • Preserve and protect existing trees, and shrubs. Established plants are often adapted to low-water-using conditions, and their use saves water needed to establish replacement vegetation. • Install efficient irrigation systems that minimize runoff and evaporation, and maximize water that will reach plant roots. Drip irrigation, soil moisture sensors, and automatic irrigation systems are a few methods of increasing irrigation efficiency. • Use pervious paving materials whenever feasible, to reduce surface water runoff and to aid in groundwater recharge. • Grade slopes so that runoff of surface water is minimized. 4-56 JBX/709EIO1A2 J • Investigate the feasibility of using reclaimed wastewater, stored rainwater, or gray water for irrigation. • Encourage cluster d_velopment, which can reduce the amount of land being converted ts� urban use. This will reduce the amount of impervious paving created, and thereby aid in groundwater recharge. • Preserve existing natural drainage areas and encourage the incorporation of natural drainage systems in new developments. This aids groundwnLar recharge. • To aid in groundwater recharge, preserve floodplains and aquifer recharge areas as open space. Cumulative Impacts The proposed project will add to the cumulative demand on water services imposed by this and other. existing and proposed developments in the region. However, EVMWD anticipates no adverse impacts on its ability to provide water to the area as a result of this development. Nevertheless, the project will add to the cumulative Idemand on water resources in the region. 1 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts No significant, unavoidable, adverse impacts related to water supply, conveyance, or treatment would result from project development. I4.9.4 WASTEWATER Existing Conditions Wastewater service for Ramsgate will be provided by the EVMWD. Presently, the Ramsgate project area does not contain sewer facilities. Existing EVMWD facilities lin the vicinity of the project area include a trunk line along State Route 74. The trunk line currently terminates approximately 9,000 feet south of the project site. 1 Rows within the trunk line travel to the regional treatment plant located approximately 3 to 4 miles south of the project site. 4-57 JBX/709EIO1A2 Currently, the regional treatment plant serving the Ramsgate project area has an average wastewater flow capacity of 1.7 million gallons per day, and a maximum flow capacity of 2 million gallons per day. The EVMWD treatment plant is undergoing an expansion that would allow an average flow capacity of over 2 million gallons per day. Project Impacts 1 It is estimated that Ramsgate will have an average wastewater flow of 1,156,720 thousand gallons per day (mgd).1 The EVMWD has indicated that there are no adverse impacts from providing wastewater service to the Ramsgate project. j The proposed wastewater concept plan for Ramsgate is shown on Exhibit 4-29. The wastewater plan proposes to extend the existing 15-inch trunkline, located along State Route 74, to the northern entrance of Ramsgate. Additionally, the plan ` proposes a line along Ramsgate Drive, varying in size from 10 inches to 15 inches, an 8-inch line along Riverside Street, and an 8-inch line along the Phase 2 loop road. 1 The existing downstream portion of the State Route 74 trunkline is capable of servicing approximately 1,845 dwelling units and all of the commercial developments within Phase 1. The remaining units within Phase 1 and all of the units within Phase 2 will be serviced by splitting the flow at Conard and State Route 74, and constructing a 15-inch line along Conard Avenue and Third Street. The proposed line will then be extended under Highway 15 and connected to existing sewer facilities at Third Street and Collier. The existing facilities along Third Street, south of the freeway, will be upgraded to accommodate the additional flow. Proposed lift stations will be utilized at the lower and upper crossings of Wasson Canyon to provide flows to locations with higher elevations. The final wastewater plan for { Ramsgate will be approved by the EVMWD prior to recordation of a final map. J 1 Assumes wastewater generation of 80 percent per gallon of water consumed (Michael Brandman Associates 1988). 4-58 JBX/709EIO1A2 I •• 74 I 5 IVERSID ST ' `l ........... • I 1 4 •,,. I lip • ' I (. ` • ��— • -- • 1 3 � . 00 -- -- Legend •' I, 15' TRUNKLINE r •'•'• 1 a ...... 10' TO 15' LINE I ........ 9• LINE I PROPOSED LIFT STATION -- P.N.7MMI MH,..1&.n6tinAms Sewer Concept Plan Amended Ramsgate Specific Plan Nr 0 9 JET Exhibit 4-29 Implementation of the proposed wastewater concept plan will result in short-term construction impacts to the environment. Visual impacts may be incurred from machinery, trenching, and dirt piling. Noise levels will increase during construction, including noise from trenching and posting, pipe installation, and backfill. Construction operations will also generate temporary increases in exhaust and fugitive dust emissions in the immediate vicinity. These impacts will be short term, and are not considered significant. The construction impac". will occur prior to completion of proposed residential uses, and thus will not affect existing onsite homeowners. Mitigation Measures I. The timing of road and wastewater facility construction shall be coordinated to the maximum extent possible. 2. Additional application of water reclamatioca - techniques shall be implemented as soon as possible to assist in water resource conservation. 3. A final wastewater service plan for Ramsgate shall be approved by the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District and the city prior to the recordation of any final map. Cumulative Impacts The proposed project will add to the cumulative demand on wastewater services imposed by this and other existing and proposed developments in the region. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts No significant, unavoidable, adverse impacts related to wastewater conveyance or treatment would result from project development. 4-59 JBX/709EIO1A2 4.9.5 SCHOOLS Existing Conditions Ramsgate is located within the Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD). The Lake Elsinore Unified School District consists of six elementary schools, two junior high schools, and one high school. Currently, all schools within the district' -re operating near or at capacity. Project Impacts Based upon generation rates provided by LEUSD (see Table 4-18), the Ramsgate development will generate a total of 2,232 students. TABLE 4-18 LAKE ELSINORE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT GENERATION RATES School Generation Rate Total Total Students Grade Per Dwelling Unit Dwelling Units Generated K-6 0.583 2,850 1,662 7-12 0.2 2,850 570 TOTAL 2,850 2,232 State funding for school facilities in conjunction with developer fees has proved inadequate both in amount and timing to finance school facilities necessary to serve the students generated by the Ramsgate development. There are today a substantial number of students from existing developments for whom the District is unable to provide sufficient classrooms to adequately serve their educational needs. The school district and the developer have entered into negotiations to assist the jschool district in providing adequate school facilities to serve the project in a timely J manner. Assistance may include dedication of land, improvements or participation in alternative funding mechanisms such as a Community Facilities District (CFD) in 4-60 JBX/709EI01A2 �1 lieu of fees. An agreement which indicates that the need for schools has been met must be entered into between the school district and the developer prior to recordation of any'final tract map. Mitigation Measures 1. The project proponent shall provide two school sites, as Indicated on the proposed land use plan. 2. The project proponent should discuss alternative funding methods, such as 1 Mello-Roos, with the Lake Elsinore Unified School District, in order to provide schools in a timely manner. Cumulative Impacts IDevelopment of the proposed project would add to the cumulative impact on schools in the project area. Since the schools that could serve the site are already at capacity, implementation of the project would require adoption of the mitigation measures listed above. Unavoidable Adverse Im acts If the mitigation measures are adopted, project impacts related to school over- crowding will be reduced to an insignificant level. 4.9.6 PARKS Existing Conditions I Park facilities within the project area are provided by the Lake Elsinore Parks and Recreation District and the Riverside County Parks Department. There are three regional parks relatively close to the project site. Hartford Springs Park is located 8 miles to the north, and Kabian Park is located 3.5 miles to the northeast. Lake Elsinore is located south of the project area and is operated by the State of California. The City of Lake Elsinore Parks and Recreation District currently operates four parks in the Lake Elsinore area; however, none of these parks serve the immediate project area. 4-61 JBX/709EIOlA2 Project Impacts Based on the city's park ordinance of 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 population, Ramsgate is required to provide a total of 49.05 acres of parkland. The parkland requirement for Ramsgate shall be satisfied 6:irough the dedication of a 23-acre community park and a 6-acre neighborhood park and through payment of in-lieu park site improvement fees. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. l Mitigation Measures 1. The YP 9 g developer shall satisfy ark re uiremcnts through a combination of P park site dedications and in lieu of park improvement fees. 2. All park sites within the Ramsgate Specific Pi-nn shall be dedicated to the City of Lake Elsinore for parkland.credit. The dedication of park sites 1 shall occur prior to the recordation of final tract maps of areas that contain or are immediately adjacent to planned park sites. Cumulative Impacts Cumulative development within the project area may affect existing recreational facilities. Onsite recreational facilities should be provided on each new ! development, to lessen impacts. The Ramsgate development is not anticipated to 1 have any significant cumulative recreation impacts. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts J There are no unavoidable adverse recreational impacts associated with the proposed project. ,J 4-62 JBX/709EIO1A2 { 4.9.7 ELECTRICITY Existing Conditions The project area is located within the Southern California Edison Company (SCE) service area. An existing 220-kilovolt (kV) transmission line is located 9,000 feet to the north of thQ project site. A proposed `.120-kV transmission line is located along the northern boundary of the property. Project Impacts SCE has indicated that there are no constraints in providing electrical service to the Ramsgate Planned Community. However, this service will require the construction of new electrical systems (e.g., electrical lines). Electrical loads for the Ramsgate Planned Community are described in Table 4-19. TABLE 4-19 ELECTRICAL DEMANDS Electrical Consumption Dwelling Units (du) Generation Annual Usage Land Use or square footage (sq ft) (kWh*/year) (million kWh/year) lResidential 2,850 du 6,081/du 17.33 Commercial 370,000asq ft 17.1/sq ft 6.30 Total: 26.63 * kWh = kilowatt-hours a Assumes 10,000 square feet of floor area per acre. Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District Air Quality Handbook 1987. 4-63 JBX/709EIOlA2 J Mitigation Measures la Onsite electrical systems shall be installed with other uti-Iities, with costs to the developer limited to trenching, backfill, and condivt costs. 2. SCE will provide assistance in utility and infrastructure construction. Cumulative Impacts The proposed project will add to the cumulative demand on electricity imposed by this and other existing and proposed developments in the region. However, SCE does not anticipate any adverse impacts to its ability to provide electrical service to the area as a result of these developments.' Unavoidable Adverse Impacts No unavoidable adverse impacts on electricity or service would result from project development. 4.9.8 NATURAL GAS Existing Conditions The proposed Ramsgate Planned Community will be serviced by Southern California Gas Company (SCG). Currently, SCG does not have gas facilities in the project area. pHowever, there are two existing mains along State Route 74. One of the lines is a 6- inch line and is located at Elmer Street, approximately 4 miles north of the proposed I project. The other line, located at Conard Street, is approximately 3 miles south- west of the proposed project. 1 Project Impacts 1 Ramsgate natural gas consumption projections are shown in Table 4-20. ` 4-64 JBX/709EIOlA2 TABLE 4-20 NATURAL GAS DEMANDS Generation Factor Annual Usage Land Use Units cu ft/year (million cu ft) Residential 1,850 du 64,620 cu ft/du 184.1 Commercial 370,000 sq ft 34.8 cu ft/sq ft 12.9 Total: 197.0 Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District Air Quality Handbook 1987. There are no adverse environmental impacts associated with the provision of natural gas, although cooperation between SCG and the developer is imperative in order to coordinate, oversee, and install gas lines. Mitigation Measures 1. Onsite natural gas systems shall be installed concurrent with other utilities, with costs to the developer limited to trenching and backf ill. 2. The developer shall consult the SCG to select effective applications of energy conservation techniques for Ramsgate. Cumulative Impacts The proposed project will add to the cumulative demand on natural gas imposed by this and other existing and proposed developments in the region. However, SCG does not anticipate any adverse impacts to its ability to provide natural gas service to the area as a result of these developments. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts No unavoidable adverse impacts on natural gas service or resources are anticipated from the implementation of the proposed project. 4-65 JBX/709EIOlA2 iI J SECTION 5 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Section 15126(d)(2) of the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended, man- dates that all EIRs.include a comprehensive evaluation of the proposed project with alternatives to the project, including the no-project alternative. Four alternatives are addressed in this EIR: (1) no project, (2) existing specific plan, (3) reduced residential density, and (4) increased residential density. 5.1 NO PROJECT 5.1.1 DESCRIPTION With the no-project alternative, development of the site would not occur. . The site would renLain in its current vacant use. 5.1.2 IMPACTS With this alternative, none of the adverse environmental impacts would occur. Unlike the proposed project, there would be no unavoidable adverse impacts to earth resources, biological resources, and aesthetics. Adverse impacts would also not occur for hydrology, traffic, noise, cultural resources, and public services. The no-project alternative would not allow any viable economic use of the site. Beneficial impacts, such as property and sales tax revenues and new job opportuni- ties, would not occur. Additionally, various circulation improvements to State Route 74 would also not occur. The amount of available housing for Lake Elsinore would not increase. 5-1 JBX/709EIOIA2 5.2 PRIMARY ALTERNATIVE 5.2.1 DESCRIPTION The primary alternative would provide for the development of 2,975 residential units on 955 acres, 37 acres of commercial, 139 acres of parks and open space, and 50 acres of schools and roads. The proposed land use plan and statistical summary for the primary alternative is shown on Exhibits 5-1 and 5-2. 5.2.2 IMPACTS Earth Resources As with the proposed project, a substantial amount of grading and landform altera- tion would occur with this alternative. Grading concepts associated with the primary alternative would be similar to the grading concept for the proposed project. The concept grading plan for the primary alternative is shown on Exhibit 5-3. The primary alternative would significantly alter the landform of the site. Mitigation measures provided for the proposed project would be applicable for this alternative. Cumulative impacts associated with this alternative would also be consistent with those of the proposed project. Hydrology Development of this alternative would increase the surface water runoff from the project site, because of the construction of buildings, roadways, sidewalks, and other impervious surfaces. Additionally, the site would be impacted by runoff from upstream properties. Hydrological impacts associated with the primary alternative would be similar to the hydrological impacts for the proposed project. Mitigation measures provided for the proposed project would be applicable to the primary alternative. 5-2 JBX/709EIOIA2 Biological Resources With this alternative, impacts to biological resources would be similar to those identified for the proposed project. With either this alternative or the proposed project, impacts to biological resources would be significant and unavoidable. Mitigation measures provided for the proposed project would be applicable to the primary alternative. traffic With this alternative, traffic impacts would be slightly higher than the proposed project. A traffic report for this alternative is provided in Appendix F. Traffic impacts associated with this alternative can be mitigated to acceptable levels. A listing of those mitigation measures is provided in the traffic analysis of this EIR. Cumulative traffic impacts associated with this alternative are also mitigated to acceptable levels. No significant traffic impacts are anticipated. Noise The noise analysis for the proposed project was based on this alternative. Noise impacts associated with this .alternative can be mitigated to insignificant levels. Mitigation measures for the proposed project are applicable to this alternative. Cumulative noise impacts associated with this alternative would be similar to those of the proposed project. No significant noise impacts are anticipated. Exhibit 5-4 shows the 65 CNEL contours for the primary alternative. Population The City of Lake Elsinore currently utilizes a population generation factor of 2.67 residents per household (Boland, pers. comm., 10/7/88). Based on the project proposal to build 2,975 dwelling units, the total buildout population of Ramsgate . I would be 7,943. Buildout for Ramsgate is anticipated to occur by the year 2010. - 5-3 JBX/709EIOIA2 J The projected population for Ramsgate is well within the 36,722 population increase expected to occur within Lake Elsinore by the year 2010. The Ramsgate development represents approximately 22 percent of Lake Elsinore's forecasted population increase. No significant adverse population impacts are anticipated. Housing The proposed Ramsgate development will provide a total of 2,975 dwelling units when built out. Buildout for Ramsgate is anticipated to occur by the year 2010. The proposed dwelling units for Ramsgate is well within the 20,947 dwelling unit increase forecast for Lake Elsinore. The Ramsgate development represents approximately 14 percent of Lake Elsinore's forecast dwelling unit increase. No significant adverse housing impacts are anticipated. Cultural Resources The project-related and cumulative impacts of this alternative on cultural resources would be similar to that of the proposed project. Impacts to cultural resources are mitigable in either case. Mitigation measures provided for the proposed project are applicable to this alternative. No significant cultural resource impacts are anticipated. Aesthetic and Open Space Resources This alternative would have project-related and cumulative impacts similar to those of the proposed project. The aesthetic character of the site would be unavoidably altered by this alternative; therefore, the impact would be significant. Mitigation measures provided for the proposed project would be applicable to this alternative. Public Services and Facilities This alternative would provide 125 additional dwelling units and the same amount of commercial acreage. Public service and facility impacts would be of a higher intensity. The following is an impact analysis for public services and facilities associated with this alternative. 5-4 JBX/709EIOlA2 Sheriff Services Development of this alternative would generate approximately 7,943 new residents. In order to minimally service this population, the Sheriff's Department estimates 12 additional deputies are necessary (1.5 deputies per 1,000 persons) (Reynolds 1988). Development of the Ramsgate project without the 12 additional deputies will adversely affect response time and sheriff services. Mitigation measures provided for the proposed project would be applicable to this alternative. Cumulative development within the project area would ultimately affect police services. The Riverside County Sheriff's Department has indicated that manpower in the project area is at an undesirable level of service. Increased development in the area, at current manpower levels, would further reduce the level of service. Fire Protection Services Development of this alternative would increase the need for additional fire protection services. Existing equipment and manpower would not be adequate to service this alternative. Additionally, cumulative development in the vicinity of Ramsgate would compound the need for fire protection services. Mitigation measures provided for the proposed project would be applicable to this alternative. Water Services Development of this alternative would increase onsite water consumption. The project, when built out, will require 1,445,900 gallons of water daily. Table 5-1 indicates the breakdown of water consumption for Ramsgate. The EVMWD has indicated that no adverse impacts associated with providing water service to the t project site for both domestic use and fire-flow requirements are anticipated. 7 Mitigation measures provided for the proposed project would be applicable to this alternative. �r 5-5 I JBX/709EIOlA2 �1 TABLE 5-1 DAILY WATER USAGE Consumption Rate Dwelling Units Daily Usage Land Use (gal/unit or sq ft) or Square Footage (gallons) Residential Single Family 500/unit 2,115 1,057,500 Multiple Family 400/unit 860 344,000 Subtotal 2,975 1,401,500 Commercial 120/1,000 sq ft 370,000a 44,400 Total: 19445,900 a Assumes 10,000 square feet of floor area per acre. Source: Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. The proposed project will add'to the cumulative demand on water services imposed by this and other- existing and proposed developments in the region. However, EVMWD anticipates no adverse impacts on its ability to provide water to the area as a result of this development. Nevertheless, the project will add to the cumulative demand on water resources in the region. Wastewater Services Development of this alternative would have an average wastewater flow of 1,156,720 thousand gallons per day (mgd). The EVMWD has indicated that there are no adverse impacts from providing wastewater service. This alternative would add to the cumulative demand for wastewater services imposed by this alternative and other existing and proposed developments in the region. Mitigation measures provided for the proposed project would be applicable to this alternative. 5-6 JBX/709EIOlA2 Schools iDevelopment of this alternative would provide 2,975 residential dwelling units. These 2,975 dwelling units have an elementary student generation factor of 0.4, and a 0.25 high school student generation facator. This creates the need for school facilities for 1,190 elementary students (Miller 1988) and 743 high school students (Manka 1988). Both the Lake Elsinore School District and Lake Elsh,ore Union School District have indicated that they cannot currently provide an adequate level of service for the projected students associated with this alternative. 1 Development of this alternative would add to the cumulative impact on schools in the project area. Since the schools that could serve the site are.already at capacity, implementation of this alternative would further the cumulative impact on schools in the project area. Mitigation measures provided for the proposed project are applicable to this alternative and would reduce projected sc;' 01 impacts to insignificant levels. Parks Development of this alternative would result in an increased demand for recreation facilities. The primary alternative would generate a population of 7,943 residents. Based on the city's park requirement standard of 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 people, an approximate total of 40 acres of parkland would be required. Electricity I ` The electrical demands for the primary alternative is shown on Table 5-2. Southern California Edison has indicated that there would be no adverse impacts associated with providing electrical service for the primary alternative. Mitigation measures provided for the proposed project would be applicable to the primary alternative. 1 . I e 1 5-7 JBX/709EIOlA2 I TABLE 5-2 ELECTRICAL DEMANDS i Electrical Consumption Dwelling Units (du) Generation Annual Usage Land Use or square footage (sq ft) (kWH*/year) (million kWh/year) Residential 2,975 du 6,081/du 18.09 Commercial 370,000a sq ft 17.1/sq ft 6.30 1 Total: 24.39 I * kWh = kilowatt-hours a Assumes 10,000 square feet of floor area per acre. Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District Air Quality Handbook 1987. Natural Gas The natural gas demands for the primary alternative are shown on Table 5-3. The Southern California Gas Company has indicated that there would be no adverse impacts associated with providing natural gas service for the primary alternative. Mitigation measures provided for the proposed project would be applicable to the primary alternative. e TABLE 5-3 NATURAL GAS DEMANDS _J Generation Factor Annual Usage Land Use Units cu ft/year (million cu ft) ._1 Residential 2,975 du 64,620 cu ft/du 192.2 I Commercial 370,000 sq ft 34.8 cu ft/sq ft 12.9 1 Total: 205.1 Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District Air Quality Handbook 1987. 5-8 JBY/709EIOIA2 "-1 _ 5.3 REDUCED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY 5.3.1 DESCRIPTION With the reduced residential density alternative, the overall nature an-1 mix of land luses would be similar to that of the current proposal, but reduced in residential density. Assuming the acreage currently designated for each use stays the same, but 1 residential densities were not to exceed 2.0 dwelling units per acre, buildout of the 4 project would generate up to 2,380 dwelling units. This alternative represents a 1 decrease of 595 dwelling units. J5.3.2 IMPACTS Earth Resources This alternative may result in a slightly lower amount of earthwork on the site. Residential lots would probably be larger and have more open space between them. However, the amount to be graded for roadways would remain the same. This alternative would significantly alter the landform of the site. 1 Hydrology This alterative may result in more onsite open space and less impervious surface. J Surface water runoff quantities may be less than those of the proposed project. The proposed project mitigates surface water runoff impacts to insignificant levels. Therefore, this alternative has no greater environmental advantage. Biological Resouces �l 1 This alternative could result in less conversion of open space and biological habitat as compared to the proposed project. However, with either this alternative or the proposed project, impacts to biological resources would be significant and unavoidable. II� _J 5-9 JBX/709EIOlA2 J Traffic Based on an average generation rate of 8.0 daily traffic trips per dwelling unit, this alternative represents approximately an 11-percent (4,760) decrease of total project- related traffic trips. This decrease in project-related traffic would lessen impacts to ps,Dject-area intersections aiid would decrease cumulative traffic impacts for the area. However, roadway improvements required for the proposed project would also be necessary for this alternative. Traffic impacts associated with the proposed project are mitigable- to acceptable levels. Therefore, this alternative provides no greater environmental advantage. Noise With this alternative, as compared to the proposed project, the 65 dB CNEL line from State Route 74 and Ramsgate Drive would extend less into the development area of Ramsgate. However, noise impacts associated with the proposed project are mitigated to insignificant levels. Therefore, this alternative has no greater environmental advantages. Population and Housing With this alternative, 2,380 dwelling units would be built and approximately 6,354 residents would be generated. Both the proposed project and this alternative are consistent with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Draft Growth Forecasts. Therefore, this alternative has no greater environmental advantage. Cultural Resources The impact of this alternative would be similar to the impact of the proposed project on cultural resources. Impacts are mitigable in both cases. 5-10 JBX/709EIOlA2 Aesthetic and Open Space Resources This alternative would have impacts similar to the proposed project's. However, with the reduced residential density alternative, the site may appear to be less dense. For both this alternative and the proposed project, the aesthetic character of the site would be unavoidably altered. Public Services and Facilities Public services and facilities impacts would be similar for this alternative and the proposed project, except that the proposed project impacts would be more intensive. As indicated in Sect-ion 4.9, all project impacts related to public services and facilities are mitigable to a level that is less than significant. Thus, this alternative would provide no environmental advantages over the proposed project. 5.4 INCREASiD RESIDENTIAL DENSITY . 5.4.1 DESCRIPTION With the increased residential density alternative, the overall nature and mix of land uses would, be similar to that of the proposed project, but with increased residential density. Assuming the acreage currently designated for each use stays the same, but residential densities were not to exceed 3.0 dwelling units per acre, buildout of the project would generate a total of 3,570 dwelling units. 5.4.2 IMPACTS Earth Resources This alternative may result in a slight increase in earthwork on the site. A substantial amount of landform alteration would occur. This alternative has no greater environmental advantages. 5-11 JBX/709EIOIA2 Hydrology This alternative may result in an increase of impervious surfaces. Surface water runoff ;;.a.Aities for the site could increase. This alterative has no greater environmental advantages. Biole-meal Resources This alternative could result in the conversion of additional open space and biological habitat as compared to the proposed project. With either this alterative or the proposed project, impacts to biological resources would be significant and unavoidable. Traffic Based on an average generation rate of 8.0 daily traffic trips per dwelling unit, this alternative represents an 11-percent (4,760) increase of total project-related traffic trips. Impacts to project area intersections would be greater. Therefore, this alternative does not provide any greater environmental advantages. ` Noise With this alternative, the 65 dB CNEL line from State Route 74 and Ramsgate Drive would extend farther into the development area of Ramsgate. The proposed project would result in less noise impacts. Therefore, this alternative has no greater environmental advantage. Population and Housing This alternative would generate a total of 3,570 dwelling units and 9,531 residents. These projections and the proposed project's projections are within the SCAG-87 Draft Growth Forecasts. This alternative has no greater environmental advantage. _ I 5-12 JBX/709EI01A2 Cultural Resources The impact of this alternativc on cultural resources would be similar to the impacts of the proposed project. impacts to cultural resources are mitigable in both cases. This alternative has no greater environmental advantages. Aesthetic and Open Sp�.:a Resources This alternative would have impacts similar to the proposed project's. However, residential uses may appear to be more dense, and less amounts of open space may occur between land uses. The aesthetic character of the site would be significantly altered. This alternative has no greater environmental advantages. Public Services and Facilities Public service and utility impacts would be similar for this alternative and the proposed project, except that the proposed project would be less intensive. This alternative has no greater environmental advantages. 5-13 JBX/709EIOlA2 SECTION 6 LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT 6.1 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAN'S ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY The proposed project provides an opportunity to balance short-term urban uses with long-term environmental productivity. Development of 1,051 acres of the Ramsgate project site with urban uses would result in a relatively short-term use of the site, given the 50- to 75-year structural lifetime of facilities that would be developed on the site. However, given the cost of developing urban infrastructure, it is probable that the site would continue with urban uses into the future. The developed project would contribute to long-term adverse impacts on air quality, noise, traffic and circulation, energy consumption, and demands on utilities and services. The project will also provide several long-term beneficial impacts. Local employ- ment opportunities will be created for both construction and operation of the project. Housing will be available to meet local market demands. Property tax and sales tax revenues will help to offset government expenditures to service the project. No long-term risks to health and safety are expected to result from implementation of the proposed project. The Ramsgate project site consists of 1,190 acres of undeveloped land. Approxi- mately 176 acres will be retained as open space through the preservation of Wasson Canyon and onsite riparian corridors, as well as through the provision of onsite local parks. Additionally, the proposed project mitigates impacts to the Stephens' kangaroo rat and to identified riparian areas. This will, in effect, promote the long- term environmental productivity of the project area. 6-1 JBX/709EIO1A2 6.2 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES THAT WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE PROPOSED ACTION SHOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED The environmental changes produced by the implementation of the proposed project would occur as a result of alteration of the physical environment. If the project is approved and subsequently implemented, a planned community development with residential, commercial, and open space uses will be developed. Project development is a short-term irreversible commitment of the land. Once the 50- to 75-year structural lifespan of the project's buildings is reached, it is probable that the site would continue to support urban uses due to the large investment of capital resources already expended on the site. Implementation of the project also represents a long-term commitment of energy resources primarily in the form of fossil fuels, including fuel oil, natural gas, and gasoline for automobiles and construction equipment. An increased commitment of social services and public maintenance would also be required. 6.3 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT The California Environmental Quality Act identifies a project as growth inducing if it is characterized by any one of the following criteria: fosters economic or popu- lation growth or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment; removes obstacles to population growth; and encour- ages and facilitates other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively. The proposed project will not significantly foster either economic or population growth in the surrounding environment. While the proposed project does provide onsite employment, it is not anticipated that potential new employment opportuni- ties are vast enough to foster surrounding area population, housing, or economic growth. The future residents of the project could stimulate additional commercial development in surrounding areas to serve the project; however, this occurrence should be hindered by the provision of onsite and nearby commercial development. Any additional commercial development initiated by the proposed project would likely be considered minor. 6-2 JBX/7u9EI01A2 Inherent with the intensification of land use is an increase on the demand for municipal and public services, including utilities, fire, and police service. Indirectly, the demand on these services will create an additional demand for market support services in the regional area. However, this impact of the proposed project is anticipated to be minimal. The proposed project is consistent with the city's General Plan. The increased public service demands associated with the proposed project have been planned for by the City of Lake Elsinore. 6-3 JBX/709EIO1A2 SECTION 7 ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED 7.1 LEAD AGENCY City of Lake Elsinore Community Development Department . . . . . . . . . . . <. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gary Thornhill Tnm Last 7.2 PUBLIC AGENCIES Riverside County Fire Department . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ray Herbard R. Regis Lake Elsinore Sheriff's Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .William Reynolds Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Loren Culp Aida Raywood Lake Elsinore School District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . Patti Epsic Linda Miller Lake Elsinore Union School District. . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . Priscilla Manka City of Perris Planning Department . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . .. . . . .. . . .Lewis Mazley Riverside County Waste Management Department . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mike Perry Riverside County Public Works Department . .. . . .. . . . . . . . .Richard Gaughan 7.3 PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS Southern California Gas Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .Rogelio Rawlins Southern California Edison Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ron Step 7-1 JBX/709EIOIA2 SECTION 8 LIST OF EIR PREPARERS MICHAEL BRANDMAN ASSOCIATES (EIR) Project Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . Joan P. Kelly Senior Project Manager . � � . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Melissa Holmes Project Manager . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Dan Bott Environmental Analysts . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Julie McCall Jason Brandman Julie Gaa Biological Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Dick Friesen Mike Fuller WEBBER ENGINEERING President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . ..Michael Webber KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES Project Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . John Caine 8-1 JBX/709EIOlA2 SECTION 9 REFERENCES CITED Boland, Dave. City of Lake Elsinore. Personal communication, 1988: Oct. 7. California Natural Diversity Data Base. 1987. Data Base Record Search for Information on Threatened, Endangered, Rare or Otherwise Sensitive Sr ecies and Communities in the Vicinity of Lake Elsinore. California Department of Fish and Game, State of California Resources Agency, Sacramento, California. Garret, K., and J. Dunn. 1981. Birds of Southern California, Status and Distribution. Los Angeles: The Artisan Press. Herbard, Ray. 1988. (Aug. 31) Letter. Herbard (Fire Chief, Riverside County Fire Department) to J. Brandman of Michael Brandman Associates (MBA). Interdisciplinary Systems, Inc. 1981. "Kecor Project Biological Data Statement and Impact Analysis." Prepared for L. D. King, Inc. Interdisciplinary Systems, Inc., Claremont, California. Manka, Priscilla. 1988. Letter. Manka (Elsinore Union High School) to J. Brandman of MBA. Marsh, K. 1983. "Existing Biological Resources, Ramsgate Project Recent Acquisition Parcel." Prepared for the Planning Network, Karlin Marsh, Biological Consultant, Silverado, California. Mazley, Lewis. Associate Planner, City of Perris. Personal communication, 1988: Oct. Miller, Linda. 1988 (Aug. 19). Letter. Miller (Lake Elsinore School District) to J. Brandman of MBA. Perry, Mike. Administrative Assistant, County Waste Management Department. Personal communication, 1988: Sept. 14. Rawlins, Rogelio. Engineer, Southern California Gas Company. Personal communi- cation, 1988: Sept. 19. Raywood, Aida. Engineer, Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. Personal com- munication, 1988: Sept. 20. Regis, R. Riverside County Fire Department. Personal communication, 1988: November. 9-1 JBX/709EIO1A2 Remsen, J. V. 1978. "Bird Species of Special Concern in California: An Annotated List of Declining or Vulnerable Bird Species." Nongame Wildlife Investigations, Wildlife Management Branch, California Department of Fish and Game. Administrative Report No 78-1. Reynolds, William. 1988 (Aug. 17). Letter. Reynolds (Captain, Lake Elsinore Sheriff Station, Riverside County Sheriff's Department) to J. Brandman of MBA. Smith, J. P., Jr., and K. Berg. 198°_ Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Special Publication No. 1 (4th Ed.), California Native Plant Society. Step, Ron. Engineer, Southern California Edison Company. Personal communication, 1988: Sept. 14. i l r f 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 9-2 JBX/709EIO1A2 �J