Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/16/07 PC Reports PAGE 2 -PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA~ JANUARY 16, 2007 2. Minor. Design ReYiew/~~3~ingle-FamiIy Residence located at 412 Langstaff Street (APN:. 374...061...005) . Staff is requesting a continuance of the propos.ed project. CASE PLANNER: Justin Carlson, Associate Planner Ext. 295, jcarlson@lake-elsinore.org RECOMMENDATION: Continue 3. Minor Design llevie",of. a Single-Family Residence located at 414 Langstaff Street (APN: 374-061-005) . Staff is requesting a continuance of the proposed project. CASE PLANNER: Justin Carlson, Associate Planner Ext.. 295, jcarlson@lake-elsinore.org RECOMMENDATION: Continue 4. Minor Design Reviewofa Single-Family Residence located at 416 Langstaff Street (APN: 374-061-005) . Staff is requesting a continuance of the proposed project. CASE PLANNER: Justin Carlson, Associate Planner Ext. 295,jcarlson@lake-elsinore.org RECOMMENDATION: Continue MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEE TING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530 TUESDAY, JULY 18, 2006 CALL TO ORDER: e4~~>:~/ <;:?/';;;<' ,n; ;::;;:y' OATH OFf,€lF:ltI€E to order. 6:01:00PM Chairman O'Neal called the Regular Planning c2~i~: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Chairman O'Neal led the Pledge of Allegiance. . ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: ZANELLI, ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Also present were: Weiner, City Engipe Associate Planner Rese ffice to Phil Mendoza and Axel Zanelli as new None CONSENT CALENDAR Chairman O'Neal requested to pull Items No.1 and 3. AOENDA ITEM NO. PAOE \ \ OF b PAGE 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -JULY 18,2006 ITEM NOT PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 2. Minor Design Review for a single-family residence located at 71 Via De La Valle (APN: 363-365-026). 1. Minor Design Review of a residential duplex loca 044-012). MOVED BY GONZALES, SECONDED BY MENDOZA PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4-0 BY THOSE PREi;,T, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2006-62, AP~ 'ING A MINOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A SI~j. FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 71 VIA,.;,E (APN: 363-365-026).8' ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT 374- Chairman O'Neal requested the Planne and the elevation. He went on to say that ,;::;; and on the elevation it shows a split so it ap~ear <:;;tj: Associate Planner C the two garages. 1\1~ . 'that the buildings look like they are split. Mr. Z disq; has bee there is a jo B~ckman Ct. Murrieta, explained that there is no fie. In order not to make it one long roof, a column es the impression from the front of the building, that Chairman O'N e~' between the garage horizontal jog. .... again, that looking at it from the front it looks like there is a jog 'on the right verses the garage plane on the left; a vertical and a Mr. Zubieta, agreed that it does look like there is but there isn't one. Chairman O'Neal requested any comments. There being no comments, Chairman O'Neal requested a Motion. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE ~ \ OF (; PAGE 3 - PLANNING COMMISSION:MINUfES -JULY 18, 2006 MOVED BY GONZALES, SECONDED BY ZANELLI AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4-0 BY THOSE PRESENT, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2006-61, APPROVING A MINOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A DUPLEX LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF LINDSAY APPROXIMATELY 380-FEET NORTH OF SUMNER AVENUE, AT 311 LINDSAY STREET (APN: 374-044-012). 3. Public Convenience and Necessity (PCN) Beverage Control Board for Longs Drugs located Hills Marketplace). Chairman O'Neal stated that he pulled this Community Development Director Preis and asked him to review the project with they may have. mg Manager Tom Weiner d answer any questions that alCode requires a Conditional Use Permit t the Municipal Code does not require it ecessity finding generally is found within a . I acce at as the finding by a City. Since there isn't a uire this type of drug store to get a CUP we have to go et them the Public Convenience and Necessity letter hen an area is over concentrated as this one is on the Chairman O'Nea clarification between last week's denial of a project because of the high concentratI of number of retail alcohol violations as opposed to this one which is also high inp hcentration but an approval is requested here. Planning Manager Weiner explained that the Public Convenience and Necessity has to be made for a particular use to serve a public need or convenience. If the Commission feels that the drug store use provides a convenience and is a necessity to the people in the Canyon Hills neighborhood and the commuters that go through there, then the finding can be made. As opposed to the service station and the mini-mart, there were several (mini-marts) in that area ACEN~:;:EM~O. OF' l .:- PAGE 4 - PLANNING CDMMISSION MINUTES -JULY 18, 2006 which sell alcohol and this was one of many reasons which the Commission used to deny that project. A representative from Longs Drugs is here, should there be any questions. Chairman O'Neal stated he had no questions for Longs Drugs, but wanted a clarification of what was done in the past compared to today, and the reasoning behind it. He also added that the Chief of Police had given a positive recommendation for this project yet he had not the last time. Chairman O'Neal requested any comments. requested a Motion. for this project a letter to the staff. Planning Manager Weiner confirmed the Chief of Police's and indicated that last time the Chief s concerns were made corrril~ll~, Chairman O'Neal PUBLIC HEARlN None Community Development Director Preisendanz commented on the following: . He welcomed the new Commissioners to the Planning Commission and stated that the Planning Department Staff will be happy to answer any questions and be of assistance. AC~NOAlttM NO. OF~:- PAGE ~ __ PAGE 5 - PLANNING COMMISSIONMINUfES -JULY 18, 2006 City Engineer Seumalo commented on the following: . He stated that he would like to propose to the Commission an update on Capital Improvement projects. . The City is waiting for the CalTrans permit for the Ortega and Grand signal project. . The Railroad Canyon Road work is moving forward, and.~~i!;!ills has approved the exposed piles and there is no safety issue. Ail};"" . Spring Street work will begin tomorrow and we wi~~~n< avement, to allow the drainage in that area. We also will be fixing a<iR~?~i.~tter i'<ii~ect to a dip that it creates, we would like to create a storm dra~lsysfem and elimin~~~~he need for that kind of a dip. The same issues exist on .<. treet, }vhich we woul~~l~~~ fi~ as well. . ~~ fig forward, it~~~as stuck in s in the next few days. ", ~'f:." . He stated that Tuesday, Ju g to City Council for appeal next Amendments to our Municipal Code u meetings. Weare trying to address some the zoning code, as they need to be addressed and ented on the followin . Stated he is Commission. to be here and looks forward to working with the staff and the Vice Chair Gonzales commented on the following: . He welcomed the new members. AOENOA ITEM NO. \ PAGE 5 OF b PAGE 6 - PLANNING CDMMISSION MINUTES -JULY 18, 2006 Commissioner Mendoza commented on the following: . He thanked the staff for their continuous help in his first few weeks as a Commissioner and added he is looking forward to being a part of this new and dynamic time in the City of Lake Elsinore. As the City grows with control, it's wonderful to be able to contribute to it as a Commissioner. Chairman O'Neal commented on the following: ATTEST: . He also, welcomed Commissioner Mendoza and . He stated that next Tuesday when the City Lennar projects, he is going to attend the the reasoning for decisions made by the few reversals by the City Council, So, Planning Commission came to their decisio ADJOURNMENT THERE BEING NO FURTHER B THE MEETING AT 6:20:17 PM ON <'NEAL ADJOURNED Rolfe Preisendanz, Dj'ector of Community Development ACl;NOA ITEM NO. PAGE_ . b OF {., CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: JANUARY 16,2006 PREPARED BY: JUSTIN CARLSON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 412 LANGSTAFF STREET (APN: 374-061-005) APPLICANT: ANTON WELSHffDK INVESTMENTS, INC.: 2180 RESERVOm DRIVE, NORCO, CA 92680 OWNER: SAME PROJECT REQUEST Staff is requesting a continuance of the proposed project. BACKGROUND Staff and the applicant have worked to bring the project forward; however, staff is requesting a continuance of the proposed project in order to allow staff the necessary time to finalize project issues. Therefore, with the consent of the Planning Commission, staff is requesting the project be continued to February 6, 2007. PREPARED BY: JUSTIN CARLSON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER APPROVED BY: -t~ l~ Foe ep ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE I d- OF I CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: JANUARY 16, 2006 PREPARED BY: JUSTIN CARLSON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 414 LANGSTAFF STREET (APN: 374-061-004) APPLICANT: ANTON WELSH/TDK INVESTMENTS, INC.: 2180 RESERVOIR DRIVE, NORCO, CA 92680 OWNER: SAME PROJECT REQUEST Staff is requesting a continuance of the proposed project. BACKGROUND Staff and the applicant have worked to bring the project forward; however, staff is requesting a continuance of the proposed project in order to allow staff the necessary time to finalize project issues. Therefore, with the consent of the Planning Commission, staffis requesting the project be continued to February 6, 2007. PREPARED BY: JUSTIN CARLSON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER APPROVED BY: --+- \ n l~ ~ f'orz..(ZP ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 3 ACEN"DA ITEM NO. PAGE I OF I = CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: JANUARY 16,2006 PREPARED BY: JUSTIN CARLSON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER PROJECT TITLE: MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 416 LANGSTAFF STREET (APN: 374-061-003) APPLICANT: ANTON WELSHlTDK INVESTMENTS, INC.: 2180 RESERVOIR DRIVE, NORCO, CA 92680 OWNER: SAME PROJECT REQUEST Staff is requesting a continuance of the proposed project. BACKGROUND Staff and the applicant have worked to bring the project forward; however, staff is requesting a continuance of the proposed project in order to allow staff the necessary time to finalize project issues. Therefore, with the consent of the Planning Commission, staff is requesting the project be continued to February 6, 2007. PREPARED BY: JUSTIN CARLSON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER APPROVED BY: ----t: ~ rva ~ ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 4 ACENDA ITEM NO. ,PAGE ..1 .. OF CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: JANUARY 16,2007 PREPARED BY: KIRT A. COURY, PLANNING CONSULTANT PROJECT TITLE: CANYON HILLS ESTATES: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2006-02, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-04, SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2006-01 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34249 APPLICANT: VICKI MATA, TRUMARK COMPANIES, 9911 IRVINE CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 150, IRVINE CA, 92618; JEREMY KROUT, RGP PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, 8921 RESEARCH DRIVE, IRVINE, CA 92618 OWNER: VICKI MATA, TRUMARK COMPANIES, 9911 IRVINE CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 150, IRVINE CA, 92618. PROJECT REQUEST The request before the Planning Commission is for consideration of: . Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 2006-02; and . General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 2006-04 to re-designate the Project Site from Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) and Mountainous (M) to Low Density Residential (LDR); and AGENDA ITEM NO. '- S- P/';GE~ LOF____l- J d- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 16, 2007 PAGE 2 OF 12 . Specific Plan No. 2006-01 - Adoption of the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan; and . Tract Map 34249 -to permit subdivision of the Project Site. PROJECT LOCATION The 246.4-acre project site is located immediately adjacent to the existing southern boundary of the Canyon Hills Specific Plan and is bounded by Hemlock Street to the north, Pine Avenue to the east, Crooked Arrow Drive and Crab Hollow Circle to the south and west (the "Project Site"). Cottonwood Creek flows through the northeast comer of the Project Site adjacent to Cottonwood Canyon Road. The Project Site is accessible from Lost Road, Navajo Springs Road and Cottonwood Canyon Road (Exhibit "A"). ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The Project Site is bounded on the north by the existing Canyon Hills Specific Plan development, to the south by the Sedco Hills and very low density residential units along Crab Hollow Circle. The project site is also bounded on the west by very low density residential units along Crooked Arrow Drive and Navajo Springs Road and on the east by very low density residential units with access from Pine Street east of Cottonwood Creek. Project Site Single- Family Residential & Vacant North Single- and Multifamily Residential South Sin le- Specific Plan (City of Lake Elsinore SOl) Very Low Density Residential and Rural Mountainous (City of Lake Elsinore SOl) Specific Plan Single Family 2 (2 to 4 du/ac), Single Family 3 (4 to 8 du/ac), Multi-Family 1 (8 to 15 du/ac) and Multi-Family 2 (15 to 24 du/ac) (Canyon Hills S ecific Plan) Residential A riculture, Rural Mountainous and ACENDA iTEM fJO. '-"- S- PACE_ d..OF_ - Jif PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 16,2007 PAGE 3 OF 12 Family Rural Residential, and Rural Residential (County Residential Residential one-acre of Riverside) (County of Riverside) East Single- Residential one-acre Low Density Residential Family (County of Riverside) (County of Riverside) Residential West Single- Residential Agriculture, Rural Mountainous and Family Rural Residential, and Rural Residential (County Residential Residential one-acre of Riverside) (County of Riverside) PROJECT BACKGROUND As the Planning Commission is aware, the project was continued from the December 19, 2006 Planning Commission meeting to the January 19, 2007 meeting. The continuance was requested to allow the environmental noticing period for the Draft Environmental Impact Report to close on December 27, 2006. It should be noted that since the Planning Commission is the recommending body, and not the approving body, the project could have proceeded forward as originally scheduled without any violation or compromise of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, due to the nature of the comments staff was receiving relating to the project, staff felt it was prudent to continue the item until after the environmental noticing period was complete, hence the scheduled meeting on January 16, 2007. At the close of the environmental noticing period, staff has received fifteen (15) comment letters (Exhibit "F"). In addition, staff has provided responses to the comment letters received (Exhibit "0"). In October 2005, the property owners of the "Project Site" filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting that their property be annexed into the City. The annexation request was based primarily upon the fact that any future development of the Project Site could be most efficiently and effectively served by the public facilities of the Canyon Hills Estates community of Lake Elsinore. In addition, the "Project Site" has long been associated with the City of Lake Elsinore as it was once a part of the City's Sphere of Influence. LAFCO removed the "Project Site" and other areas from the City's Sphere of Influence (SOl) in 1997 and added the territory to the Wi1domar/Sedco Hills Unincorporated ACEND'A iTEM NO. .s PAGE_. - 3 OF_ Jd: PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 16, 2007 PAGE 4 OF 12 Community (UC). Annexation of the Project Site into the City of Lake Elsinore would lead to logical growth and provision of services. To that end, on April 11, 2006, the City of Lake Elsinore City Council approved the following entitlements and commenced annexation proceedings for the Project Site: 1. General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 2005-08, which amended the City's General Plan Land Use Map to change the City's southern boundary to incorporate the Project Site; and 2. Zone Change (Pre-Zone) No. 2005-09, which changed the zoning designation of the Project Site to SP Specific Plan subject to the completion/approval of Annexation No. 75 by the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO); and 3. Annexation No. 75, which approved the commencement of proceedings for the SOl and annexation boundary change through LAFCO pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000; and 4. Negative Declaration No. 2006-02, which concluded that GP A No. 2005-08, Zone Change (Pre-Zone) No. 2005-09, and Annexation No. 75 would result in no significant environmental impacts. After the City Council adopted its resolution commencing annexation proceedings, Staff submitted an application to LAFCO for an amendment to the City's Sphere of Influencelboundary to include the Project Site. On October 26, 2006, LAFCO approved the boundary change by way of LAFCO 2006-105-1 & 3 - Amendment to Sphere of Influence of the City of Lake Elsinore (Addition) and Removal from the Wildomar UC. PROJECT DESCRIPTION GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-04 General Plan Amendment No. 2006-04 will change the City of Lake Elsinore's General Plan designation for the Project Site from Very Low Density Residential and Mountainous to Low Density Residential (Exhibit "B"). The Low Density Residential designation will allow the development of up to 738 dwelling units AGENDA ITEM NO. v,- 5 PAGE_~' 1-0F _ M PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 16, 2007 PAGE 5 OF 12 (DU) at a density of three (3) DU/acre. Despite the foregoing General Plan designation, the proposed Specific Plan and Tentative Tract Map will limit the total number of dwelling units to 302 DU or 1.23 DU/ac. SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2006-01 The purpose of the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan (Exhibit "D") is to provide for the orderly and efficient development of the Project Site. Canyon Hills Estates will be a planned residential community containing a maximum of 302 DU with a public park and open space areas integrated into the project design. Canyon Hills Estates is designed to conform to the topography of the site and to appear as an extension of the existing Canyon Hills development immediately to the north. Extending the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan to cover the proposed Project Site is logical from a planning perspective because the Project Site slopes downward from south to north, with the northern portion of the site approximately at the same elevation as the Canyon Hills Estates development, and the existing infrastructure improvements (roads, water, sewer and dry utilities) and community services (retail and service commercial, parks and schools) which abut the Project Site provide the most logical connection. The Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan divides the Project Site into three (3) basic land use categories: Residential, Public Park and Open Space. The Residential category has two subcategories: Single Family Residential-l (SF-I) and Single Family Residential-2 (SF-2). Design guidelines are contained in Chapter 5 of the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan. The Design Guidelines provide an added level of definition for the Plan's design objectives and the intended development character. The Specific Plan's principal design objective is to utilize a comprehensive, high quality community design approach addressing both community level design elements (streetscapes, entries, parks/open space) and individual lot design elements (siting, architecture). The design guidelines are intended to provide criteria for design, while allowing flexibility for architects, landscape architects, developers, and builders in the implementation of the Specific Plan. Single Family Residential 1 (SF-I) Approximately 33.2 percent (33.2%) of the "Project Site", the majority of the development area, is designated as Single Family Residential-l (SF-I). The SF-I ACENDA ITEM NO. v- PACtL - 50F - - t:J Jd- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 16,2007 PAGE 6 OF 12 area will contain a maximum yield of 238 single family detached dwelling units. The residential products planned for this area are detached homes of one and two stories on a mix of lot sizes ranging from a minimum of 7,200 square feet to over 20,000 square feet. The largest lot sizes are located on the southwesterly and southerly portions of the "Project Site". Single Family Residential 2 (SF-2) Approximately 9.4 acres of the northeasterly portion of the "Project Site" adjacent to Cottonwood Canyon Road are designated Single Family Residential-2 (SF-2). The SF-2 use comprises approximately 3.8 percent of the total "Project Site". SF-2 will contain a maximum yield of 64 dwelling units. Residential products may be made up of detached homes on compact lots or other similar residential products. The proposed location of the SF -2 area in Canyon Hills Estates is reflective of the adjacent existing and planned higher density residential community to the north in Canyon Hills and the SF-2 area's proximity to the planned public park and major circulation routes. Public Park The public park designation has been assigned to 5.4 acres, or approximately 2.2 percent (2.2%), of the "Project Site". The park facility is located in the northeast comer of the "Project Site". The park will be the focal point for neighborhood interaction and a natural and aesthetically pleasing gateway feature for the Canyon Hills Estates development. The park concept will preserve and enhance the oak woodland and riparian character of the Cottonwood Creek corridor which passes through the park area while blending in active and passive park facilities. The Public Park will have public street frontage along Cottonwood Canyon Road which facilitates visibility and access. On-street parking for the park will be permitted on Cottonwood Canyon Road. The public park will include active and passive park facilities that will be constructed to City standards. Facilities may include, but are not limited to, a tot lot and children's play areas, picnic tables and barbeques, turf play areas, a half basketball court, pedestrian paths and passive areas. Open Space Approximately 149.9 acres, or 60.8 percent, of the Project Site have been devoted to open space. The open space stretches east to west through the central portion of the Project Site. This area will provide a natural appearing visual backdrop to the lower residential development area and the community of Canyon Hills. AOENDA ITEM NO. 1__ 5 PAOE_ bOF_' - D PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 16,2007 PAGE 7 OF 12 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34249 Exhibit "C" shows how the Project Site will be subdivided. The design of the subdivision and density of 1.23 dwelling units per acre are consistent with the proposed General Plan designations of Low Density Residential, which accommodates residential development of up to three (3) dwelling units per acre. A Design Review Approval is not being considered at this time; therefore, home designs and specific home configurations on lots will be reviewed by the Planning Commission once a Design Review Permit application is submitted. The Tentative Tract Map encompasses the entire detached single-family residential area. The following describes the proposed Tentative Tract Map: 1. Proposed Lots: The Tentative Tract Map proposes 317 total lots as follows: . 302 single-family detached residential lots within the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan. . Twelve (12) lettered lots for open space. . Two (2) lettered lots for water tank sites. It should be noted that the water tank sites are designated at specific site locations as a requirement of the appropriate water district to allow for usable water pressure and proper fire safety water flows. Any attempt to deviate from the appointed locations could disrupt designated water flow requirements and impact such agency standards. Please note that condition number four (4) of the conditions of approval requires that the applicant to provide landscape screening of the on-site water tanks to mitigate the aesthetics appearance of the identified tanks. . One (1) lettered lot for a public park. 2. Proposed Lot Size: The proposed lot sizes will range from 3,000 to 28,931 square feet, with an average lot size of 9,219 square feet. 3. Proposed Roadwav and Circulation Improvements: The general layout and design standards for streets allow the Canyon Hills Estates community to safely meet the circulation needs of the residents and users of the Project Site. The circulation concept consists of an internal street system supporting the land use allocations in the Specific Plan with connections to surrounding vehicular access streets and pedestrian linkages within the project area. Vehicular street access to the Project Site is provided by Cottonwood Canyon ACENDA ITEM NO._ L'- 5 PACE__1oF ~ ~d- ~ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 16,2007 PAGE 8 OF 12 Road on the north, and Lost Road via Navajo Springs Road on the west. Due to its proximity to Canyon Hills Road, the entrance on Cottonwood Canyon Road is considered the Canyon Hills Estates community's primary access. The system meets the primary and secondary access requirements of the Riverside County Fire Department. A description of current planned road improvements is as follows: . Cottonwood Canvon Road: Cottonwood Canyon Road will have a 48-foot pavement section with one 12- foot travel lane in each direction and 12- foot auxiliary lanes on both sides within a total right-of-way of 70 feet. This configuration conforms to the existing improvements to the north of the Project Site in the Canyon Hills development. . Lost Road: Lost Road south of Canyon Hills is currently a two-lane dirt road. As a part of the project's access improvements, Lost Road, from its intersection with Navajo Springs Road northerly to the existing Lost Road improvements in the Canyon Hills development, will be enhanced to a 36- foot pavement section, including 2- foot shoulders where possible with a 4- foot sidewalk within the existing right-of-way. This road section is designed to accommodate project traffic and bring a significant access improvement to the surrounding area. . Nava;o Springs Road: Navajo Springs Road is an eXIstmg unimproved public local street abutting the west side of the Project Site, and provides a vehicular connection from the project to Lost Road. The subdivider of Tract Map No. 2910, containing the majority of Navajo Springs Road, made an irrevocable offer of dedication of Navajo Springs Road to the County of Riverside for public use for street purposes. Pursuant to its standard procedures, the County has not yet accepted this irrevocable offer of dedication because Navajo Springs Road has not yet been improved to County specifications. On May 26, 2006, an application to vacate the offer of dedication was submitted to the County of Riverside Transportation Department. The County may only grant the proposed vacation if it finds that Navajo Springs Road is "unnecessary for present or prospective public use" (Streets & Highway Code, 9 8324; Riverside County Resolution No. 85-330). The Riverside County Fire Department has already recommended that the County deny the proposed vacation. Should the Riverside County Transportation Department deny the proposed vacation of the "offer of dedication" on Navajo Springs Road, it is expected that the County will AGENDA ITEM NO. 5" PACE_ '" 5..0F _ ~ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 16, 2007 PAGE 9 OF 12 accept the "offer of dedication" once Navajo Springs Road is improved. This existing connector will have its existing road section enhanced to 24 feet, including 2- foot shoulders where possible, providing one travel lane in each direction with a 4-foot sidewalk. 4. Local Streets: Internal local streets serving the overall Project Site, excluding the Private Local Streets of the SF-2 area, will be designed to minimize through traffic within neighborhoods but will provide an indirect connection through the project from Cottonwood Canyon Road on the east to Navajo Springs Road and Lost Road on the west. They will also provide internal linkages for Canyon Hills Estates residents, and provide access to the park recreation/open space amenities. These local internal streets will have a special modified section with an expanded parkway on one side to facilitate a public trail system throughout the project. Design standards for Local Streets are described as follows: . Local Streets will have a 40- foot pavement section with one 12- foot travel lane in each direction and parking on both sides, within a total right-of-way of 60 feet. . The pavement section will be offset within the right-of-way to provide a 17- foot expanded parkway on one side, which will accommodate the 8-foot public trail with native landscaping. 5. Private Local Streets: The SF-2 area will be serviced by an internal street system consisting of "Private Local Streets", which will connect directly to the overall Canyon -Hills Estates community's primary access to Cottonwood Canyon Road. "Private Local Streets" will have a 46 foot design right-of-way to ensure safe and adequate mobility to community residents, visitors and emergency personnel. Curb adjacent sidewalks will also be provided along the "Private Local Streets". 6. Emer2encv Access: An Emergency Access Road (intended for emergency personnel only) with a 24-foot right-of-way is planned at the southern site boundary within the public right-of-way off Turtle Creek Road. From the southern property line, the access road will extend approximately 170 feet north to the "J" Street terminus. The access road improvements will not connect to Crab Hollow Circle as the road is intended to provide only emergency vehicle access to the southern boundary of the Project Site. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 PACE_ iOF _ - J.if- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 16, 2007 PAGE 10 OF 12 7. Non-Vehicular Circulation System: The Specific Plan includes a non- vehicular circulation system composed of an 8-foot public trail within a 17-foot expanded parkway along one side of the internal local streets. In addition to these local street trails, there will be Class 2 on-street bicycle lanes along Cottonwood Canyon Road that will provide connections to both the north and south. ANALYSIS The Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan is consistent with the City's General Plan and pre-existing development adjacent to the Project Site. The Low Density Residential designation in combination with the Specific Plan zoning provides an opportunity to cluster development and create a significant open space area that other General Plan designations would not facilitate. By functioning as a regulatory document, the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan provides a means of implementing the City's General Plan through implementation of particularized land use provisions, development regulations and design guidelines. The proposed project does not result in cumulative impacts to land use and planning for other land in the project vicinity. Canyon Hills to the north is an existing community, which has been developed pursuant to a Specific Plan. The Project Site is oriented to Canyon Hills to the north. Existing commercial, institutional, and schools are closer to the north and accessible via paved improved roads. The project, as proposed, will compliment the existing and proposed development in the surrounding area. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION According to the State CEQA Guidelines, "the EIR process starts with the decision to prepare an EIR." (14 C.C.R. 9 15081.) At the conclusion of the initial study of the proposed project, it was determined that there was substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. To that end, a draft environmental impact report (DEIR) was prepared. Even though the DEIR concluded that unavoidable adverse impacts related to air quality (only short term impacts during construction) and traffic (cumulative impacts post 2025 that would occur in the future with or without the project) would result with the proposed applications, a Statement of Overriding ACENDA ITEM NO. PACE_ [QOF 5 Jd- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 16,2007 PAGE 11 OF 12 Considerations has been prepared in accordance with Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, which "balances" the proposed project against this unavoidable environmental effect. The CEQA Guidelines require that a DEIR, which is submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by state agencies, be circulated for public review for a minimum of 45 days (14 C.C.R. 9 15105.) Accordingly, the public review period for the proposed project began on November 13,2006 and closed on December 27, 2006. Staff prepared responses to all comments received, which are identified as Exhibit "F". RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the following Resolutions: 1. Resolution No. 2006-_ recommending to the City Council certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 2006-02. 2. Resolution No. 2006- recommending to the City Council adoption of MSHCP Consistency Findings. 3. Resolution No. 2006-_ recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2006-04. 4. Resolution No. 2006-_ recommending to the City Council adoption of Canyon Hills Specific Plan No. 2006-01. 5. Resolution No. 2006-_ recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 34249. This recommendation is based on the findings, exhibits and conditions of approval attached to this Staff Report. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 PAGE__ lloF_ --1.d PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 16, 2007 PAGE 12 OF 12 PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: KIRT A. COURY, PROJECT PLANNER ;/)JJ7L. --/ ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 2006- recommending to the City Council certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 2006-02. 2. Resolution No. 2006-_ making Findings that the Project is consistent with the Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) 3. Resolution No. 2006-_ recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2006-04 4. Resolution No. 2006-_ recommending to the City Council adoption of Canyon Hills Specific Plan No. 2006-01 5. Resolution No. 2006-_ recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 34249 6. Conditions of Approval 7. Exhibits "A": Location Map "B": General Plan Amendment No. 2006-04 Land Use Map "C": Tentative Tract Map 34249 "D": Specific Plan No. 2006-01 "E": Comment letters relating to the project "F": Response to comment letters "G". Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 2006-02 ACENDA ITEM NO. v, 5 PACE_ j;lOF _ =-I-'d- RESOLUTION NO. 2007- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE CERTIFY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2006-02 FOR THE CANYON HILLS ESTATES PROJECT WHEREAS, the Vicki Mata, Trumark Companies, has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2006-04, Specific Plan No. 2006-01, and Tentative Tract Map No. 34249 for the project identified as the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore (the "City") has caused an Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073: the "EIR") to be prepared on the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq.: "CEQA"), the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (14 California Code of Regulations, Sections 15000, et seq.: the "State CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's procedures relating to environmental evaluation of public and private projects; and WHEREAS, the City transmitted for filing a Notice of Completion of the Draft EIR and thereafter, in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines, forwarded the Draft EIR to the State Clearinghouse for distribution to those agencies which have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project and to other interested persons and agencies, and sought the comments of such persons and agencies; and WHEREAS, notice to all interested persons and agencies inviting comments on the Draft EIR was published in accordance with the provIsions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15082(c)(1), on October 5, 2006 the City held a duly noticed scoping meeting in order to expedite consultation regarding the scope and content of the environmental information in the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, all actions required to be taken by applicable law related to the preparation, circulation, and review of the Draft EIR have been taken; and CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE 2 OF 9 WHEREAS, the Draft EIR prepared for the Project was sent to the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission held a public hearing to receive public input on the adequacy of the Draft EIR on January 16,2007. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission has evaluated all comments, written and oral, received from persons who have reviewed the Draft EIR. Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that the EIR for the Project is adequate and has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and local procedures adopted by the City pursuant thereto; the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Draft EIR and finds that the Draft EIR represents the independent judgment of the City. Section 3. The Planning Commission hereby makes, adopts, and incorporates herein as its "findings of fact" regarding the potential environmental impacts of the Project, the analysis and conclusions set forth in the Draft EIR (including, without limitation, the mitigation measures therein set forth); the following summarizes those conclusions: a. The Initial Study and the Draft EIR determined that impacts related to the implementation of the Project would be less than significant without mitigation for agricultural resources, land use, mineral resources, population/housing, and recreation. b. The Draft EIR identified potentially significant adverse impacts related to the implementation of the Project, but which will be mitigated to an insignificant level by conditions imposed upon the Project, in the areas of aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, and noise. The type of impact for which mitigation was designed and the associated mitigation measures are identified in Section 3.1 Environmental Analysis of the Draft EIR, and are summarized in the Executive Summary of the Draft EIR. c. All feasible mitigation measures, which are within the jurisdiction of the City, as identified in the Draft EIR have been incorporated into the Project and CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE30F9 represent the fullest extent to which the Project-related impacts can be reasonably avoided and/or substantially lessened. d. The Draft EIR did not identify alternatives to the Project which would reduce environmental impacts while still substantially achieving the Project's objectives, and the proposed Project was determined to be the environmentally superior alternative. e. The proposed Project and associated discretionary approvals will result in significant unavoidable impacts to short-term (construction-related) air quality associated with localized PMlO and PM2.5, near-term (2010), and future (2025) traffic. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council has determined that the unavoidable adverse impacts that will result from project implementation are acceptable and outweighed by specific social, economic and other benefits of the project. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared and is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein. Section 4. A mitigation monitoring program for the Project has been prepared in accordance with Section 21081.6 of CEQA, and the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the mitigation monitoring program. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE40F9 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of January, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development "EXHIBIT A" STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a public agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. The Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan has identified and discussed significant effects that may occur as a result of the Project. With the implementation of the mitigation measures discussed in the EIR, these effects can be mitigated to a level of less than significant except for unavoidable significant impacts as discussed in Section III of the Findings. The City of Lake Elsinore has made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate or substantially mitigate the potential impacts resulting from the Specific Plan. Impacts, in these and all other cases, have been mitigated to the extent considered feasible. All significant adverse impacts are identified in the Final EIR and are addressed in the Findings, which accompany this Statement of Overriding Considerations. The Project will result in the following significant impacts that cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels: 1. Traffic and Circulation Year 2010 Transportation Improvements: The Project will participate in the Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) transportation improvement programs; however, the possibility exists that some of the necessary Year 2010 intersection improvements might not be constructed by 2010. As such, a significant impact could remain after Project mitigation (fee payment) and until the improvements are constructed. Year 2025 Transportation Improvements: The Project will contribute incrementally (from <1 % to approximately 6.3% of total trips) to cumulative level of service deficiencies at five study area intersections in Year 2025. The Project cannot feasibly mitigate its share of those future cumulative impacts because those intersections are not CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE60F9 scheduled for improvements under a City or County fair-share funding and implementation program. 2. Air Quality Localized Significance Thresholds: Even with the use of all feasible mitigation, the Project will result in short-term (project construction- related) air quality impacts associated with localized PMIO and PM2.5 levels adjacent to residences in the existing Canyon Hills community. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City must balance the benefits of the Project against any unavoidable environmental impacts in determining whether to approve the Project. If the benefits of the Specific Plan outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, those impacts may be considered "acceptable." The City has determined that the unavoidable adverse impacts that will result from Project implementation are acceptable and outweighed by specific social, economic and other benefits of the Project. In making this determination, the factors and public benefits specified below were considered. The City further finds that except for the Specific Plan, all other alternatives set forth in the EIR are infeasible because they would prohibit the realization of Specific Plan objectives and/or of specific economic, social and other benefits that this City finds outweigh any environmental benefits of the alternatives. Having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the Specific Plan to the extent feasible by adopting the proposed mitigation measures; having considered the entire administrative record on the Specific Plan; and having weighed the benefits of the Specific Plan against its unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation, the City has determined that the following social, economic, and environmental benefits of the Specific Plan outweigh the potential unavoidable adverse impacts and render those potential adverse environmental impacts acceptable based upon the following overriding considerations: CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE70F9 Environmental Benefits of the Project . The Open Space conservation easements will benefit biological resources through preservation of approximately 126 acres of natural hillside and riparian areas in perpetuity and designation of an additional 24 acres of open space. (Draft EIR, p. 3.8-17) . The Open Space conservation easements will benefit the City by contributing to the City's overall conservation acreage under the MSHCP program. (Draft EIR, p. 3.8-27) . The Project will benefit biological resources and provide quality Riparian/Riverine habitat through the enhancement of Cottonwood Creek and existing riparian oak woodland, including the removal invasive non-native plant species and revegetation with appropriate native species. (Draft EIR, p. 3.8-35) . The Project will enhance the value of Cottonwood Creek as a wildlife movement corridor extending beyond the Project Site via a 155.3-acre open space and park plan. (Draft EIR, pp. 2-8 - 2-11,3.8-35) . The Project will eliminate existing erosion conditions that have compromised the structural facilities and have caused siltation and temporary capacity reductions in the existing debris/detention basin in Tract 30492. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.7-19, 3.7-24) . The Project will provide water quality and flood control benefits by reducing and detaining some of the existing storm flows passing through the Project Site, much of which originates from existing and developing residential properties upstream in the study area watershed. (Draft EIR, p. 3.7-32) . Through expanded detention/water quality basin design, the Project will negate more than its incremental share of runoff volumes by releasing stormwater from the Project Site at rates that are below the 100-year storm flow capacities of downstream storm drains in the Canyon Hills development. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.7-19,3.7-32) Social Benefits of the Project . The Project will improve local traffic circulation and emergency vehicle access to the Project Site and surrounding properties through CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE80F9 the proposed road improvements. (Draft EIR, p. 2-11, 2-15 - 2-16; 3.9-3) . The Project will remove a potential health risk through demolition and clean up of debris, including possible asbestos-containing materials and lead-based paints. (Draft EIR, p. 3.9-7 - 3.9-8) . The Project will benefit the community as a whole, by removing the potential for illegal dumping, trespass, and other activities. (Draft EIR, p. 3.2-22) . The Project will provide recreational opportunities for City residents and visitors including a SA-acre park. (Draft EIR, p. 2-8 - 2-11) . The Project will provide an emergency access road that will promote emergency response and accessibility not only for the Project Site, but also for the adjacent residential areas in the County of Riverside to the south, which are currently accessible only by unimproved roads. (Draft EIR, p. 3.9-3) . The Project will provide trails and bikeways, including a special modified roadway section with an expanded eight-foot parkway on one side to facilitate a public trail system throughout the project. (Draft EIR, p. 2-15) . The Project has prepared a Fire Protection Plan that will reduce wildfire risk in the general vicinity of the Project site. (Draft EIR, p. 3.13-7) Economic Benefits of the Project . The Project is expected to be built out by 2010, providing steady construction jobs over the construction period. . The Project will contribute fees toward traffic improvements, school facilities, park facilities, fire services, police services, water facilities, and sewer facilities. . The payment of parkland mitigation fees will benefit the City's park programs. (Draft EIR, p. 3.13-13) The City has determined that the foregoing benefits provided to the public through approval and implementation of the Specific Plan outweigh the CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE 9 OF 9 identified significant adverse environmental impacts of the Specific Plan, which cannot be mitigated. The City finds that each of the Specific Plan benefits outweighs the unavoidable adverse environmental effects identified in the ErR and therefore finds those impacts to be acceptable. RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ADOPTION OF FINDINGS THAT THE PROJECT KNOWN AS CANYON HILLS ESTATES IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN WHEREAS, Vicki Mata, Trumark Companies, has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2006-04, Specific Plan No. 2006-01, and Tentative Tract Map No. 34249 for the project identified as the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the 246.4-acre project site is located immediately adjacent to the existing southern boundary of the Canyon Hills Specific Plan and is bounded by Hemlock Street to the north, Pine Avenue to the east, Crooked Arrow Drive and Crab Hollow Circle to the south and west. Cottonwood Creek flows through the northeast comer of the site adjacent to Cottonwood Canyon Road (the "Project Site"); and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 of the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (the "MSHCP") requires that the City of Lake Elsinore adopt consistency findings demonstrating that the proposed development is consistent with the MSHCP criteria and the MSHCP goals and objectives; and WHEREAS, action taken by the Planning Commission and City Council with regard to general plan amendment, specific plan, and tentative tract map applications are discretionary actions subject to the MSHCP; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub. Res. Code ~~ 21000 et seq.: "CEQA") and the CEQA Guidelines (14 C.C.R. 99 15000 et seq.), a draft environmental impact report was prepared for the project, circulated for public review for a period of 45 days and was accompanied by a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and WHEREAS, public notice of the Project has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on January 16,2007. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE20F5 NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the Project's consistency with the MSHCP prior to recommending that the City Council adopt Findings of Consistency with the MSHCP. SECTION 2. That in accordance with the MSHCP, the Planning Commission makes the following MSHCP Consistency Findings: 1. The Project is a project under the City's MSHCP Implementing Resolution, and the City must make an MSHCP Consistency finding before approving the Project. Pursuant to the City's MSHCP Implementing Resolution, prior to approving any discretionary entitlement, the City is required to review the project to ensure consistency with the MSHCP criteria and other "Plan Wide Requirements." The Project, as proposed, was found to be consistent with the MSHCP criteria. In addition, the Project was reviewed and found consistent with the following "Plan Wide Requirements": Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines (MSHCP S 6.1.2), Protection of Narrow Endemic Species (MSHCP S 6.1.3), Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines (MSHCP S 6.1.4), Vegetation Mapping (MSHCP S 6.3.1), Additional Survey Needs and Procedures (MSHCP S 6.3.2), Fuels Management (MSHCP S 6.4), and payment of the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee (MSHCP Ordinance S 4.0). 2. The Project is subject to the City's Lake Elsinore Acquisition Process (LEAP) and the County's Joint Project Review processes. The Project Site is within the Elsinore Area Plan, but the site is not within a Criteria Cell. A LEAP was processed, but because the Project Site is not within a Criteria Cell, the Project is not subject to LEAP, and a Joint Project Review with the RCA was not required. 3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE30F5 Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP focuses on protection of riparian/riverine areas and vernal pool habitat types based upon their value in the conservation of a number of MSHCP covered species. All potential impacts to riparian/riverine areas will be mitigated as identified in the Determination of Biological Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP). The Project Site does not have vernal pools. The Project is therefore consistent with Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. 4. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines. The Project is not located in a Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area as mapped in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP. Therefore the provisions of Section 6.1.3 are not applicable to the Project. 5. The Project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. The Project is located within the Burrowing Owl survey area as identified in Section 6.3.2 Additional Survey Need and Procedures of the MSHCP. Five surveys were conducted on the entire site. The results of the surveys indicated that no Burrowing Owls occupied the Project site. However, the Project will be required to conduct a pre-construction survey 30 days prior to the commencement of grading. As such, the Project is consistent with Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP. 6. The Project is consistent with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines. The Project Site is not within an MSHCP Criteria Cell. However, Cell 4951 is south of the Project Site. A number of Project design features have been included to address edge effects beyond the limits of grading at the urban/wildlands interface that are consistent with the guidelines of Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP. Therefore, the Project is consistent with Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP. 7. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. The Project site is not within a MSHCP Criteria Cell. Additionally, the site is not within the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area; therefore, no Narrow Endemic Plant surveys were required. However, plant communities were mapped and sensitive plant species not adequately conserved or covered by the MSHCP PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE 4 OF 5 were surveyed. These species include: Parry's spineflower, Plummer's mariposa lily, chaparral sand verbena, and Coulter's matilija poppy. Surveys and mapping were conducted pursuant to MSHCP requirements; therefore, the Project is consistent with the MSHCP Section 6.3.1 Vegetation Mapping requirements. 8. The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. The Fuels Management Guidelines presented in Section 6.4 of the MSHCP are intended to address brush management activities around new development within or adjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area. The Project Site is not in a Criteria Cell and is therefore not a Conservation Area. Criteria Cell 4951 is south of the Project Site, but the proposed fuels management as part of the Project do not encroach into Cell 4951. Therefore the Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. 9. The Project will be conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. As a condition of approval, the Project will be required to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee at the time of issuance ofbuilding permits. 10. The Project is consistent with the MSHCP. For theforegoing reasons, the Project is consistent with the MSHCP. SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE50F5 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of January 2007, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development RESOLUTION NO. 2007- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-04 WHEREAS, Vicki Mata, Trumark Companies, has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2006-04 for the project identified as the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the 246.4-acre project site is located immediately adjacent to the existing southern boundary of the Canyon Hills Specific Plan and is bounded by Hemlock Street to the north, Pine Avenue to the east, Crooked Arrow Drive and Crab Hollow Circle to the south and west. Cottonwood Creek flows through the northeast comer of the site adjacent to Cottonwood Canyon Road (the "Project Site"); and WHEREAS, on November 27, 1990, the City of Lake Elsinore City Council approved the current version of the Lake Elsinore General Plan; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65300 requires each city prepare and adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the City and any land outside the City's boundaries which in the City's judgment bear relation to the City's planning; and WHEREAS, the 1990 Lake Elsinore General Plan "Land Use Map" Figure designates the Project Site as Very Low Density Residential and Mountainous; and WHEREAS, on April 11, 2006, the City Council entertained a request by Trumark Companies to commence annexation proceedings for the Project Site; and WHEREAS, one of the entitlements which the City Council approved on April 11, 2006, as part of the annexation package, was General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 2005-08, which amended the City's General Plan Land Use Map to change the City's southern boundary and sphere of influence to incorporate the Project Site; and WHEREAS, after receiving City Council approval for the commencement of annexation proceedings, the applicant filed an application for a sphere of PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE20F5 influence change and annexation request with the Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO"); and WHEREAS, on October 26, 2006, LAFCO approved the sphere of influence request by way of LAFCO Resolution 2006-105-1&3, which added the Project Site to the City of Lake Elsinore's Sphere of Influence and removed the Project Site from the Wildomar Unincorporated Community (UC); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 17.80.010 of the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council for approval of General Plan Amendments; and WHEREAS, public notice of the Project has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on January 16,2007. NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Prior to making a recommendation to the City Council, the Planning Commission has reviewed and analyzed the General Plan Amendment pursuant to the State Planning and Zoning Laws (Cal. Gov. Code 99 65000 et seq.) to determine the appropriateness of changing the general plan land use designation from Very Low Density Residential and Mountainous to Low Density Residential. SECTION 2. In accordance with State Planning and Zoning Laws and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code ("LEMC"), the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2006-04: 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not be: a) detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE30F5 The proposed General Plan Amendment will change the Project Site's General Plan land use designation to Low Density Residential. Currently, the Project Site has a General Plan land use designation of Very Low Density Residential and Mountainous, which allow residential and accessory land uses. The proposed land uses are similar to existing and approved uses on all sides of the Project perimeter and roadway network. Impacts will be mitigated and therefore will not result in any significant impacts in surrounding neighborhood(s), except in the areas of construction-related air quality impacts and the timing of improvements to intersections that will not be operating at acceptable levels of service in 2025. The significant air quality impacts are only construction related and will not have long term effects. The intersection impacts will occur with or without the Project, which does contribute an insignificant amount of traffic to the impacted intersection. Therefore, the Project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the Project. Furthermore, because the Project is a residential community, the Project will not be injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood surrounding the Project Site or within the City. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment will permit reasonable development of the area consistent with its constraints and will make the area more compatible with adjacent properties. The Project Site has been pre-zoned Specific Plan, which requires the preparation of a Specific Plan for the purpose of master planning the site prior to allowing development to occur. Furthermore, section 17.99.010 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code states that the purpose of the Specific Plan zoning district is to enhance the appearance and livability of the community through encouragement of creative approaches to the use of land and the design of facilities; and, to promote and create public and private open space as an integral part of land development design. To this end, the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan will include residential, open space and park uses consistent with the Low Density Residential General Plan designation and compatible with the surrounding residential, open space and park land uses surrounding the Project Site. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE 4 OF 5 3. The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a land use designation and usage more in character with the subject property's location, access, and constraints. The master planned community of Canyon Hills lies just north of the Project Site. Canyon Hills' residential neighborhoods are comprised of 5,000 square foot lots, which is a higher density than the Project Site and surrounding properties' General Plan designations. Changing the land use designation for the Project Site to Low Density Residential will create a neighborhood that is more in character with the pre-existing Canyon Hills development. In addition, the Low Density Residential designation will create a more natural transition from the higher density residential neighborhoods of Canyon Hills to the rural residential areas surrounding the Project Site. Residential clustering results in a residential product that compliments the topography and location of the Project Site. Finally, the Project will use existing points of access for the future residential community. SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE50F5 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of January 2007, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development RESOLUTION NO. 2007- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2006-01 WHEREAS, Vicki Mata, Trumark Companies, has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting approval of Specific Plan No. 2006-01 for the project identified as the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan (the "Project"). The 246.4-acre project site is located immediately adjacent to the existing southern boundary of the Canyon Hills Specific Plan and is bounded by Hemlock Street to the north, Pine Avenue to the east, Crooked Arrow Drive and Crab Hollow Circle to the south and west. Cottonwood Creek flows through the northeast comer of the site adjacent to Cottonwood Canyon Road; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council for approval of specific plans; and WHEREAS, public notice of the Project has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on January 16,2007. NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Prior to making a recommendation to the City Council, the Planning Commission has reviewed and analyzed Specific Plan No. 2006-01 pursuant to the Planning and Zoning Laws (Cal. Gov. Code ~~ 65000 et seq.) and Chapter 17.99 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code ("LEMC"). SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning laws and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the approval of Specific Plan No. 2006-01: 1. The location and design of the proposed development shall be consistent with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan and with any other applicable plan or policies adopted by the City. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006- PAGE20F4 The Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan meets the City's Specific Plan criteria for content and required implementation of the General Plan established by Section 65450 et seq. of the California Government Code and Section 17.99 of the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. Accordingly, the proposed Specific Plan is in concurrence with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning district in which the site is located 2. The proposed location shall allow the development to be well- integrated with or adequately buffered from its surroundings, whichever may be the case. The proposed project is appropriate to the site and surrounding developments in that the project will construct single-family detached units in accordance with appropriate development and design standards contained in the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan. The project creates interest and varying vistas as a person moves along any project street. The project also complements the quality of existing neighboring development and will continue to provide visually-pleasing design and architecture within the immediate area. 3. All vehicular traffic generated .by the development, either in phased increments or at full build-out, is to be accommodated safely and without causing undue congestion upon adjoining streets. The proposed Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan has been reviewed as to its relation to the width and type of pavement needed to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated, in that the City has adequately evaluated the potential impacts associated with the proposed uses prior to its approval and has conditioned the project to be served by roads of adequate capacity and design standards to provide reasonable access by car, truck, transit, and bicycle. 4. The Final Specific Plan shall identify a methodology(s) to allow land uses to be adequately serviced by existing or proposed public facilities and services. In appropriate circumstances , and as provided elsewhere by City Code, the City may require that suitable areas be reserved for schools, parks and pedestrian ways; or public open spaces shall be dedicated or reserved by private covenant for the common use of residents, establishments or operations in the development. The Final Specific Plan properly identifies methodologies to allow land uses to be adequately serviced by existing or proposed public facilities and services. The PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006- PAGE 3 OF 4 Final Specific Plan identifies necessary streets and circulation to support the proposed land use allocations, as well as all necessary wet and dry utilities for proper and adequate infrastructure services. In addition, the Specific Plan identifies a 5.4 acre park site for common use of the residents, and approximately 126 acres of open space for dedication and preservation. 5. The overall design of the Specific Plan will produce an attractive, efficient and stable development. The proposed Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan has been designed in consideration of the size and shape of the property, thereby strengthening and enhancing the immediate residential area. The project, as proposed, will complement the quality of existing development and will create a visually pleasing, non-detractive relationship between the proposed and existing projects, in that the proposed use has been reviewed to ensure adequate provision of screening from the public rights-of-way or adjacent properties. The Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan will not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working near the project area or within the City, nor will it be injurious to property or improvements in the project area or within the City. In addition, staff has substantiated that all applicable City Departments and Agencies have been afforded the opportunity for a thorough review of the Specific Plan and have incorporated all applicable comments and/or conditions related to installation and maintenance of landscaping, street dedications, regulations of points of vehicular ingress and egress and control of potential nuisances, so as to eliminate any negative impacts to the general health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of the surrounding neighborhood or the City. 6. In accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), impacts have been reduced to a level of non-significance, or in the case where impacts remain, a statement of overriding considerations must be adopted to justify the merits of project implementation. Environmental Impact Report No. 2006-02 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which analyzes environmental effects of the Specific Plan. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2006- PAGE40F4 SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of January, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development RESOLUTION NO. 2007- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34249 WHEREAS, Vicki Mata, Trumark Companies, has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 34249 which subdivides 246.40 acres of land into 302 residential lots (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the 246.4-acre project site is located immediately adjacent to the existing southern boundary of the Canyon Hills Specific Plan and is bounded by Hemlock Street to the north, Pine Avenue to the east, Crooked Arrow Drive and Crab Hollow Circle to the south and west. Cottonwood Creek flows through the northeast comer of the site adjacent to Cottonwood Canyon Road (the "Project Site"); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council pertaining to the subdivision of land; and WHEREAS, public notice of the Project has been given, and the Planning. Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on January 16,2007. NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Prior to making a recommendation to the City Council, the Planning Commission has reviewed and analyzed Tentative Tract Map No. 34249 pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (Cal. Gov. Code 99 66000 et seq.) and Title 16 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code ("LEMC"). SECTION 2. In accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and Title 16 of the LEMC, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 34249: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE20F4 1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for the design and improvement, are consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Code, Title 16 of the Municipal Code relating to Subdivisions, and the State Subdivision Map Act. The design of the subdivision and density of i.23 dwelling units per acre is consistent with the General Plan designation of Low Density Residential, which accommodates residential development up to 3 dwelling units per acre. The Project is consistent with the designated land use planning area, development and design standards, and all other requirements contained in the General Plan, Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, and Subdivision Map Act. 2. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan (Government Code Section 66473.5). The Project is consistent with the land use plan, development and design standards and programs, and all other requirements of the General Plan and Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan. For example, the General Plan designates the Project Site as Low Density Residential. The Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan designates the Project Site as Single Family Residential i (SF-i) (minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet) and Single Family Residential 2 (SF-2) (maximum density of 6.8 dwelling units per acre). Tract Map No. 34249 is consistent with the SF-i and SF- 2 designations and applicable development and design standards because the. maximum density incorporated into the Tract Map is i.23 dwelling units per acre. 3. The effects this proposed subdivision is likely to have upon the housing needs of the region, the public service requirements of its residents, and the available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and balanced (Government Code Section 66412.3). In light of General Plan Amendment No. 2006-04 and Specific Plan 2006-01, the Project is consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Code, will provide necessary public services and facilities, and will pay all appropriate fees. The proposed subdivision's effects upon the housing needs of the region, the public service requirements of its residents, and the available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and balanced in the Project EIR and Plan of Services. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE 3 OF 4 4. The design of the subdivision provides, to the greatest extent possible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision (Government Code Section 66412.3). Government Code Section 66473.1(b)(1) and (2) indicate that examples of passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities in subdivision design include design of lot size and configuration to permit orientation of a structure in an east-west alignment for southern exposure and to permit orientation of a structure to take advantage of shade or prevailing breezes. The Project subdivision has been designed to include a variety of lot sizes ranging from 3,000 square feet to over 20,000 square feet, and a variety of lot configurations. Lot configurations and lot sizes were determined based upon the consideration of multiple factors, including, but not limited to: passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities, contours, circulation, access, open space buffers and biological resources. Nevertheless, because much of the site is a north facing slope, passive or natural heating opportunities are limited. Similarly, opportunities were limited to orient the lots to take advantage of southwest prevailing winds due to site contours. Where feasible, lots were configured to permit orientation of a structure in an east- west alignment for southern exposure and to permit orientation of a structure to take advantage of shade or prevailing breezes. Additionally, the Project will comply with all appropriate conservation requirements of the City and Uniform Building Code. SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE 4 OF 4 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of January 2007, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2006-01 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34249 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2006-04 CANYON HILLS ESTATES SPECIFIC PLAN GENERAL 1. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, Agents, and its Consultants from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning implementation and construction of the proposed project, which action is bought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Sections 65009 and/or 66499.37, and Public Resources Code Section 21167. The City will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City and will cooperate fully with the defense. PLANNING DIVISION 2. All Conditions of approval shall be reproduced on page one of building plans prior to their acceptance by Building Division. All Conditions of Approval shall be met prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities. 3. The applicant shall comply with the City's Noise Ordinance Chapter 17.78 (Noise Control) of the LEMC. 4. The applicant shall prepare a final landscape plan subject to the review and approval of the Director of Community Development or designee. The plan shall incorporate details identifying screening, irrigation and aesthetic mitigation of the on-site water tanks. Said landscape improvements shall be bonded with a 100 percent Faithful Performance Bond for materials and labor for two years from Certificate of Occupancy. 5. The Project will expire two (2) years from date of approval unless within that period of time Annexation No. 75 has been filed and recorded with the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo), or an extension of time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council. SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2006-01 6. The Draft Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan shall be revised to incorporate any corrections and changes required by the Planning Commission and/or City Council. A Final Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan document shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Director or designee within 30 days of approval by the City Council. No permit shall be issued until the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan document and any required revisions are administratively approved by the Community Development Director or designee. 7. Future development shall comply with those standards and guidelines contained in the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan document. 8. Those issues, standards, guidelines, etc. not addressed in the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan will revert to the City Municipal Code and/or Zoning Code in effect at the time future projects are proposed. 9. The applicant shall participate and annex into the City of Lake Elsinore Citywide Landscaping and Street Lighting District, as appropriate. 10. The applicant shall provide all project-related onsite and offsite improvements as described in the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan document. . TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 34249 11. The Tentative Tract Map No. 34249 will expire two (2) years from date of approval unless within that period of time an appropriate instrument has been filed and recorded with the County Recorder, or an extension of time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. 12.The Tentative Parcel Map No. 34249 shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 16 unless modified by approved Conditions of Approval. 13.Prior to final certificate of occupancy of Tentative Parcel Map No. 34249, the improvements specified herein and approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council shall be installed, or agreements for said improvements, shall be submitted to the City for approval by the City Engineer, and all other stated conditions shall be complied with. All uncompleted improvements must be bonded for as part of the agreements. 14.Prior to approval of the Final Map or if deemed appropriate by the City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall initiate and complete the formation of a Homeowner's Association, approved by the City, recorded, and in place. All Association documents shall be approved by City Planning and Engineering and the City Attorney and recorded, such as the Articles of Incorporation for the Association; and Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs). At a minimum, the CC&Rs shall include language to ensure the following conditions. l5.All construction shall comply with these Conditions of Approval and those provisions and requirements contained in the Cottage Lane Specific Plan and Municipal Code, prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy and release of utilities. 16. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the City's Grading Ordinance. Construction generated dust and erosion shall be mitigated in accordance with the provisions of Municipal Code, Chapter 15.72 and using accepted techniques. Interim erosion control measures shall be provided 30 days after the site's rough grading, as approved by the City Engineering. 17. The applicant shall comply with all applicable City Codes and Ordinances. l8.A cash bond of$l,OOO.OO shall be required for any construction trailers used during construction. Bonds will be released after removal of trailers, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director or designee. 19.The design and construction of the project shall meet all County Fire Department standards for fire protection. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall provide assurance that all requirements of the Riverside County Fire Department have been met. 20.The project shall comply with the requirements of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). The applicant shall submit water and sewer plans to the EVMWD and shall incorporate all district conditions and standards. 2 1. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall pay park-in-lieu fee in effect at time of building permit issuance or dedicate the proposed approximately 5.4 acre park area to the City. 22. The applicant shall pay school fees to the Lake Elsinore Unified School District prior to issuance of building permit. 23.The Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Fee (MSHCP) will be due upon issuance of each building permit. ENVIRONMENTAL 24. The following mitigation measures related to the protection of Cultural Resources shall be implemented as described below: · TS-O 1 shall be avoided and preserved where feasible including a 10 meter buffer surrounding the boundaries of TS-O I to protect the delineated site area and any associated subsurface components. Protective fencing during construction shall be provided to protect TS-O 1 where feasible. Any recovered artifacts shall be housed at a curatorial facility in compliance with 36 CFR 79 or given to the affiliated Tribe as determined by the Section 106 process in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act. · Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, a Phase II cultural resources testing and evaluation program shall be conducted for TS- Oland TS-02. The Phase II evaluation plan shall contain a research design and field methodology designed to evaluate the significance of the sites pursuant to applicable law and in accordance with general archaeological reporting standards for such. If Phase II testing determines the presence of a "unique archaeological resource" under Public Resources Code Section 21083.2, the report shall include recommended measures to avoid or mitigate impacts to the sites. Where avoidance of significant resources is not feasible, Phase III investigations (data recovery) shall be completed. · All testing and evaluation shall be supervised by an individual or individuals meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards as a qualified prehistoric archaeologist for Site TS-O I and as an historic archaeologist for Site TS-02 and/or a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RP A) with similar qualifications. · If the Phase II cultural resources evaluation program determines that a given resource is eligible for listing on the California Registry of Historic Resources (CRHR) and/or local listings and therefore meets the definition of an "historical resource," or if there is a determination by the City in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe that a resource is "unique" pursuant to applicable law, an impact determination shall be made prior to issuance of grading permits. If the impacts are determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be designed in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe to mitigate impacts to below a level of significance with preservation as the preferred mitigation if feasible. If preservation is not the chosen alternative, a data recovery program shall be implemented. The data recovery program shall entail, at a minimum, the collection of surface materials and a sufficient sample of buried materials, analysis, and reporting of recovered materials consistent with the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement by and between the Project Applicant and the Pechanga Tribe. · Prior to issuance of grading permit(s) for the Project, the Project Applicant shall retain an archaeological monitor to monitor all ground-disturbing activities with special emphasis on the vicinity of TS-O 1 and TS-02 in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation. · At least 30 days prior to seeking a grading permit, the project applicant shall contact the Pechanga Band of Luiseiio Indians for the purpose of notifying the Tribe of the grading, excavation and monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Lake Elsinore and the Pechanga Band of Luiseiio Indians to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the treatment of known cultural resources, the designation, responsibilities, and participation of Native American monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation; and treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. The City of Lake Elsinore shall be the final arbiter of any disputes concerning the conditions included in the Agreement. · Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the project archaeologist shall file a pre-grading report with the City and County (if required) to document the proposed methodology for grading activity observation. Said methodology shall include the requirement for a qualified archaeological monitor to be present and to have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. In accordance with the Treatment Agreement, the archaeological monitor's authority to stop and redirect grading will be exercised in consultation with the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians in order to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. Tribal monitors from the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities, and shall also have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities in consultation with the project archaeologist. · If human remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 shall apply and no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The Riverside County Coroner shall be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection and provide its recommendations pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. 25.The applicant shall implement all mitigation measures identified in Environmental Impact Report No. 2006-02 and its Mitigation Monitoring Program. ENGINEERING DIVISION 26.A grading plan signed and stamped by a Calif. Registered Civil Engineer shall be required if the grading exceeds 50 cubic yards or the existing flow pattern is substantially modified as determined by the City Engineer. If the grading is less than 50 cubic yards and a grading plan is not required, a grading permit shall still be obtained so that a cursory drainage and flow pattern inspection can be conducted before grading begins. 27.Prior to commencement of grading operations, applicant to provide to the City with a map of all proposed haul routes to be used for movement of export material. Such routes shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. 28.All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer who shall also certify, for stability and proper erosion control, all slopes approved by the City to be steeper than 2 to 1. 29.An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained prior to any work on City right- of-way. 30.Street improvements, traffic signing and striping are required as part of this project. The improvements shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and shall meet city and/or riverside county standards. 31.Arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) out of the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property owner or his agent. 32.Applicant shall pay all applicable development impact/mitigation fees, including but not limited to TUMF, MSHCP,TIF and Area Drainage Fees. The amount to be paid for each fee shall be consistent with the fee in effect per each fee's implementing ordinance. 33.10 year storm runoff shall be contained within the curb and the 100 year storm runoff shall be contained within the street right-of-way. When either of these criteria is exceeded, drainage facilities shall be provided. 34.All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie notes delineated on 8 ~" x 11" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering Division before final inspection of public works improvements will be scheduled and approved. 35.In accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste disposal & recycling, the applicant shall be required to contract with CR&R Inc. for removal and disposal of all waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or all other phases of construction. 36.0n-site drainage shall be conveyed to a public facility, accepted by adjacent property owners by a letter of drainage acceptance, or conveyed to a drainage easement. 37.All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer. Diversion of historic flows shall not be allowed. a. Roof drains shall not be allowed to outlet directly through coring in the street curb. 38.Roofs should drain across a minimum of20-feet of landscaped area. 39.Provide for the detention of storm water increases due to the project as increased from historic flow volumes. Basins shall be designed consistent with Riverside County Flood Control District standards. 40.Applicant shall comply with all NPDES requirements in effect; including the submittal of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) as required per the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. 41.City of Lake Elsinore has adopted ordinances for storm water management and discharge control. In accordance with state and federal law, these local storm water ordinances prohibit the discharge of waste into storm drain system or local surface waters. This includes non-storm water discharges containing oil, grease, detergents, trash, or other waste remains. Brochures of "Storm water Pollution, What You Should Know" describing preventing measures are available at City Hall. 42.PLEASE NOTE: The discharge of pollutants into street, gutters, storm drain system, or waterways -without Regional Water Quality Control Board permit or waver - is strictly prohibited by local ordinances and state and federal law. Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 43.Ifthe grading is less than 50 cubic yards and a grading plan is not required, a site plan showing proposed project improvements and drainage patterns shall be submitted so that a cursory drainage and flow pattern inspection can be conducted before grading begins. 44.Submit grading plans with appropriate security, Hydrology and Hydraulic Reports prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer for approval by the City Engineer. Developer shall mitigate any flooding and/or erosion downstream caused by development of the site and/or diversion of drainage. 45.The approved grading plan shall show conveyance of any storm water historically traversing the project site. The storm drain design shall convey, at a minimum, the 100 year storm event detailing overland release of any supplemental water volume. 46.Provide soils, geology and seismic report for plan check review and approval. Provide final soils report showing compliance with recommendations. 47. The applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements for off-site grading and/or drainage acceptance from the adjacent property owners prior to grading permit issuance. a. Applicant shall provide erosion control measures as part of their grading plan. The applicant shall contribute to protection of storm water quality and meet the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. 48.Applicant shall provide the city with proof of his having filed a Notice of Intent with the Regional Water Quality Control Board for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program with a storm water pollution prevention plan prior to issuance of grading permits. 49.Applicant shall obtain approval from Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board for their storm water pollution prevention plan including approval of erosion control for the grading plan prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant shall provide a WQMP for post construction, which describes BMP's that will be implemented for the development and including maintenance responsibilities. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit 50. Unless other timing is indicated, all Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior to building permit. 51. Construct a full 40- foot street section on 60- feet of dedicated right of way as the modified section with expanded parkway for project site internal public streets. 52. Cottonwood Canyon Road shall be constructed with 48-feet of road section from curb to curb with a dedicated right of way width of70-feet. 53.Construct a 24-foot street section with asphalt dyke on the southerly side and curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements on the northerly side of Navajo Springs Road. Provide geotechnical data to support a slope steeper than 2: 1 between the toe of slope and right of way line. 54. Construct a 32-foot street section with asphalt dyke on the southerly side and curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements on the northerly side of Lost Road. All slopes exceeding 2: 1 shall be approved prior to issuance of grading permit. 55.All project site internal private local streets shall have a minimum 36-foot section with rolled curbs constructed on a 46-foot easement. 56. Comply with access requirements from the Fire Department. 57.Submit a "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division from the applicable water agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project and specify the technical data for the water service at the location. such as water pressure and volume etc. Submit this letter prior to applying for a building permit. 58.Pay all Capital Improvement Impact/Mitigation Fees and Plan Check fees (LEMC 16.34) including , but not limited to Traffic Improvement Fee, Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee, Area Drainage fee, etc. Prior to Occupancy 59.All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie notes delineated on 8 1/2" x 11" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering Division. 60.All public improvements including signing and striping, and street lighting shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans or as condition of development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 61.0nsite circulation of the project shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. 62.Coordinate the construction of a street light with Southern California Edison consistent with the City Standard street light spacing. 63.Water and sewer improvements. shall be completed in accordance with Water District requirements. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 64.Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall dedicate the 5.4 acre park area to the City. Park credit fees towards park construction will be applied (302 units @ $1,600 = $483,200). 65.Developer will be required to participate III the "Public Facility" fee program. 66.Developer to comply with all NPDES storm water requirements. 67.All interior landscape, recreation areas, facilities and/or open space that is maintained by the HOA will not receive park credits. 68.HOA to maintain all natural and manufactured slopes. 69.HOA to maintain all drainage facilities and structures. 70.HOA to maintain all catch basins, collectors, v-ditches or any other related flood control or storm water control device. 71.HOA to maintain all exterior walls and landscaping. 72. Developer to participate in the City-wide LLMD. 73.Prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy, the developer must annex into LLMD District I for all exterior landscaping to be maintained by the City. 74.Developer to comply with all City Ordinances regarding construction debris removal and recycling as per Section 8.32 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 75.Prior to issuance of the final certificate of occupancy, the developer must provide City with an inventory of all street signs, street markings, street trees and total square footage of all streets in a digital format acceptable to the City. 76.Developer to meet City curb, gutter and sidewalk requirements. 77.City to review and approve all park development and implementation plans. 78.City's Landscape Architect to review all landscape and/or irrigation plans. 79.Developer to dedicate five (5) acres of park land to the City in perpetuity. Site to be equestrian in design and located off of Cottonwood Canyon Road (as per preliminary park site plan) intersecting Street "A". 80.Regional Trail connection to be provided as part of development. 81.Park construction to be completed at the opening of the first model home. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT 82.Annex into CFD 2003-1: Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel Map, Site Development Plan, Special Use Permit or building permit (as applicable), the applicant shall annex into the Mello-Roos Community Facilities District 2003-1 to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on public safety operations and maintenance issues in the City. Applicant shall make a four thousand two hundred dollar ($4,200) non- refundable deposit to cover the cost of the annexation process. Contact Dennis Anderson, Harris & Associates at (949) 655-3900 x334 or danderson@harris-assoc.com. g3.Annex into CFD 2006-5: Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel Map, Site Development Plan, Special Use Permit or building permit (as applicable), the applicant shall annex into the Mello-Roos Community Facilities District 2006-5 to fund the on-going operation and maintenance of the new parks, parkways, open space and public storm drains constructed within the development and federal NPDES requirements to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project. Applicant shall make a four thousand two hundred dollar ($4,200) non-refundable deposit to cover the cost of the annexation process. Contact Dennis Anderson, Harris & Associates at (949) 655-3900 x334 or danderson@harris-assoc.com. g4.Annex into LLMD No.1: Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel Map, Site Development Plan, Special Use Permit or building permit (as applicable), the applicant shall annex into Lighting and Landscape Maintenance District No.1 to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on public right-of-way landscaped areas and neighborhood parks to be maintained by the City and for street lights in the public right-of-way for which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to Southern California Edison. Applicant shall make a four thousand seven hundred dollar ($4,700) non-refundable deposit to cover the cost of the annexation process. Contact Dennis Anderson, Harris & Associates at (949) 655-3900 x334 or danderson@harris-assoc.com. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: JANUARY 16,2007 PREPARED BY: LINDA MILLER, PLANNING CONSULTANT PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004- 08/MITIGATION MONITORING & REPORTING PROGRAM AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31839 FOR FINANCE AND CONVEYANCE PURPOSES APPLICANT: WATERSEDGE ELSINORE ASSOCIATES, 4060 CAMPUS DRIVE, SUITE 100, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 OWNER: SAME PROJECT REQUEST . Review and recommendation to City Council to certify Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-08 and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15077 (California Administrative Code Section 15000 et seq.). . Review and recommendation to City Council for approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 31839 for Finance and Conveyance Purposes pursuant to Section 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), Sections 66424 and 66427 of the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA) and the East Lake Specific Plan. ACENDA ITEM NO. PACE~ LOF (p -J5 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 16,2007 PAGE20F4 PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004- 08 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31839 FOR FINANCE AND CONVEYANCE PURPOSES PROJECT LOCATION The project site is located at the eastern boundary of the lake, along the edge of the San Jacinto Channel, south of Lakeshore Drive and east of Lakepoint Park Drive (APN 373-300-002, 002, 005, 006, 007; 373-270-010, 373-292-002 and 003). ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Project Vacant East Lake Specific Plan East Lake Specific Plan Site North Vacant, SFR, East Lake Specific Plan East Lake Specific Plan Commercial South San Jacinto East Lake Specific Plan East Lake Specific Plan Channel East SFR East Lake S ecific Plan East Lake S ecific Plan West Park, Vacant CP (Commercial Park) and Public Institutional and (OS 0 en S ace o en S ace PROJECT HISTORY The applicant originally submitted a request for approval of a Tentative Tract Map in October 2003. This application requested the subdivision of approximately fifty (50) acres into (5) parcels. At that time the applicant indicated that the map was to be considered part of a condominium project, however, in June 2004 the applicant requested that the Tentative Tract Map be changed to the subject Tentative Tract Map for Finance and Conveyance Purposes. At that time approximately twenty-five (25) acres were added to the project and was re-subdivided into thirteen (13) parcels. An Initial Study was completed and from that review it was determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration would be appropriate. The Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-08 was transmitted to the State Clearinghouse (SCH No. 2004111116) for review and comments to all required agencies. A total of three (3) comment letters were received during the comment period which closed December AGENDA ITEM NO. to PAGE - dOF_.' -.15 -J REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 16,2007 PAGE30F4 PROJECT TITLE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004- 08 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31839 FOR FINANCE AND CONVEYANCE PURPOSES 21, 2004. Responses to each comment letter are included in the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration. Since its initial submittal, the project has evolved with changes in size and design. Subsequently, the number of parcels changed from thirteen (13) parcels to twenty-two (22) parcels. Accordingly, the Mitigated Negative Declaration was revised to reflect both the changes in the number of parcels proposed and to respond to the three (3) comment letters. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is proposing to subdivide approximately 75 acres into twenty-two (22) parcels. The parcels range in size from .25 acres to 20.6 acres, with an average size of 3.4 acres. Approval of this map will allow for the sale of parcels only. Development will not be allowed until the applicant has complied with all Conditions of Approval. The existing zoning designations for the project site are Residential 1, Residential 2 and Open Space (Park). ANALYSIS Staff has researched the request for a Tentative Tract Map for Finance and Conveyance Purposes and found that although the map includes the words "for Finance and Conveyance Purposes" it will be required to meet all the same requirements of a standard Tentative Tract Map. Additionally, restrictions will be placed upon the map that no development may take place with this approval until all Conditions of Approval have been met to the satisfaction of the City of Lake Elsinore. This shall include all environmental clearances necessary to allow for future development. Since the map shall be used solely for financing purposes by the developer Staff can recommend approval of the Tentative Tract Map for Finance and Conveyance Purposes. ACENDA ITEM I'JO. ro PAOE___..3.0F_ -J5 - REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 16,2007 PAGE40F4 PROJECT TITLE: MITIGA TED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004- 08 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31839 FOR FINANCE AND CONVEYANCE PURPOSES ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-08 has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), the CEQA Guidelines (California Administrative Code Section 15000 et seq.), County of Riverside and the City of Lake Elsinore CEQA procedures. Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) findings will be made when an actual development footprint has been submitted for review and approval. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2007-_, recommending to the City Council certification of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-08 and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Resolution No. 2007- _, recommending to City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 31839 for Finance and Conveyance Purposes. Approval is based on the attached Findings, Exhibits, and Conditions of Approval. APPROVED BY: LINDA MILLER, AICP, PROJECT PLANNER -j- ~ LJ, h~H~ ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PREPARED BY: ATTACHMENTS: 1. VICINITY MAP 2. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 3. PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS OF APPROV AL 4. REDUCED EXHIBIT 5. FULL SIZED EXHIBITS AGENDA ITEM ~.!O. ~ ro PAGE_" 3.oF.-JS- - VICINITY MAP TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31839 FOR FINANCE AND CONVEYANCE PURPOSE FOR THE WATERS EDGE LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM NO. _ b PACE__ SCF 15 - "-'- RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ADOPTION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-08 WHEREAS, WatersEdge Elsinore Associates, LLC filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-08 and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Tentative Tract Map No. 31839 for Finance and Conveyance Purposes (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the Project is subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code, Sections 21000, et seq.: "CEQA") and the State Implementation Guidelines for CEQA (14 California Code of Regulations, Sections 15000, et seq.: "CEQA Guidelines") because the Project involves an activity which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and involves the issuance of a lease, permit license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies (Public Resources Code, Section 21065); and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, the City conducted an Initial Study, which revealed that the Project may present potentially significant environmental impacts; and WHEREAS, based upon the results of the Initial Study, and based upon the standards set forth in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15070, it was determined appropriate to prepare and circulate Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-08 (State Clearinghouse No. 2004111116) for the Project (the "Mitigated Negative Declaration"); and WHEREAS, consistent with Section 21081.6 of CEQA, which requires that a lead agency prepare a reporting or monitoring program for changes made to the project or conditions of project approval when adopting an environmental impact report or a mitigated negative declaration, the City prepared and circulated a Mitigation and Monitoring Program with the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15072, on November 18, 2004 the City duly issued a notice of intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and AOENDA ITEM NO. --" ~ PAOE ,~Of-~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE20F3 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council regarding environmental documents; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on January 16, 2007, the Planning Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item. NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has evaluated all comments, written and oral, received from persons who have reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration. SECTION 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation and Monitoring Program for the Project are adequate and have been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's procedures for implementation of CEQA. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation and Monitoring Program and finds that the documents represent the independent judgment of the City. SECTION 3. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning Law, CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation and Monitoring Program: 1. Revision in the Project plans or proposal made by or agreed to by the applicant before a proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigated the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. The applicant has made revisions to the Project and has agreed to specific conditions of approval, which both avoid certain effects and mitigate other effects of the Project to less than significant. AOENDA ITEM NO.____ b PAGE_ f.e?---L5~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE30F3 2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency, that the Project as revised may have significant effect on the environment. In the light of the whole record before the Planning Commission, including verbal the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this sixteenth day of January, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz, Director of Community Development AOEilJDA ITEril rm. _ ~ PAClE 6OF-L5 RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31839 FOR FINANCE AND CONVEYANCE PURPOSES WHEREAS, WatersEdge Elsinore Associates, LLC filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 31839 for Finance and Conveyance Purposes; and WHEREAS, Chapter 16.24 requires that the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore consider and make recommendations to the City Council regarding tentative tract maps; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on January 16, 2007, the Planning Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item. NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 31839 for Finance and Conveyance Purposes prior to making a decision to recommend approval to the City Council. SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning Law and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 31839 for Finance and Conveyance Purposes: 1. The proposed division of land is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. The proposed division of land has been reviewed by the City and the appropriate affected Agencies and has been determined to be consistent with the designated land use planning area, development and design standards, and all other appropriate requirements contained in the General Plan, Specific Plan, City Municipal Code, and Subdivision Map Act. AOE;~DA ITEM NO. . ' ~ PAOE__1.0F -15_ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE 2 OF 3 2. The design or improvement of the proposed division of land IS consistent with applicable general and specific plans. Construction and development are not allowed with the proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 31839 for Finance and Conveyance Purposes. Any future construction or development on the project site is required to acquire entitlements from the City and other applicable public agencies. Future site development would be required to comply with Federal, State of California, County of Riverside, and City of Lake Elsinore guidelines as appropriate. 3. The site of the proposed division of land is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. Construction and development are not allowed with the proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 31839 for Finance and Conveyance Purposes. Any future construction or development on the project site is required to acquire entitlements from the City and other applicable public agencies. Future site development would be required to comply with Federal, State of California, County of Riverside, and City of Lake Elsinore guidelines as appropriate. 4. The design of the proposed division of land or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program that were prepared for the project ensure that the subdivision will not result in environmental damage or harm to fish, wildlife, or their habitat. 5. The design of the proposed division of land or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. Construction and development are not allowed with the proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 31839 for Finance and Conveyance Purposes. Any future construction or development on the project site is required to acquire entitlements from the City and other applicable public agencies. Future site development would be required to comply with Federal, State of California, County of Riverside, and City of Lake Elsinore guidelines as appropriate. 6. The design of the proposed division of land or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed division of land. / AGENDA ITEM NO._ b PACE . lOOF~'_ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ PAGE30F3 Construction and development are not allowed with the proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 31839 for Finance and Conveyance Purposes. Any future construction or development on the project site is required to acquire entitlements from the City and other applicable public agencies. Future site development would be required to comply with Federal, State of California, County of Riverside, and City of Lake Elsinore guidelines as appropriate. SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this sixteenth day of January, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz, Director of Community Development AGENDA ITEM NO._ ro PACE 'LLm=_ If g CONDITIONS OF APPROV AL FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-08 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31839 GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Official, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Official, Officers, Employees, or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning the Tentative Tract Map No. 31839, which action is bought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Sections 65009 and/or 66499.37, and Public Resources Code Section 21167. The City will promptly notify the Applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City and will cooperate fully with the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the Applicant of any such claim, or proceeding, the Applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. 2. The applicant shall submit a money order, cashier's check or check, made payable to the County Recorder, for filing of a Certification of Fee Exemption "De Minimis Impact Finding." in the amount of $64.00 to the Planning Division within 48 hours of the City Council approval date for the required Environmental Filing. 3. The applicant shall comply with those mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-08 and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan. PLANNING DIVISION 4. The Tentative Tract Map No. 31839 will expire two (2) years from date of approval unless within that period of time an appropriate instrument has been filed and recorded with the County Recorder, or an extension of time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. 5. The Tentative Tract Map No. 31839 shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 16 unless modified by approved Conditions of Approval. AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ PAGE_.L~-_OF _ , SJ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-08 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31839 6. In the event an association or other legally responsible entity fail to maintain applicable improvements in such a manner as to cause same to constitute a public nuisance, said City may, upon proper notice and hearing, institute summary abatement procedures and impose a lien for the costs of such abatement upon said common area, individual units or whole thereof as provided by law. 7. All future development with the Tract Map area shall conform to all standards set forth in the proposed WatersEdge Specific Plan area. 8. All future development with the Tract Map area shall conform to all provisions of the proposed WatersEdge Environmental Impact Report, including but not limited to all mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan. 9. Current landowner shall disclose to all potential buyers of any lot within the WatersEdge Specific Plan area the requirement to conform to all standards and provisions as described in the two previous conditions. ENGINEERING DIVISION 10. The project shall comply with the most current amendment to the East Lake Specific Plan. II.Dedicate full half width right-of-way on Lakeshore Drive for the project frontage. The dedication shall be consistent with the current General Plan Circulation Element roadway designation for Lakeshore Drive. I2.Dedicate full half width right-of-way for the project frontage of Lakepoint Park Drive. The dedication shall be based on the full local street right-of-way standard of sixty (60) feet. In the event the project traffic study identifies a larger roadway requirement for Lakepoint Park Drive, the dedication will be the larger of the local standard or the traffic study recommendations. AGENDA nr:M NO.---= - ~ PAGE I J 3 OF .J 5" .... CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-08 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31839 13.Dedicate full half width right-of-way for the project frontage of Lucerne Street. The dedication shall be based on the full local street right-of-way standard of sixty (60) feet. In the event the project traffic study identifies a larger roadway requirement for Lucerne Street, the dedication shall be the larger of the local standard or the traffic study recommendations. 14.Applicant shall provide a blanket cost sharing agreement requiring all parcels to participate in the construction of the "backbone" circulation network. 15.Provide reciprocal access easements on circulation routes and between all parcels. 16.All applications for development projects within this map shall be subject to additional Engineering Conditions of Approval. End of Conditions - rn AOEtm..~ '.TEM N,O._ \ .~. PACE__ILL.OF~ ... ""'':J,._'I/II1!!.''''''''. _l:~"'~"''''''''-'~''. ~ t i I ~ ~' ~ ~~ ~ ~ M . .i I --I I --I --I I ---I \ , \ ----" j~l. .. I' .1 J. wi .1 .1- dila' ..:11 .11 ril en < 0 z D... g D:: e:: I e :::> .v ~ D... \1! t) O:l ril ~ SC"JU~ r.:l CO Z I ~ c;:) >: ~ fn ril 2 >0 zc!. 01:; u' ~ Q. Z8 <, ril~ UI ZoO <8 ZI ~~ e:: I. Og r.:.., Q~ ril" e::f:i <.... D...~ ril e:: D... f:So... ~~ r.:l > ii!E-< r...U 0< ~o::: ~E-< o t)~ r.i> D:: - 0E-< ~< ~E-< r.:lZ !::!~ jE-< "i,. S.-I ".1' III! :1., Iohl se" :11- !. "Iml" I .. . ,en UI ~ > ~ ~ td ,~ ~ ,~ irl~~ Zen' , Z It ~ <( -\g '.~\ O} \- ... Z w I ~\ --\ \ ~\ \ -I ~) / / ~ I: r... o ~ u t: i~ "zo. ~Q~ will '" III{ II I G~ I~ ,! i i ~ ~ . ~ ffi . I in I II '" I.i!i ~jllll II !;!. z ~ ~ ~ H f.! ~ II 0 WIi"1 ~uu g liin qH ~ ~ 5 . ~ liit ;; ~ M ~I Ii' "II ~ -IiI ::> ~~~ ~o.;; ;;: II II~ ...r ~ ~nn!~ ~ I ~ g ~ij I.,. ~ ~f~f~~~ ~ ~ @ f ~e ~ 1111 IIII Ih. ~ lid ill W ... in II II III I 11...........11...11.... . .. .. . . .. ~.. ~ . I I I I ! = i I""""""""""" ! lallllll!!II!!IIIII'!!I. 1_"~...~._..Doz..~.....JII IIIIIIIII!!!!!I!I!I!III II ~= AGENDA ITEM NO. - PACE_L5 _OF I ;; CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION J'}i TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: JANUARY 16, 2007 PREPARED BY: JUSTIN CARLSON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER PROJECT TITLE: ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT 2006-04, ZONE CHANGE 2006-10, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2006-04, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW 2006-03, UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM 2006-04, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2006-08 FOR THE LAKE ELSINORE HOTEL AND CASINO APPLICANT: TED KINGSTON/LAKE ELSINORE HOTEL AND CASINO: 20930 MALAGA ROAD, LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530 OWNER(S): LOUIS DE PASQUALE: 23741 SONATA DRIVE, MURRIETA, CA 92562 (APN: 365-040-016/365-040-011) TED KINGSTON: 20930 MALAGA ROAD, LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92562 PROJECT REOUEST . Zoning Code Text Amendment 2006-04: A zoning ordinance text amendment to Chapter 17.48 (C-2, General Commercial District) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). The proposed text amendment would allow "card rooms" as a conditional use subject to a Conditional Use . . AGENDA ITEM NO. I PAGE~ _OF_ , - - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Page 2 of 12 JANUARY 16, 2007 Permit (CUP). The pertinent Lake Elsinore Municipal Code relating to Text Amendments is Chapter 17.84 (Amendments). . Zone Change 2006-10: A Zone Change for the property located at 20930 Ma1aga Road (APN: 365-040-016), 20970 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040- 003), and 21000 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-011) [from the current zoning designation of C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial District) to C-2 (General Commercial District).] The subject Zone Change is pursuant to Government Code Section(s) 65350 through 65362 and Chapter 17.92 (Hearings). . Conditional Use Permit 2006-04: The applicant requests approval of a CUP for the construction, expansion, and operation of a 3,520 square-foot bar and cocktail lounge and outdoor patio, within the existing "Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino" for the purposes of on-site sale and consumption alcohol and associated activities. The enlarged bar and cocktail lounge will include a lounge area, dance floor, pool tables, restrooms, and a 220 square-foot outdoor patio. The subject Conditional Use Permits is subject to Chapter 17.74 (Conditional Use Permits). . Commercial Design Review 2006-03: The applicant requests Design Review for the design and construction of a 3,520 square-foot bar and cocktail lounge, a 220 square-foot employee lounge, 1,264 square-foot offices located on the second story of the existing Casino, a 220 square-foot outdoor patio, and a 130 square-foot covered employee deck, located at the existing Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino. The pertinent Lake Elsinore Municipal Codes relating to Commercial Design Review are Chapter 17.48 (C-2 General Commercial District); Chapter 17.94 (Signs-Advertising Structures); Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements); Chapter 17.82 (Design Review); and Chapter 17.38 (Non-Residential Development Standards). . Uniform Sign Program 2006-04: The applicant request approval of a Uniform Sign Program for the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino. The pertinent Lake Elsinore Municipal Codes relating to sign programs are Chapter 17.94 (Signs-Advertising Structures); Chapter 17.38 (Non- Residential Development Standards); and Chapter 17.48 (C-2 General Commercial District). AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE ()- J OF_ ,I I ~ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Page 3 of 12 JANUARY 16, 2007 . Negative Declaration (ND) 2006-08: The City of Lake Elsinore intends to adopt a negative declaration pursuant to the Guidelines established by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). PROJECT LOCATION The proposed project is located on the northwest comer of Casino Drive and Malaga Road, at 20930 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-016), 20970 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-003), and 21000 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-011). ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Proj ect Commercial C-l (Neighborhood General Commercial Site Commercial) North Commercial C-2 (General General Commercial Commercial South Residential R-R County of County of Riverside , Riverside East Interstate 15 West Commercial C-2 (General General Commercial Commercial) BACKGROUND On November 6, 2006 the Design Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the proposed plans and sign program and provided several substantive comments relating to the project meeting code requirements, additional architectural articulation, landscaping, and signage. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Text Amendment 2006-04 The applicant requests a zoning ordinance text amendment. The proposed text amendment would amend Chapter 17.48 (C-2 General Commercial District to allow "card rooms" as a conditional use subject to a Conditional Use Permit. , . AC"'N"""' '~'r"'" ~IO ~ . !l,~ l ~ ~:.,l ~ 1 .:_.,,~ j,-.;i '\ l :""Ii '...... b' '" :! ~ ....;..: g .. ~ PAGE ~_m.-lJ ~ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Page 4 of 12 JANUARY 16, 2007 Zone Change 2006-10 The applicant is requesting a Zone Change for the property located at 20930 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-016), 20970 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-003), and 21000 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-011) [from a current zoning designation ofC- 1 (Neighborhood Commercial District) to a zoning designation of C-2 (General Commercial District).] Conditional Use Permit 2006-04 The applicant is requesting approval for the construction, expansion, and operation of a 3,520 square-foot bar and cocktail lounge and outdoor patio, within the existing Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino for the purposes of on-site sale and consumption of alcohol and associated activities, [Pursuant to Chapter 17.48 (Subject to a Conditional Use Permit) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC),]. The enlarged bar/cocktail lounge, and outdoor deck, will also include a dance floor with a stage, pool tables, and restrooms. As allowed in the LEMC, the Planning Commission is empowered to grant and to deny applications for Conditional Use Permits and to impose reasonable conditions upon the granting of Conditional Use Permits. Commercial Design Review (C) 2006-03 Sitin$! The proposed Commercial Design Review located at 20930 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-016) is approximately 4.91 acres in size and is fully developed with an existing 15,888 square-foot casino/restaurant and a 26, 440 square-foot two-story hotel, which connect to the casino and restaurant. Entrance to the site is attained via Malaga Road. It should be noted that the public will be able to gain access to the hotel and casino, via the expanded bar and cocktai11ounge. Circulation and Parkin$! Svace Lavout Main access to the site will be made available through three (3) existing driveways along Malaga Road. The applicant is proposing to re-pave, re-seal, and re-stripe the existing parking lot, directly west and adjacent to the existing hotel and casino. The new parking lot will provide approximately 236 parking spaces. The parking AGENDA ITEM NO. -:t PAGE Y- _OJ -1. I :;)... PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Page 5 of 12 JANUARY 16, 2007 spaces will include planter beds which will separate parking spaces from drive aisles. The most northeast driveway entrance along Malaga Road will allow for customers to either circulate west, to the newly renovated casino parking lot or enter a one way drive aisle located adjacent and directly east of the existing hotel and casino. This one way drive aisle circulates to an existing covered porte-cochere, which is designated as valet parking for casino and hotel patrons. The one way drive aisle then will then circulate around the rear of the subject property, thus connecting to the new parking lot on the west side of the hotel and casino. Furthermore, the applicant is proposing six (6) handicap spaces. Landscaping The applicant is proposing to landscape the parking lot and the twenty-foot (20') dedication along Malaga Road. In addition, he is also proposing to enhance the existing landscaping around the existing hotel and casino as well as all slopes that reside directly adjacent and east of the hotel and casino. All proposed landscaping, both new and enhanced, will be comprised of approximately 50,421 square-feet or twenty-four percent (24%) of the site. The proposed parking lot will include twenty-four inch (24") box Queen Palms, Crape Myrtles, and five-gallon Ballerina shrubs throughout the site and within all landscape planter beds. Landscaping along the right-of-way will include three (3) twenty- four inch (24") box Queen Palms, eight (8) five-gallon Indian Hawthorne shrubs, thirteen (13) fifteen-gallon New Zealand Flax shrubs, and Hyoporum Parvifolium ground cover. It should be noted that the applicant has been conditioned to install twenty-four inch (24") box street trees every thirty (30) linear feet (selected from the City approved street tree list) to be installed prior to Certificate of Occupancy. The slopes directly adjacent and east of the existing hotel and casino will be landscaped to include approximately twenty-six (26) twenty-four inch (24") box Queen Palms and Hyoporum Parvifolium ground cover. Furthermore, the applicant is proposing to install landscaping around the existing building of the hotel and casino. Surrounding landscaping will include approximately nineteen (19) twenty- four inch (24") box Queen Palms, sixteen (16) five gallon Mock Orange shrubs, six . , AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ PAGE 5 ---o! __ 1.1 ?- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Page 6 of 12 JANUARY 16, 2007 (6) five gallon New Zealand Flax shrubs, six (6) fifteen gallon Photinia Shrubs, and Hyoporum Parvifolium ground cover. Architecture In an effort to achieve architectural variety, the applicant is proposing to construct the 3,520 square-foot bar and lounge, 220 square-foot employee lounge, and second-story offices utilizing elements of traditional architecture. The south elevation (fronting Malaga Road) will include an 'Eldorado Stone' base that runs the length of the elevation. The applicant also proposes to utilize the stone to resemble columns that extend from the top of the base furring to the base of the roof parapet. The applicant is also proposing to include a covered entry over the existing front arched entry. The new covered entry will be supported by square- columns that incorporate the 'Eldorado Stone'. On the west side of the front elevation, the applicant is proposing to include the 220 square-foot employee lounge. The lounge will be attached to the existing casino. It should be noted that the proposed lounge will match the color of the casino. The east side of the front elevation, visible from Malaga Road, will have the entrance to the porte-cochere to serve as the valet parking entrance. The porte- cochere will be built to match the other covered entry seen on this elevation. The second story offices will be constructed to match the color of the ground floor of the casino. There will be three (3) windows visible from Malaga Road and will incorporate window trim surrounds. It should be noted that the window surrounds will be painted an offsetting color than the proposed wall color. The "East" elevation will serve as a secondary entrance to the "casino" as well as to the hotel. The applicant is proposing to include 'Eldorado Stone' base furring with the same faux columns on the front elevation. The columns will extend from the top of the base furring to the bottom of the parapet. The second-story offices will also match the color of the existing casino and all windows will have window trim surrounds painted an offsetting color. The "West" elevation, which will not be visible from Malaga Road, will aesthetically match the colors of stucco that will be used on the front elevation. It should be noted that the proposed second story office window will be constructed with a window trim surround. . . AGENDAiTEMJJO._ -, _ PAGE b OF [I ~ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Page 7 of 12 JANUARY 16, 2007 Additionally, the applicant is proposing to incorporate a neon light that will be incorporated underneath the roof parapet. The proposed neon lighting will be located on all elevations and will provide a downward directional lighting. Color and Materials Genoa (Base 4 Sorrento (Base Painted Stucco 4 Benavento Stucco/foam Surrounds Base 4 Base Furring and Columns Sierra Eldorado Stone (Mountain Led e) Uniform Sign Program 2006-04 The applicant is requests approval of Uniform Sign Program No. 2006-04 for all building mounted signs on the casino and hotel. The objective of the proposed sign program is to provide standards and specifications that assure consistency of signage throughout the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino in regards to quality, composition, size and placement. Moreover, the sign program will then be referenced and enforced by the City as the standards and specifications for all future signage for all building mounted signage for the hotel and casino. The sign program will assist landlord and/or property owner/manager in the selection and approval of all proposed building mounted signage. It should be noted that approval of the subject Uniform Sign Program 2006-04 will only consist of building mounted signs. ANAL YSIS Text Amendment 2006-04 The request is being made with the intention of amending Chapter 17.48 (C-2 General Commercial District) to allow 'card rooms' in the C-2 Zoning District as a conditional use, subject to a Conditional Use Permit. Presently Chapter 5.28 AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE 7 -:r O!_.l!'y'd- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Page 8 of 12 JANUARY 16, 2007 (Cardrooms) of the LEMC outlines the establishment and proc~dures ~or c~rd rooms within City limits. At present there is no land use zomng desIgnatIOn permits the establishment and use of a "card room". Considering this, the proposed Text Amendment will be necessary to provide staff with the tools and guidelines necessary for the implementation and formation of "card rooms" within the City of Lake Elsinore. Zone Change No. 2006-10 The project site is currently zoned C-l (Neighborhood Commercial District). Zone Change No. 2006-10 would rezone the property located at 20930 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-016), 20970 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-003), and 21000 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-011) to the C-2 (General Commercial District). Staff conducted a thorough analysis and determined that the C-2 (General Commercial) Zoning District was the most compatible land use to accommodate a "card room" as well as being consistent with the surrounding zoning designations and existing land uses. Currently, the subject properties to the north and west are zoned C-2 (General Commercial District) and Interstate-l 5 lies to the east. It should be noted that residential uses that are located within the County of Riverside's jurisdiction, adjacent to and south of the subject properties. The proposed Zone Change from C-l (Neighborhood Commercial District) to C-2 (General Commercial District) is consistent wit the General Commercial General Plan Designation, which provides a wide range of retail and service activities, including department stores, restaurants, hotels, theaters, offices, and specialized services. Furthermore, Table 1II-5 (General Plan/Zoning Compatibility Matrix) verifies that C-2 (General Commercial District) is a zone that is compatible with the General Commercial General Plan designation. Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-04 Section 17.74.010 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code explains that certain uses have operational characteristics that, depending upon the location and design of the use, may have the potential to negatively impact adjoining properties, businesses, or residents in regards to the construction, expansion, and operation of the existing bar/cocktail lounge and outdoor patio. Some identified impacts include outdoor seating and consumption of alcohol, visual impacts, live entertainment, and noise. ACEND.~ ITEM NO. ~ PACE_ CO _OF--1l.;;r PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Page 9 of 12 JANUARY 16, 2007 With respect to the issue of outdoor seating and the consumption of alcohol outside, this could be mitigated by requiring that the applicant ascertain proper approvals from the California Department of Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) prior to the issuance of building permits. Noise from live entertainment and/or a P A system generated from the outdoor patio can be mitigated by requiring compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance, Section 17.78. Section 17.78 requires noise or sound levels to be below 60 decibels between the hours of 7:00 am 10:00 pm and below 40 decibels in nearby residential uses, between the hours of 10:00 pm and 7:00 am. If necessary, prohibiting the use of outdoor live entertainment and an entertainmentlP A system will also reduce noise generated by the activities associated with the outdoor patio. Commercial Design Review 2006-03 Sitinf! Staff has determined that the proposed project conforms to the following development standards as outlined in Chapter 17.48 C-2 (General Commercial), including setbacks, building height, and lot area. Although, the C-2 (General Commercial District) zoning district does not have a minimum lot coverage or minimum floor-area-ratio (F AR) section within the LEMC, the applicant is proposing to have a net lot coverage of approximately sixteen percent (16%) and a FAR twenty-two percent (22%). It should be noted that the proposed FAR of twenty-two percent (22%) complies with and is below the FAR requirement outlined in the General Commercial General Plan designation, which cannot exceed forty percent (40%). Conditions of Approval have been added which require compliance to the Parking Standards contained in the LEMC. Circulation and Parking The applicant proposes to re-pave, re-seal, and re-stripe the existing parking lot in order to provide a comprehensive parking lot layout that incorporates landscaping and parking lot lighting as well as vehicular circulation. The applicant has provided approximately 236-parking spaces, including six (6) ADA Handicap spaces. Although, the applicant has indicated that six (6) ADA spaces will be provided. The Americans with Disabilities Act requires approximately seven (7) parking AGENDA ITt~ NO. PACE ~ ~ OF I~ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Page 10 of 12 JANUARY 16, 2007 spaces for any project that has provided between 201-300 spaces. To meet this requirement, staff has added a Condition of Approval requiring that the applicant provide assurances that one (1) additional space has been designated prior to the issuance of a building permit. Landscaping The applicant is proposing to re-develop the site with approximately 50,421 square-feet of landscaping, or twenty-three percent (23%) of the overall site. The minimum landscaping coverage requirement for commercial projects in the C-2 (General Commercial District) is twenty percent (20%) as outlined in Section 17.48.080(c) of the LEMC. By proposing twenty-three percent (23%) landscaping, the applicant has exceeded the minimum on-site landscaping percentage requirement. Architecture The architecture of the proposed Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino located at 20930 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-016), is generally similar in nature to existing buildings within the immediate vicinity. The proposed colors and materials to be incorporated on the building will be consistent with existing building. Uniform Sign Program No. 2006-04 The proposed Uniform Sign Program is consistent with the purposes of Chapter 17.94 (Signs-Advertising Structures) of the LEMC, in that the sign program will avoid the indiscriminate and substandard assembly, locations, illumination, color, size, and proper maintenance of signs located within the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino. Additionally, the program complies with specific conditions of approval placed on the underlying hotel and casino design review approval as well as LEMC Section 17.94.170(D), which requires that: "Businesses in an integrated development shall comply with a uniform sign program approved by the Planning Commission" It should be noted that staff has added a Condition of Approval requiring the applicant to submit a revised Uniform Sign Program indicating that no overall width of any sign shall not exceed 75% of any uninterrupted architectural , ACENDA ITEM NO._ ~ PAGE-LQ _OF --.ll ~ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Page 11 of 12 JANUARY 16, 2007 treatment, or leased frontage, which ever is smaller. This will ensure that at all signs attached to uninterrupted elements will be centered and proportionate in scale. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The proposed Negative Declaration (ND) No. 2006-08 has been prepared pursuant to Article 6 (Negative Declaration Process) and Section 15070 (Decision to Prepare a Negative or Mitigated Negative Declaration) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on staffs evaluation, the proposed project will not result in a significant effect on the environment. Further, pursuant to Section 15073 (Public Review of a Proposed Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration), the intended Negative Declaration was submitted to the State Clearing House. The required thirty (30) day review period was completed on December 20, 2006. Three (3) affected agencies have commented on the proposed Negative Declaration, including Native American Heritage Commission, Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and the Gas Company. These agency letters and staff s responses to their comments are attached. RECOMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider the attached project. Staff is receptive to direction from the Planning Commission if the Planning Commission desires changes to be made. Should the Planning Commission find the project acceptable, staff has included in the Agenda, Resolutions (See the following) for the approval of each of the requested entitlements. 1. Resolution No. 2007 _ recommending to the City Council adoption of Negative Declaration (ND) 2006-08 2. Resolution No. 2007 _ recommending to the City Council the adoption of findings of consistency with the Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) 3. Resolution No. 2007-_ recommending to the City Council approval of Text Amendment 2006-04 AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ PACE~OF~IIl#- - - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Page 12 of 12 JANUARY 16, 2007 4. Resolution No. 2007-_ recommending to the City Council approval of Zone Change 2006-10 5. Resolution No. 2007_ approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-04 6. Resolution No. 2007 recommending to the City Council approval of Commercial Design Review 2006-03 7. Resolution No. 2007 _ approving Uniform Sign Program 2006-04 PREPARED BY: TOM WEINER, PLANNING MANAGER JUSTIN CARLSON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER APPROVED BY: ROLFE M. PREISENDANZ DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ATTACHMENTS: 1. VICINITY MAP 2. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS 3. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 4. EXPANDED INITIAL STUDYINEGATIVE DECLARATION 5. AGENCY RESPONSES TO NEGATIVE DECLARATION 6. "DRAFT" ZONING ORDINANCE 7. EXHIBITS . REDUCTIONS (8 ~ xII) EXHIBIT A SITE PLAN EXHIBIT B EXISTING FIRST FLOOR PLAN EXHIBIT C PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN EXHIBIT D BUILDING SECTIONS/PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN EXHIBITE ELEVATIONS EXHIBIT F PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN EXHIBIT G MATERIALS SHEET AND COLOR BOARD 8. FULL SIZE PLANS 9. SIGN PROGRAM AGENDA ITEM NO. 'J PAGE-! ~ OF it d- VICINITY MAP ZONE CHANGE NO. 2006-10 20930 MALAGA ROAD (APN 365-040-016) 20970 MALAGA ROAD (APN 365-040-003) 21000 MALAGA ROAD (APN 365-040-011) ~ ~~ " '. PROJECT SITE \ \ \ " \ \ \ \ \ \ .. \ \ PLANNING COMMISSION ACENDA 11EM NO. ~ .pAGL r ~. OF~t f~-- VICINITY MAP TEXT AMENDMENT 2006-04, ZONE CHANGE (ZC) 2006-10 COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW 2006-03, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2006-04, UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM 2006-04, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO 2006-08, FOR THE LAKE ELSINORE HOTELAND CASINO PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA IiEM No.__~1 - PAGf . '1 :LoF_ll ~ RESOLUTION NO. 2007- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ADOPTION OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2006-08 FOR THE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2006-04; ZONE CHANGE NO. 2006-10; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-04; COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2006-03; AND UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 2006-04 FOR THE LAKE ELSINORE HOTEL AND CASINO WHEREAS, Ted Kingston, Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino, filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting the approval of Text Amendment 2006-04, Zone Change 2006-10, Commercial Design Review 2006- 03, Conditional Use Permit 2006-04, Uniform Sign Program 2006-004, and Negative Declaration 2006-08 (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the Project is subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code, Sections 21000, et seq.: "CEQA") and the State Implementation Guidelines for CEQA (14 California Code of Regulations, Sections 15000, et seq.: "CEQA Guidelines") because the Project involves an activity which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and involves the issuance of a lease, permit license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies (Public Resources Code, Section 21065); and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, the City conducted an Initial Study to determine if the Project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based upon the results of that Initial Study, there was no substantial evidence that the Project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS, based upon the results of the Initial Study, and based upon the standards set forth in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15070, it was determined appropriate to prepare and circulate Negative Declaration No. 2006-08 (State Clearinghouse No. 2006071027) for the Project (the "Negative Declaration"); and AGEND..\ iTb\~ rm. --, " PAGEJ.5_0F -1l d- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE20F3 WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15072, on November 20, 2006, the City duly issued a notice of intent to adopt the Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council regarding negative declarations; and WHEREAS, on January 16, 2007, at a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has evaluated all comments, written and oral, received from persons who have reviewed the Negative Declaration. SECTION 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that the Negative Declaration for the Project is adequate and has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's procedures for implementation of CEQA. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Negative Declaration and finds that the Negative Declaration represents the independent judgment of the City. SECTION 3. The Planning Commission further finds and determines that none of the circumstances listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5 requiring recirculation of the Negative Declaration are present and that it would be appropriate to adopt the Negative Declaration as proposed. SECTION 4. The Planning Commission hereby makes, adopts, and incorporates the following findings regarding the lack of potential environmental impacts of the Project and the analysis and conclusions set forth in the Negative Declaration: 1. Revisions in the Project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a Negative Declaration and Initial Study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. ACHJDA ITEM NO. -, PAGE_---L (0__ oi --1Jf _ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE30F3 Based upon the Initial Study conducted for the Project, there is no substantial evidence suggesting that the Project may have a significant effect on the environment. Additionally, the design of the Project, coupled with the City's standard conditions of approval, ensure that the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency, that the Project as revised may have significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to the evidence received, and in the light of the whole record presented, the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. SECTION 5. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of January, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Rolfe Preisendanz Director of Community Development AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ -- PAGE-L7._0F_1 J 0-. RESOLUTION NO. 2007 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT THE PROJECT IDENTIFIED AS TEXT AMENDMENT 2006-04, ZONE CHANGE 2006-10, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2006-04, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW 2006-03, UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM 2006- 04, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2006-08 FOR THE LAKE ELSINORE HOTEL AND CASINO IS CONSISTENT WITH THE MULTI-SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN WHEREAS, Ted Kingston, Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino, has filed an application with the City of Lake Elsinore requesting approval of Text Amendment 2006-04, Zone Change 2006-10, Conditional Use Permit 2006-04, Commercial Design Review 2006-03, Uniform Sign Program 2006-04, and Negative Declaration 2006-08 for the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the Project is generally located on the northwest comer of Malaga Road and Casino Drive at 20930 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-016), 20970 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-003), and 21000 Malaga Road (APN: 365- 040-011) ("Project Site"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 6.0 of the MSHCP, projects not within a criteria cell need not be evaluated pursuant to all MSHCP requirements, but, must be evaluated in light of the general MSHCP "Plan Wide Requirements"; and WHEREAS, Section 6.0 of the MSHCP requires that the City of Lake Elsinore adopt findings confirming that the project is consistent with MSHCP "Plan Wide Requirements"; and WHEREAS, of the total Project Site, only 0.01 acre lies within a Western Riverside County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) criteria cell #4838, and given the de minimus exposure, the Project was only reviewed pursuant to the MSHCP Plan Wide Requirements; and WHEREAS, public notice of the Project has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on January 16,2007. ACENDA ITEM NO.~ PAGE~: OF II~~ - W' . . PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE20F4 NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed application and its consistency with the MSHCP prior to making a recommendation to that the City Council adopt findings confirming that the Project is consistent with the MSHCP. SECTION 2. That in accordance with the MSHCP, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for MSHCP consistency: MSHCP CONSISTENCY FINDINGS 1. The Project is a project under the City's MSHCP Resolution, and the City must make an MSHCP Consistency finding before approval. Pursuant to the City's MSHCP Resolution, the Project is required to be reviewed for MSHCP consistency, including consistency with other "Plan Wide Requirements." Only 0.01 acre of the Project Site is located within a MSHCP Criteria Cell #4838. The Project involves improvements to already existing facilities, a zone change and a text amendment. The area is already developed and does not include an alteration of vacant land. Further, none of these approvals results in additional development within areas determined to be valuable to the MSHCP. Therefore, the City finds that the Project is consistent with all requirements of the MSHCP. 2. The Project is subject to the City's LEAP and the County's Joint Project Review processes. As stated above, the Project Site is entirely within a developed area. The 0.01 acre piece is considered by the City to be an error in MSHCP coverage. For these reasons, the Project was determined as not being subject to the City's LEAP and the County's Joint Project Review. 3. The Project is consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools Guidelines. AGENDA ITEM NO. I .- PAGE (q _OF _ 1I d-- - - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE30F4 No Riparian/Riverine areas or vernal pools are present on the Project Site. The Project is therefore consistent with the Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pool Guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. No further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required. 4. The Project is consistent with the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines. Per MSHCP requirements, the Project is not subject to the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.3. No further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required. 5. The Project is consistent with the Additional Survey Needs and Procedures. Per MSHCP requirements, the Project is not subject to Critical Area Species Survey Area Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP. No further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required. 6. The Project is consistent with the UrbanlWildlands Interface Guidelines. The Project Site is developed and surrounded by existing development. Therefore, the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP are not applicable to the Project. No further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required. 7. The Project is consistent with the Vegetation Mapping requirements. There are no resources existing on Project Site that would be subject to the requirements of Vegetation Mapping setforth in Section 6.3.1 of the MSHCP. No further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required. 8. The Project is consistent with the Fuels Management Guidelines. As stated above, the Project Site is developed and is surrounded by development. Therefore, the Fuels Management Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.4 of the MSHCP are not applicable to the Project. No further action regarding this section of the MSHCP is required. AGENDA ITEM NO _ -l,_ PAGE_~O_OF_, I )?--_ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE 4 OF 4 9. The Project will not be conditioned to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. For reasons stated above, the developer will not be required to pay the City's MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee. 10. The Project is consistent with the MSHCP. The Project is consistent with all applicable provisions of the MSHCP. No further actions related to the MSHCP are required. SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of January, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development AGENDA ITEM NO. I PAGE_?---I '_OF_'j J ~ RESOLUTION NO. 2007- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2006-04 WHEREAS, the Ted Kingston, Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino, has filed an application requesting that Chapter 17.48 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code regarding the C-2 General Commercial District be amended to allow card rooms as a conditional use subject to a Conditional Use Permit (the "Amendment"); and WHEREAS, Section 17.84.010 states that any provision of Title 17, Zoning, of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code may be amended whenever the public convenience and necessity and the general welfare require a change be made; and WHEREAS, pursuant Section 17.84.050 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is delegated with the responsibility of examining, considering, and making a recommendation to the City Council regarding proposed amendments to Title 17; and WHEREAS, on January 16, 2007, at a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the Amendment prior to recommending that the City Council approve the changes. SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the recommendation of approval of Text Amendment No. 2006-04: 1. The text Amendment will not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City. AOENC\?t ifJ. -:1. PAOE_ ?-d:.oF -11;)-;- ~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE20F3 Amending .the ~ake Elsinore Municipal Code to include card rooms as one of the uses permztted In the C-2 Commercial Zoning District subject to a conditional use permit, will not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City. Before a card room can be built or operated in the C-2 zone, the applicant will be required to apply for a conditional use permit, which will enable the City to further review, analyze, and condition the use to the extent necessary. The second layer of review will ensure protection of the health, safety, comfort, and welfare of all persons in the immediate vicinity of any proposed card room. 2. The text Amendment will not be injurious to property or improvements within the City. The revision to Chapter 17.48 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code enhances the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code because it permits more flexibility with regard to permitted uses in the C-2 zone. The amendment strengthens the City's ability to process projects and proposals consistent with the City's recent and expected growth. In addition, because card rooms are conditionally permitted uses, the City will have an opportunity to ensure that the use is safe and appropriate when an applicant seeks a conditional use permit for the card room in the future. 3. The proposed text Amendment is consistent with the General Plan. The text Amendment is consistent with the General Plan in that the General Plan designation is intended to provide for a wide range of retail and service activities including department stores, restaurants, hotels, theaters, offices, and specialized services. Furthermore, Table 111-5 (General Plan/Compatibility Matrix) indicates that the C-2 (General Commercial District) designation is a zone that is compatible with General Plan designation General Commercial. In addition, C-2 (General Commercial District) is to reserve appropriate locations consistent with the General Plan to accommodate a full range of retail stores, offices, personal and business service establishments offering commodities and services scaled to meet the needs of the residents of the entire City. SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. AGi::','''"<f. ~T;;::('~ l-iO (- '- il\.i-". f..VI 't . ,_ __ PAGE23_of.-U ~ -- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE30F3 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of January, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Rolfe Preisendanz Director of Community Development AGENDA ITEM N~. -:7 PACE--:d-lf _Of ~ (r RESOLUTION NO. 2007- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 2006-10 TO RE-ZONE THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 20930, 20970, AND 21000 MALAGA ROAD FROM (C-l) NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO (C-2) GENERAL COMMERCIAL WHEREAS, Ted Kingston, Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino, submitted an application for Zone Change No. 2006-10 to change the zoning designation for properties located at 20930 Malaga Road (APN 365-040-016),20970 Malaga Road (APN 365-040-003), and 21000 Malaga Road (APN 365-040-011) from C-l (Neighborhood Commercial District) to C-2 (General Commercial District) (the "Zone Change"). The three (3) subject lots, totaling approximately 9.61 acres, are generally located at the northwest comer of Malaga Road and Casino Drive; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council for approval of Zone Changes; and WHEREAS, on January 16, 2007, at a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the Zone Change prior to making recommendation that the City Council approve the request. SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the approval of Zone Change 2006-10: 1. The Zone Change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan and the development standards established in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. AGENDA ITEM NO. I PAGE_d5_0F_ II?- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE20F3 The Zone Change, which will re-zone the subject properties from their current zoning designation of C-l (Neighborhood Commercial District) to C-2 (General Commercial District), is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan. The General Plan designation General Commercial is intended to provide for a wide range of retail and service activities, including department stores, restaurants, hotels, theaters, offices and specialized services. Furthermore, Table 111-5 (General Plan/Compatibility Matrix) indicates that the C-2 (General Commercial District) designation is a zone that is compatible with General Plan designation General Commercial. The Zone Change is consistent with the General Plan designation General Commercial in that its intent is to reserve appropriate locations consistent with the General Plan designation General Commercial and to accommodate a full-range of retail stores, offices, personal and business service establishments offering commodities and services scaled to meet the needs of the residents and entire City. 2. The Zone Change will not be detrimental to the general health, safety, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the Zone Change or the City, or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the City. The Zone Change has been analyzed by all City departments relative to its potential to be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort, and welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment. All comments made by the various City departments have been incorporated into the project entitlements as conditions of approval. Specific conditions related to installation and maintenance of landscaping, street dedications, regulations of points of vehicular ingress and egress, on-site vehicular circulation, and nuisances were integrated in order to eliminate any negative impacts to the surrounding neighborhoods and the City. SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. NO ::7 - AGENDA lTEM '- 11 ~ PACE ;::}~_OF_ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE30F3 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of January, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Rolfe Preisendanz Director of Community Development AGENDA ITEM NO._ f_ PAGE_ ,d--~_OF_ I ( d::_ ~ RESOLUTION NO. 2007- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-04 FOR THE EXPANSION AND CONTINUED OPERATION OF AN EXISTING BAR, COCKTAIL LOUNGE, AND OUTDOOR PATIO ASSOCIATED WITH THE LAKE ELSINORE HOTEL AND CASINO WHEREAS, Ted Kingston, Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino, has initiated proceedings to request the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-04 for the expansion and continued operation of an existing bar, cocktail lounge, and outdoor patio associated with the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino located at 20930 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-016); and WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore recognizes that certain uses have operational characteristics that, depending upon the location and design of the use, may have the potential to negatively impact adjoining properties, businesses or residents and therefore are permitted subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit, which allows the City to comprehensively review and approve the use; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Text Amendment 2006-04, Chapter 17.48 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code regarding the C-2 General Commercial District has been amended to allow card rooms as a permitted use, subject to a conditional use permi t; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of considering and approving, conditionally approving, or denying conditional use permits; and WHEREAS, on January 16, 2007, at a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-04 prior to approval. AOENDA ITEM NO. '1 PAG~ ~t _oF_II d--_ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007 _ PAGE20F4 SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning Law and the ~ake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findmgs for the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-04: 1. The proposed use, on its own merits and within the context of its setting, is in accord with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, and the Zoning District in which the project is located. General Plan designation General Commercial is intended to provide a wide range of retail and service activities including department stores, restaurants, hotels, theaters, offices, and specialized services. By permitting a card room in the C-2 zone, the City is furthering the goals of mixed-use retail establishments called for in the General Plan. A survey of the surrounding areas shows that there are no other card rooms adjacent to or in the vicinity of the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino. Pursuant to Zone Change No. 2006-10 and Text Amendment No. 2006-04, card rooms are permitted uses in the C-2 zone, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit. In order to achieve a well balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses, the Conditional Use Permit has been conditioned and the project has been designed to be compatible with surrounding land uses vis-a-vis, noise, live entertainment, outdoor seating, consumption of alcohol, and visual impacts. 2. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the general health, safety, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed use or the City, or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the City. Given that the bar, cocktail lounge, and outdoor patio associated with the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino may have the potential to negatively impact the welfare of persons residing or working within the neighborhood or the City, the project has been reviewed by all applicable City departments. Any and all comments received from each City department have been integrated into the project entitlements in the form of conditions of approval. The conditions of approval include, but are not limited to, installation and maintenance of landscaping, street dedications, regulations of points of vehicular ingress and egress, on-site vehicular circulation, and nuisances, so as to eliminate any impacts to the general health, safety, comfort, or welfare of the surrounding neighborhood or the City. AGENDA ITEM NO. ( PAce29 -oFl I ~ 4_ _ _ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007 _ PAGE30F4 3. The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the uses, and for all the yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping, buffers, and other features required by Title 17 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. The proposed Conditional Use Permit for the expansion and continued operation of the existing bar, cocktail lounge, and outdoor patio associated with the existing Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino has been designed in consideration of the size and shape of the property thereby strengthening and enhancing the immediate commercial area. Further, the project as proposed, will complement the quality of existing development and will create a visually pleasing, non-detractive relationship between the proposed and existing projects, in that the proposed use has been reviewed to ensure adequate provision of screening from the public rights-ol-way and adjacent properties. 4. The site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways with proper design both as to width and type of pavement to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the subject use. The proposed Conditional Use Permit for the construction, expansion, and operation of the bar, cocktail lounge, and outdoor patio associated with the existing Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino has been reviewed as to its relation to the width and type of pavement needed to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated. The City has adequately evaluated the potential impacts associated with the proposed use prior to its approval and has conditioned the project to be served by roads of adequate capacity and design standards to provide reasonable access by car, truck, transit, and bicycle. 5. In approving the subject use located at the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino, there will be no adverse affect on abutting property or the permitted and normal use thereof. The proposed use has been thoroughly reviewed and conditioned by all applicable City departments and outside agencies, eliminating for the potential for any and all adverse effects on the abutting property. 6. Adequate conditions and safeguards pursuant to Section 17.74.50 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code have been incorporated into the approval of the Conditional Use Permit to insure that the use continues in a manner envisioned by these findings for the term of the use. AGENDA ITEM NO. I ..... PAGE_30 _OF_ I r;J...._ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007 - PAGE 4 OF 4 Pursuant to Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Section 17.74.050, the proposed Conditional Use Permit for the expansion and continued operation of the bar, cocktail lounge, and outdoor patio associated with the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino has been scheduled for consideration by the Planning Commission at the regularly scheduled meeting on January 16, 2006. SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of January 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development AGENDA ITEM NO. I PACE_ 31 _OF_ l[~ RESOLUTION NO. 2007- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2006-03 FOR THE LAKE ELSINORE HOTEL AND CASINO WHEREAS, Ted Kingston, Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino, has initiated proceedings for Commercial Design Review No. 2006-03 for the design and construction of a 3,520 square-foot bar and cocktail lounge, a 220 square-foot employee lounge, 1,264 square-foot offices located on the second story of the existing casino, a 220 square-foot outdoor patio, and a 130 square-foot covered employee deck, within the existing Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino located at 20930 Malaga Road (APN: 365-040-016) and generally located on the northwest comer of Casino Drive and Malaga Road (the "Commercial Design Review"); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of considering and making recommendations to the City Council for commercial design review applications; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing held on January 16, 2007, the Planning Commission considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the Commercial Design Review prior to making a decision to recommend that the City Council approve the application. SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning Law and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the approval of the Commercial Design Review: 1. The project, as approved, will comply with the goals and objectives of the General Plan and the Zoning District in which the project is located. ACENDA ITEM NO. I PAGE_ ~ _OF_ [I ~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007 - PAGE20F3 The Commercial Design Review complies with the goals and objectives of the General Plan because the architectural and aesthetic expansion of the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino will assist in achieving the development of well- balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses and the project will diversify Lake Elsinore's economic base. 2. The project complies with the design directives contained in the General Plan Urban Design Element and all other applicable provisions of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. The Commercial Design Review is appropriate to the site and surrounding developments in that the architectural and aesthetic expansion compliments the size and shape of the property. Sufficient setbacks and enhanced onsite landscaping have been provided thereby creating interest and varying vistas as a person moves along abutting streets and within the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino. In addition, safe and efficient circulation has been achieved onsite. The project will compliment the quality of existing development and will create a visually pleasing, non-detractive relationship between the proposed development and existing projects in that the applicant is providing a "Traditional" architectural design with various elements which serve to enhance the buildings of the existing Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino. A variety of materials and colors will be used, including architectural stone accents and earth tone colors, which serves to blend the proposed additions with surrounding developments. The project demonstrates a concern for quality and originality. 3. Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Chapter 17.82.070 of the Zoning Code, including guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the approval of the project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the objectives of Chapter 17.82. Pursuant to Section 17.82.070 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the project has been scheduled for consideration by the Planning Commission on January 16, 2007. SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ A \ PAGE_ ~3 _OF _ ll)- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007 _ PAGE30F3 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of January 2007, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development ACENDA ITEM NO. -;t PACE-... 34 _OF _ ~ II d:- - RESOLUTION NO. 2007- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 2006-04 FOR THE LAKE ELSINORE HOTEL AND CASINO WHEREAS, Ted Kingston, Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino, has initiated proceedings for Uniform Sign Program No. 2006-04 (the "Sign Program"); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of considering, and approving, conditionally approving, or denying uniform sign programs; and WHEREAS, on January 16, 2007, at a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties with respect to this item. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the Sign Program prior to taking action on the application. SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning Law and the City of Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for the approval of Sign Program: 1. The project, as approved, will comply with the goals and objectives of the General Plan and the Zoning District in which the project is located. The Sign Program complies with the goals and objectives of the General Plan and the C-2 zone in which the site is located. The Sign Program will assist in achieving the development of a well-balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses, diversifying Lake Elsinore's economic base. Moreover, the Sign Program will facilitate the efficient and orderly use of signs for the purpose of attracting new and returning customers to the participating businesses. 2. The project complies with the design directives contained in Section 17.82.060 and all other applicable provisions of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. AGENDA ITEM NO. I PAGE -35QF t~ I'.~ - -- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE20F3 The proposed Sign Program for the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino is appropriate to the site and surrounding developments in that the Uniform Sign Program has been designed in consideration of the size and shape of the property, thereby creating interest and varying vistas as a person moves along the street. Further, the project as proposed will complement the quality of existing development and will create a visually pleasing, non-detractive relationship between the proposed and existing projects in that the architectural design, color and materials and site design proposed evidence for concern of quality and originality. 3. Subject to the attached conditions of approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. The project, as reviewed and conditioned by all applicable City divisions and departments, will not have a significant effect on the environment. 4. Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Chapter 17.82.070 of the Zoning Code, including guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the approval of the subject project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the objectives of Chapter 17.82. Pursuant to Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Section 17.82.070, the proposed Sign Program for the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino has been scheduled for consideration by the Planning Commission at its regularly scheduled meeting on January 16, 2006. SECTION 3. This resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption. AOENDA ITEM NO. ') f PAOE_3b _OF-11~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- PAGE30F3 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of January, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Michael O'Neal, Chairman City of Lake Elsinore ATTEST: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Director of Community Development ACENDA ITEM NO. . I PACE~3~_OF -.:...:. \ I d:- CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PROJECT NAME: ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2006-04, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2006-10, CONDITONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-04, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO.2006-03, UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 2006-04, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2006-08, FOR THE LAKE ELSINORE HOTEL AND CASINO PLANNING DIVISION GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Official, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Official, Officers, Employees, or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning the commercial project, which action is bought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Sections 65009 and/or 66499.37, and Public Resources Code Section 21167. The City will promptly notify the Applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City and will cooperate fully with the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the Applicant of any such claim, or proceeding, the Applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. 2. All Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced upon page one of building plans submitted to the Building and Safety Division for Plan Check. 3. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgement of Conditions," and shall return the executed original to the Community Development Department for inclusion in the case records. 4. The applicant shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order made payable to the Riverside County Clerk in the amount of One ACEND,~ ITEM rJo. ( PAC!=- 3CO ~ I d-- - Thousand eight hundred dollars ($1,800.00) to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination. Said filing fee shall be provided to the City within forty-eight (48) hours of project approval. 5. Any alteration or expansion of a project for which there has been a "Design Review" approval as well as all applications for modification or other change in the conditions of approval of a "Design Review" shall be reviewed according to the provisions of Chapter 17.82 in a similar manner as a new application. 6. The applicant shall place a weatherproof 3' x 3' sign at the entrance to the project site identifying the approved days and hours of construction activity and a statement that complaints regarding the operation can be lodged with the City of Lake Elsinore Code Enforcement Division (951) 674-3124. 7. The Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the City's Grading Ordinance. Construction generated dust and erosion shall be mitigated in accordance with the provisions of Municipal Code, Chapter 15.72 and using accepted control techniques. Interim erosion control measures shall be provided thirty (30) days after the site's rough grading, as approved by the City Engineer. 8. The Applicant shall comply with the City's Noise Ordinance. Construction activity shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday, and no construction activity shall occur on Saturdays, Sundays or legal holidays. 9. A cash bond of $1,000.00 shall be required for any construction trailers placed on the site and used during construction. Bonds will be released after removal of trailers and restoration of the site to an acceptable state, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director or designee. 10. The applicant shall comply with all applicable City codes and ordinances. ZONE CHANGE NO. 2006-10 & COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2006-03 11. Future development shall comply with those standards and guidelines contained in Chapter 17.48 (C-2 General Commercial District). AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ PACE_ ~9 JF..! I. I d- l2.All site improvements approved with this request shall be constructed as indicated on the approved site plan and elevations. Revisions to approved site plans or building elevations shall be subject to the review of the Community Development Director. l3.Commercial Design Review No. 2006-03 approved herein shall lapse and become void one (l) year following the date on which the Design Review became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year, a building permit related to the Design Review is issued and construction commenced and diligently pursued toward completion. l4.Plan Check shall conform to the submitted plans as modified by Conditions of Approval, or the Planning Commission/City Council through subsequent action. l5.All roof mounted or ground support air conditioning units or other mechanical equipment incidental to development shall be architecturally screened or shielded by landscaping so that they are not visible from neighboring property or public streets. Any material covering the roof equipment shall match the primary wall color. l6.All exterior on-site lighting shall be shielded and directed on-site so as not to create glare onto neighboring property and streets. All light fixtures shall compliment the architectural style of the building. l7.Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department, a photometric study showing the locations of all proposed exterior lighting fixtures and verifying that a minimum of I-foot candle is achieved throughout the parking area. Furthermore, the photometric study shall demonstrate that there is a minimum of 5-foot candle at building entrances. l8.Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit revised plans showing that the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirement of seven (7) ADA parking spaces has been met. The location of all proposed ADA spaces and any other ADA requirements shall be reviewed and approved by the City's Building Official or designee. ACENDA ITEM NO. . ( PACE_ Lfo _OF -1 /':;)--.. 1 9. Trash enclosures shall be constructed per City standards and Chapter 17.38.120 as approved by the Community Development Director or Designee prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 20.Decorative light fixtures shall be placed within the onsite parking lot. The fixtures shall be ADA compliant and shall compliment and enhance the architectural style of the buildings on-site. The specific fixture type shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director or designee and shall be shown on the construction drawings. 21.N 0 exterior roof ladders shall be permitted. 22.All exterior downspouts shall be concealed within the building. 23. The Planning Division shall approve the location of any construction trailers utilized during construction. All construction trailers shall require a cash bond processed through the Planning Division. 24.All materials and colors depicted on the plans and materials board shall be used unless modified by the Community Development Director or designee. 25.0n-site surface drainage shall not cross sidewalks. 26.Allloading zones shall be clearly marked with yellow striping and shall comply with the requirements of the LEMC. 27.All exposed slopes in excess of three feet (3') in height shall have a permanent irrigation system and erosion control vegetation installed, approved by the Planning Division. 28. The landscape plan shall provide for ground cover, shrubs, and trees and shall meet all requirements of the City's adopted Landscape Guidelines. Special attention to the use of Xeriscape or drought resistant plantings with combination drip irrigation systems shall be used to prevent excessive watering. 29. Three (3) sets of the Final Landscaping/Irrigation Detail Plan shall be submitted, reviewed and approved by the City's Landscape Architect Consultant and the Community Development Director or designee, prior to issuance of AOENDA 'TE~ NO._ I PAOE_ 41' OF \'"-/ r- ... -----.--- building permit. A Landscape Plan Check & Inspection Fee will be charged prior to final landscape approval. a) All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler system with 100% plant and grass coverage using a combination of drip and conventional irrigation methods. b) All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six inch (6") high and six inch (6") wide concrete curb. c) Planting within fifteen feet (15') of ingress/egress points shall be no higher than thirty-six inches (36"). d) Any transformers and mechanical or electrical equipment shall be indicated on landscape plan and screened as part of the landscaping plan. e) The landscape plan shall provide for ground cover, shrubs, and trees and meet all requirements of the City's adopted Landscape Guidelines. Special attention to the use of Xeriscape or drought resistant plantings with combination drip irrigation system to be used to prevent excessive watering. f) All landscape improvements shall be bonded 100% for material and labor for two years from installation sign-off by the City. Release of the landscaping bond shall be requested by the applicant at the end of the required two years with approval/acceptance by the Landscape Consultant and Community Development Director or Designee. g) All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed within affected portion of any phase at the time a Certificate of Occupancy is requested for any building. Final landscape plan must be consistent with approved site plan. h) Final landscape plans to include planting and irrigation details. 30. The applicant shall provide assurances to the Planning Division that the Public Building Impact fee has been met, prior to the issuance of a building permit. ACENDA ITEM NO ( PACE___Lfd- OF .~ ~ 31.Prior to the issuance of building permits the applicant shall provide assurances that any/all required fees of the Lake Elsinore Unified School District have been met. 32. The applicant shall provide assurances that any/all requirements of the Community Services Department have been met. 33.The applicant shall provide assurances that the Library Capital Improvement Fund fee has been met. 34.All parking spaces adjacent to loading docks shall have wheel stops. 3S.The applicant shall provide assurances that all Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan fees have been met, prior to the issuance of building permits. 36.All parking stalls shall be double-striped with four-inch (4") lines two-feet (2') apart. The applicant shall provide a note and detail on the construction plans. 37.Planting within IS-feet of ingress/egress points shall be no higher than 36- inches. 38.The applicant shall provide assurances to the City that the design, construction, and all drive aisle complies with all Riverside County Fire Department standards, prior to the issuance of building permits. 39.All mechanical and electrical equipment shall be ground mounted and architecturally screened and all outdoor ground or wall mounted utility equipment shall also be architecturally screened along with substantial landscaping, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director, prior to the issuance of a building permit. 40. The revised construction plans shall be consistent with each other and reviewed for consistency to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director or designee, prior to the issuance of a building permit. 41.The applicant shall provide a twenty foot (20') landscape buffer along Malaga Road. The construction plans shall reflect the twenty foot (20') landscape buffer and shall be reviewed and approved by the City's resident landscape architect, prior to the issuance of a building permit. ACENDA ITEM NO. -, PACE_ Y3_0F_II~_ 42. The applicant shall provide a detailed parking analysis of all the existing and proposed uses on the site. The applicant will be responsible for meeting all the minimum parking space requirements for all existing and proposed uses as outlined in Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements), prior to the issuance of a building permit. 43.Ifthe applicant proposes to utilize the adjacent lots as additional parking for the existing hotel and casino, as either overflow or to meet the minimum parking requirements for the existing and proposed uses for the hotel and casino as outlined in Chapter 17.66; he shall submit a reciprocal parking agreement to Planning Division, prior to the issuance of a building permit. The submitted parking analysis shall reflect the reciprocal parking agreement for the adjacent lots as well as the amount of parking against all uses within the three (3) subject lots. 44. The applicant needs to meet the minimum drive aisle width of twenty-six (26') feet as outlined in Chapter 17.66.030. The alterations in drive aisle width to meet Chapter 17.66.030, shall be reflected in the construction plans and are to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director or designee, prior to the issuance of a building permit. 45. The applicant shall revise the parking plan after all drive aisles have met the requirements of Chapter 17.66.030, to meet the size of (9' x 18') for interior spaces and (11' x 18') that abut a wall, building, or fence. This is to be reviewed by the Community Development Director or designee, prior to the issuance of a building permit. 46.The applicant needs to provide one (1) loading space and so reflected on the construction plans. The proposed loading space shall measure (40' x 12' x 14') and shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director or designee, prior to the issuance of a building permit. 47. The applicant needs to provide a note on the construction landscape plan that the intemallandscaping within the parking area is equal to five percent (5%). This is to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director or designee, prior to the issuance of a building permit. ACENDA ITEM NO. I PACE_ \f ~ ')f . IT ~ 48. The applicant needs to provide a note on the construction landscape plan that all landscape planter beds in the interior parking area shall not be less than five- feet in width and bordered by a curb not less than six-inches (6") and no more than eight-inches (8") in height. This is to be reviewed by the Community Development Director or designee, prior to the issuance of a building permit. 49.The applicant is to provide one (1) twenty-four inch (24") box tree for every five (5) parking spaces within the parking area. This is to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director or designee, prior to the issuance of a building permit. 50. The applicant shall install one (1) twenty-four inch (24") box street tree every thirty-linear feet (30'), selected from the City approved street tree list, and installed prior to Certificate of Occupancy. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-03 5l.Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-03 approved herein shall lapse and shall become void one (1) year following the date on which the use permit became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one (1) year, a building permit is issued and construction commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on the site. 52. The Conditional Use Permit shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC); Title 17, unless modified by the approved Conditions of Approval. 53. The Conditional Use Permit granted herein shall run with the land and shall continue to be valid upon a change of ownership of the site or structure which was the subject of this approval. 54. The applicant shall comply with all necessary California Department of Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) requirements. 55.Live entertainment or PA system shall not be permitted on the outdoor patio. ACENDA ITEM NO. . ( , - ....- PAGE_ 43 _OF_ .blld- UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 2006-04 56. The applicant shall provide a note on the submitted Uniform Sign Program that reads "The overall width of any sign shall not exceed 75% of any interrupted architectural treatment, or leased frontage, which ever is small". This note and the revised signs shall be submitted to Planning Division for review and approval by the Community Development Director or designee, prior to the issuance of a building permit. DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 57. Annex into CFD 2006-5 Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel Map, Site Development Plan, Special Use Permit or building permit (as applicable), the applicant shall annex into the Mello-Roos Community Facilities District 2006-5 to fund the on-going operation and maintenance of the new parks, parkways, open space and public storm drains constructed within the development and federal NPDES requirements to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project. Applicant shall make a four thousand two hundred dollar ($4,200) non- refundable deposit to cover the cost of the annexation process. Contact Dennis Anderson, Harris & Associates at (949) 655-3900 x334 or danderson@harris- assoc. com. 58. Annex into LLMD No. I Prior to approval of the Final Map, Parcel Map, Site Development Plan, Special Use Permit or building permit (as applicable), the applicant shall annex into Lighting and Landscape Maintenance District No. I to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on public right-of-way landscaped areas and neighborhood parks to be maintained by the City and for street lights in the public right-of-way for which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to Southern California Edison. Applicant shall make a four thousand seven hundred dollar ($4,700) non-refundable deposit to cover the cost of the annexation process. Contact Dennis Anderson, Harris & Associates at (949) 655-3900 x334 or danderson@harris-assoc.com. I ACENDA ITEM NO.___ >--- PACE_ 4 b _OF _ - \ l;;r ENGINEERING DIVISION 60. The applicant shall dedicate full half width street right-of-way such that the centerline of Malaga Road to property line measures 50-feet. If the dedication exists, provide documentation identifying the dedication such as a current title report. 61.The applicant shall comply with the City's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit. 62.In accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste disposal & recycling, the applicant shall be required to contract with CR&R Inc. for removal and disposal of all waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or all other phases of construction. 63. The applicant shall pay all fees including the most current Traffic Improvement Fund (TIF), area drainage fee and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) as applicable. 64.All street and alley improvement plans and specifications shall be prepared by a Calif. Registered Civil Engineer. All Improvements shall be designed and constructed to Riverside County Road Department Standards, latest edition, and City Codes (LEMC 12.04 and 16.34). 65.If the existing street improvements are to be modified, the existing street plans on file shall be modified accordingly and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permit. An encroachment permit will be required to do the work. 66.All work done under an encroachment permit for off-site improvements shall be delineated on a street improvement plan and submitted with the encroachment permit application. 67. The applicant shall pay all fees and meet requirements of an encroachment permit issued by the Engineering Division for construction of off-site public works improvements (LEMCl2.08, Res.83-78). All fees and requirements for an encroachment permit shall be fulfilled before Certificate of Occupancy. AGENDA ITEM NO. ., , PAGE_ 4/ )F_fll~ 68. The applicant shall obtain all necessary off-site easements for off-site grading or drainage from the adjacent property owners prior to grading permit issuance. 69.The applicant shall apply and obtain a grading permit with appropriate security prior to building permit issuance. A grading plan signed and stamped by a Calif. Registered Civil Engineer shall be required if the grading exceeds 50 cubic yards or the existing flow pattern is substantially modified as determined by the City Engineer. If the grading is less than 50 cubic yards and a grading plan is not required, a grading permit shall still be obtained so that a cursory drainage and flow pattern inspection can be conducted before grading begins. 70.The applicant to provide erosion control measures as part of their grading plan. The applicant shall contribute to protection of storm water quality and met the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. 71.All arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) out of the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property owner or his agent. 72. The applicant is to provide fire protection facilities as required in writing by Riverside County Fire. 73.All on-site drainage shall be conveyed to a public facility or accepted by adjacent property owners by a letter of drainage acceptance or conveyed to a drainage easement. 74.All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer. 75.All roof and yard drains will not be allowed to outlet through cuts in the street curb. 76.All roofs should drain to a landscaped area whenever feasible. 77. The applicant shall meet all requirements of LEMC 15.64 regarding flood hazard regulations. 78.The applicant shall obtain approval from Santa Ana Regional Water Quality AGENDA ITEM NO. '-, ( PAOE_ 4e _OF_ -~ I ~ Control Board for their storm water pollution prevention plan including approval of erosion control for the grading plan prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant shall provide a SWPPP for post construction which describes BMP's that will be implemented for the development and including maintenance responsibilities. 79.All education guidelines and Best Management Practices (BMP) shall be provided to residents of the development in the use of herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers as well as other environmental awareness education materials on good housekeeping practices that contribute to protection of storm water quality and met the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. 80.The applicant shall provide BMP's that will reduce storm water pollutants from parking areas and driveway aisles. ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT 81.Water and sewer is available to the project, the applicant shall contact the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) for a 'will serve' letter for additional sewer and water connection fees. RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 82. Please refer to the attached Riverside County Fire Department Conditions of Approval. AGENDA ITEM NO. '-, I PAOE_ Y q _OF _' . \ I-a-- .---~....:~7. 1D}!f(g~ Bill \f~ ru DEe 14 2005 \IU O~ B new and Comments (Complete Application) atr .fLob 8"1_ p/4IIr1in, tJi,,;,'." 1:SOS.MU.S_ tall< aw-. CA 915:10 ('.IS1) 67~312. ClSll m-m9flll To: t!!3 City ~~er o PI:umiug Manager I8J DemUs Anderson - lhnis &. As,ociateS ~ Engineerinc M:uiager I8l ColJl11;y Fife Depattmem 181 EnvirowtlCmal PJ;umer t8I DirectOr of CDtlltlUItili.y Services I8l L:uKhcape ArchiteCt o Building lit Safety ~er I8l LB. Police Date: WednesdaYi October 04, 2006 J1.JStin Carlson, Assistant Planner (951) 674--3124, ext. 295 E. mail: jcarJson@lake-elsinore.org LF,.O(rCUP-O,-! From: PrQj~g ~cription: C 2006-03, Cl.lP 2006-04 &. Sign Ptogt'3m 2006-04 (please refer to this nUIllber when responding) Ted KingstonlLal{e Elsinore Hotel & Casino: 2093Q Ml!a&:\ Road, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Owner: Jack Baremeld, P.O. Box 65644. Sla, ill 84165 Addition ~ casino resla~nt & bar and Ildd upstain offices (5,004 sf). Also add landscape enhancements to site plans. Project Title: ~; pl'(lj~ l-ocation: '!be subjCC1: site is locafed at the comer of Malaga Road and Casino Drive. APN: 365-040-016. RW b.r: O:wbcr 21J 2006 CRS: 1099 OOMMENfS: (tJ/tadJas~sf.utif~ Date: Name/ntle: Telephone: e-mail Signature: Request/or Redewand CommenlS . Form No. PD 2000-27- Revised August. 2004 'r Page 1 of 1 NO- AGENDA \iEM I .-:-- \'~ PAGE_ SO _Of~ . DEC~22-2006 FRI 08:27 AM RIV CO FIRE P&E FAX NO. 951 955 4886 ---...-/ .'"",,--," 12/21/06 06:41 Riverside County LMS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Library Conditions 10. GBNERAL CONDITIONS J-E -Ob- ~tJ ?-o'1 CU? ~()6 -0-4 CASE - CITY CASE STATEMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT 10.FIRE.999 With respect to the conditions of approval for the referenced project, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection standards: 10.FIRE.999 USE-#50-BLUE POT REFLECTOR alue retroreflective pavement markers shall be mounted on private street, public streets and driveways to indicate location of fire hydrants. Prior to installation, placement of markers must be approved by the Riverside County Fire Department. 10.FIRE.999 USE*-#23-MIN REQ FIRE FLOW Minimum required fire flow shall be~GPM for a 3 hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. Fire flow is based on type ~J-~ construction per the 2001 CBC and Building(s) having a fire sprinkler system. 10.FIRE.999 USE-#19-0N/OFF LOOPED HYD A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants, on a looped system (611X41lX2 1/2nx2 1/2"), will be located not less tban 25 feet or more tban 165 feet from any portion of the building as measured along approved vehicular travel ways. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydranta(s) in the system. 80. PRIOR TO BLDG PRMT ISSUANCE FIRE DEPARTMENT 80.FlRE.999 USE-#~7A-BLDG PLAN CHECK $ Building Plan check deposit base fee of $11056.00, shall be paid in a check or money order to the Riverside County Fire Department atter plans have been approved by our ottice. P. 02 Page: 1 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT AGE~mA ITEM NO. ~~. PACE_ -:7 r _OF _ .I I ')-- DEC:22-2006 FRI 08:27 AM RIV CO FIRE P&E FAX NO. 951 955 4886 '"--'" '-.-/ .2/21/06 l6:41 Riverside County LMS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ~ibrary Conditions BQ. PRIOR TO BLDG PRMT ISSUANCE 80.FIRE.999 USE-#4-WATER PLANS The applicant or develope+ shall separately submit two copies of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review and approval. Calculated velocities shall not exceed 10 feet per second. plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, anQ the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed and approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water oompany with the following oertification: II! certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department." 90. PRIOR TO BLDG FINAL INSPECTION FIRE DEPARTMENT 90.FIRE.999 USE-#45-FlRE LANES The applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and/or signs. 90.FIRE.999 USE-#12A-SPRINKLER SYSTEM Install a oomplete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13 1999 edition (130 and 13R system are not allowed) in.all buildings requiring a fire flow of 1500 GPM or greater. Sprinkler system(s) with pipe sizes in excess of 4" in diamter will require the project structural engineer to certify (wet signature) the stability of the building system for seismic and gravity loaqs to support the sprinkler system. All fire sprinkler risers shall be protected from any physical damage. The post indicator valve and fire department connection shall be located to the front, within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 teet from the building(s). A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinkled must be included on the title page of the building plans. (current sprinkler plan check deposit base fee is $614.00 per riser) pplicant or developer shall be responsible to install a .L. central Station Monitored Fire Alarm System. Monitoring system shall monitor the fire sprinkler system(s) water flow, P.I.V.'s and all control valves. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to P. 03 PCl.ge: 2 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT AGENDA ITEM NO. 7 -"-..--- PACE_ 5"?- IF -1/ .~ DEC-22-2006 FRI 08:27 AM RIV CO FIRE P&E FAX NO. 951 955 4886 "'--" ......../ .2/21/06 16 :4~ Riverside county LMS CONDITIONS OF AllPROVAL library Conditions 90. PRIOR TQ BLDG FINAL INSPECTION 90.FIRE.999 USE-#~2A-SPRINKLER SYSTEM (cont.) installation. Contact fire department for guideline handout (current monitoring plan check deposit base fee is $192.00) 90.FlRE.999 USE-#35-VOICE FIRE ALARM Applicant o~ developer shall be responsible to install a manual and automatic pre-recorded VOICE Fire Alarm System. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation. (current plan check deposit base fee is $627.00) (~D e\~ 90.FIRE.999 USE-#37-LOW ~EL EXIT SIGN loor - Level exit signs, exit markers and exit path marking shall be installed per the California Building Code. 90.FIRE.999 USE-#27-EXTINGUISHERS nstall portable fire extinguishers with a minimum rating of 2A-10BC and signage.Fire Extinguishers located in public areas shall be in recessed cabinets mounted 48" (inches) to center above floor level with maximum 411 projection from the wall. Contact Fire Department for proper placement of equipment prior to installation. 90.FIRE.999 USE-#36-HOOD DUCTS A U.L. 300 hood duct fire extinguishing system must be installed over the cooking equipment. Wet chemical extinguishing system must provide automatic ahutdown of all electrical componets. and outlets under the hood upon activation. System must be installed by a licensed C-16 contractor. Plans must be aubmitted with current fee to the ~ire Department for review and approval prior to installation. NOTE: A dedicated alarm system is not required to be installed tor the exclusive purpose of monitoring this suppression system. However, a new or pre-existing alarm system must be connected to the extinguishing system. (* separate fire alarm plans must be submitted for connection) (current plan check deposit base fee is $215.00) P. 04 Page: 3 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT AGENDA ITEM NO. ( PAGE _ 5 3' ,:>F _ . \ I d.:... CITY OF ~~ LAI{f: ,6JLSiI10Rf: ~~ DREAM E.xTREME", COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Main (951) 674-3124 Fax (951) 471-1419 INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change No. 2006-03, Text Amendment No. 2006-04, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 Introduction This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with relevant provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, and the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15063(c) of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that the purposes of an Initial Study are to: 1. Provide the Lead Agency (i.e., the City of Lake Elsinore) with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative Declaration; 2. Enable an applicant or Lead Agency to modify a project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to quality for a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration; 3. Assist in the preparation of an EIR, if one is required, by: . Focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant; . Identifying the effects determined not to be significant; . Explaining the reasons why potentially significant effects would not be significant; and . Identifying whether a program EIR, tiering, or another appropriate process can be used for analysis of the project's environmental effects; 4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of a project; 5. Provide documentation of the factual basis for the findings in a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment; 6. Eliminate unnecessary EIRs; and 7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project. 1 AGENDA 'TFr.1 NO. -, PACE_ Slf ,--0;; ~ . i r;j- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Proiect Title: Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino Zone Change and Text Amendment 2. Lead Aeencv Name and Address: City of Lake Elsinore Community Development Department 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, California 92530 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Justin Carlson (951) 674-3124 4. Proiect Location and/or APNs: 365-040-003; 365-040-011; 365-040-016 5. Proiect Applicant Name and Address: City of Lake Elsinore Community Development Department 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 6. Existine General Plan Desienation(s): General Commercial 7. Existine Zonine: C-1 Neighborhood Commercial 8. Description of Proiect: The City of Lake Elsinore (City) is proposing a zone change and text amendment for three APNs encompassing 9.6 acres (see #4 above) that make up the site of the existing Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino (Figure 1). Concurrent with the request for a zone change and text amendment, the property owner (applicant) is proposing the addition of 5,000 square feet onto the existing hotel/casino structure as well as upgraded landscaping on the property. The zone change and text amendment would allow for these improvements to be constructed. Once approved, the proposed re-zoning would allow for a change from C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) to C-2 (General Commercial) making these parcels consistent with surrounding uses as well as becoming consistent with the uses designated in the General Plan for this area. A C-2 Zoning District allows for all uses within a C-l Zoning District. The text amendment is proposed to allow for card rooms as a permitted use (through an additional Conditional Use Permit process) within the C-2 Zoning District. The addition of 5,000 square feet to the existing hotel/casino structure continues to be less than the floor-area-ratio (FAR) requirement of General Commercial wl1ich :L 2 AGENDA \1EM NO. --: \ I ?- PACE_ 55 _Or - - City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 allows for a maximum density of forty percent (40%). The project will also require a Commercial Design Review and Conditional Use Permit. 9. Surrounding: Land Uses and Settine: The proposed project area is surrounded by C-2 uses to the north and west, 1-15 to the east, and Malaga Road and County of Riverside property to the south. 10. Other ag:encies whose approval is required (e.g:.. permits. financing: approval. or participating: ag:reement): None. 3 AOENDA ITEM NO. ( PA~ . ~_OF l ,~~~ ~ ~ z => o ID r- U w ..., o 0::: a. Cl w en o a. o 0::: a. .. ...... PAGE.1i2J_OF -::- .dJ cr City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. o Aesthetics 0 Agricultural Resources 0 Air Quality o Biological Resources 0 Cultural Resources 0 Geology/Soils o Hazards & Hazardous Materials 0 o Mineral Resources 0 Noise o Public Services 0 Recreation o Mandatory Findings of Significance Hydrology/Water Quality 0 Land Use/Planning o Population/Housing o Transportationffraffic o Utilities/Service Systems DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: [8'J I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. o I find that although the project could have a significant effect on the environment there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. o I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. o I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. o I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATNE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature November 16, 2006 Date Wendy Worthey Print Name Principal Environmental Planner Title 5 AGENDA ITEM NO. -, PAGE .,.,S ~_CF _' L.1d-' City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACT EVALUATION CHECKLIST 1. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A ''No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analyses," cited in support of conclusions reached in other sections may be cross-referenced). 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a. Earlier Analysis Used-Identify and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed-Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation Measures-For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. The explanation of each issue should identity: a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. 6 AOENDA ITErR 1\10._' J- PACE 59_OF -11 ?-- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 A. AESTHETICS Would the project: 1. Have a substantial adverse effect vista? on a scemc 2. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?) 3. Substantially degrade character or quality surroundings?) the existing visual of the site and its 4. Create a source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Potentially Significant Impact D D D D Less Than Significant With Mitigation D D D D Less than Significant No Impact Impact D [gJ D [gJ D [gJ D [gJ B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES* Would the proj ect: 5. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? 6. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? 7. Involve other changes m the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result m converSIOn of Farmland, to nonagricultural use? Potentially Significant Impact D D D Less Than Significant With Mitigation D D D Less than Significant No Impact Impact D [gJ D [gJ D ~ * In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects. lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agricultural and farmland. 7 AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ '1 PAGE_GO JF_~'~- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 c. AIR QUALITY* Would the project: 8. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? 9. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 10. Result III a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project regIOn IS non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? 11. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?} 12. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?} Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D Less Than Significant With Mitigation D D D D D Less than Significant No Impact Impact ~ D ~ D ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 >I< Where available, the significant criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: 13. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any speCIes identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 14. Have a substantial adverse effect on any npanan habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Potentially Significant Impact D D 8 Less Than Significant With Mitigation D D Less than Significant No Impact Impact D ~ D ~ AGENDA ITEM NO. ., - -.-- PAGE~( _OF .-lL~- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 Would the project: 15. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 16. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? 17. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? 18. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant No Impact Impact D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES D D D ~ D D D ~ D D D ~ D D D ~ E. CULTURAL RESOURCES Potentially Less Than Less than Significant Significant Significant No Impact Would the project: Impact With Impact Mitigation 19. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined D D D ~ in ~15064.5? 20. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource D D D ~ pursuant to ~ 15064.5? 21. Directly or indirectly destroy a umque paleontological resource or site or umque D D D ~ geological feature? 22. Disturb any human remains, including those D D D ~ interred outside of formal cemeteries? 9 AOENDAITEM NO.---:J. PAGE_ (~'d- _OF ~ .~ City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: 23. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: a. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Pub. 42. b. Strong seismic ground shaking? c. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? d. Landslides? 24. Result in substantial soil erosion, or the loss of topsoil? 25. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse 26. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table l8-l-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D 27. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal system where sewers are not D available for the disposal of waste water? Less Than Significant With Mitigation D D D D D D D D Less than Significant No Impact Impact D ~ D ~ D ~ D ~ D ~ D ~ D ~ D ~ G.HAZARDSANDHAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact 10 Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant No Impact Impact AGENDA ITEM NO. I PAGE --03 _OF _11 '5== City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 G. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: 28. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? 29. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable up-set and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? 30. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 31. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 32. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 33 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 34. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan oremergency evacuation plan? 35. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D 11 Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant No Impact Impact D D D D D D D D ~ ~ D D D D D D o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ AGENDA ITElVI NO. I PAGE ~.Lf OF \ I ~ - -- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: 36. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 37. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of preexisting nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 38. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? 39. Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 40. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 41. Place housing within a lOa-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? 42. Place within a lOa-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? 43. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? 44. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D D D D 12 Less Than Significant With Mitigation D D D D D D D D D Less than Significant No Impact Impact ~ D D ~ ~ D ~ D ~ D D ~ D ~ D ~ D ~ AGENDA ITEMrNO. -, PAGE_leS_C:-_ ..,- I Id- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 Would the project: 45. Physically divide an established community? 46. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local D coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 47. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community D conservation plan? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation D Less than Significant No Impact Impact I. LAND USE AND PLANNING D D ~ D ~ D D D ~ J. MINERAL RESOURCES Potentially Less Than Less than Significant Significant Significant No Impact Would the project: Impact With Impact Mitigation 48. Result in the loss of availability of a known D D D ~ mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? 49. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site D D D ~ delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? K. NOISE Potentially Less Than Less than Significant Significant Significant No Impact Would the project result in: Impact With Impact Mitigation 50. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the D D ~ D local general plan or nOIse ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? 51. Exposure of persons to or generation of exceSSIve groundborne vibration or D D ~ D groundborne noise levels? 13 ACENDA ITEM NO. ., PACE_~0 _OF_ ll;}-- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 K. NOISE Potentially Less Than Less than Significant Significant Significant No Impact With Would the project result in: Impact Mitigation Impact 52. A substantial permanent increase in ambient D D ~ D noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 53. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in D D ~ D ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels without the project? 54. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public D D D ~ use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 55. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people D D D ~ residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Would the project: 56. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through an extension of roads or other infra-structure)? 57. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 58. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant No Impact Impact L. POPULATION AND HOUSING D D D ~ D D D ~ D D D ~ M. PUBLIC SERVICES* Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts to the following: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant No Impact Impact 14 AGENDA ITEM NO I .~ PAGE Ce -:J OF .\ I ~ - -- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 M. PUBLIC SERVICES* Less Than Potentially Significant Less than Would the project result in substantial adverse Significant With Significant No Impact physical impacts to the following: Impact Mitigation Impact 59. Fire protection? D D D [X] 60. Police protection? D D D [X] 61. Schools? D D D [X] 62. Parks? D D D [X] 63. Other public facilities? D D D [X] * Include potential effects associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities. the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts. in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services. N. RECREATION Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant No Impact Impact 64. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 65. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? D D D [X] D D D [X] Would the project: 66. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant No Impact Impact O. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC D D [gJ D 15 AGENDA ITEM NO._ I _1- PAGE ~ B or . I 1--'d-- - -- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 O. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the proj ect: 67. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the County congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? 68. Result in a change in traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? 69. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? 70. Result in inadequate emergency access? 71. Result in inadequate parking capacity? 72. Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Potentially Significant Impact D D D D D D Less Than Significant With Mitigation D D D D D D Less than Significant No Impact Impact [Z] D [Z] D D ~ D ~ D ~ D ~ P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: 73. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 74. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 75. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 76. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Potentially Significant Impact D D D D 16 Less Than Significant With Mitigation D D D D Less than Significant No Impact Impact D ~ D ~ D ~ D ~ AGENDA ITEM NO. -, PAGE (09 OF 11 d-- _ . ---z--......- .. City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Less Than Potentially Significant Less than Significant With Significant No Impact Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact 77. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve D 0 D ~ the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? 78. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted D D ~ D capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? 79. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes D D D ~ and regulations related to solid waste? Q. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 80. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? 81. Does the proj ect have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? 82. Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant No Impact Impact D D D ~ D D ~ D D D ~ D -End of Environmental Impact Evaluation Checklist- 17 AGENDA ITEM NO._ _~ PACE_(O_OF_.IId: City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATION DISCUSSION The following is a discussion of the potential impacts associated with the approval of the proposed project, as identified in the above Environmental Impact Evaluation Checklist. Explanations are provided for each item below. A. AESTHETICS. Would the project: 1) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact: The project proposes a zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements to an existing building on the project site. The zone change and text amendment are administrative only, and alone do not result in any physical changes to the existing environment. However, their approval would allow for the structure improvements thus resulting in a physical change to the existing environment. There are no designated scenic vistas within or surrounding the project site. Therefore, the structure improvements would have no affect on a scenic vista. Mitigation Measures: None. 2) Substantiallv damaf!e scenic resources. includinf!. but not limited to. trees. rock outcroopinf!s. and historic buildinf!s within a state scenic hif!hwav? No Impact: The project proposes a zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements to an existing building on the project site. The zone change and text amendment are administrative only, and alone do not result in any physical changes to the existing environment. However, their approval would allow for the structure improvements thus resulting in a physical change to the existing environment. There are no designated scenic highways within or surrounding the project site. Therefore, the structure improvements would have no affect on these resources. Mitigation Measures: None. 3) Substantiallv def!rade the existinf! visual character or Qualitv of the site and its surroundinf!s? No Impact: The proposed zone change and text amendment are administrative changes and involve no physical development per se. However, the structure improvements will include an addition of 5,000 square feet onto an existing building. The proposed project required to go through the Commercial Design Review process. As such, the design of these improvements, including colors and materials, will require approval by the City and thus would not degrade the existing visual character or quality in the area. Further, the applicant is required to upgrade or add to the existing landscaping. The project will have no impacts to this issue area. 18 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE.-:J l ( ~- OF _ . / ll~ City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 Mitigation Measures: None. 4) Create a new source of substantiallif!ht or f!lare which would adverselv affect dav or niJ!httime views in the area? No Impact: The proposed project does not include any changes to the existing lighting on the site. As such, there will be no new sources of light or glare affecting day or nighttime views in the area. Mitigation Measures: None. B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: . 5) Convert Prime Farmland. Unique Farmland. or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland). as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mappinf! and Monitorinf! PrOf!ram of the California Resources Af!encv. to non-af!ricultural use? No Impact: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. As such, there would be no impacts to any agricultural lands. Mitigation Measures: None. 6) Conflict with existinf! zoninf! for af!ricultural use. or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact: Refer to response to B-5 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 7) Involve other chanf!es in the existinf! environment. which due to their location or nature. could result in the conversion of Farmland. to non-af!ricultural use? No Impact: Refer to response B-5 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 19 AGENDA ITEM NO._ -, PAGE_I&- _OF_ .,1-J /).. City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 C. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: 8) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air Quality plan? Less Than Significant. The zone change and text amendment are administrative only, and alone do not result in any physical changes to the existing environment. The structure improvements however would be considered a physical change due the use of paints and materials during construction, as well as additional traffic generated by the addition of casino space. The addition of 5,000 square feet to an already existing building would not be expected to result in impacts to air quality that would be considered significant, either during construction or operations. Further, the proposed project would change zoning but not the existing land uses provided for in the City's General Plan. Impacts to air quality would be considered less than significant. Mitigation Measures: None. 9) Violate anv air Quality standard or contribute substantiallv to an existinf! or projected air Quality violation? Less Than Significant: Refer to response C-8 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 10) Result in a cumulativelv considerable net increase of anv criteria pollutant for which the project ref!ion is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (inc/udinf! releasinf! emissions which exceed Quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Less Than Significant: Refer to response C-8 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 11) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant: Refer to response C-8 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 12) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number ofpeople? 20 AGENDA ITEM NO. -.:L PAGE_ r3 .OF. \ I ).-=- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 Le~s !han Significant: As stated above, the addition of 5,000 square feet to an already existing bUIldmg would not be expected to result in impacts to air quality that would be considered significant. The use of paints and other construction materials however could affect patrons of the hoteVcasino. The applicant would implement standard measures during construction to ensure that there would be minimal, if any, odors affecting the people using these facilities. As such, a less than significant impact is anticipated. Mitigation Measures: None. D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: 13) Have a substantial adverse effect. either directly or throuf!h habitat modifications. on any species identified as a candidate. sensitive. or svecial status species in local or ref!ionalvlans, volicies. or ref!Ulations, or bv the California Department of Fish and Game or Us. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. As such, there would be no impacts to any biological resources. Likewise, there will be no conflict between the project and any adopted city, county, regional, state or federal policy, goal, or plan pertaining to the preservation and/or conservation of biological resources in this area. Mitigation Measures: None. 14) Have a substantial adverse effect on anv rivarian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or ref!ionalvlans, volicies. ref!Ulations or bv the California Devartment of Fish and Game or US. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact: Refer to response D-13 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 15) Have a substantial adverse effect on federallv vrotected wetlands as defined bv Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (includinf!, but not limited to. marsh. vernalvool. coastal, etc,) throuf!h direct removal, fillim!. hvdrolof!ical interruvtion. or other means? No Impact: Refer to response D-13 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 21 AGENDA ITEM NO._ ~ PAOE~ "( If _OF _ .11 #:- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 16) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or imr>ede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? No Impact: Refer to response D-13 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 17) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact: Refer to response D-13 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 18) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. Natural Communitv Conservation Plan. or other approved local. ref!ional. or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact: A small portion (0.01 acre) of the parcel 365-040-011 is located within 'Criteria Cell #4838 of the Western Riverside Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The proposed project area was developed years before implementation of the MSHCP and should not have been included as part of a criteria cell. There are no biological resources present on- site. Further, the proposed project site is in the southwest portion of the Criteria Cell #4838 but the area of that cell to be conserved is in the northeast portion of the Cell. Because the proposed project area is already developed and there is no habitat remaining on the site, a Joint Project Review with the Regional Conservation Authority is not required. As such, there would be no conflict with any adopted conservation plans. Mitigation Measures: None E. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: 19) Cause a substantial adverse chanf!e in the sif!nificance of a historical resource as defined in CEOA Guidelines Q15064.5? No Impact: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. There are no ground disturbing activities associated with this project. As such, there would be no impacts to any cultural resources. Mitigation Measures: None. 22 AOENDA ITEM NO. , PACE /5 _OF_ ~ 0J;;}- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 20) Cause a substantial adverse chanf!e in the sif!nificance of an archaeolof!ical resource pursuant to CEOA Guidelines Q15064.5? No Impact: Refer to response E-19 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 21) Directlv or indirectlv destrov a unique paleontolof!ical resource or site or unique f!eolof!ic feature? No Impact: Refer to response E-19 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 22) Disturb anv human remains. includinf! those interred outside offormal cemeteries? No Impact: Refer to response E-19 above. Mitigation Measures: None. F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: 23) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects. includinf! the risk of loss. in;urv. or death involvinf!: a.) Rupture of a known earthquake fault. as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoninf! Map issued bv the State Geolof!ist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geolof!V Special Publication 42. No Impact: The zone change and text amendment are administrative only, and alone do not result in any physical changes to the existing environment. The structure improvements however would be considered a physical change due the addition of 5,000 square feet to an existing building. The site is already developed and the existing facilities are in use. Any improvements to existing facilities would be required to comply with the California Building Code and/or Uniform Building Code (UBC) as applicable. Further, there are no earthmoving 23 ACENDA ITEM NO. '-\ I -.......,...,..- PACE~(P _OF_. . -.J Id- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 activities associated with the proposed project. No impacts related to geology or soils are anticipated. Mitigation Measures: None. b.) Strong seismic ground shaking? No Impact: Refer to response F-23 (a) above. Mitigation Measures: None. c.) Seismic-related ground failure. includinfl liquefaction? No Impact: Refer to response F-23 (a) above. Mitigation Measures: None. d.) Landslides? No Impact: Refer to response F-23 (a) above. Mitigation Measures: None. 24) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss oftoTJsoil? No Impact. Refer to response F-23 (a) above. Mitigation Measures: None. 25) Be located on a fleoloflic unit or soil that is unstable. or would become unstable as a result of the TJroiect. and potentiallv result in on- or off-site landslide. lateral spreading. subsidence. liQuefaction or collaTJse? No Impact: Refer to responses F-23 (a). Mitigation Measures: None. 26) Be located on eXTJansive soil. as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Buildinfl Code (]994). creatinfl substantial risks to life or TJropertv? 24 ACENDA ITEM t~O._ .~ PAGE I~ OF , - ._- l -11> City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 No Impact: Refer to responses F-23 (a). Mitigation Measures: None. 27) Have soils incapable of adequately supportinfl the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal system where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No Impact: Refer to response F-23 (a) above. Mitigation Measures: None. G. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: 28) Create a siflnificant hazard to the public or the environment throuflh the routine transport. use. or disposal of hazardous materials? Less Than Significant: The zone change and text amendment are administrative only, and alone would not result in the transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials. The structure improvements would involve of use of paints or materials during construction which could be considered hazardous. The applicant is required to comply with all safety regulations, including the preparation and implementation of a Spill Prevention Control Plan (SPCP) and lawful disposal of hazardous materials. As such, impacts are considered less than significant. Mitigation Measures: None. 29) Create a siflnificant hazard to the public or the environment throuflh reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less Than Significant: Refer to response G-28 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 30) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutelv hazardous materials. substances. or waste within one-Quarter mile of an existinfl or proposed school? No Impact: There are no schools within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. There would be no impact to this issue area. 25 AGENDA ITE~4 NO. l PAOE_ 0-~. OF / . ""-- - .lId..- - .- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 Mitigation Measures: None. 31) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites comoiled oursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result. would it create a si~nificant hazard to the oublic or the environment? No Impact: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. All structure improvements are being added to an existing building. There are no ground disturbing activities associated with this project that could result in an encounter with any known hazardous materials sites. As such, there would be no impacts related to hazardous materials. Mitigation Measures: None. 32) For a oro;ect located within an airport land use olan or, where such a olan has not been adooted. within two miles of a oublic airoort or oublic use airoort. would the pro;ect result in a safety hazard for peoole residin~ or workin~ in the oro;ect area? No Impact: The proposed project is not located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. There would be no impact to this issue area. Mitigation Measures: None. 33) For a oro;ect within the vicinity of a orivate airstrio. would the oro;ect result in a safety hazard for oeoole residin~ or working in the pro;ect area? No Impact: The proposed project is not located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. There would be no impact to this issue area. Mitigation Measures: None. 34) Imoair imolementation of or ohvsicallv interfere with an adoTJted emer~encv resoonse olan or emer~encv evacuation olan? No Impact: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. All structure improvements are being added to an existing building, and would not interfere with any adopted emergency plans. Mitigation Measures: None. 26 AOENDA ITEM NO._ -. PAGE_19__oF__ { lId- - - City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 35) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of/oss. in;urv or death involving wildland fires. including where wildlands are ad;acent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. This area is not located within or adjacent to any wildland areas. Mitigation Measures: None. H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: 36) Violate anv water qualitv standards or waste discharge requirements? Less Than Significant: The project proposes a zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements to an existing building on the project site. The zone change and text amendment are administrative only, and alone would not impact water quality. Any construction activities or landscape upgrades would be required to comply with federal, State, and local requirements to prevent any violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. As such, any potential impacts to water quality would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: None. 37) Substantiallv devlete f!roundwater supplies or interfere substantiallv with f!Youndwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g.. the production rate of pre-existing nearbv wells would drop to a level which would not support existinf! land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? No Impact: The zone change and text amendment are administrative only, and the proposed project site is already developed. No aspect of the structure improvements would affect groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. Mitigation Measures: None. 38) Substantiallv alter the existinf! drainaf!e pattern of the site or area. includinf! through the alteration of the course of stream or river. or substantiallv increase the rate or amount of the surface runoff in a manner. which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Less Than Significant: The proposed project does not involve the alteration of a stream or river course. Also, refer to response H-36 above. Impacts would be considered less than significant. 27 AGENDA ITEM NO. ( PAGE_~O _oF__1~~ City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 Mitigation Measures: None. 39) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existinJ! or vlanned storm water drainaJ!e svstems or vrovide substantial additional sources of volluted runoff? Less Than Significant: The zone change and text amendment are administrative only, and the proposed project site is already developed. The addition of 5,000 square feet and landscape upgrades would not result in the exceedance of drainage systems or additional sources of polluted runoff. Also, refer to response H-36 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 40) Otherwise substantiallv deJ!rade water Qualitv? Less Than Significant: Refer to response H-36 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 41) Place housinJ! within a 100-vear flood hazard area as mavved on a federal Flood Hazard Boundarv or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation mav? No Impact: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. This area is not within a flood hazard area, and the proposed project would not expose people or structures to flooding. Therefore, there would be no impacts related to flooding. Mitigation Measures: None. 42) Place within a 100-vear flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? No Impact: Refer to response H-41 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 43) Exvose veovle or structures to a siJ!nificant risk of loss. in;ury or death involvinJ! floodinJ!. inc/udinJ! floodinJ! as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? No Impact: Refer to response H-41 above. 28 AGENDA ITEM NO.___ 2 PAGE_ t) '_0';=_ 11)- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 Mitigation Measures: None. 44) Inundation bv seiche. tsunami. or mudtlow? No Impact: Refer to response H-41 above. Mitigation Measures: None. I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: 45) Phvsicallv divide an established community? No Impact: The project proposes a zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements to an existing building on the project site. The site has already been developed, and the addition of 5,000 square feet would not physically divide an established community. No impacts to land use are anticipated. Mitigation Measures: None 46) Conflict with anv alJTJlicable land use plan. policv. or rewlation of an af!enCV with ;urisdiction over the pro;ect (inc/udinf!. but not limited to the f!eneral plan. specific plan. local coastal prOf!ram. or zoninf! ordinance) adoTJted for the purpose of avoidinf! or mitif!atinf! an environmental effect? Less Than Significant: The City is proposing a zone change and text amendment for three APNs (see #4 above) that make up the site of the existing Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino. Concurrent with the request for a zone change and text amendment, the property owner (applicant) is proposing the addition of 5,000 square feet onto the existing hotel/casino structure as well as upgraded landscaping on the property. The zone change and text amendment would allow for these improvements to be constructed. Once approved, the proposed re-zoning would allow for a change from C-l (Neighborhood Commercial) to C-2 (General Commercial) making these parcels consistent with surrounding uses as well as becoming consistent with the uses designated in the General Plan for this area. A C-2 Zoning District allows for all uses within a C-l Zoning District. The text amendment is proposed to allow for card rooms as a permitted use (through an additional Conditional Use Permit process) within the C-2 Zoning District. The floor-area-ratio (FAR) will stay the same as identified in the General Plan designation of General Commercial allowing for a maximum density of forty percent (40%). Impacts would be considered less than significant. Mitigation Measures: None. 29 AOENDA ITEM NO. PACE. 'BJ.- _01:_ ( LD- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 47) Conflict with any aTmlicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact: Refer to response D-18 (Biological Resources) above. Mitigation Measures: None. J. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: 48) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the rei!ion and the residents of the state? No Impact: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. As such, there would be no impacts to any mineral resources. Mitigation Measures: None. 49) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan. specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact: Refer to response J-48 above. Mitigation Measures: None. K NOISE. Would the project result in: 50) Exposure of persons to or i!eneration of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local i!eneral plan or noise ordinance. or applicable standards of other ai!encies? Less Than Significant: The proposed zone change and text amendment are administrative changes and involve no physical development per se. However, the structure improvements will include an addition of 5,000 square feet onto an existing building. Construction could result in a temporary increase in noise levels but is not anticipated to exceed applicable standards. Further, there are no residences or schools near the project site, and construction will comply with the City's noise ordinance. As such, noise generated from construction of the building improvements would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: None. 30 ACENDA ITEM NO._ ~_ PACl_re-3._01=.-lJ ~- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 51) Exposure of persons to or f!eneration of excessive f!roundborne vibration or f!roundborne noise levels? Less Than Significant: Refer to response H-50 Mitigation Measures: None. 52) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the pro;ect vicinitv above levels existinf! without the pro;ect? Less Than Significant: Refer to response H-50 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 53) A substantial temporarv or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the pro;ect vicinitv above levels existinf! without the pro;ect? Less Than Significant: Refer to response H-50 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 54) For a pro;ect located within an airvort land use plan or. where such a plan has not been adoTJted. within two miles of a public airvort or public use airvort. would the pro;ect expose people residinf! or workinf! in the pro;ect area to excessive noise levels? No Impact: The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan, or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. There would be no impact to this issue area. Mitigation Measures: None. 55) For a pro;ect within the vicinitv of a private airstrip. would the vro;ect expose people residinf! or workinf! in the pro;ect area to excessive noise levels? No Impact: Refer to response H-54 above. Mitigation Measures: None. L. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: 31 AGENDA ITEM Np. PAGE~'1 _OF_ , ~- \\ ~ City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 56) Induce substantial population flrowth in an area. either directlv (for example. bv proposinfl new homes and businesses) or indirectlv (for example. throuflh extension of roads or other infrastructure) ? No Impact: The project proposes a zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements to an existing building on the project site. The zone change and text amendment are administrative changes and do not directly result in physical development. The site has already been developed, and the addition of 5,000 commercial square feet would not be expected to result in direct or indirect population growth. As such, there would be no impact on population and housing. Mitigation Measures: None. 57) Displace substantial numbers of existinfl housinfl. necessitatinfl the construction of replacement housinfl elsewhere? No Impact: The project proposes a zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements to an existing building on the project site. The zone change and text amendment are administrative changes and do not directly result in physical development. The site has already been developed, and the addition of 5,000 commercial square feet would not displace any existing housing or people, or result in the need for replacement housing. As such, there would be no impact on population and housing. Mitigation Measures: None. 58) Displace substantial numbers of people. necessitatinfl the construction of replacement housinfl elsewhere? No Impact: Refer to response L-57 above. Mitigation Measures: None. M. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the pro;ect result in substantial adverse phvsical impacts associated with the provision of new or phvsicallv altered flovernmental facilities. need for new or phvsicallv altered governmental facilities. the construction of which could cause siflnificant environmental impacts. in order to maintain acceptable service ratio. response times or other performance ob;ectives for anv of the public service: 59) Fire protection? 32 ACENDA ITEM NO._ -, I PACE_ ~5 _OF : \ \ .~ City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 No Impact. The project proposes a zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements to an existing building on the project site. The zone change and text amendment are administrative changes and do not directly result in physical development. The site has already been developed, and the addition of 5,000 commercial square feet would result in the need for additional City services. As such, there would be no impact on the City's public services, including parks and recreation. Mitigation Measures: None 60) Police protection? No Impact: Refer to response M-59 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 61) Schools? No Impact: Refer to response M-59 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 62) Parks? No Impact: Refer to response M-59 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 63) Other Public Facilities? No Impact: Refer to response M-59 above. Mitigation Measures: None. N. RECREATION 64) Would the proposed pro;ect increase the use of existin!! nei!!hborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial phvsical deterioration of the facilitv would occur or be accelerated? 33 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE_ e" -L ~F .\ \ &-- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 No Impact: Refer to response M-59 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 65) Does the pro;ect include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that mif!ht have an adverse effect on the environment? No Impact: Refer to response M-59 above. Mitigation Measures: None. O. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC. Would the project: 66) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existinf! traffic load and capacitv of the street system 0. e.. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips. the volume to capacitv ratio on roads. or conf!estion at intersections)? Less Than Significant: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. The zone change and text amendment are administrative only and alone do not result in direct impacts to the environment. However, the construction and operation of an additional 5,000 square feet of commercial use could result in additional traffic. This increase would not be considered substantial in relation to existing traffic. As such, impacts to existing traffic would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: None. 67) Exceed. either individually or cumulatively. a level of service standard established bv the county conf!estion manaf!ement agency for designated roads or hif!hwavs? Less Than Significant: Refer to response M-66 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 68) Result in a chanf!e in traffic patterns. includinf! either an increase in traffic levels or a chanf!e in location that results in substantial safety risks? Less Than Signifcant: Refer to response M-66 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 34 ACENDA ITEM NO. PACE_ ~i~_OF_, I \ lr City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 69) Substantiallv increase hazards due to a desi$m feature (e.f!., sham curves or danf!erous intersections) or incompatible uses (e,f!" farm eQuipment)? No Impact: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. The zone change and text amendment are administrative only and alone do not result in direct impacts to the environment. The construction and operation of an additional 5,000 square feet of commercial use could result in additional traffic. However, the proposed project does not involve any dangerous design features or incompatible uses. As such, there are no impacts related to this issue area. Mitigation Measures: None. 70) Result in inadeQuate emerf!ency access? No Impact: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. The zone change and text amendment are administrative only and alone do not result in direct impacts to the environment. The construction and operation of an additional 5,000 square feet of commercial use would not affect emergency access. As such, there are no impacts related to this issue area. Mitigation Measures: None. 71) Result in inadeQuate parkinf! capacitv? No Impact: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. The zone change and text amendment are administrative only and alone do not result in direct impacts to the environment. However, the construction and operation of an additional 5,000 square feet of commercial use would result in the need for additional parking. The existing hoteVcasino has parking that already exceeds the capacity required by the City. Therefore, even with a slight reduction in parking spaces, the existing parking capacity can serve the additional commercial use. As such, there are no impacts to parking capacity. Mitigation Measures: None. 72) Conflict with adopted policies, plans. or prof!rams supportinf! alternative transportation (e.f!., bus turnouts, bicvcle racks)? No Impact: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. The zone change and text amendment arf' AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE_~g or 35 ( \~- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14, 2006 administrative only and alone do not result in direct impacts to the environment. The construction and operation of an additional 5,000 square feet of commercial use would not conflict with any alternative transportation plans. As such, there are no impacts related to this Issue area. Mitigation Measures: None. P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: 73) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Reflional Water Oualitv Control Board? No Impact: The project proposes a zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements to an existing building on the project site. The zone change and text amendment are administrative changes only and do not directly result in physical development. The site has already been developed, and the addition of 5,000 commercial square feet would not affect the wastewater treatment requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. Further, the proposed structure improvements would not result in the construction or expansion of water or wastewater treatment facilities. As such, there would be no impact on water or wastewater treatment, or treatment requirements. Mitigation Measures: None. 74) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existinfl facilities. the construction of which could cause siflnificant environmental effects? No Impact: Refer to response P-73 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 75) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainaze facilities or expansion of existing facilities. the construction of which could cause siflnificant environmental effects? No Impact: The project proposes a zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements to an existing building on the project site. The zone change and text amendment are administrative changes only and do not directly result in physical development. The site has already been developed, and the addition of 5,000 commercial square feet would not result in the construction or expansion of storm drain facilities. Further, the proposed structure improvements would not result in the construction or expansion of water or wastewater treatment facilities. As such, there would be no impact on water or wastewater treatment, or treatment requirements. 36 ACENDAITEM NO. J PAGE_ ~ q _OF _ \ \ ;r- City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 Mitigation Measures: None. 76) Have sufficient water suvvlies available to serve the vro;ect from existinJ! entitlements and resources. or are new or expanded entitlements needed? No Impact: The project proposes a zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements to an existing building on the project site. The zone change and text amendment are administrative changes only and do not directly result in physical development. The site has already been developed, and the addition of 5,000 commercial square feet is covered by existing entitlements. As such, the proposed project would not affect available water supplies or wastewater treatment capacities. Mitigation Measures: None. 77) Result in a determination bv the wastewater treatment provider which serves or mav serve the pro;ect that it has adequate capacitv to serve the pro;ect's pro;ected demand in addition to the provider's existinJ! commitments? No Impact: Refer to response P-76 above. Mitigation Measures: None. 78) Be served bv a landfill with sufficient permitted capacitv to accommodate the pro;ect's solid waste disposal needs? Less Than Significant: The project proposes a zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements to an existing building on the project site. The zone change and text amendment are administrative changes only and do not directly result in physical development. The site has already been developed, and the addition of 5,000 commercial square feet would not affect landfill capacity. The City requires that all wastes generated by construction and demolition be recycled by CR&R. Further, the City has available recycling for solid wastes generated by operation of the hotel/casino, including solid wastes generated by additional commercial use. As such, there would be a less than significant impact to landfills serving the City. Mitigation Measures: None. 79) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No Impact: Refer to response P-78 above. 37 AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ PAGE q 0 OF \ I ~ City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 Mitigation Measures: None. Q. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. 80) Does the vro;ect have the votential to def!rade the C/ualitv of the environment. substantiallv reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife svecies. cause a fish or wildlife vovulation to drov below self-sustaininf! levels. threaten to eliminate a vlant or animal communitv. reduce the number or restrict the ran e 0 a rare or endan ered lant or animal or eliminate im ortant exam les 0 the ma;or veriods of California historv or vrehistorv? No Impact: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. As such, the proposed project would not result in further degradation of the environment and would have no impacts to any biological resources. 81) Does the vro;ect have imvacts that are individuallv limited. but cumulativelv considerable? ("Cumulativelv considerable" means that the incremental effects of a vro;ect are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of vast vro;ects. the effects of other current vro;ects. and the effects ofvrobable future vro;ects)? Less Than Significant: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. The zone change and text amendment are administrative only and alone do not result in direct impacts to the environment. However, the construction and operation of an additional 5,000 square feet of commercial place could result in impacts, but none considered significant with or without mitigation. As such, there are no related or cumulative projects to be considered further. 82) Does the vro;ect have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beinf!s. either directlv or indirectlv? Less Than Significant: The proposed zone change, text amendment, and structure improvements apply to an area that has already been developed. The zone change and text amendment are administrative only and alone do not result in direct impacts to the environment. However, the construction and operation of an additional 5,000 square feet of commercial area could result in impacts, but none considered significant with or without mitigation. As such, there would be no significant direct or indirect effects to human beings. -End of Environmental Impact Evaluation Discussion- 38 AGENDA iTEM NO. ." PAGE3' _m:_ \ \Y City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino November 14,2006 REFERENCES FOR ENIVRONMENTAL EVALUATION The following references were utilized during preparation of this Initial Study: 1) City of Lake Elsinore General Plan. 39 AGENDA ITEM NO. '-, PAC~ q;2. .oF \ I 2J CITY OF ~ LAKE ,6/LSil'lORf .. DREAM EfTREME11I COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Main (951) 674-3124 Fax (951) 471-1419 NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT - MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN a Mitigated Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Public Review Period: November 20 to December 20, 2006 (30 Days) Project Name: Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Lake Elsinore Hotel/Casino Improvements Project Applicant(s): . City of Lake Elsinore, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 . Ted Kingston, 20930 Malaga Road, Lake Elsinore 92530 Project Location: Adjacent on the 1-15 to the west, located at Malaga Road and Casino Drive Project Description: The City of Lake Elsinore (City) is proposing a zone change and text amendment for three APNs (see #4 above) that make up the site of the existing Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino (Figure 1). Concurrent with the request for a zone change and text amendment, the property owner (applicant) is proposing the addition of 5,000 square feet onto the existing hotel/casino structure as well as upgraded landscaping on the property. The zone change and text amendment would allow for these improvements to be constructed. Once approved, the proposed re-zoning would allow for a change from C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) to C-2 (General Commercial) making these parcels consistent with surrounding uses as well as becoming consistent with the uses designated in the General Plan for this area. A C-2 Zoning District allows for all uses within a C-1 Zoning District. The text amendment is proposed to allow for card rooms as a permitted use (through an additional Conditional Use Permit process) within the C-2 Zoning District. The addition of 5,000 square feet to the existing hotel/casino structure continues to be less than the floor-area-ratio (FAR) requirement of General Commercial which allows for a maximum density of forty percent (40%). The project will also require a Commercial Design Review and Conditional Use Permit. 130 $"utl: di("in "shut, ..cake. Ef..lnou, (!a19z530 · cr..!..pf.on..: (909) 674-3124 '3ax: (909)~9~AA ITEM NO._ f _ PACE q 3_0F_ ~ 10_ FINDING This is to advise that the City of Lake Elsinore, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environmental and is proposing this Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the following findings: D The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [29 The Initial Study identifies potentially significant effects but: (1) Proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. (3) Mitigation measures are required to ensure all potentially significant impacts are reduced to levels of insignificance. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. If adopted, the Mitigated Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding are included in the Initial Study. The project file, including the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, and all related documents, are available for review at the City of Lake Elsinore, Planning Division, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, 92530. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please contact Justin Carlson at (951) 674-3124 ext 295. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration during the review period. Date of Determination Wendy Worthey, Principal Err November 16,2006 130 .:Sou.t!; d!tt"ill .:Shut, ...c"k~ Ef~iIlO~~, C!,df 92530 · fJd~p~oll~: (909) 674-3124 ':fa.x: (gog)AGENM ITE~O. ::l PAGE_~lf _OF .\ llY' STATE Or: CALIFORNIA Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit rl-Of p~ ...~~~'\ ~*~\ t _> .~ -~. "~OF C,.\.\fO"'~ Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor Sean Walsh Director December 21,2006 Justin Carlson City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Subject: City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Hotel/Casino Improvements SCH#: 2006111110 Dear Justin Carlson: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Negative Declaration to selected state agencies for review. The review period closed on December 20, 2006, and no state agencies submitted comments by that date. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Please call the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. If you have a question about the above-named project, please refer to the ten-digit State Clearinghouse number when contacting this office. Sincerely, J ~ Te::::L Director, State Clearinghouse 1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95812.3044 TEL (916) 445.0613 FAX (916) 323-3018 www.opr.ca.gov ACENDA ITEM NO. PACE ~ > OF 1- \I~. SCH# Project Title Lead Agency Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Bas 2006111110 City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change, Text Amendment, and Hotel/Casino Improvements Lake Elsinore, City of Type Description Neg Negative Declaration Concurrent with the request for a zone change and text amendment, the property owner (applicant) is proposing the addition of 5,000 square feet onto the existing hotel/casino structure as well as upgraded landscaping on the property. The zone change and text amendment would allow for these improvements to be constructed. Once approved, the proposed re-zoning would allow for a change from C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) to C-2 (General Commercial) making these parcels consistent with surrounding uses as well as becoming consistent with the uses designated in the General Plan for this area. A C-2 Zoning District allows for all uses within a C-1 Zoning District. The text amendment is proposed to allow for card rooms as a permitted use (through an additional Conditional Use Permit process) within the C-2 Zoning District. The addition of 5,000 square feet to the existing hotel/casino structure continues to be less than the floor-area-ratio (FAR) requirement of General Commercial which allows for a maximum density of 40%. The project will also require a Commercial Design Review and Conditional Use Permit. Lead Agency Contact Name Justin Carlson Agency City of Lake Elsinore Phone (951) 674-3124 em ail Address 130 S. Main Street City Lake Elsinore Fax State CA Zip 92530 Project Location County Riverside City Lake Elsinore Region Cross Streets Parcel No. Township Malaga Road and Casino Drive 365-040-003,011,016 Range Section Base Lake Els Proximity to: Highways 1-15 Airports Railways Waterways Schools Land Use Project Issues Reviewing Resources Agency; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 8; Department of Parks and Agencies Recreation; Native American Heritage Commission; Department of Fish and Game, Region 6; Department of Water Resources; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 8; Department of Toxic Substances Control Start of Review 11/21/2006 End of Review 12/20/2006 Date Received 11/21/2006 AGENDA '~'-rJ1 NO.~ PAC,- 9 b OF ,\.I;:Y Note: Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency. -- STATE OF CALIFORNIA Arnold Schwarzeneaaer GovernJU NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION 915 CAPITOL MALL, ROOM 364 SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 (916) 653-6251 Fax (916) 657-5390 W eb Site 'i'lWW nahllJdL9Qlt. e-mall: ds_nahc@pacbell.net December 6, 2006 ~r;'I; .):~.)_. . ~-- ~~ [~ l1: w! -'ff -- r~ .1'4. JIF - -'. '--' - , II J..~ \ f I' , l' " , !, i"[i II! ' !-! Ui! i,,~. '*=cirTi'-l,'i[.'-'~ !"LAi\;1,NG ui: l'siaN' Mr. Justin Carlson City of Lake Elsinore Community Development Department 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 R.~:~~,!;:I~~~~11~~~Q,Q~~,N~~i~R~tgc;nnDletion:Init,~l S~y~yl NeSl~tjve.DecJaration: for City ofLa,k,e ~Isinore Zohe;j~ff ", ,,-- ",m xtA-mendment No. 2006':04 and 1m 0' ements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casil'lQ' Rv~~ ae' ',ou.nW:Oalffom1i Dear Mr. Carlson: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above-referenced document. The Native American Heritage Commission is the state's Trustee Agency for Native American Cultural Resources. The Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEOA) requires that any project that causes a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource, that includes archeological resources, is a 'significant effect' requiring the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) per CEOA guidelines ~ 15064.5(b)(c). In order to comply with this provision, the lead agency is required to assess whether the project will have an adverse impact on these resources within the 'area of potential effect (APE)', and if so, to mitigate that effect. To adequately assess the project-related impacts on historical resources, the Commission recommends the following action: " Contact the appropriate Califomia Historic Resources Information Center (CHRIS). The record search will determine: · If a part or the entire APE has been previously surveyed for cultural resources. · If any known cultural resources have already been recorded in or adjacent to the APE. · If the probability is low, moderate, or high that cultural resources are located in the APE. · If a survey is required to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present. " If an archaeological inventory survey is required, the final stage is the preparation of a professional report detailing the findings and recommendations of the records search and field survey. · The final report containing site forms, site significance, and mitigation measurers should be submitted immediately to the planning department. All information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum, and not be made available for pubic disclosure. The final written report should be submitted within 3 months after work has been completed to the appropriate regional archaeological Information Center. " Contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for: * A Sacred Lands File (SLF) search of the project area and information on tribal contacts in the project vicinity who may have additional cultural resource information. Please provide this office with the following citation format to assist with the Sacred Lands File search request: USGS 7.5-minute auadranale citation with name. townshio. ranee and section: . The NAHC advises the use of Native American Monitors to ensure proper identification and care given cultural resources that may be discovered. The NAHC recommends that contact be made with Native American Contacts on the attached list to get their input on potential project impact, particularly the contacts of the on the list. " Lack of surface evidence of archeological resources does not preclude their subsurface existence. · Lead agencies should include In their mitigation plan provisions for the identification and evaluation of accidentally discovered archeological resources, per Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) ~15064.5 (t). In areas of identified archaeological sensitivity, a certified archaeologist and a culturally affiliated Native American, with knowledge in cultural resources, should monitor all ground-disturbing activities. · Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the disposition of recovered artifacts, in consultation with culturally affiliated Native Americans. ..J Lead agencies should include provisions for discovery of Native American human remains or unmarked cemeteries in their mitigation plans. AGENDA ITEM NO. _1_. PACE q 7 OF_\ I cr- * CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(d) requires the lead agency to work with the Native Americans identified by this Commission if the initial Study identifies the presence or likely presence of Native American human remains within the APE. CEQA Guidelines provide for agreements with Native American, identified by the NAHC, to assure the appropriate and dignified treatment of Native American human remains and any associated grave liens. ~ Health and Safety Code ~7050.5, Public Resources Code ~5097.98 and Sec. ~15064.5 (d) of the CEQA Guidelines mandate procedures to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery. .J Lead aaencies should consider avoidance. as defined in ~ 15370 of the CEQA Guidelines. when sianificant cultural resources are discovered durina the course of oroiect olannina. Please feel free to contact me at (916) 653-6251 if you have any questions. Cc: State Clearinghouse Attachment: List of Native American Contacts AGENDA ITEM NO. . ( PAGE q <h OF . tl d-: Native American Contacts Riverside County December 6, 2006 Pala Band of Mission Indians Robert Smith, Chairperson 12196 Pala Mission Rd.; PMB 50 Pala , CA 92059 Luiseno Pauma & Yuima Christobal C. Devers, Chairperson P.O. Box 369 Luiseno Pauma Valley , CA 92061 kymberlLpeters@yah (760) 742-1289 Cupeno (760) 742-3784 (760) 742-1411 Fax (760) 742-3422 Fax Temecula ,CA 92593 Soboba Band of Mission Indians Robert J. Salgado, Sr., Chairperson P.O. Box 487 Luiseno San Jacinto , CA 92581 luiseno@soboba-nsn. (951) 654-2765 Pechanga Band of Mission Indians Paul Macarro, Cultural Resource Center P.O. Box 1477 Luiseno (951) 308-9295 (951) 676-2768 (951) 695-1778 Fax (951) 654-4198 - Fax Soboba Band of Luiseiio Indians Bennae Calac, Director of Cultural Resources 23904 Soboba Road Luiseno San Jacinto ,CA 92581 Pechanga Band of Mission Indians Mark Macarro, Chairperson P.O. Box 2183 Luiseno Temecula ,CA 92593 (951) 663-8332 (951) 676-2768 (951) 654-4198 Fax (951) 695-1778 Fax This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibilitiey as defined in Sec. 7050,5 of the Health & Safety Code, Sec. 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Sec. 5097.98 of the Publi Resources Code. This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources for the proposed 2006111110; CEQA Notice of Completion; Intial StudylNegative Declaration for City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change 2006-03, Text Amendment No. 2006-04 and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino; Riverside County, California. AGENDA ITEM NO. :l PACE 9q OF_ \.l~ Native American Contacts Riverside County December 6, 2006 Willie Pink 48310 Pechanga Road Temecula ,CA 92592 wjpink@hotmail.com (909) 936-1216 Luiseno This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibilitiey as defined in Sec. 7050,5 of the Health & Safety Code. Sec. 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Sec. 5097.98 of the Publi Resources Code. This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources for the proposed 2006111110; CEQA Notice of Completion; Intial Study/Negative Declaration for City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change 2006-03, Text Amendment No. 2006-04 and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino; Riverside County, California. ACENDA ITEM NO. PACE .JOO OF =:l '\'I-~ WARREND. WILLIAMS General Manager-Chief Engineer 1995 MARKET STREET RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 951.955.1200 951.788.9965 FAX www.floodcontrol.co.riverside.ca.us Mr. Justin Carlson City of Lake Elsinore Planning Department 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL ,..... --..~- : L_..___ CITY Of Li,>:, cI,siiiOf(E PL:~~:~~~__E:; 0 f~ Dear Mr. Carlson: Re: Notice of Intent to Agopt Declaration for' ZoneCh " Te~t"Aineu " '..04, .. I Design R~~ie . . 3 and Conditio I Use Permit 200 - 4 This letter is written in response to the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration (ND) for Zone Change 2006-03, Text Amendment 2006-04, Commercial Design Review 2006-03 and Conditional Use Permit 2006-04. The proposed project consists of a zone change, text amendment and the addition of 5,000 square feet onto the existing hotel/casino structure as well as upgraded landscaping on the property. The proposed project is located west of Interstate 15 at Malaga Road and Casino Drive in the city of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County. The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District has no comments at this time. Thank you for the opportunity to review the ND. Please forward any subsequent environmental documents regarding the project to my attention at this office. Any further questions concerning this letter may be referred to Jason Swenson at 951.955.8082 or me at 951.955.1233. Very truly yours, . (,..." ~ '.~' Lj ... \ _ ) 5.- "! "",,, '.\/ ()_;i'~,.A""/~.-'~"'" TERESA TUNG () Senior Civil Engineer II c: TLMA Attn: David Mares JDS :mcv P8\111161 AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ PAOE_ 'I O'( .9F _ 1 \' \' ~ MThe Gas Company" Southern California Gas Company 1981 W. Lugonia Avenue Redlands, CA 92374-9720 Mailing Address: PO Box 3003 Redlands, CA 92373-0306 ) A ~ Sempra Energy'" utility November 20, 2006 City of Lake Elsinore Community Development Department 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 ~.~ ~ ~ [E....~.-"-~.u. [---..--.- _ . h.___...__., '1;' j __......./ i JI CITY OF LAI(['~;.SINORE PW!NiN~.._ISION Attention: Justine Carlson Re: (JJ:Ill> I,.~~e Elsinore Hotel and Casino - APNs: 365-040-003, 365-040-011, 365-040-016 Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the above-referenced project. Please note that Southern California Gas Company has facilities in the area where the above named project is proposed. Gas service to the project could be provided without any significant impact on the environment. The service would be in accordance with the Company's policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the time contractual arrangements are made. You should be aware that this letter is not to be interpreted as a contractual commitment to serve the proposed project, but only as an informational service. The availability of natural gas service, as set forth in this letter, is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, The Southern California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission. We can also be affected by actions of federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action, which affects gas supply, or the conditions under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance with revised conditions. Typical demand use for: a. Residential (System Area Average/Use Per Meter) Yearly Single Family 799 therms/year dwelling unit Multi-Family 4 or less units 482 therms/year dwelling unit Multi-Family 5 or more units 483 therms/year dwelling unit These averages are based on total gas consumption in residential units served by Southern California Gas Company, and it should not be implied that any particular home, apartment or tract of homes will use these amounts of energy. AOENDA ITEM NO. ~ . . PACF IOa...m: _ I d- November 20, 2006 Page 2 b. Commercial Due to the fact that construction varies so widely (a glass building vs. a heavily insulated building) and there is such a wide variation in types of materials and, a typical demand figure is not available for this type of construction. Calculations would need to be made after the building has been designed. We have Demand Side Management programs available to commercial/industrial customers to provide assistance in selecting the most effective applications of energy of our energy conservation programs, please contact our Commercial/Industrial Support Center at 1-800-GAS- 2000. SinCerelY" .. ~ d/~ Dick Gebhard/" Technical Services Supervisor AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ PAGE~ ID3_m=_ \ I ~ CITY OF ~ LAKE ,6,LSiI10Rt V DREAM E,xTREMElII January 5, 2007 Dave Singleton Program Analyst Native American Heritage Commission 915 Capitol Mall, Room 364 Sacramento, CA 95814 Subject: Response to Comment Letter Dated December 6, 2006 re: Initial Study/Negative Declaration SCH #2006111110 for City of Lake Elsinore Zone Change 2006-03, Text Amendment 2006-04, and Improvements to the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino Dear Mr. Singleton, The City of Lake Elsinore (City) appreciates your comments on the above-referenced document. All aspects of the proposed project are related to improvements to existing facilities only and would not cause any change in the significance of any historical or pre-historical resource. Further, the proposed project does not involve any earth- moving activities. Therefore, there is no potential to impact any resources of concern to the Native American Heritage Commission. Prior to approving the proposed project, the City Council, as the Lead Agency's decision- making body, will consider the proposed IS/MND and supporting documentation as well as your comments. At this time, we anticipate that the proposed project will be scheduled for Planning Commission consideration at a public hearing on or about January 16, 2007. If you have any additional questions for the City, please contact me at (951) 674-3124 ext 288. Best Regards, ~c:r..._........ ~-_.--".,~~ ,...". W endy Worthey, Principal Environmental Planner Cc: Justin Carlson, Project Planner, City of Lake Elsinore Community Development Department 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Main (951) 674-3124 Fax (951) 471-1419 ACENDA ITEM NO. ~ PAGE t 0 Lf Of ~ J ;:::y ATTACHMENT 6 "DRAFT ORDINANCE REVISIONS" To permit card room as a conditional use subiect to a Conditional Use Permit in C-2 (General Commercial District) Chapter l7.48.030(H) Other uses that the Planning Commission finds by resolution to be in accord with the purpose of this Chapter and having characteristics similar to those uses listed in this Section. ..^.. list of these uses shall be maintained in the Planning Diyision for future reference. (H.) Card rooms, or any other establishments associated with card playing as may be permitted under the provisions of Section 330 of the Penal Code of the State of California. Chapter 17.48.030 (I.) Other uses that the Planning Commission finds by resolution to be in accord with the purpose of this Chapter and having characteristics similar to those uses listed in this Section. A list of these uses shall be maintained in the Planning Division for future reference. - End Draft Ordinance Revisions- AGENDA ITEM NO. '-J_ PACE I 0.5 OF \ 1 r ~- ---, t)i i i -e ~ . . _ z o I~ ml Ii iiI II ml I en ~ Q~h ~ . i h~~ >> i 'II l ~ M j ! i~l~ I . .1 I ~, ~; Q II~iIP I~I" Ii I ~ I i ~ ~n~m nm m;1 i ~ ~ , - - - - it i8 ~ ~W~~I' mu .-- <. I' ~ II tlni~ ~im ~:~ ~. j i~ ~~ ~ liilli II.rl I i il ;= ~ I i ~n ~ i :r::r. z * ~ H . n ~ 9 ~ ;: __. : == . I I ~:~;~ mTITIof!TTTTI11IIlTlI ~:;;.:- . nm:1, ~ 11~llilll'l III'!P ~ ~ T I{I '" " !&: i t I -I P ~i t~. o \ l)1 ~ ill : , \ j/~/ ........ ...---- ~ .----./ .----.. .----.. ..................... ~Aii'~...----~........ ......\. 1ft ~~~ .~ ...... @lGlIZI'''''"P Q ~'" ../ m .____.. .' ----- ......../............. II ~ I' PI P I ~ .' _____....... ^ .a l i,' l ...- .' ...... .. '" ~ I ....- ~ ..............",\5 '., ..............~ 0 .;Ii>....... ,,\-' .............. 1\ ./~.....--.. .............................. 1) tl ~~ I ~ ! t ; I I S 5i~ ~ ~ . . . . . - ~ z ~ 2 i E ~j! ~ i t t t ! ! 5 i I ~ ::! ~i m q ~ p n ~ (IE( U~'lm 'I~I fii~l ~ n ~ ~ ~ n I U tV iJlf ij!g W Mg ii!U ~ i! ~ i i lh ~! H ~! ~ l -t ~. ~ ~ I Il!id ;""1 ~ f r. 5 I I ~ ~ i 2 t J iz I ( ~'" . o ~~~~I um o ~~~ " IIi i ~ ." . ~ 0 p '" J I ~. n · H q j ~ .. ~ ~;Ii II = I I j ~ i ~id I , Q . ; ;: Q ~iih II D. i I~~~ en . Jdl'; ~~~~~~~~~~w ~~~~@~ IL~~~ ~IL~~~(Q)~~ ~~~~~(Q) ~n == IIIE____ _/DEI'Bllfl!R:1Bl_ -- ---RQIIl --RQIIl __CA"'" __CA..... H01B.\II'11144101 H01B.(II1I_ ~~~~~ ~~(C[K]~IJ~(CIJ ALLEN DUEBER _aBIIIMIfllM: lA_CA.'" ...... . J- PAGE_loC? _OF_ LI <r - ~ !~ (p ~ iji (p &l I II I~ 1 W~ 1 ....... II L tT.T ~I ~i !i I I II - I I l:l ~~ . ~~~~~~~~~~w ~~~~@~ !L~~~ ~!L~~~(Q)[ffi~ ~~~~~(Q) ...,. == ~__~ _/DMLCI'l!R:1!Il_ -- _MAlJADD alDliMLIllMRDNJ __CA .... __CA .... Hll1B.lIII11740101 Hll1B.lII1l1740101 N - Z i~ ~U~ II = ~~ h~i ~l en ~F lI~G~ r !We I~~F :0 ~ o~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~ l : I~~ i ~ &h ~ Q l;!~ ~ 1I ~~~ ~ j ~~~ _ QiiI ~ ~ fA ~~ ~ ~~ 1111111111'11" ~ [ffi ~ lMl~lF ~ ~ IF ~ 1,1 ! ~kh5~ RY..~B~ - p. . J U'__ PAGE_ '/O"L.OF_ J I >=- r-n----- , t--------- I , , . ,.: " Q' - Q :n____n .~ : . ;J! i ~ ~-------- L________ l:l ~~ . I~ (p :-n iP iji r-r------.--nn--r-' ~ I I I 1 ,.. r I I . I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I , , , l : ; : : I I I I I iin~~ ,ft. .... - 1 :;n~:~~.~~. 0 ~ 0 O~. . II I 'am> if.'}. ~ p ~ I~"p ~ ~ HlrL.l.J1 "'-". U' c p U' ""b U' U" v--- I '~rm :~:~: (~ u lfi B u {~ ~ ., iH~: ~.~i! ., f.'p f,1.1f,1. ~ ~ ~' p ~ I _ : i~ ~~ ~~b ~\~ ~ ~ c~ b ~ . I I ~ I11rri -: ~'. I~ ~ IIMII ~ i ~ - -- I~ r-~~ r~ f'\:ti I I t~ ~ ~ i ~ I; I I 1, ~ ~( ~ ! I pt. ~ ~..,~ _ I ~ -II I I ~:_) ? ~ ~ III H ill [~::,! I (- ~ i ~.... ~H - @;p ~ [ I ~......-.. 11 r::f II L ~, ~ 2: 4 ~~- - ~l' ~ J....-J tA-. ~llii A "I 0 I ~ tto) ~_~ ~ ~6i~ =0 i 0 , "-'~~;tY fl \;: I :.:-~ .~ ~I .... ~I~~i ~ t !I 1.1 LIT :1 B ~ . <: , ~ 1:~'~-~-TlQ :':f;--% m m ~ I ~ ~ I N .'J.. Q ....,. Q "tJ .."'. ~ ~_ ~ ~/ ~ 'V '\1' A ~ x. ~.\: ,/'\ II!~ 0 ITl ITl ITl l~"" % i ,\ = rn E rx-xx ~ J. ~H ~~ il' - ill i I~ ~ ,II ~ - z IE' - - - II m!!' a ~~ ~~h' ~ ~~ i~~F l' ~ ~!~~ ; ~ !i~\' i ~ I" ~ ~ ~~j F Q ~~i ~ ill ~2~ i ~ ~~~ _ mm [Fl [b ~ ~2 ~ ~Q IIII I' ~[R1~IXl~lF~~lF I I ~bh5~ ~.Y..~~ . =J- PAGE t ocr; OF. \ I r l- ....... [Fl~~[b~~~~~~W ~~~~@~ [!:'~IK\~ ~[!:,~m~](Q)~~ ~~~~~(Q) Iftn == -- ~--- --- __CA ... H01B.lIltl"_ CMtB/D!W!I.OPBt 1ED DGIItW --- __CA ... HllIB.(I51)"441Ol <P m .0 -I :2 OJ ~ ~ i ~ ~' ....... ..... Ii ~~ ~ ~E3 ,.... E3 ~E3 S2'.U' I~ !~ ;II ~ " ~ ~~~~~~~~~~w ~~~~@~ lL~lK\[g [glL$~[M@IPJ[g <C~~~[M@ ..... == II'IEADDMII: INCE B.IIIDR! CMI<<) OMERI DEVI!UI'I!R: 1m DI38I'ON ....... - ...IMI.AMIICWJ _MN..AMD.D __CA_ __CA_ IIllB.lllt)".... 1IllB.(II1)- l:l @il~ B """ i~ !~ ~ N - Z r~ ii~~i Ii ~ II UH~! Cl ~~ a~G~ ~ ~B ~~~. l" . ~ ~~!lF ~ % ~/;~~ l ji ;~t -< Ii ~~~ ! ~ !d r ~ o~~ I i !~Ii ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ -<~ II' ~~~[K]~lF~~lF ALLEN DUEBER _ CIBIIMIB lIME !ABA. CAttMI ...... AGENDA ITEM NO. ::.? ~ PAGE_.(!Z~_OF_ \ I ~ I~ r2 IQ --? I J_ D D (p .ffi z :2 it '(p :~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ 1: 1: m m m r r J_ r 1- m J m ~ m ~ ~ ; t, ~ 2 Q Ii ~ 2 8 Ii 2 ~ n !I ~ 1- h' ~ " ~ ~ U 0: 21 ~ ~ i t lil J_ Q~ ~~ 01 .....t'I .~. 1- J tB II n 8 -r DB DB ,~~~,'1- 08 08 ~~~~~~~~~~w ~~~~@~ [L~IK<~ ~[L~~~(Q)IR{~ ~~~~~(Q) mn ='= ~___ _/IlE'oILCI'l!R:1Bl_ -- DlDIIMI.MARlWJ DlDIIM.MADD LNlEB.INIRf.CA ... lMEBllllE.CA - 1IIlB.1II1l..441ot 1IIlB.(II1117441ot ~~~~~ 1111I11II1I ~1R1(cll=ll~lf~(clf .lllli I ~b!!~ ~lttB~ I:l @>~ B I ACENDAITEM r~o. -::r - PACE I: (. 0 . OF _ \ r~ \. I AO~T~ _. ..._-l2"'" I ~ Q . OENI!RIL. e<::M"I!lIflCIAl.- .lliITmr\TTTlllf'ilmfmmr1jifITm TIT'~ .. - - I i ::! i ~ " U~ : ~ j. ~~~ -. .. GI III 1 \ ~h !. I. >> ! ~. I I I I II III 1'1 , t) III I II I . ADJACENT I"'IIllOf"EJItT .APN. J<eo!o~.21-CCl lOt'E C2 .. Q&Eft.AL COMr"EJ1ilCI,A,l.. i o ~ @....(;)(;)O I P I I U I 1111 I I I' I I II I I ~ II' III I I I I II i i I III ~HIP I I l III I ~ ~ .",' ~ ! ,",' ~i ...... ~ 10 I I \ I I I [P>[L~~~ I ~1Ri(C[fl]~Ir~(c1r _ ALLEN DUEBER · i All CfES'IlIA\EN ~1.tA.sA CA...ttz '11-8-1110 ._.w A ITEM NO. ~ PAGE_ { I J_OF_ \ l?r XHIBIT . '... ':>.. 5 TAT E OF C A L I FOR N I A Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit ~Ilf~ ..../'~ ~ * ~ i .... i '3.~~ .{1 "1"eOFGA~ Wendy Worthey City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street. Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor December 28, 2006 Subject: Draft EIR for General Plan Amendment #2006-04, Annexation No. 75, Zone Change/Pre-Zone No. 2005-09, Annexation by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, and SCH#: 2006051073 Dear Wendy Worthey: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Draft EIR to selected state agencies for review. On the enclosed Document Details Report please note that the Clearinghouse has listed the state agencies that reviewed your document The review period closed on December 27, 2006, and the comments from the responding agency (ies) is (are) enclosed. If this comment package is not in order, please notify the State Clearinghouse immediately. Please refer to the project's ten-digit State Clearinghouse number in future correspondence so that we may respond promptly. Please note that Section 21104(c) of the California Public Resources Code states that: "A responsible or other public agency shall only make substantive comments regarding those activities involved in a project which are within an area of expertise of the agency or which are required to be carried out or approved by the agency. Those comments shall be supported by specific documentation." These comments are forwarded for use in preparing your fmal enviroilInental document. Should you need more information or clarification of the enclosed comments, we recommend that you contact the commenting agency directly. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft . . environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Please contact the State "Clearinghouse at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. ~~ Terry ROQerts Director, State Clearinghouse Enclosures cc: Resources Agency EXHIBIT \ E.' 1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95812-8044 TEL (916) 445-0618 FAX (916) 328-3018 www.opr.ca.gov Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Base SCH# Project Title Lead Agency 2006051073 Draft EIR for General Plan Amendment #2006-04, Annexation No. 75, Zone Change/Pre-Zone No. 2005-09, Annexation by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, and Lake Elsinore, City of Type EIR Draft EIR DescriptIon (1) General Plan Amendment #2006-04 - Change the project site land use designation from Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) and Mountainous (M) to Low Density Residential (LOR); (2) Annexation No. 75 - Completion of the annexation of the project site into the City of Lake Elsinore; (3) Zone Change/Pre-Zone No. 2005-09 - Adoption of the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan in conformance with pre-zoning; (4) Tract Map 34249 - Approval of a Tentative Tract Map to permit subdivision of the project site; and (5) Annexation of project site by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). Lead Agency Contact Name Wendy Worthey Agency City of Lake Elsinore Phone (951) 674-3124 x288 email Address 130 S. Main Street CIty Lake Elsinore Fax State CA Zip 92530 Project Location County Riverside CIty Lake Elsinore RegIon Cross Streets Parcel No. TownshIp Canyon Hills Road/Lost Road/Navajo Springs Road and Canyon Hills Rd./Cottonwood Canyon Rd. 365-220-026,027; 365-230-001, 005, 006, 007,009 through 013 6S Range 4W Sect/on 13 Base SB Proximity to: Highways 1-15 Airports Railways Waterways Schools Land Use Canyon Lake Cottonwood Canyon ES, Canyon Lake MS Z: Specific Plan GP: Very Low Density (VLD) Residential and Mountainous (M) Project Issues AesthetlcNisual; Agricultural Land; Air Quality; Archaeologic-Historic; Biological Resources; Cumulative Effects; Drainage/Absorption; Flood Plain/Flooding; Forest Land/Fire Hazard; Geologic/Seismic; Growth Inducing; Landuse; Noise; Public Services; Schools/Universities; Sewer Capacity; Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading; Solid Waste; Toxic/Hazardous; Traffic/Circulation; Vegetation; Water Quality; Water Supply; Wetland/Riparian; Wildlife Reviewing Resources Agency; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 8; Department of Parks and Agencies Recreation; Native American Heritage Commission; Office of Emergency Services; Department of Health Services; Office of Historic Preservation; Department of Forestry and Fire Protection; Department of Fish and Game, Region 6; Department of Water Hesources; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 8; Department of Toxic Substances Control Date ReceIved 11/13/2006 Start of Review 11/13/2006 End of Review 12/27/2006 Note: Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency. November 15,2005 City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Wendy Worthey, Principal Environmental Planner Wendy, In response to the Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report received by the District on November 11,2006 regarding the Canyon Hills Estates project, located by the existing Canyon Hills project to the North, Pine Avenue to the East and Crooked Arrow Dr. and Crab Hollow Circle to the West and South, totaling approximately 246.4 acres of land and a potential 302 SFRs, the Lake Elsinore Unified School district offers the following response: The Lake Elsinore Unified School District is currently operating at capacity. Additional development projects will impact existing schools and create a need for additional facilities. School impact fees shall be paid pursuant to state law. Even after such payment, district schools will become increasingly impacted and overcrowded. Based on information provided in the Draft Environmental Impact Report, the following is a projection for the number of students this project may generate: K_51h 302 X .3698 = 112 students 6_81h 302 X .1640 = 50 students 9-121h 302 X .1776= 54 students =total of216 students generated from project. Please contact me should you have any questions and/or comments at (951) 253-7015 or kira. falsettoauleusd.kI2.ca.us. Respectfu)~ " ~ Kira Falsetto Assistant Director Facilities Planning Lake Elsinore Unified School District State of California-Health and Human Services Agency Department of Health Services SANDRA SHEWRY Director ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER Governor November 17, 2006 Wendy Worthey City of lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street lake Elsinore, CA 92530 PLANNING DI\ISION.. RE: Canyon Hills Estates.,... SCH2006051 073 The California Department of Health Services (CDHS) is in receipt of the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the above project. If the City of lake Elsinore plans to develop a new water supply well or make modifications to the existing domestic water treatment system to serve the Canyon Hills Estates-project site, an application to amend the water system permit must be reviewed and approved by the CDHS Riverside District Office. These future developments may be subject to separate environmental review. Please contact the office at (619) 525-4159 for further information. Sincerely, t~~ California Department of Health Services Environmental Review Unit Division of Drinking Water and Environmental Management Environmental Review Unit/State Revolving Fund/Prop 50 1616 Capitol Avenue, MS 7418, P.O. Box 997413, Sacramento CA 95899-7413 . (916) 449-5600 Fax: (916) 446-5656 Internet Address: www.dhs.ca.aov/os/ddwem . ... IVlS. vvonney Page 2 November 17, 2006 cc: State Clearinghouse P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812-0613 Steve Williams, District Engineer CDHS Riverside 1350 Front Street, Room 2050 San Diego, CA 92101 MThe Gas Company. Southern California Gas Company 1981 W. lugonia Avenue Redlands. CA 92374-9720 ) A ~ Sempra Energy- utility November 20, 2006 Mailing Address: PO 80x 3003 Redlands. CA 92373-0306 Attention: Wendy Worthey ~~ :7U~: ~~ e/r{ OFLAKfQSINO PLANNING DIV/SIONRE City of Lake Elsinore Community Development Department 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Re: (EIR) Canyon Hills Estates - Tract Map 34249 Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the above-referenced project. Please note that Southern California Gas Company has facilities in the area where the above named project is proposed. Gas service to the project could be provided without any significant impact on the environment. The service would be in accordance with the Company's policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the time contractual arrangements are made. You should be aware that this letter is not to be interpreted as a contractual commitment to serve the proposed project, but only as an informational service. The availability of natural gas service, as set forth in this letter, is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, The Southern California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission. We can also be affected by actions of federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action, which affects gas supply, or the conditions under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance with revised conditions. Typical demand use for: a. Residential (System Area AveragelUse Per Meter) Yearly Single Family 799 thenns/year dwelling unit Multi-Family 4 or less units 482 therms/year dwelling unit Multi-Family 5 or more units 483 therms/year dwelling unit These averages are based on total gas consumption in residential units served by Southern California Gas Company, and it should not be implied that any particular home, apartment or tract of homes will use these amounts of energy. November 20, 2006 Page 2 b. Commercial Due to the fact that construction varies so widely (a glass building vs. a heavily insulated building) and there is such a wide variation in types of materials and, a typical demand figure is not available for this type of construction. Calculations would need to be made after the building has been designed. We have Demand Side Management programs available to commercial/industrial customers to provide assistance in selecting the most effective applications of energy of our energy conservation programs, please contact our Commercial/Industrial Support Center at 1-800-GAS- 2000. ~h 1f4;~ DickGebY Technical Services Supervisor Board of Directors Phil Williams, President W. Ben Wicke, Vice President Harvey A. Ryan, Treasurer Christine Hyland, Director Kris Anderson, Director Elsinore Valley MunicIpal Water Dlst GenerafManager . Ronald E. Young Board Secretary Terese Quintanar Legal Counsel Best Best & Krieger November 22, 2006 City of lake Elsinore Attn: Wendy Worthey, Principal Environmental Planner 130 South Main Street lake Elsinore, CA 92530 RE: COMMENT ON DEIR FOR CANYON HILLS ESTATES (General Plan Amendment #2006-04, Annexation No. 75, Zone Change/Pre-Zone No. 2005- 09, Annexation by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District and Tract Map 34249 Dear Ms. Worthey: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above-referenced DIER. In Appendix 8.2, the Canyon Hills Estates Annexation Report and Plan for Providing Services, section 3.2, annexation is addressed. Since EVMWD receives imported water from Metropolitan Water District (MWD) through its member agency, Western Municipal Water District (WMWD) , no territory can be annexed into EVMWD without also annexing into MWD and WMWD. Therefore, please amend this section of Appendix 8.2 to list the requirement for annexation to the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) and the Western MuniCipal Water District (WMWD), in addition to the annexation to EVMWD and the City of lake Elsinore service boundaries. Please be advised that grading water will not be provided, nor will water meters be set for the project until the annexation into all three agencies is complete. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (951) 674-3146, extension 8223. Sincerely, Terese Quintanar District Secretary/Administrative Services Supervisor g:ladmln\1-2006 correspondencelO63nlq.doc 951.674.3146 Fax 951.674.9872 www.evmwd.com Our Mission... EVMWD will provide reliable, cost-effective, high quality water and wastewater services that are dedicated to the people we serve. ~1315 Chaney Street P.O. Box 3000 Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 .. C [E ~ ~ [E ~ " '~-D'-E'"-C".' 'e ..'";--,-.,."~.' ~..~~~.,l" . n ..", ! Ii))" r .."....__...._.._~.. CITY OF lAKE ~LSlj~bRE' .. PLANNiNG ,:i\ ISION Mission: Educate and communicate the rich heritage of Soboba peoples; Lead and assist individuals, organizations and communities in understanding the needs and concerns of Native American monitoring of traditional sites; Advocate Native American participation in state agencies and boards; Advocate legislation and enforcement oflaws affecting Native American peoples and protecting historical and archaeological resources, November 30, 2006 Attn: Wendy Worthy City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Re: Canyon Hills Estate The Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians appreciates your observance of Tribal Cultural Resources and their preservation in your project. The information provided on said project(s) has been assessed through our Cultural Resource Department, where it was concluded that although this site is outside the existing reservation, the project area does fall within the bounds of our Tribal Traditional Use Areas. At this time the Soboba Band does see a direct need for Native American Monitoring. The Tribe requests a Native American Monitor be present during any and all ground disturbing activities. Soboba requests this, until deemed unnecessary by both Archaeological and Native American Monitors. Also the Tribe requests to be involved in any and all consultation throughout the project. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact the Cultural Resource Department. [SPECIAL NOTE (for projects other than cell towers): .lfthis project is associated with a city or county specific plan or general plan action it is subject to the provisions ofSB 18-Tradtional Tribal Cultural Places (law became effective January 1,2005) and will require the city or county to participate in formal, government-to-government consultation with the Tribe. If the city or county are your client, you may wish to make them aware of this requirement. By law, they are required to contact the Tribe.] rica Helms Soboba Cultural Resource Department Cell (951) 663-8333 Phone (951) 487-8268 ehe1ms@soboba-nsn.gov Officers: President: Yvonne B. Burke, Los Angeles County. first Vice President:Gary Ovill, San Bemanlino County. Se<ond VKe President Richard Dixon, Lake forest . Immediate Pal! President loni Young, Port Hueneme Imperial County: Victor Carrillo, Imperial County. Jon Edney, EI Centto Los Angeles County: Yvonne B. Burke, Los Angeles (ounty . Zev Yaroslavsky, Los Angeles County. Jim Aldinger, Manhallan Beadl. Harry Baldwin, San Gabriel. Paul Bowlen, Ceni\os . Todd Campbell, Burbank . lony Canlena~ Los Angeles . Stan Carroll, La Habra Heights . Margaret Clark, Rosemead . (,ene Daniels, Paramount. Mike Dispenza, Palmdale . Judy Dunlap, Inglewood . Rae Gabelich, L""g Bead1 . David Galin, Downey. flic Garcelli, Los Angeles. Wendy Greuel, LOI Angeles. frank Gurule, Cudahy . Janice Hahn, Los Angeles. Isadore Hall, Compton. Keith W. Hanks, Azusa. Jose Huizar, Los Angeles . 10m LaBonge, Los Angeles. Paula Lantz, Pomona. Paul Nowalka, lorrance . Pam O'Connor, Santa Monica. Alex Padilla, Los Angeles . Bernard Parks, Los Angeles. Jan Perry,LOI Angeles. Ed Reyes, Los Angeles. Bm Rosendahl, Los Angeles. Greig Smith, Los Angeles. 10m Sylles, Walnut. Mike len, South Pasadena .Ionia Reyes Uranga,Long Beach. Antonio Villaraigosa, Los Angeles. Dennis Walhburn, Calabasas . Jad We~~ LOI Angeles . Herb J. Wesson. Jr., Los Angeles. Dennis Zine,los Angele. Orange County: Chris Norby, Orange County. Christine Barnes, la Palma . John Deauman, Bre. . Lou Bone. Tuslin . Art Brown, Buena Parle . Richard Chavez, Anahe.im . .Debbie Cook. Sincerely Huntington Beach . le.t,e O"gle, Newport , Beach. Richard Dixon. lake foreSl. Paul Glaab. ~ laguna Niguel Riverside County: Jeff Stone. Rive"ide County -;?;' I. . . lhomas Buckley, Lake Elsinore' Bonnie . ~. flidinger, Moreno Valley. Ron love"dge. . ~ ~ Rive"ide. Greg Pellis, Calhedral City. Ron SYLVIA PA TSAOURAS Roberts,lernecula M' E . 1 D' . . San Bernardino County: Gary Ovill, San anager, nVlronmenta IVISIOn Bernardino County. Lawrence Dale. BarstoW . Paul Eaton, Montdair . It<! Ann Garcia, Grand Terrace. TIm Jasper, Town of Apple Valley .larry McCallon, Highland. Deborah Rohertson. Rialto . Alan Wapner, Ontario Ventura County: Judy MiI<els, Ventura County . Glen Becerra, Stmi Valley. Carl Moreho"",. San Buena",ntura . Toni Young. Port Hueneme Orange County Transportation Authority: Lou Correa. County of Or.nge Riverside County Transportation Commission: Robin Lowe, Hemel Ventura County Transportation Commission: Keith Millhouse, Moorpark SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS Main Office 818 West Seventh Street 12th Floor Los Angeles, California 90017-3435 t (213) 236-1800 f(213) 236-1825 www.scag.c..gov December 15, 2006 ~. --==---::--- o r ~_(G [~n JIf.J~, r~l , I " I , r- 'j I U I" I. L ' , L.,i) ft"'......c"",.. CiTY"OF u.ri::j ;,<7:;:,.---1 '--_--..!.!:.MiNi ~.jc: /8i""" -----~_~..n____ Ms. Wendy Worthey Principal Environmental Planner City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 f ',. ...--..-.i RE: SCAG Clearinghouse No. 120060754 Canyon Hills Estates Dear Ms. Worthey: Thank you for submitting the Canyon Hills Estates for review and comment. As areawide clearinghouse for regionally significant projects, SCAG reviews the consistency of local plans, projects and programs with regional plans. This activity is based on SCAG's responsibilities as a regional planning organization pursuant to state and federal laws and regulations. Guidance provided by these reviews is intended to assist local agencies and project sponsors to take actions that contribute to the attainment of regional goals and policies. We have reviewed the Canyon Hills Estates, and have determined that the proposed Project is not regionally significant per SCAG Intergovernmental Review (IGR) Criteria and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Section 15206). Therefore, the proposed Project does not warrant comments at this time. Should there be a change in the scope of the proposed Project, we would appreciate the opportunity to review and comment at that time. A description of the proposed Project was published in SCAG's November 1-30, 2006 Intergovernmental Review Clearinghouse Report for public review and comment. The project title and SCAG Clearinghouse number should be used in all correspondence with SCAG concerning this Project. Correspondence should be sent to the attention of the Clearinghouse Coordinator.. If you have any questions, please contact me at (213) 236-1856. Thank you. Doc #129346 11.14.~ -----Original Message----- From: Katherine [mailto:katherine@nbgi.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 20068:14 AM To: Kirt Coury Subject: Canyon Hills Estates - Noted Opposition Importance: High RE: Canyon Hills Estates: Environmental Impact Report No. 2006-02, General Plan Amendment No. 2006-04, Specific Plan No. 2006-01 and Tentative Tract Map No. 34249 Mr. Coury, I am writing to you today to have my objection on the above mentioned project filed as a matter public record. I have been in objection since the inception of this idea and any subsequent plans to build high- density homes in this area. The community is vehemently opposed as I have made a matter of record with over 700 signatures to this fact. Canyon Hills Residents are not opposed to growth that is responsible and reasonable however we are and I am opposed to this project as it does not improve the area. It will overcrowd the community, overburden it's residents with a myriad of traffic problems & overcrowding of schools. In addtion to plummeting property values of the local nieghbrohoods. I would respectfully request that the Planning Commission take all the residents in the area's concers in to mind and vote against this project. Thank you, Katherine Celli 32013 Cottage Glen Drive Lake Elsinore, Ca 92532 Katherine Celli Business Development &. Compliance Tel.: 323.850.2200 FAX: 323.850.2285 www.nbal.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: The information contained in this message is legally privileged and confidential Information intended only for the use of the indlvidual(s) or entity named In this document. If you have received this in error, please advise the sender bye-mail or phone and Immediately delete this message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents. e , ,\ 't ~~ -- - . Department of Toxic Substances Control Linda S. Adams Secretary for Environmental Protection Maureen F. Gorsen, Director 1001 "I" Street, 25th Floor Sacramento, California 95814 Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor MEMORANDUM FROM: Greg Holmes, Unit Chief Southern California Cleanup Operations Branch Cypress Office, Region 4 ~ ' . Guenther W. Moskat, Chief . ~ -R ~ ) Planning & Environmental Analysis Section V""""- ~ TO: DATE: December 7, 2006 SUBJECT: CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT REVIEW FOR: DRAFT EIR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (lake Elsinore). SCH # 2006051073 The Office of Environmental Analysis and Regulations (OEAR) received the attached document from an outside agency for DTSC review as a potential Responsible or Interested Agency pursuant the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A preliminary review of this document by our office shows that the project may fall within the regulatory authority of DTSC because it involves one of the following land uses that could potentially expose individuals to hazards or hazardous materials: o AN EXISTING OR PROPOSED SCHOOL SITE 181 SENSITIVE LAND USES (e.g., daycare facility, nursing home, hospital) o NON-SENSITIVE LAND USES (e.g., commercial or industrial facilities) This document is being forwarded to your office for further assessment. Please provide the lead Agency that is identified on the attached Notice of Completion Form with any comments you may have on this document before the close of the comment period (12/27/2006). After your review, please complete the information requested in the box below and return this form to our office at the following address: CEQA Tracking Center Office of Environmental Analysis and Regulations 10011 Street, 22nd Floor/ P.O. Box. 806 Sacramento, CA 95812 COMMENTS WERE SENT TO THE LEAD AGENCY and a copy for OEAR is attached to his memo COMMENTS WERE NOT SENT TO THE LEAD AGENCY because: o The project did not fall within the jurisdiction of DTSC o The document adequately assessed impacts from the proposed project as it relates to DTSC's area of jurisdiction o Other (explain) Printed on Recycled Paper " I ..:~ - - e Department of Toxic Substances Control Linda S. Adams Secretary for Environmental Protection Maureen F. Gorsen, Director 5796 Corporate Avenue Cypress, California 90630 I (6). Ie. (fU Arnold Schwarzenegger IfIJI ~-1 \If 1 :.m~ /Gc 26 2006 ~ CITY OFL'AKEr PLANNING ,~,:LP,NOFIE l . ,S,GN December 20, 2006 Ms. Wendy Worthey City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, California 92530 --- NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR CANYON HILLS ESTATES (SCH#2006051 073) Dear Ms. Worthey: The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has received your submitted (EIR) document for the above-mentioned project. The proposed project includes several components. as follows: . General Plan Amendment No.2006-04- Change the Project Site land use designation from Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) and Mountainous (M) to Low Density Residential (LOR); . Annexation No.75-Completion of the annexation of the Project Site into the City of Lake Elsinore; . . Zone Change/Pre-Zone No. 2005-09- Adoption of the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan in conformance with pre-zoning; . Tract Map 34249- Approval of a Tentative Map to permit subdivision of the Project site; and Annexation of Project Site by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). DTSC sent you NOP comments on 6/12/06, and has additional comments on the EIR report, as follows: 1. All environmental investigations, sampling and/or remediation should be conducted under a Workplan approved and overseen by a regulatory agency that has jurisdiction to oversee hazardous waste cleanup. The findings and sampling results from the subsequent report should be clearly summarized in the EIR. * Printed on Recycled Paper Ms. Wendy Worthey December 20, 2006 Page 2 2. Proper investigation, sampling and remedial actions, if necessary, should be conducted at the site prior to the new development or any construction, and overseen by a regulatory agency. 3. If it is determined that hazardous wastes are, or will be, generated by the proposed operations, the wastes must be managed in accordance with the California Hazardous Waste Control Law (California Health and Safety Code, Division 20, chapter 6.5) and the Hazardous Waste Control Regulations (California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4.5). If so, the facility should obtain a United States Environmental Protection Agency Identification Number by contacting (800) 618-6942. 4. If hazardous wastes are (a) stored in tanks or containers for more than ninety days, (b) treated onsite, or (c) disposed of onsite, then a permit from DTSC may be required. If so, the facility should contact DTSC at (818) 551-2171 to initiate pre application discussions and determine the permitting process applicable to the facility. 5. Certain hazardous waste treatment processes may require authorization from the local Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). Information about the requirement for authorization can be obtained by contacting your local CUPA. 6. If the project plans include discharging wastewater to a storm drain, you may be required to obtain a wastewater discharge permit from the overseeing Regional Water Quality Control Board. 7. If structures on the Project Site contain potentially hazardous materials, such as; asbestos-containing material, lead-based paint, and mercury- or PCB-containing material, such materials should be removed properly prior to demolition, and disposed of at appropriate landfills or recycled, in accordance with the regulatory guidance provided in California Code of Regulation (CCR) and following the requirements of the Universal Waste Rule (40 CFR part 9). Ms. Wendy Worthey December 20,2006 Page 3 If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at (714) 484-5461 or call Mr. AI Shami, Project Manager, at (714) 484-5472 or at "ashami@dtsc.ca.gov". Sincerely, d/ff~ /vh:7 /y7~ Greg Holmes Unit Chief Southern California Cleanup Operations Branch - Cypress Office cc: Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, California 95812-3044 Mr. Guenther W. Moskat, Chief Planning and Environmental Analysis Section CEQA Tracking Center Department of Toxic Substances Control P.O. Box 806 Sacramento, California 95812-0806 CEQA # 1595 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY lransportation Department George A. Johnson, P.E. Director of Transportation December 21, 2006 Wendy Worthey Principal Environmental Planner City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 SUBJECT: Response to Notice of Availability of a Draft Environmental Impact Report for Canyon Hills Estates (General Plan Amendment #2006-04, Annexation No. 75, Zone Change/Pre- Zone No. 2005-09, Annexation by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, and Tract Map 34249) Dear Ms. Worthey: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed project. The Transportation Department is highly concerned about adding development traffic to currently unimproved roads in the County, including Lost Road and Cottonwood Canyon. It is our general position that development that connects to unimproved roads needs to be responsible for improving the roads to a standard that can ad.equately carry the additional traffic and thatcan be maintained by a public agency. This development proposes to make a connection to Lost Road (via Navajo Springs), and to Cottonwood Canyon, both unimproved dirt roads. The project also appears to have an emergency connection to Turtle Green, Crab Hollows, and Crooked Arrow. The study indicates that in 2025, at such time as Lost Road and Cottonwood Canyon are anticipated to be improved, 28% of the project traffic will use Lost Road to the south and 17% will use Cottonwood Canyon. However, given the level of congestion at the Railroad Canyon/I-15 Interchange, the fact that these dirt roads are drivable today(and carry significant traffic levels for a dirt road in the case of Lost Road), and that they are convenient short-cuts to access Wildomar, Bundy Canyon Road, 1-15 and 1-215 to the south, it is expected that some level of project traffic will immediately use these roads. 4080 Lemon Street, 8th Floor. Riverside, California 92501 . (951) 955-6740 P.O. Box 1090' Riverside, California 92502-1090. FAX (951) 955-3198 Therefore, The Transportation Department requests that the project be designed and conditioned to mitigate its anticipated impacts as follows: 1. Pave Navajo Springs and Lost Road (north of Navajo Springs) to County standards. 2. Participate financially in a funding mechanism for the paving of Lost Road southerly to Lemon. The County is considering establishing a funding mechanism for development in the County to participate, which should also include a substantial contribution from this project that will directly access Lost Road and is anticipated to use it substantially in the future. 3. Participate financially in a funding mechanism to improve Cottonwood Canyon Road (south to Bundy Canyon). The Transportation Department would be pleased to work with the City to jointly develop a funding mechanism for improving Cottonwood Canyon Road. 4. The traffic study identifies that project traffic will use Holland Road to the east and references that the Pardee Homes project is responsible for the paving of Holland. It also states that the road will be paved up to the City boundary. The project should be conditioned to provide the paving in the event the Pardee project does not move forward (if the paving has not already been done) and the paving should extend east to meet the existing paved section beyond the City limits. S. If it is found that it is not feasible to improve either Lost Road or Cottonwood Canyon, alternative forms of access for the project need to be explored. We appreciate the opportunity to comment, please do not hesitate to contact us should you wish to discuss our comments. G: Juan C. Perez Deputy Director CC: Supervisor Bob Buster George A. Johnson, Director of Transportation JCP:dlp U.& .- AWIUXD'S SERVICE ~ ~ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office 6010 Hidden Valley Road Carlsbad, California 92011 (760) 431-9440 FAX (760) 431-5902 + 9618 California Department ofFish & Game Eastern Sierra Inland Deserts Region 3602 Inland Empire Blvd., Ste C-220 Ontario, California 91764 (909) 484-0459 FAX (909) 481-2945 In Reply Refer To: FWS/CDFG 5122.1 0, FE (G ~ --- ... T -.JJf.Jr! -~ DEe 2 1 2006 , ~~,i\';QFlA!{E,C!SI"'OD!!" i i n'A/^"""'JA'" ,hue IJ -----=_"..._ . ,1'dli1(J ~ 1 0J'i!'.l I .'-".~.dL;j'f : Ms. Wendy Worthey Principal Environmental Planner City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, California 92562 Subj: Draft Environmental hnpact Report, Canyon Hills Estates, City of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, Califomia Dear Ms. Worthey: The California Department ofFish and Game (Department) and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), hereafter collectively referred to as the Wildlife Agencies, have reviewed the Canyon Hills Estates Draft Environmental hnpact Report (DEIR). The Canyon Hills Estates proposed housing development is approximately 126.2 acres of a 252.5 acre site and is located in Sedco Hills, east oflnterstate 15 and south of Railroad Canyon Road. Access to the northeast comer of the proposed project will be via Cottonwood Canyon Road and access to the'northwest will be Navajo Springs Road. This project is proposed for annexation into the City'ofLake Elsinore. The primary concern and mandate of the Service is the protection of public fish and wildlife resources and their habitats. The Service has legal responsibility for the welfare of migratory birds, anadromous fish, and endangered animals and plants occurring in the United States. The Service is also responsible for administering the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The Department is a trustee agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and is responsible for ensuring appropriate conservation of fish and wflafife resources including rare, threatened, and endangered plant and animal species, pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act, and administers the Natural Community Conservation Planning Program (NCCP). On June 22,2004, the Service issued a section lO(a)(I)(B) permit for the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The MSHCP establishes a multiple species conservation program to minimize and mitigate habitat loss and the incidental take of cover~dspecies in association ..yith activiti~s covered under thepermit. The Department also issued Natural Community Conservation Plan ApprovaFahd Take Authoriza:tlofi foithe MSHCP as per SecHon2800;etseq:,oftheCalifoinia Fisharld'Game Cbde;' The ptoposdI' ' ' proj'ect o~curswithin the MSHCP Plail Area. Alth6ughthe proposed' projeCt is 'located Outside of TAKE PRIDEelt::::.;, INAMERICA~ Ms. Wendy Worthy (FWS/CDFG 5122.1) 2 the MSHCP Criteria Area, other MSHCP policies and procedures apply to the proposed project. These include, but are not limited to, the Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban Wildlands Interface (MSHCP section 6.1.4) and the Protection of Species Associated with RiparianlRiverine Areas and Vernal Pools policy (MSHCP section 6.1.2). The project, as proposed, will result in 4.23 acres of permanent impacts and 0.81 acres of temporary impacts to riparian/riverine habitat. Although the acreage is not explicitly stated in the DEIR, some ofthe riparian impacts would be to oak woodlands. Ofthe 8.4 acres of oak woodlands identified on the project site, 35 acres would be permanently impacted due to construction grading and fuel modification. An additional, 0.2 acres of oak woodland will be temporarily impacted. The majority of the impacts to oak riparian would occur from the development proposed within the southeastern portion of the project site along Drainage A, a perennia~ tributary to Cottonwood Canyon Creek. We recommend that other project design alternatives be thoroughly examined that would avoid and/or minimize impacts to Drainage A. The DEIR states that mitigation for the impacts to oak woodlands would consist of planting individual oaks based on a 4: I ratio. Oaks would be planted within the fuel modification zone, within the proposed park, and along the roadways. Oak woodlands typically support a high level of biodiversity and there is a temporal loss of habitat support functions associated with their removal due to the long time period required for re-growth of oak trees. Oak woodlands are recognized broadly as a sensitive habitat and the City of Lake Elsinore's Background Report supporting their General Plan recognizes coastal live oak woodlands as a sensitive habitat as well. As stated in our comments on the MSHCP Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (Determination), the temporal loss of habitat functions associated with oak woodlands is greater than for other riparian habitat types. We recommend that the oak riparian impacts be mitigated on the order of a 10 to I ratio. Oaks that are not associated with riparian areas and are larger than saplings should be also be avoided or mitigated in a manner that takes into account the long term impact of tree removal. It appeared from our site visit on December 4, 2006, that structurally complex oak habitat would be impacted. Structurally diverse oak woodlands can be important for nesting, roosting, denning, food storage, and plant-species habitat. We recommend that the planting of the oak trees be clustered such that they form a structured community rather than simply replacing individual trees along roadways, the park, and fuel modification zone. Although the central portion of Drainage A would be avoided, the proposed development and a road would bound this area. Weare concerned that the proposed development would alter the watershed of Drainage A and potentially degrade the avoided habitat areas. We recommend that measures be incorporated into the proposed project to maintain existing quantity and quality of flow rates into the stream. In addition, we recommend that alternatives be examined that would shift the fuel modification zone away from Drainage A to avoid riparian habitat including individual oak trees. Ms. Wendy Worthy (FWS/CDFG 5122.1) 3 In regards to the proposed 2.30 acres of onsite mitigation, we are concerned that this area may not adequately offset project related impacts. The proposed 2.30 acres of onsite mitigation will be surrounded by a park and is paralleled by Cottonwood Canyon Road, which will possibly be widened. The proposed widep.ing of the road and the potential increase in human use due to the park and the proposed development (which has its highest density adjacent to the Cottonwood Canyon Roa4) should be considered when assessing the contribution of this area to mitigation. We recommend measures be incorporated into the project that protect and conserve the onsite mitigation area for the purposes of wildlife habitat. In addition to the 2.30 acres of onsite mitigation, the project includes the purchase of 5 acres of offsite credits from an approved mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program. We are not aware of any approved mitigation bank from which the project can purchase credits to offset the proposed impacts to oak riparian woodlands. Most in-lieu fee programs that we are aware of are primarily restricted to enhancement efforts such as invasive plant removal and do not include habitat restoration. Enhancement credits for the acres needed for the proposed mitigation would not be adequate given the extent and type of habitat that would be impacted from project implementation. The proposed project will impact a large area that could support breeding migratory bird habitat. The DEIR states that the site will be cleared outside of the breeding season to minimize impacts to Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) species. However, the DEIR also states that if clearing is conducted during the breeding season, surveys will be conducted to locate the nests of breeding birds and these nests will be avoided through the use of a 100 to 300 foot buffer. Due to the large size of the project site, we anticipate that it will be difficult to find all of the nests of MBT A species on the site. Therefore, we recommend that vegetation clearing occur outside ofthe breeding season to ensure that no impacts occur to MBT A species. We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the" proposed project. If you have any questions pertaining to these comme~ts, please contact Scott Dawson of the Department at (909) 987-7764) or Kathleen Pollett ofthe Service at (760) 431-9440, extension 357. Sincerely, tJ~~{LL If Karen A. Goebel Assistant Field Supervisor U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service ~~M~7(~ Leslie MacNair Staff Environmental Scientist California Department of Fish and Game cc: Stephanie Gasca, PCR Services Corporation, Irvine, California W AMEN D. WILLIAMS General Manager-Chief Engineer 1995 MARKET STREET RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 951.955.1200 951.788.9965 FAX www.f1oodcontrol.co.riverside.ca.us December 26, 2006 ~ L~_ (G f€ II WJ re----.., r ----..------~~~ "i' ^ j I ./ f l,A N -', ?'1(17 ill i) L L LU"i li~ cTiYGF LA.!it-;:~;n;'f---.JRE ' P/l'\!",",,,. . ..JI/l) ~:~~~ ~-;. !~:.~::_~,._~--.,-~:~~2 ~~_ RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTR AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRI Ms. Wendy Worthey Principal Environmental Planner City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Dear Ms. Worthey: Re: Notice of Availability of a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Canyon Hills Estates Projtct This letter is written in response to the Notice of Availability of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Canyon Hills Estates Project. The proposed project would consist of General Plan Amendment 2006-04; Annexation No. 75; Zone Change/Pre-Zone No. 2005-09; approval of Tentative Tract Map 34249; and annexation of the project site by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. The project is bounded by the existing Canyon Hills Specific Plan development to the north, Pine Avenue to the east, and Crooked Arrow Drive and Crab Hollow Circle to the west and south, respectively. The site is located in unincorporated Riverside County adjacent to the southern City limits of the city of Lake Elsinore. The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) has the following comment/concern that should be addressed in the DEIR: Page 3.7-19 of the DEIR states that all drainage facilities shall be constructed to District standards. It should be noted that the District does not normally plan check or recommend conditions for land use cases in incorporated cities. The District will only assume an advisory role and comment on items of specific interest to the District, including MDP facilities or other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be considered a logical component or extension of a master plan system, upon written request from the Cities. Thank you for the opportunity to review the DEIR. Please forward any subsequent environmental documents regarding the project to my attention at this office. Any further questions concerning this letter may be referred to Jason Swenson at 951.955.8082 or me at 951.955.1233. Very truly yours, Al~ J.., TERESA TUNG Senior Civil Engineer c: TLMA Attn: David Mares JDS:mcv P8\111244' * tWiN Protecting Wildomar Independence Wildomar Incorporation Now (909) 330-03551 P.O. Box 14761 Wildomar, CA 92595 December 27, 2006 Kirt A. Coury Project Planner City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Ref: Draft EIR for Canyon Hills Estates (State Clearinahouse # 2006051073) Mr. Coury: Below is my response to the DEIR referenced above. Please respond in writing to my questions and concerns. A. Scope of Project I request a clarification on the scope of the project: At the April 11, 2006 City of Lake Elsinore City Council meeting, Rolf Preisendanz (Director, Community Development) informed all present that Tract Map 34249 had been withdrawn from documents pertaining to this project (General Plan Amendment 2005-8, Zone Change (Pre-Zone) No. 2005-09, Annexation No. 75 and Negative Declaration No. 2006-02), the application money had been returned to the developer (Trumark) and that no tract was being processed. At the LAFCO SOl hearing, it was stated there was not a project - the consideration for LAFCO Commissioners was undeveloped land only. Without benefit of a scoping meeting or public hearing of any type specific to the current project as it is described in the DEIR noted above, we now have a draft EIR for something called Canyon Hills Estates, which is deemed a specific plan. The DEIR indicates it is using concerns and comments brought up at previous public hearings related to this project. Those concerns and comments were specific only to those conceptual plans presented at that time; clearly the scope of the project has changed. How can the City possibly believe they are meeting their legal obligation under CEQA statutes when there has been no public presentation, hearing or scoping meeting to present the revised project plan and revised project scope and obtain comments/questions/ concerns specific to these changes? Kit Coury - Project Planner Canyon Hills Estates DEIR - Comment Ltr. Dec. 27,2006 Page 2 I do not believe it would be appropriate to submit comments on the Canyon Hills Estates DEIR and Technical Appendices other than what I have outlined in this letter until there has been a public scoping meeting/hearing on the revised project plans. I would therefore request that the City of Lake Elsinore extend the comment period for the Canyon Hills Estates DEIR until such time as the legal public hearing process has been held and public comments are duly noted and responded to in a revised DEIR. I look forward to your written response to these comments. Respectfully submitted, WILDOMAR INCORPORATION NOW Sheryl Ade Secretary cc Rolf Preisendanz, Director, Lake Elsinore Comm. Devel. Dept. Robert Brady, City Manager Bob Buster, Supervisor, 1st District, County of Riverside George Johnson, Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District Bob Cashman, Chair,Wildomar Incorporation Now Rick Estes, President, Wildomar Chamber of Commerce Dan Wildish, Wild ish & Nialyis File Page 1 of1 Kirt Coury From: TownShip Center [TownshipCenter@Earthlink.net] Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 12:08 PM To: Sheryl Ade Cc: Marc Miller; Sheryl Ade Subject: Canyon Hills Estates DEIR Comment Sheryl: I am aghast at the consistent pedantic manipulation and mis-statements of the real and current CEQA and State Planning Laws and how County and LAFCO ignoring both Wildomar's position and there own cityhood requirements. Personally I think both LE and the developers have twisted CEQA to mean submitting 'constant exceptions qualifies anything'. Mter lengthily discussions on the urbani rural-equestrian conflict coming from the Christiansen's questionable annexation on Menifee, Quail and Paloma Valleys side of the Canyon Hills SP, I am impressed, but dismayed, at Lake E's staff and counsels' hard line belief in their Specific Plan land use designation as being a panacea! My personal, but highly qualified, opinion of this 'magic potion' is not the 'universal remedy' as it is touted to be. 'Specific'by any thesaurus means 'unambiguous~ which is not a word I would use to define these any Specific Plan in their consistent changes, updates, extensions, modifications or expansions, and worst restatements or rewrites or conditions of development most often without any public review and most often to developers benefit. Most I have found were rewritten by the developer's planners or advising engineers! By all the guidelines, policies, rules, regulations and laws I know of, any thing beyond the original requires a complete new and contemporaneous look-see by all parties. Anything differentfrom the original plan as accepted through the public process is subject to all controls up to the date offinal filing of plans, permits and maps! That includes all recent case law! This hair splitting of barely meeting the mis-stated requirements has completely overshadowed the responsibility everyone has to the existing rural/equestrian community and the obvious propriety right Wildomar was assigned in this Trumark case. LAFCO and County continue to ignore both Wildomar and Menifee Valley in these annexations. I believe both the State Planning office and the Attorney General should get involved ASAP! Bill Zeidlik 1/212007 PECHANGA INDIAN RESERVATION Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians General Counsel John L. Macarro OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL Post Office Box 1477 · Temecula. CA 92593 Telephone (951) 676-2768 Ext. 2138 Fax (951) 587-8162 Deputy General Counsel James E. Cohen Laura Y. Miranda February 8, 2006 Sent via Email Wendy Worthey, Principal Environmental Planner City of Lake Elsinore Planning Department 130 Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Re: Pechanga Tribe's comments on Canyon Hills Estates DEIR, November 2006 Dear Ms. Worthy: This comment letter is submitted by the Pechanga Band of Luisefio Indians (hereinafter, "Pechanga Tribe"), a federally recognized Indian tribe and sovereign government. The Pechanga Tribe is formally requesting, pursuant to Public Resources Code ~21 092.2, to be notified and involved in the entire CEQA environmental review process for the duration of the above referenced project (the "Project"), and requests to receive notices of all public comment periods and public hearings. We submit the following comments on the above listed document for the Project. We request that all comments be part of the official record for the approval of this Project The Pechanga Tribe is not opposed to this development project. The Pechanga Tribe's primary concerns stem from the project's likely impacts on Native American cultural resources. The Pechanga Tribe is concerned about both the protection of unique and irreplaceable cultural resources, such as Luisefio village sites and archaeological items which would be displaced by ground-disturbing work on the project, and on the proper and lawful treatment of cultural items, Native American human remains and sacred items likely to be discovered in the course of the work. THE LEAD AGENCY MUST INCLUDE AND CONSULT WITH THE TRIBE IN ITS REVIEW PROCESS It has been the intent of the Federal Governmentl and the State of Califomia2 that Indian tribes be consulted with regard to issues which impact cultural and spiritual resources, as well as other governmental concerns. The responsibility to consult with Indian tribes stems from the unique government-to-government relationship between the United States and Indian tribes. This arises when tribal interests are affected by the actions of governmental agencies and departments such as approval of General Plans, Specific Plans and EIRs. In this case, it is undisputed that the project lies within the Luiseiio tribe's traditional territory. Therefore, in order to comply with CEQA and other applicable Federal and California law, it is imperative that the Lead Agency consult with the Tribe in order to guarantee an adequate basis of knowledge for an appropriate evaluation of the project effects, as well as generating adequate policies and mitigation measures. In addition, if the Project requires a 401 or 404 permit or some similar action which triggers federal law, then the National Historic Preservation Act (16 D.S.C. ~~ 470 et. seq) requires that a Section 106 review be performed for all Federal undertakings. (16 V.S.C. 470w(7); 36 CFR ~800.16(y)) The issuance of permits such as a Section 401 or 404 permit are considered undertakings under Section 106. Id. As such, the Army Corps, and the City as applicant, must initiate the Section 106 review process, which includes consultation with, among others, federally-recognized Indian tribes. (Id. at ~800.16(f) and (m)). Consultation is required whether the property in question is on or off tribal lands (Id. at ~800.2(cX2)(ii)). THE CITY OF MURRIETA MUST CONSULT WITH THE PECHANGA TRIBE PURSUANT TO CAL. GOVT. C. 6665351.65352. 65352.3. AND 65352.4 (SENATE BILL 18 - TRADITIONAL TRIBAL CULTURAL PLACES LAW) The Lead Agency, the City of Murrieta, is required to consult with the Pechanga Tribe pursuant to a State law entitled Traditional Tribal Cultural Places (also known as SB 18) (Cal. Govt. C. ~ 65352.3) prior to adoption or amendment of a general plan or a specific plan and when a scared site is placed in Open Space. Such consultation shall be for the purposes of identifying any Native American sacred places and any geographical areas which could potentially yield sacred places, identifying proper means of treatment and management of such places, and to ensure the protection and preservation of such places through agreed upon mitigation (Cal. Govt. C. 65352.3; SB 18, Chapter 90S, Section 1(4)(b)(3)). All official consultations shall be government"to"government, meaning they shall be directly between the Tribe and the Lead Agency; and seeking agreement where feasible (Cal. Govt. C. ~ 65352.4; SB 18, Chapter 905, Section I See Executive Memorandum of April 29, 1994 on Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments and Executive Order of November 6, 2000 on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments. 2 See California Public Resource Code 95097.9 et seq. 1 (4)(b)(3)). The DEIR states that the City andlor Applicant have received no request for SB 18 consultation (DEIR, November 2006, Page 3.11-2). This is not true. The Pechanga Tribe submitted a request for consultation pursuant to SB 18 to City Planner Kirt Coury on 2/21/06. To this date the Tribe has not received a response to this letter nor have we received any contact from the City or the Applicant about commencing with the SB 18 consultation. Further, the Tribe noticed the 2121106 letter was not part of the public record of approval for this Project. We request that it be made part of the public record and that the City and the Applicant contact us to begin such consultations. We further request that such consultations be completed prior to any approval of this Project. Lastly, any such information conveyed to the Lead Agency concerning Native American sacred places shall be confidential in terms of the specific identity, location, character, and use of those places and associated features and objects. Such information shall not be subject to public disclosure pursuant the California Public Records Act (Cal. Govt. C. 6254(r)). THE PECHANGA TRIBE IS CULTURALLY AFFILIATED WITH THE PROJECf AREA The Pechanga Tribe has a legal and cultural interest in the proper protection of sacred places and all Luiseno cultural resources. The Tribe is concerned about both the protection of unique and irreplaceable cultural resources, such as Luiseno village sites and archaeological items which will be displaced by development, and on the proper and lawful treatment of cultural items, Native American human remains and sacred items likely to be discovered in the course of development and improvements within the City. The PechangalLuiseno people traditionally occupied the geographical area known today as the City Lake Elsinore and the surrounding area for thousands of years. This is verified through stories and songs of the Pechanga p~ople that are cultural evidence ofthe Tribe's cultural affiliation with these lands. Occupation is also evidenced through anthropological studies, archaeological studies, and histories of the area, including the archeological assessments prepared for this Project (Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Canyon Hills Estates, September 22,2006, Pg. 3). In addition, Tribal ties to these territories have been maintained to the present day through cultural and governmental actions. The Tribe would welcome the opportunity to meet with the City andlor Applicant to further explain and provide documentation concerning our specific cultural affiliation to lands within your jurisdiction. PROJECT IMP ACTS TO CULTURAL RESOURCES The Pechanga Tribe asserts that the Project area contains cultural resources that must be properly evaluated and assessed pursuant to the CEQA. It is the Tribe's position that the DEIR has failed to do this, and that the conclusions and mitigation measures contained with the DEIR are inadequate. Per the Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment. there is at least one archeological site on the property with another site. CA-RIV 4154. located either on the edge of the property or within the Project property (Phase I Report, Page 8). Thus far. the only archeological evaluation that has been completed is a Phase I surface survey and a site records search. The site records search resulted in the conclusion that "none of the Project APE has been previously surveyed" (Phase I Report. Page 7). This fact coupled with the fact that this area has not been subject to a Phase II test program leads the Tribe to believe that the proposed mitigation measures are likely inadequate or incomplete mitigation pursuant to the CEQA. Until the Phase II program has been completed the City cannot set appropriate mitigation as the specifics of the sites are not fully known. It is not prudent to defer the Phase II testing to post-project approval as this could be construed as "deferred mitigation" pursuant to CEQA, which is only allowed in certain circumstances. Here we have a situation where the due diligence concerning the nature of the cultural resources can be completed to prior to Project approval. which will give the City has a full understanding of the impacts to cultural resources and the potential for inadvertent discoveries. It is prudent to gather all information possible prior to Project approval so that all issues can be dealt with through the CEQA process. For example. if the Phase II is allowed to be completed post-project approval the City may not be able to condition the project appropriately without going through another approval process. In addition. if resources are uncovered of a nature not analyzed or assessed in the DEIR another DEIR process may be required anyway. The only type of mitigation concerning cultural resources that may make sense to defer is a process for inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources, but even in that case the process should be as detailed as possible. In the interest of time and the goal to accurately and adequately perform an environmental assessment. the Tribe asserts that the Phase II must be co"mpleted prior to Project approval, so that a clear understanding of Project impacts can be analyzed and appropriate mitigation can be set. The DEIR recommends that the sites be treated as "significant" or "unique" until the Phase II proves otherwise. It is the Tribe's contention that the Phase II will likely result in the cultural resources being "unique" or "significant" pursuant to CEQA. As such, any Phase II testing and mitigation measures should be created accordingly. This area is a number of cultural resources sites in the vicinity as well as two sites on and immediately surrounding the Project property. In addition. the topography and vegetation is indicative of subsurface resources. As stated above. the area known as. and immediately sUlTounding. the City of Lake Elsinore is culturally important to the Tribe as many of our oral histories. including our creation stories tell of Luiseno places in the area. These places are likely to contain resources that are of an archeological and cultural importance to the Tribe. We commend the City for proposing a mitigation measure to preserve the archeological/cultural site known as TS-Ol. However, the DEIR calls for only avoidance of certain portions of the archeological/cultural site designated at TS-O 1. The Tribe is in disagreement with this conclusion for two reasons. First. the full nature of the site is not known without a Phase II. In addition, because Phase II subsurface testing has not been completed the exact site boundaries are not known. The City should make provisions for determining this exact site boundary and the full nature of the site, and should make provisions for the possibility that part of the site may be subsurface and may extend beyond what is believed to be the current boundary. Second, the Tribe is also in disagreement because the emphasis is only on preserving the portion of the site that contains a large feature, a bedrock mortar feature (DEIR, November 2006, Page 3.11-4, mitigation measure PDF 3.11-1). This is not appropriate mitigation because the other portions contain artifacts and resources that are no less important than the bedrock mortar. This emphasis on the scientific value of the site rather than both the archeological value and the cultural significance is insulting and an inappropriate form of mitigation. Moreover, if one was going to attempt to make a value judgment regarding the "most important" portions of the site there is an argument that the most important part may not even be the bedrock mortar, but a different portion. This value judgment has been made by only the archeologist and does not employ any input by the Pechanga Tribe or any application ofthe cultural significance of the area. The Tribe is in support of preservation of the entire site, surface and subsurface, currently known and unknown. In addition, the Pechanga Tribe requests that in the case of discovery of new or additional sites or resources that the Lead Agency commit to re-evaluating the Project impacts to cultural resources and adopting appropriate mitigation measures to address such inadvertent discoveries. The Pechanga Tribe intends to assert its legal rights with respect to additional finds of significant sites or cultural resources which are of sacred and ceremonial significance to the Pechanga Tribe. The Tribe would also like to point out that a preferred method of treatment for archeological sites according to the CEQA is avoidance (California Public Resources Code ~21 083.1), and that this is in agreement with the Tribe's practices and policies concerning cultural. resources. PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES INADEOUATE The Pechanga Tribe asserts that the proposed mitigation measures are inadequate to bring this Project in compliance with the CEQA. The mitigation measures do not take into account the cultural significance of the resources, but focus on the scientific value and practices of archeology. All of the mitigation measures do not provide for treatment of the resources in a culturally appropriate manner, i.e. no mechanisms to take into account Tribe's treatment practices and preferences, and no acknowledgement that all resources, including ceremonial and sacred resources should be treated in accordance with tribal customs and traditions as they are affiliated to a present-day community that retains practicing beliefs and customs associated with such resources. Moreover, it is common practice of the lead agencies in our area to require repatriation of the resources back to the affiliated Indian tribe and to protect sacred and ceremonial places. The Pechanga Tribe requests the same here, and requests a requirement that the resources, especially sacred and ceremonial resources be relinquished to the Pechanga Tribe for appropriate treatment. The Pechanga Tribe is adamantly opposed to any type of scientific testing on Native American human remains, ceremonial cultural resources and sacred cultural resources. Such testing is not required or necessary to meet the legal obligations of this Project, and should not be required in any mitigation measures or conditions for this Project. The Pechanga Tribe requests that any requirement for the resources be curated or housed at a curatorial facility pursuant to federal law be removed from the mitigation measures and conditions. There is no such federal requirement for a project of this nature. Further, the Pechanga Tribe believes that ifhuman remains are discovered, State law would apply and the mitigation measures must account for this. According to the California Public Resources Code, ~ 5097.98, if Native American human remains are discovered, the Native American Heritage commission must name a "most likely descendant," who shall be consulted as to the appropriate disposition of the remains. Given the Project's location in Pechanga territory, the Pechanga Tribe intends to assert its right pursuant to California law with regard to any remains or items discovered in the course of this project. Because the cultural resources and Project area are within the traditional territory of the Pechanga Tribe, it is prudent for the City to include the Pechanga Tribe as a partner in mitigating the Project impacts to cultural resources as the CEQA authorizes such action (CEQA Guidelines, 15086(b)). The current mitigation measures fail to include Pechanga in a consistent manner. Not clarifying the role of the Tribe positions the City for a possible violation of State law, including CEQA. The Tribe must be allowed to be involved and participate with the Lead Agency and the Project Applicant in developing all monitoring and mitigation plans for the duration of the Project. Further, given the potential for archaeological resources within the Project area, it is the position of the Pechanga Tribe that Pechanga tribal monitors should be required to be present prior to and during all ground-disturbing activities conducted in connection with the project, including any archeological testing performed, not just for the areas immediately surrounding known archeological sites. It is further the position of the Pechanga Tribe that an Agreement regarding appropriate treatment of cultural resources be drafted and entered into. In addition, since no subsurface archeological surveys were conducted for the purposes of the cultural resources assessment, grading may reveal additional significant archaeological resources and sites which may be eligible for inclusion in the historic site register, and may contain human remains or sacred items. Therefore, we request that the Lead Agency commit to evaluating Project environmental impacts to any cultural sites that are discovered during archeological testing and grading, and to adopt appropriate mitigation for such sites, in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe. CEQA authorizes a Lead Agency to adopt provisions for responding to "accidental discoveries" or inadvertent discoveries during construction. We ask for mitigations measures to account for inadvertent discoveries of this nature as we believe there is a good likelihood of such discoveries. REQUESTED MITIGATION Given that Luiseno cultural resources will be affected by the Project, the Pechanga Tribe, for the reasons stated ahove, requests the following changes to the currently proposed mitigation measures (strike-outs are deletions and underlines are additions): MM 3.11.1a: Prior ta the issuanoe of any gradiag penaits, a preservatioa easement shall be established ta restrict the Hse &ad Ge"/elepmen.t of Lee-us 3 of TS-OI shall be avoided and preserved-:-A including alO meter buffer surroundine: the boundaries of TS-O 1 outside the LOCHS area shall he established to protect the delineated site area and any associate subsurface components. Protective fencing during construction shall be provided to protect Leoos 3TS-OI. Ia additiea, tmy smaee aaG/or soosurfaee artifacts shaII be oelleetea. analyzed, ana reflocted te a.leid the iadiree-t impaets resulting from unalHhorized eoUeeting. These reeo.leFed artifaets shall be hOBsed at a curatorial facility in oomplianee with 3€i CPR 79. MM 3.11-1b: Prior to Project approval the issuance of any gradiag permits, a Phase II cultural resources testing and evaluation program shall be conducted for TS-O I and TS- 02. The Phase II evaluation plan shall contain a research design and field methodology designed ta reeover data amendable to testiag the site's ability to yield answers to q1:lestions of interest to the puelio and .'fJr scientific eommunityevaluate the significance of the sites pursaant to applicable law. includine: CEOA. and in accordance with general archeoloe:ical reporting standards for such. Testiag sliall iaelude sapplemental mappiag, s1:lffaee eoIleetiofts ','lith spatial eontrols, sabsarfaee elcea-vatioas, recoyery of SJ3eeial samples (e.g. eamon ana/or sail samples), aaalysis, flfld report pl'681:letioa presefttiag the results of the Phase II studies. If Phase II testing detennines the presence of a "unique archaeological resource" under Public Resources Code Section 21083.2, the report shall include recommended measures to avoid or mitigate impacts to the sites. Where avoiElanee of sigaifieant l'esouroes is aot feasible, Phase III iB',estiga.tioRS (data recovery) shall be oompleted. All testing and evaluation shall be supervised by an individual or individuals meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards as a qualified prehistoric archaeologist for Site TS-Ol and as an historic archaeologist for Site TS-02 and/or a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RP A) with similar qualifications. MM 3.11-Ie: If the Phase II cultural resources evaluation program detennines that a given resource is eligible for listing on the California Registry of Historic Resources (CRHR) and/or local listings and therefore meets the definition of an "historical resource," or if there is a detennination by the City in consultation with the Pechanfta Tribe that a resource is "unique" pursuant to CEOA or other applicable law. an impact determination shall be made prior to issuanee of grading perm.itsProiect approval. If the impacts are determined to be significant, a treatmem: plan shall beappropriate mitigation measures shall be desiR:ned in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe implemented to mitigate impacts to below a level of significance with nreservation as the preferred mitigation. If preservation tlKough easement is not f-easiblethe chosen alternative. ~data recovery program shall be implemented. The data recovery program shall entail, at a minimum, the collection of surface materials and a sufficient sample of buried materials, analysis. and reporting of recovered materials consistent with the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring A2I'eement by and between the Proiect Apolicant and the Pechanga Tribe reauired in MM 3.11 ~2a. 85 well as c1:lfation of these materials at a cmarorial fooility m complianee .....i-tk 36 CFR 79. MM 3.11~ld: As reEf\:lireG m the Prior to issuance of grading permit(s) for the Proiect, the Proiect Applicant shall retain an archaeological monitoriag shall be eondueted as part of aay grOlmG disturbanee iael1:lding topsoil disturbances monitor to monitor all ground- disturbing activities with special emphasis on the vicinity of TS-O1 and TS~02 in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation (see MM 3.11-1b AND 3.II-Ic). MM 3.H-Ie: Mitigation Measures 3.11-2a through 3.1l-2c include provisions for Native American consultation and monitoring. and shall apply to all activities undertaken with respect to Site TS-O 1. MM 3.11-2a: At least 30 days prior to seeking a grading permit, the project applicant shall contact the Pechanga Band ofLuiseno Indians for the purpose of notifying the Tribe of the grading. excavation, and monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Lake Elsinore and the Pechanga Band of Luiseiio Indians to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the treatment of known cultural resources. the designation, responsibilities. and participation of Native monitors during grading, excavation. and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation; and treatment and fmal disposition of any cultural resources. sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. The City of Lake Elsinore shall be the final arbiter of any disputes concerning the provisions included in the Agreement. MM 3.11-2b: Prior to issuance of any grading permit. the project archaeologist shall file a pre-grading report with the City and County (if required) to document the proposed methodology for grading activity observation. Said methodology shall include the requirement for a qualified archaeological monitor to be present and to have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. In accordance with the Agreement required in MM 3.11-2a, the archaeological monitor's authority to stop and redirect grading will be exercised in consultation with the Pechanga Band of Luiseiio Indians in order to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. Tribal monitors from the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities, and shall also have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities in consultation with the project archaeologist MM 3.1l-2c: If human remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 shall apply and no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The Riverside County Coroner shall be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or hislher authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection and provide its recommendations pursuant to Public Resourced Code 5097.98 ..vi-t:hia 2<1 hams af BotifieatieB. by the N..\HC. The MLD may reoommend seieatifie removal and Beooestruoti'/e analysis of human remains and items associated with Nati'/e .^..meriean burials. Adherence to Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 is required as a matter of course. In addition, we request to add the following three (3) mitigation measures: The landowner agrees to relinQuish ownership of all cultural resources. including all Luisefio sacred items. burial !loods and all archeological artifacts that are found on the Project area to the Pechanga Band of Luisefio Indians for proper treatment and disposition. All sacred sites within the Proiect area are to be avoided and preserved. If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeological resources are discovered during grading. the Developer. the Proiect archaeologist. and the Pechan!la Band of Luiseno Indians shall assess the significance of such resources and shall meet and confer re!lardin!l the mitigation for such resources. If the Developer and the Pechanga Band cannot agree on the sisznificance or the mitigation for such resources. these issues will be presented to the City Planning Director for decision. The Planning Director shall make his decision based. on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources and shall take into account the relillious beliefs. customs and practices of the Pechan!la Band. The decision of the Planning Director shall be appealable to the City of Lake Elsinore. The Pechanga Tribe looks forward to working together with the City of Lake Elsinore in protecting the invaluable Luisefio cultural resources found in the Project area. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (951) 676-2768, Ext. 2137. Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments. Sincerely, Qfk. Deputy cc: Dale Foster, Pechanga Cultural Resources Analyst Jeremy Krout, RGP Planning & Development Services CANYON HillS ESTATES City of Lake Elsinore, California RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR INTRODUCTION The Canyon Hills Estates (CHE) Draft EIR dated November 2006 was made available for public review and comment pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Section 15087) from November 10 to December 27, 2006. During this public review period, the City of Lake Elsinore, as the CEQA Lead Agency, received fourteen (14) comment letters and/or emails on the Draft EIR from public agencies, organizations, tribes, and individuals. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines 915088, the City of Lake Elsinore has evaluated the comments and has prepared written responses to each pertinent comment relating to the adequacy of the environmental analysis contained in the Draft EIR. The public review comment period of the CEQA process serves an important and essential role. Comments are solicited under CEQA for the purposes of disclosing additional possible impacts, alternatives, or mitigation measures. Comments need to be supported by substantial evidence such as data, references, expert opinion, or other facts. This allows the Lead Agency to assess the impacts of a project based on the analysis provided by other responsible or concerned agencies and provides the opportunity to amplify and explain better the analysis that the Lead Agency has undertaken to determine the potential environmental impacts of a project. To that extent, these responses to comments are intended to provide complete and thorough explanations to commenting agencies and individuals and to improve the overall understanding of the project for the decision-making body. The following agencies, organizations, and interested persons submitted comments during the 45- day public review period. Each comment document is identified with a letter in the upper right corner of the first page of the letter. The individual comments in each comment document have been given reference numbers that appear in the margin next to the bracketed comment. Agency or Organization A. State of California - Health and Human Services Agency, Department of Health Services (CDHS) B. The Gas Company Name Bridget Binning CDHS Environmental Review Unit Date Nov. 17, 2006 Dick Gebhardt Technical Services Supervisor Nov. 20, 2006 C. - Katherine Celli Dec. 19,2006 Dec. 7 & 20, 2006 D. State of California - Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Greg Holmes, Unit Chief So. Cal. Cleanup Operations Branch - Cypress Office E. Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) Terese Quintanar District Secretary/Administrative Services Supervisor Nov. 22, 2006 Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 \ , EXH I B Ire RtC-l F State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Agency or Organization Name Date F. Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians Erica Helms Nov. 30, 2006 Soboba Cultural Resources Dept. G. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Karen A. Goebel Dec. 21, 2006 {USFWS)/California Department of Fish & Assistant Field Supervisor (USFWS) Game (CDFG) Leslie MacNair Staff Environmental Scientist (CDFG) H. County of Riverside Transportation and Juan C. Perez Dec. 21, 2006 Land Management Agency, Transportation Deputy Director Department I. Wildomar Incorporation Now (WIN) Sheryl Ade Dec. 27, 2006 Secretary J. Pechanga Indian Reservation, Temecula Laura Miranda Feb. 8, 2006 Band of Luiseno Mission Indians Deputy General Counsel (sic) K. Southern California Association of Sylvia Patsaouras Dec. 15,2006 Governments (SCAG) Manager, Environmental Division L. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Teresa Tung Dec. 26, 2006 Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) Senior Civil Engineer M. Lake Elsinore Unified School District Kira Falsetto Nov. 15,2005 Assistant Director, Facilities Planning (sic) N. State of California - Governor's Office of Terry Roberts, Director Dec. 28, 2006 Planning and Research, State Director, State Clearinghouse Clearinghouse and Planning Unit Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake ElsInore January 2007 Page RtC-2 State ClearInghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Comment Document A State of Califomla-Health and Human Services Agency Department of Hearth Services November 17, 2006 fl'i ;~~.--ii7"({~-.'i~;.T;i;-"'=-:;;;-' "', ['.. ',J; .. ". \".' ':"-. r.......t II ;:J r"':':- '''_n.!..y.j':l i n I ILl ~i' ..... !III'/ l' L;":,,,,,:' .._ /81/, ",..(>".;;,.,.,........,,-.1 ---.--~L:~;~:i;;;.cji.;;:i~_._._J SANDRA SHEWRY DIrector ARNOLDSCHWARZENEGGER Governor Wendy Worthey City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 RE: Canyon Hills Estates - SCH2006051 073 The Califomia Department of Health Services (CDHS) Is in receipt of the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the above project. [If the City of Lake Elsinore plans to develop a new water supply well or make A1 modifications to the existing domestic water treatment system to serve the Canyon Hills Estates project site, an application to amend the water system permit must be reviewed and approved by the CDHS Riverside District Office. These future developments may be subject to separate environmental review. Please contact the office at (619) 525-4159 for further information. Sincerely, ~tflM 16c<}(/- Bridget s(rlriing [I Califomia Department of Health Services Environmental Review Unit Division of Drinking Water and Environmental Managemant Environmental Review Unit/Slate Revol\llng FundJProp 50 1616 Capitol Avenue, MS 7418, P.O. Box 997413, Sacramento CA 95899-7413 (916) 449.5600 Fax; (916)446-5656 IntAmAt Addrnss: www.rlhll.m.nnv/n:;/rldWf!m Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-3 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051.073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Ms. Worthey Page 2 November 17,2006 cc: State Clearinghouse P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812-0613 Steve Williams, District Engineer CDHS Riverside 1350 Front Street, Room 2050 San Diego, CA 92101 Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-4 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response to Comment Document A State of California - Health and Human Services Agency, Department of Health Services (DHS) November 17, 2006 Response No. A 1 There is no existing domestic water treatment system or other water facilities on-site (EIR Section 3.12.5.2). The Project does not propose construction of any groundwater wells because public water sources will be provided to the Project Site via transmission mains from the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EIR Section 3.7.5.5). Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-5 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Comment Document B MThe Gas ..' (....~. Southern C..llfornia Gas Co~11Y :981 W.llIC)onia Avr.nu~ RMlands. CA 92374-9"20 Malting Address: PO Box 3003 Roal"".,. CA 92373'0306 (~ A Q.- Sempra Energtutili1Y November 20, 2006 Attention; Wendy Worthey [Sl-----,,--- --=---- m1r "~._!fJjl ~;!iJ ....L' " r:[J' .1 " /'- ~it~.:t~~_1 City of Lake Elsinore Community Development Department 130 South Main Street bke Elsinore, CA 92530 Re: (EIR) Canyon Hills Estatcs- Tract Map 34249 61 [ Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the above-referenced project. Please note that Southern California Gas Company has facilities in the area where the above named project is proposed. Gas service to the project could be provided without any significant impact on the environment. The SCIvice would be in accordance with the Company's policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commis.c;ion at the time contractual arrangements are made. You should be aware that this letter is not to be interpreted as a contractual commitment to serve the proposed project, but only as an informational service. The availability of natural gas service, as set forth in this letter, is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, The Soutbern California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission. We can also be affected by actions of federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action, which affects gas supply, or the conditions under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance with revised conditions. 82 Typical demand use for: a. Residential (System Area Average/Use Per Meter) Yearlv Single Family 799 therms/year dwelling unit Multi-Family 4 or less units 482 therms/year dwelling unit Multi-Family 5 or more units 483 thernJSlyear dwelling unit These averages are based on total gas consumption in residential units seJVed by Southern California Gas Company, and it should not be implied that any particular home, apartment or tract of homes will use these amounts of energy. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-6 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR 82 [ November 20, 2006 Page 2 b. Commercial Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-7 Due to the fact that construction varies so widely (a glass building vs. a heavily insulated building) and there is such a wide variation in types of materials and, a typical demand figure is not available for this type of construction. Calculations would need to be made after the building has been designed. We have Demand Side Management programs available to commercial/industrial customers to provide assistance in selecting the most effective applications of energy of our energy conservation progmms, please contact our Commercialllndusuial Support Center at 1-800-GAS- 2000. Sincerely, d j /1 C!fl!!/1J~-- Dick Gebharl Technical Services Supervisor State C/earfnghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response to Comment Document B The Gas Company November 20, 2006 Response No. 81 The comment states that gas service to the Project could be provided without any significant impact on the environment. Consistent with the comment, Section 3.12.7 of the Draft EIR states that project-specific impacts to energy utilities, including gas, are less than significant. Section 3.12.8 of the Draft EIR states that the Project will not cause cumulatively considerable impacts on energy utilities or resources, including gas. Response No. 82 No response is required because the comment does not address environmental issues. Canyon Hflls Estates Cfty of Lake Elsfnore January 2007 Page RtC-8 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Comment Document C ---Original Message-- From: Katherine [mailto:kather\ne@nbgl.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 8:14 AM To: Kirt Coury $ubjed:: Canyon Hills Estates - Noted Opposition Importance: High RE: Canyon Hills Estates: Environmental Impact Report No. 2006-02, General Plan Amendment No. 2006-04, Specific Plan No. 2006-01 and Tentative Tract Map No. 34249 C1 Mr. CouIY, [lam writing to you today to have mt objection on the above mentioned project filed as a matter public record. I have been in objection Since the inception of this Idea and any subsequent plans to build high- del15ity homes in this area. The community is vehemently opposed as I have made a matter of record with over 700 signatures to this fact. [Canyon Hills Residents are not opposed to growth that is responsible and reasonable however we are and I am opposed to this project as it does not improve the area. It will overcrowd the OOIl'lllUlity, [overburden it's residents with a myriad of traffic problems & overcrowding of schools. In addtion to plummeting property values of the local nieghbrohoods. I would respectfully request that the Planning Commission take all the residents in the area's concers in to mind and vote against this project. Thank you, Katherine Celli 32013 Cottage Glen Drive Lake Elsinore, Ca 92532 C2 C3 htlMlrlna C.III 8usIn.. D....lopm.nt a Compliance Tel.: 323.850.2200 FAX: 323.850.2285 www na.ai ~Gm CONI'ID!!NTIAUTY NOT!!: The in'ormation contained In mis message is legally privileged and conlidentiallnformation intended only 'or me use 0' me indlvidual(s) or entity nemed in this document. If you have rwceived this in error, pI.as. advise the sander by e.mall or phone and immediately delete this message and any attachments without copying or disclosing me contenlS. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-9 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response to Comment Document C Katherine Celli December 19, 2006 Response No. C1 No response is required because the comment does not address environmental issues. The decision on the Project's merits will be made by the City's decision-makers, who will consider all the comments. Response No. C2 The potential for traffic impacts as a result of the project is addressed in Draft EIR Section 3.3 (Traffic and Circulation). The Draft EIR explains that the Proposed Project will contribute to the Citywide Transportation Impact Fee program and will not create adverse local traffic conditions in surrounding neighborhoods. The potential for school overcrowding as a result of the project is addressed in Draft EIR Section 3.13 (public Services). Per the July 2004 LEUSD School Facilities Master Plan, existing school facilities are insufficient to serve students generated from both existing and future residential development. Therefore, the LEUSD will be expanding and/or upgrading/modernizing existing facilities and building new schools to accommodate future growth. The LEUSD has established school impact mitigation fees in the amount of $3.18 per square foot for residential construction. The Project will also be forming a Communities Facilities District (CFD) with LEUSD, which will increase the school facility fee from $3.18 to $4.35 per square foot and ensure that the entirety of the school facility fees will be paid at the time of issuance of the first building permit. Impacts to property values are not an environmental issue and are the opinion of the commenter. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-l0 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Comment Document D e '\. \ I ~~ ~ Linda S. Adams Secretary lor Environmental ProlecUon Maureen F. Gorsen, Director 5796 Corporate Avenue Cypress, California 90630 Department of Toxic Substances Control December 20, 2006 ~r. ~~. ~-L.W ~r' LC2 5 J:7~! CITY Oi(Ali-<--~.!J ..----_ PLANNiNG'- .l,SI.tanE ~ Ms. Wendy Worthey City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street lake Elsinore, California 92530 NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR CANYON HILLS ESTATES (SCH#2006051073) Dear Ms. Worthey: The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has received your submitted (ErR) document for the above-mentioned project. The proposed project includes several components, as follows: . · General Plan Amendment No.2006-04. Change the Project Site land use designation from Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) and Mountainous (M) to Low Density Residential (LDR); · Annexation No.75-Completion of the annexation of the Project Site into the City of lake Elsinore; · Zone Change/Pre-Zone No. 2005-09- Adoption of the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan in conformance with pre-zoning; · Tract Map 34249- Approval of a Tentative Map to permit subdivision of the Project site; and Annexation of Project Site by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). DTSC sent you NOP comments on 6/12106, and has additional comments on the EIR report, as follows: 01 ['. All environmental investigations, sampling and/or remediation should be conducted under a Workplan approved and overseen by a regulatory agency that has jurisdiction to oversee hazardous waste cleanup. The findings and sampling results from the subsequent report should be clearly summarized in the EIR. @ Prinled on Recycled Paper Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-ll State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR .. D2 [2 03 D4 r 4 D5 [5. D6 [6 D7 [7 Ms. Wendy Worthey December 20, 2006 Page 2 Proper investigation, sampling and remedial actions, if necessary, should be conducted at the site prior to the new development or any construction, and overseen by a regulatory agency. 3. If it is determined that hazardous wastes are, or will be, generated by the proposed operations, the wastes must be managed in accordance with the Califomia Hazardous Waste Control Law (California Health and Safety Code, Division 20, chapter 6.5) and the Hazardous Waste Control Regulations (California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4.5). If so, the facility should obtain a United States Environmental Protection Agency Identification Number by contacting (800) 618-6942. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-12 If hazardous wastes are (a) stored in tanks or containers for mOre than ninety days, (b) treated onsite, or (c) disposed of onsite, then a permit from OTSC may be required. If so, the facility should contact DTSC at (818) 551-2171 to initiate pre application discussions and determine the permitting process applicable to the facility. Certain hazardous waste treatment processes may require authorization from the local Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). Information about the requirement for authorization can be obtained by contacting your local CUPA. If the project plans include discharging wastewater to a storm drain, you may be required to obtain a wastewater discharge permit from the overseeing Regional Water Quality Control Board. If structures on the Project Site contain potentially hazardous materials, such as; asbestos-containing material, lead-based paint, and mercury- or PCB-containing material, such materials should be removed properly prior to demolition, and disposed of at appropriate landfills or recycled, in accordance with the regulatory guidance provided in California Code of Regulation (CCR) and following the requirements of the Universal Waste Rule (40 CFR part 9). State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Ms. Wendy Worthey December 20, 2006 Page 3 If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at (714) 484-5461 or call Mr. AI Shami. Project Manager. at (714) 484-5472 or at "ashami@dtsc.ca.gov', Sincerely, /1/ //,/ /~ ~?~-=- Greg Holmes Unit Chief Southern California Cleanup Operations Branch - Cypress Office cc: Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse P.O, Box 3044 Sacramento. California 95812-3044 Mr. GuentherW, Moskat, Chief Planning and Environmental Analysis Section CEQA Tracking Center Department of Toxic Substances Control P.O. Box 806 Sacramento. California 95812-0806 CEQA# 1595 Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-13 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR a ,\ ' ~~ - Department of Toxic Substances Control Linda S. Adams Secretary for EnVironmental Protection Maureen F. Gorsen, Director 1001 "" Street, 25"h Floor Sacramento, California 95814 Arnold SchWarzenegger Governor MEMORANDUM FROM: Greg Holmes, Unit Chief Southern California Cleanup Operations Branch Cypress Office, Region 4 '-J1.. '.'.' ) , Guenther W. Moskat, Chief . ~~"'7 ~. Planning & Environmental Analysis Section j TO: DATE: SUBJECT: December 7, 2006 CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT REVIEW FOR: DRAFT EIR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (Lake Elsinore), SCH # 2006051073 The Office of Environmental Analysis and Regulations (OEAR) received the attached document from an outside agency for DTSC review as a potential Responsible or Interested Agency pursuant the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A preliminary review of this document by our office shows that the project may fall within the regulatory authority of DTSC 08 because it involves one of the following land uses that could potentially expose individuals to hazards or hazardous materials: o AN EXISTING OR PROPOSED SCHOOL SITE 181 SENSITIVE LAND USES (e.g., daycare facility, nursing home, hospital) o NON-SENSITIVE LAND USES (e.g., commercial or industria' facUities) This document is being forwarded to your office for further assessment Please provide the Lead Agency that is identified on the attached Notice of Completion Form with any comments you may have on this document before the close of the comment period (12127/2006). After your review, please complete the information requested in the box below and return this form to our office at the following address: CEOA Tracking Center Office of Environmental Analysis and Regulations 10011 Street, 22nd Floor/P.O. Box. 806 Sacramento, CA 95812 COMMENTS WERE SENT TO THE LEAD AGENCY and a copy for OEAR Is attached to this memo COMMENTS WERE NOT SENT TO THE LEAD AGENCY because: o The project did not fall within the jurisdiction of DTSC o The document adequately assessed impacts from the proposed project as it relates to DTSC's area of jurisdiction o Other (explain) Printed on Recycled Paper Canyon HlJls Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-14 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response to Comment Document D State of California, Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) December 20, 2006 Response No. 01 The potential for release of hazardous wastes/substances as a result of current or historic uses is addressed in Draft EIR Section 3.9 (Hazards and Hazardous Materials), which summarizes an environmental assessment that was prepared for the project site. Onsite soils were investigated for pesticide residues, VOCs, and other potentially hazardous substances. The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment summarized in Section 3.9 sufficiently describes the environmental conditions at the project site. All information relating to the need for future site investigation and/or remediation has been provided in Draft EIR Section 3.9. Provisions for pre-demolition inspections and remediation contingencies have been established as standard conditions and mitigation measures in the Draft EIR. Response. No. 02 All information related to future site investigation and/or remediation has been provided in the Draft EIR. Precautions against lead-based paint and ACM disturbance and exposure are discussed in Section 3.9 (Hazards and Hazardous Materials) of the Draft EIR. Specifically, mitigation measures require that a licensed Asbestos Inspector be retained to determine the presence of asbestos- containing material (ACM) within structures to be demolished. If ACMs are present on-site, the project shall comply with all applicable State and federal ACM abatement policies and procedures for removal of ACMs, including SCAQMD Rule 1403 - Asbestos Emissions from Demolition and Renovation Activities. The standard conditions cited in Section 3.9 further provide that if any building material encountered during demolition activities is found to contain asbestos fibers, removal shall be conducted in accordance with the remediation and mitigation procedures established by all federal, State, and local standards including federal and California Occupation Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and Air Quality Management District (AQMD) regulations for the removal and proper disposal of ACMs. The material shall be disposed of at a certified asbestos landfill. Mitigation measures also ensure that, prior to demolition of residential structures constructed before 1978, the applicant shall retain a licensed Lead-Based Paint Inspector to conduct a survey of buildings for lead-based paint. Documentation of the lead survey will be consistent with existing State and federal regulations for the management and mitigation of lead-based paint. Where lead- based paint exists, abatement will be completed prior to any demolition activities that would create lead dust or fume hazard. Lead-based paint removal will be performed in accordance with California Code of Regulations Title 8, Section 1532.1, which provides for exposure limits, exposure monitoring, respiratory protection and mandates good worker practices by workers exposed to lead. Based on the findings in the Phase I ESA, those mitigation measures will reduce potential ACM and lead-based paint impacts to levels that are less than significant. All other types of hazardous materials shall be characterized and quantified, with removal, transport, and disposal methods specified for each waste type (Mitigation Measure 3.9-1c). Response No. 03 The comment requires hazardous waste management in accordance with applicable State health and safety regulations if any hazardous waste is generated by the Project. As indicated in Draft EIR Section 3.9.5.3 (Hazards and Hazardous Materials), only household hazardous wastes (HHW) will be Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake ElsInore January 2007 Page RtC-15 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR generated by individual occupants, and in quantities similar to those of other households in the City of Lake Elsinore. The HHW will be subject to the same usage, storage, and disposal regulations that govern other households. As indicated in Draft EIR Section 3.9 (Hazards and Hazardous Materials), no aspect of the project would result in long-term generation or storage of hazardous wastes in substantial quantities. Response No. 04 The comment requires hazardous waste management and on-site storage in accordance with applicable State health and safety regulations if any hazardous waste is generated by the Project. Please refer to Response No. D3. Response No. 05 The comment requires that authorization be obtained from the local Certified Unified Program Agency for certain project-related hazardous waste treatment processes. If found applicable to the disposal of potentially contaminated ACMs or lead-based paint materials, the applicant will contact the local CUPA for authorization. However, as indicated in Draft EIR Section 3.9 (Hazards and Hazardous Materials), the project will not include any hazardous waste treatment processes. Response No. 06 The comment addresses the need for regulatory clearance if the project would involve the discharge of wastewater to a storm drain. As appropriate and necessary during project construction, the applicant will obtain all necessary NPDES permits from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (Region 8). Long-term operation of the proposed project would not involve wastewater discharges to storm drains. Response No. 07 The comment requires that appropriate health and safety procedures be implemented if contamination is suspected or identified during project construction and demolition activities. Although the Phase I ESA summarized in Draft EIR Section 3.9 (Hazards and Hazardous Wastes) found no evidence of hazardous materials, the presence ACMs and lead-based paints will be investigated and, if necessary, remediated prior to demolition activities. Demolition waste that is contaminated would be properly disposed of off-site, subject to applicable regulatory oversight. Response No. 08 The December 7, 2006 document on which this comment is identified is not a Draft EIR comment document. It is an environmental document review form that is used internally by DTSC staff to solicit comments on CEQA documents. As it pertains to the Draft EIR, the comment incorrectly identifies the Project as potentially involving a "Sensitive Land Use (e.g., daycare facility, nursing home, hospital)" that could potentially expose individuals to hazards or hazardous materials. The Proposed Project is entirely residential and does not include any of the potential Sensitive Land Uses. No further response is necessary. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-16 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Comment Document E Board of Directors Phil Williams, President W. Bell Wicke, Vice President Harvey R. Ryan. Treasurer Christine Hyland, Director Kris Anderson, Director General Manager Ronald E. Young EWard ~rlItary Terese Quintanar Legal Counsel Elsinore Valley Municipal Water Dist~.!:__.._..~ Best Best & Krieger fI L~ r Uj 0; fir:; :,:!:~';::-.-., ;/u1n 1.1 -...--_.'c..". .-~L};,l /It)1l , Ui ii, ,iI' 1 f ff j f 1"':')1 , --....6.,; .or . "'.'::__.1 '- I' ,..---~..;1':::.::~:.~ ;:<~~~~{:: , "-- i November 22, 2006 City of lake Elsinore Attn: Wendy Worthey, Principal Environmental Planner 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 RE: COMMENT ON DEIR FOR CANYON HILLS ESTATES (General Plan Amendment #2006-04, Annexation No. 75, Zone ChangelPre-Zone No. 2005- 09, Annexation by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District and Tract Map 34249 E1 Dear Ms. Worthey: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above-referenced DIER. In Appendix B.2, the Canyon Hills Estates Annexation Report and Plan for Providing Services, section 3.2, annexation is addressed. Since EVMWD receives imported water from Metropolitan Water District (MWD) through its member agency, Western Municipal Water District (WMWD), no territory can be annexed into EVMWD without also annexing into MWD and WMWD. Therefore, please amend this section of Appendix B.2 to list the requirement for annexation to the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) and the Western Municipal Water District (WMWD), in addition to the annexation to EVMWD and the City of lake Elsinore service boundaries. Please be advised that grading water will not be provided, nor will water meters be set for the project until the annexation into all three agencies is complete. E2 [ If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (951) 674-3146, extension 8223. Sincerely, 7 r;-" c(l~tf~~.I;/c/Z.t Terese Quintanar District Secretary/Administrative Services Supervisor g:1ad....'-2006~71l4_ 951.674.3146 Fax 951.674.9872 www.evmwd.cqm Our Mission. ._ EVMWD will provide reliable, cost-effective, high quality water and wastewater services that are dedicated to the people we serve. 31315 Chaney Sir"", P.O, Box 3000 Lake Elsinore. CA 92530 Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-17 State ClearInghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response to Comment Document E Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) November 22, 2006 Response No. E1 The Project site is already in the Western Municipal Water District's (WMWD) territory. Refer to www.wmwd.comjmapsabout.htm. The Project site is also within the Metropolitan Water District's (MWD) territory. Response No. E2 No response is required because the comment does not address environmental issues. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-18 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Comment Document F in~j);"}'~T .!; o-'-';-i!i.J~]i:1\~11 iif\\j 1':1 il I ; Ii! ~ .. If. Lt'BE.L_~J Mission: Educate and communicate the rich herilage of Sobobn peoples; Lead and assist individuals, organizalions and communities innnderstRnding the needs nnd concerns of Native American monitoring oftradilionalsites; Advocate Nntive American partieiplllion in state agencies nnd hoard..; Advocate legislation and enforeement of laws affecting Nalive American peoples and protecting historical and archaeological resources, November 30, 2006 Attn: Wendy Worthy City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore. CA 92530 Re: Canyon Hills Estate The Soboba Band of Luisei'lo Indians appreciates your observance of TribaJ Cultural Resources and their preservation in your project. The information provided on said project(s) has been assessed through our Cultural Resource Department, where it was concluded that although this site is outside the existing reservation, the project area does fall within the bounds of our Tribal Traditional Use Areas. F1 At this time the Soboba Band does see a direct need for Native American Monitoring. The Tribe requests a Native American Monitor be present during any and all ground disturbing activities. Soboba requests this, until deemed unnecessary by both Archaeological and Native American Monitors. Also the Tribe requests to be involved in any and all consultation throughout the project. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact the Cultural Resource Department. F2 [ [SPECIAL NOTE (for projects other than cell towers): ifthi. projcct is as.<ocintcd with n city or count) s!,ecilie plan or general plan nclion il i. sllbj~...110 lhe provisions ofSBl8-Tmdtionnl Tribal Cultul'8l Places (law became clTective January J, 200~) and will require the cit)' or collnty 10 panicipate in formal, government-to-govern."ent conslIllation with the Tribe. Iflh. cily or county are your client, )'ou may wish 10 make lhemaware oflhis requirement. B}' law, the)' arc required to contact the Tribe,] , rica Helms Soboba Cultural Resource Department Cell (951)663-8333 Phone (951) 487-8268 ehelms@soboba-.nsn_gov Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-19 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response to Comment Document F Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians November 30, 2006 Response No. F1 As specified in Section 3.11 (Cultural Resources) of the Draft EIR, the Project mitigation measures require the participation of Native American monitors during grading, excavation and other ground disturbance activities, and in decisions regarding the treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the Project Site. The mitigation measures describe monitoring activities, testing and recovery protocols, and timing and implementation responsibilities. Response No. F2 The City recognizes the Soboba Tribe's cultural affiliation with the Project Area, and the Draft EIR includes mitigation requiring the presence of a Native American Monitor during any and all ground disturbance activities. If the Project is approved, it will require a Section 404 permit from the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), with the City as the applicant. That process requires a Section 106 review under the National Historic Preservation Act. Therefore, the ACOE will initiate all necessary Tribal consultation(s) pursuant to the Section 106 review process, including consultat!on regarding cultural resources mitigation measures and subsequent cultural resources surveys/testing, etc. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-20 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft fiR Comment Document G . U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Officc 6010 Hidden Valley Road Carlsbad. California 92011 (760) 431-9440 FAX (760) 431-5902 + 9618 '.:.1..... ," . .' California Department ofFish & Game Easlern Sierra Inland Deserts Region 3602 Inland Empire Blvd., Sle C-220 Ontario, California 91764 (909) 484-0459 FAX (909) 481-2945 In Reply Refer To: FWSlCDFG 5122.1 DEe 2 1 2006 Ms. Wendy WOIthey Principal Environmental Planner City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, California 92562 Subj: Draft Environmental Impact Report, Canyon Hills Estates, City of Lake Elsinore, Riverside COlmty, California Dear Ms. Worthey: The California Department ofFish and Game (Department) and the V. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), hereafter collectively referred to as the Wildlife Agencies, have reviewed the Canyon Hills Estates Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). The Canyon Hills Estates proposed housing development is approximately 126.2 acres of a 252.5 acre site and is located in Sedco Hills, east oflnterstate 15 and south of Railroad Canyon Road. Access to the northeast comer of tile proposed project will be via Cottonwood Canyon Road and access to the northwest will be Navajo Springs Road. This project is proposed for annexation into the City of Lake Elsinore. The primary concem and mandate of the Scrvice is the protection ofpubIic fish and wildlife resources and their habitats. The Service has legal responsibility for the welfare of migratory birds, anadromous fish, and endangered animals and plants occurring in the United States. The Service is also responsible for administering the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended (16 V.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The Department is a trustee agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and is responsible for ensming appropriate conservation of fish and wildlife resources including rare, threatened, and endangered plant and animal species, pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act, and administers the Natural Community Conservation Planning Program (NCCP). On June 22,2004, the Service issued a section lO(a)(I)(B) permit for the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The MSHCP establishes a multiple species collServation program to minimize and mitigate habitat loss and the incidental taki of covered species in association with activities covered under the permit. The Department also issued Natural Community Conservation Plan Approval and Take Authorization for the MSHCP as per Section 2800, et seq., ofthe California Fish arid Game Code. The proposed project o<:curs within the MSHCP Plan Area. Although the proposed project is located outside of TAKE PR[DE:"~.I INAMERICA~ Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-21 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Ms. Wendy Worthy (FWSlCDFG 5122.1) 2 the MSHCP Criteria Area, other MSHCP policies and procedures apply to the proposed project. These include, but are not limited to, the Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban Wildlands Interface (MSHCP section 6.1.4) and the Protection of Species Associated with RipariartlRiverine Areas and Vernal Pools policy (MSHCP section 6.1.2). G1 The project, as proposed, will result in 4.23 acres of permanent impacts and 0.81 acres of temporary impacts to riparian/riverine habitat. Although the acreage is not explicitly stated in the DEIR, some of the riparian impacts would be to oak woodlands. Of the 8.4 acres of oak woodlands id~tified on the project site, 3.5 acres would be permanently impacted due to construction grading and fuel modification. An additional, 0.2 acres of oak woodland will be temporarily impacted. The majority of the impacts to oak riparian would OCCur from the development proposed within the southeastern portion ofthe project site along Drainage A, a perennial tributary to Cottonwood Canyon Creek. We recommend that other project design alternatives be thoroughly examined that would avoid and/or minimize impacts to Drainage A. The DEIR states that mitigation for the impacts to oak woodlands would consist of planting individual oaks based on a 4: I ratio. Oaks would be planted within the fuel modification 2:one, within the proposed park, and along the roadways. Oak woodlands typically support a high level of biodiversity and there is a temporal loss of habitat support functions associated with their removal due to the long time period required for re-growth of oak trees. Oak woodlands are recognized broadly as a sensitive habitat and the City of Lake Elsinore's Background Report supporting their General Plan recognizes coastal live oak woodlands as a sensitive habitat as well. As stated in our comments on the MSHCP Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (Determination), the temporal loss of habitat functions associated with oak woodlands is greater than for other riparian habitat G2 types. We recommend that the oak riparian impacts be mitigated on the order of a 10 to 1 ratio. Oaks that are not associated with riparian areas and are larger tllan Sllplings should be also be avoided or mitigated in a manlier tl1at takes into account the long term impact of tree removal. It appeared from our site visit on December 4, 2006. that structurally complex oak habitat would be impacted. Structurally diverse oak woodlands can be important for nesting, roosting, denning, food storage, and plant-species habitat. We recommend that the planting of the oak trees be clustered such that they form a structured community rather than simply replacing individual trees along roadways, the park, and fuel modification zone. G3 Although the central portion of Drainage A would be avoided, the proposed development and a road would bound this area. We are concerned that the proposed development would alter the watershed of Drainage A and potentially degrade the avoided habitat areas. We recommend that measures be incorporated into the proposed project to maintain existing quantity and quality of flow rates into the stream. In addition, we recommend that alternatives be examined that would shift the fuel modification zone away from Drainage A to avoid riparian habitat including individual oak trees. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-22 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Ms. Wendy Worthy (FWS/CDFG 5122.1) 3 G4 In regards to the proposed 2.30 acres of onsite mitigation, we are concerned that this area may not adequately offset project related impacts. The proposed 2.30 acres of onsite mitigation will be surrounded by a park and is paralleled by Cottonwood Canyon Road, which Will possibly be widened. The proposed widl3!ling ofthe road and the potential increase in human use due to the park and the proposed development (which has its highest density adjacent to the Cottonwood Canyon Road) should be considered when assessing the contribution of this area to mitigation. We recommend measures be incorporated into the project that protect and conserve the onsite mitigation area for the purposes of wildlife habitat. G5 In addition to the 2.30 acres of onsite mitigation, the project includes the purchase of 5 acres of off site credits from an approved mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program. We are not aware of any approved mitigation bank from which the project can purchase credits to offset the proposed impacts to oak riparian woodlands. Most in-lieu fee programs that we are aware of are primarily restricted to enhancement efforts such as invasive plant removal and do not include habitat restoration. Enhancement credits for the acres needed for the proposed mitigation would not be adequate given the extent and type of habitat that would be impacted from project implementation. G6 The proposed project will impact a large area that could support breeding migratory bird habitat. The DEIR states that the site Will be cleared outside of the breeding season to minimize impacts to Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) species. However, the DEIR also states that if clearing is conducted during the breeding season, surveys will be conducted 'to locate the nests of breeding [birds and these nests will be avoided through the use of a ] 00 to 300 foot buffer. Due to the large size of the project site, we anticipate that it will be difficult to find all of the nests ofMBTA species on the site. Therefore, we recommend that vegetation clearing occur outside of the breeding season to ensure that no impacts occur to MBT A species. . We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed project. If you have any questions pertaining to these comments, please contact Scott Dawson of the Department at (909) 987-7764) or Kathleen Pollett ofthe Service at (760) 43]-9440, extension 357. Sincerely, tJ~~~ ~Karen A. Goebel () Assistant Field Supervisor U. S. Fish and Wi]dlife Setvice be'd~ MaL7L~ Leslie MacNair Staff Environmental Scientist California Department ofFish and Game cc: Stephanie Gasca, PCR Services Corporation, Irvine, California Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-23 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response to Comment Document G U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)jCalifornia Department of Fish & Game (CDFG) December 21, 2006 Response No. G1 Impact avoidance and minimization alternatives were considered throughout the planning and design stages of the project, and impacts to Drainage A have been reduced to the maximum extent feasible. Although not illustrated in the DEIR, the oak tree planting locations provide the greatest opportunity for restoring and creating riparian oak woodland in areas disturbed by project grading and thinned by fuel modification. Throughout much of the site interior, the numerous rock outcrops and rocky soils may preclude successful oak woodland establishment. Therefore, the planting plan locates oaks among the other native plant species that will comprise the fuel modification zones, development edges, and preserved natural drainages. In the northern portion of the site, just west of Drainage A13, much of the impact to Drainage A is due to the expanded detention basin area that is necessary to mitigate pre-existing stormdrain deficiencies downstream in the existing Canyon Hills development. The expanded detention area became a Project Design Feature toward the latter stages of site planning and preliminary engineering; otherwise, Drainage A would have included additional preservation area. However, project design has not been guided by any single issue area, but rather has resulted from the careful attention given to reconciling competing environmental and engineering factors. In responding to the issue of inadequate off-site conveyance capacity for 100-year storm flows, the project applicant has designed the expanded detention/water quality basin in a manner that is responsive to flood control and safety, water quality enhancement, and habitat preservation needs. In the southern portion of the site, opportunities to avoid Drainage A6 were investigated by the project engineer (RBF Consulting). Impacts to Drainage A6 are a result of the road that is needed to access the cluster of homes in the southern portion of the project site, as well as the water tank. RBF evaluated the feasibility of maintaining Drainage A6 as a natural channel by investigating two culvert options: 1) using standard drain pipe with wing walls at the ends, and 2) an arched culvert with a wing wall at the northern end. 1) Using standard drain pipe, the length of the culvert can be shortened a few feet but requires the addition of 15-foot wing walls at either end. The added cost of the wing walls does not justify the savings of only a few feet of the drainage. Therefore, the standard drain pipe option is only feasible without the wing wall. 2) Using an arched culvert would preserve a large portion of the natural soft-bottom of the Drainage A6 but would require a 20-foot or greater wing wall at the northern end and a nearly 60-foot wide arch for the length of the drainage. Grading to construct the arched culvert would still be necessary and would fragment the drainage. In addition, the cost to construct a 60-foot wide arch and 20-foot wing wall is not feasible for this type of project. An additional alternative was explored that would omit the southeastern cluster of homes. This would have the advantage of preserving additional oak woodland and chaparral habitat, a portion of Drainage A, and tributaries Al through A7. However, the loss of 38 premium view lots and the water tanks would not allow the developer to realize the goals and objectives of the proposed project. Therefore, this alternative was rejected as infeasible. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-24 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response No. G2 The oak woodlands mapped on-site are classified as coast live oak woodlands (Quercus agrifolia), and their level of sensitivity and biodiversity is acknowledged. Unlike Engelmann oak (Quercus engelmannii), coast live oak is not a Covered Species under the MSHCP, nor is it assigned sensitive or protected status by USFWS or CDFG, according to CNDDB criteria1 (71.060.19 Coast Live Oak Woodland). Chapter 3, Biological Resources Background Report for the Lake Elsinore General Plan Update considers oak woodland a sensitive community, likely due to its general wildlife value, as reflected in State and County regulations and policies that encourage oak woodland impact avoidance, preservation, and enhancement. Three wildlife species have the potential to occur on-site due to the presence of the oak woodland habitat in the open space portions of the study area and/or within the drainage in the southwestern portion of the study area. These species include long-eared owl, Pacific tree frog and California toad, none of which are MSHCP Covered Species that would be adversely affected by the project-related temporal loss of habitat functions associated with live oak woodland. Similarly, species protections associated with Riparian/Riverine areas and Vernal Pools policies presented in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP are not applicable to any species present in the on-site oak woodland areas. To clarify the nature and extent of temporary and permanent impacts to oak woodland on-site, the following paragraph from the Biological Resources Assessment (p. 63) has been revised as follows: A total of 8.4 acres of oak woodland occurs within the study area. The proposed project would permanently impact ~J.Q acres due to grading (i.e., remove approximately 46 coast live, oak trees) and temDorarilv impact 0.2 acre of oak woodland within the construction buffer. ana 0.3 ao({) dl:JO ta fl:Jol moGlitioation. Trees within the fuel modification zones will not be removed but may require thinning and pruning to comply with fuel modification requirements. therebv temporarilv imDacting an additional 0.3 acre. AI'} addWonol 0.2 acm of oak waodland wOl:Jld l3e temporar!ly impacted w!thin the eenstnlOtien bl:Jffcr. Similarly, trees within the construction buffer would not be removed but may require pruning to allow passage of construction equipment. A total of 4.9 acres (58 percent) of the oak woodland on-site would be preserved within the study area's open space. Since Project entitlements are sought through the City of Lake Elsinore, the Project is not subject to Senate Bill 1334 (chaptered as Pub. Res. Code Section 21083.4), which authorizes counties to require mitigation for the significant effects of oak woodland conversion. For the same reason, the Project is not subject to the Riverside County Oak Tree Management Guidelines (1993). In mitigating the potentially significant impacts to oak woodland, however, the Project will be consistent with the County Oak Tree Management Guidelines and PRC 21083.4 provisions that conserve oak woodlands on-site through the use of Open Space conservation easements. The Project will also include an oak tree planting and maintenance program at a ratio of 4:1. Although a tree replacement ratio of 5:1 to one was originally proposed in SB 1334, PRC 921083.4 and the County Guidelines do not require tree replacement as a mitigation alternative. As shown in Figure 3.8-9 of the DEIR, a total of 184 oak trees of varying size will be planted in small clusters throughout the manufactured slopes, fuel modification zones, and proposed park as recommended by the project biologist. The Tree Preservation and Planting Plan incorporates structural diversity in oak planting. Per the Plan, "The Project developer shall mitigate the removed 1 Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife and Habitat Data Analysis Branch, September 2003. The Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program, List of California Terrestrial Natural Communities Recognized by The California Natural Diversity Database. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-25 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR trees at a 4:1 replacement ratio. Each removed tree will be mitigated at a 4:1 ratio using one 24- inch box container tree, two 15 gallon container trees and one 5 gallon container tree. These replacement oak trees shall be planted on-site as directed by the project biologist or landscape architect. " The proposed Tree Preservation and Planting Plan is intended to accommodate the normal life cycle of affected plant and wildlife species by providing migration corridors, food availability, nesting, and other functions necessary to complete a life cycle. Based on the type and extent of project-related impacts, it is the City's opinion that the proposed mitigation ratio of 4:1 is sufficient to mitigate impacts to oak woodlands on-site and to support the plant and animal species diversity that is presently found on the affected oak woodlands. Response No. G3 Drainage and Water Ouality Issues The comment expresses concerns about alterations to the Drainage A watershed and potential degradation of avoided habitat areas. Chapter 3.7 (Hydrology and Water Quality) explains that the proposed hydrology and hydraulics plan will maintain the existing quantity and quality of flow rates into Drainage A, as per the City's hydrologic/hydraulic design requirements. As stated previously in Response No. G1, the site design around Drainage A is constrained to a large extent by the area needed for expanded detention/water quality basin facilities. Hydrology studies prepared for the Proposed Project found that a substantial capacity deficiency exists downstream in the existing Canyon Hills development. The Project proposes to correct those off-site stormdrain deficiencies. As indicated in Chapter 3.7, "[t]he Proposed Project eliminates the existing deficiency for controlling existing flows and ensures there is no increase in surface water discharging from the Project Site after development. The Proposed Project would also eliminate several existing erosion and sedimentation problems at the adjacent Canyon Hills storm runoff collection basins." (p. 3.7-17) Although the proposed development area will bound Drainage A, the proposed hydrology and hydraulics plan will ensure that flow rates are maintained in the area. The proposed Stormwater Management System was specifically designed to: 1) prevent on-site flooding control and minimize impacts to the capacities of downstream storm drain facilities, 2) protect on-site water quality and designated beneficial uses in receiving waters, and 3) avoid and/or minimize project impacts to drainage courses and their dependant plant and wildlife species (DEIR p. 3.7-16). As illustrated on Draft EIR Figure 3.7-7 (Post-Development Hydrology and Water Quality Features), the proposed Stormwater Management System maintains separation between urban runoff and natural/undeveloped area runoff via the following two types of stormwater facilities: 1) Off-Site facilities to convey stormwater from undeveloped watershed subareas, and 2) On-Site facilities to manage urban runoff from the project development areas. Complete descriptions of the flood control, biological resource avoidance, and water quality protection functions of the Stormwater Management System are provided in Section 3.7 (HydrOlOgy and Water Quality). As indicated in Chapter 3.8, Biological Resources, the Proposed Project is designed to avoid on-site jurisdictional drainages to the maximum extent practicable. More than 60 percent of the linear extent of all on-site drainages will be preserved in place, including the on-site segment of Cottonwood Creek. While avoidance of the drainages is intended to provide distinct biological resource benefits, the extent of avoidance was based in part on the ability of those drainages to adequately convey storm flows through the Project Site and safely discharge to off-site stormwater facilities. Therefore, the proposed stormwater management system was designed to incorporate on-site natural drainages to the extent feasible, while also avoiding adverse impacts to already deficient downstream flood control facilities in the Canyon Hills community. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-26 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR The Off-Site system will include a series of natural drainages, large culverts, and detention basins for stormflows entering the Project Site from off-site sources. In the case of Tributary A6, off-site flows from the 126-acre upstream drainage subarea were calculated assuming a 10o-year storm event. Hydrologic modeling indicated that stormwater could be conveyed beneath the project development via a :t42-inch culvert at a rate of about 300 cubic feet per second. The culvert would essentially replace Tributary A6 and discharge stormwater to Drainage A, which will remain a natural channel for most of its length through the Project Site. Upon project completion, overall flow rates in Drainage A will decrease slightly because the tributary area will be reduced and runoff from the development areas will be routed through detention/water quality basins and a separate stormdrain system. The combination of lower flow velocities, urban and natural runoff separation, water quality detention, elimination of existing soil erosion conditions, riparian vegetation enhancements, oak woodland planting, and slope/bank stabilization in the preserved on-site drainages will positively affect biological and hydrologic conditions. Fuel Modification Issues The project applicant has examined alternatives that would decrease the extent of fuel modification within Drainage A to the maximum extent possible without compromising project goals and objectives or impacting additional "waters of the U.S." or wetlands. If the western portion of the development were shifted to the west, Drainage 81 would be impacted creating greater impacts to ACOE "waters of the U.S." and wetlands. This impact is considered more substantial than fuel modification within CDFG jurisdiction in this area which will not remove oak trees. Some of the impacted riparian areas, particularly those that support oak trees, might not be substantially affected by County fuel modification requirements. For instance, if riparian species are present that meet Fire Department plant palette requirements for fuel modification zones, those species could remain. Similarly, coast live oaks in the fuel modification zones can generally remain provided that they are in good health and do not pose a fire hazard due to disease or other conditions of failing health. In some instances, plant and shrub species that are in the riparian/fuel modification overlap area might not meet Fire Department requirements and could require replacement by other fire-safe, native riparian species. Response No. G4 The Proposed Project will improve Cottonwood Canyon Road to its ultimate width through the Project Site, consistent with the City's General Plan Circulation Element standards. The DEIR evaluated the biological impacts of the road at its ultimate width in the project area. The Cottonwood Canyon Creek mitigation areas shall be placed in a conservation easement or deed restriction ensuring that the areas remain open space in perpetuity. The language of the conservation easement or deed restriction will be submitted to the ACOE and CDFG for approval prior to recordation. In addition, the Covenants, Conditions, and Regulations of the residential development will stipulate that all associated mitigation areas be preserved and managed as natural open space in perpetuity. The final acreage of mitigation will be determined for the final HMMPjWQMP submittal, and may be influenced by agency input. To minimize disturbance to preserved wildlife habitat, exclusionary fencing will be used adjacent to the avoided riparian areas and restoration/enhancement areas. To minimize trampling and unauthorized recreational use, the HOA will be responsible for providing educational materials to the homeowners describing the sensitivity of the avoided habitat areas. Signage will be posted adjacent to the avoided riparian areas and conservation areas to alert the public as to the sensitivity of the habitat. Public trails are designed outside of the riparian area to minimize trespassing. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-27 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response No. G5 Impacts to ACOE and RWQCB jurisdictional areas will be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio for a total of at least 0.92 acre and 0.98 acres, respectively, and impacts to CDFG jurisdictional areas will be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio for a total of at least 8.28 acres. The proposed on-site mitigation will cover approximately 2.30 acres and consist of the restoration and preservation of the on-site portion of Cottonwood Canyon Creek and adjacent uplands. All ACOE and RWQCB mitigation will be accomplished on-site within Cottonwood Canyon Creek; however, off-site mitigation will be necessary to satisfy CDFG mitigation requirements. In order to satisfy the balance of the mitigation necessary to offset impacts to CDFG juriSdiction that cannot be accomplished on-site, a number of resources are being researched. First, PCR is coordinating with the CDFG to assist in remedying the off-site mitigation challenge. Second, PCR has requested information from the RWQCB regarding their knowledge of opportunities for mitigation off- site within Cottonwood Canyon Creek (up or down stream of the project site). Finally, PCR is investigating mitigation bank options for a combination of restoration and enhancement opportunities within the watershed and surrounding areas. Although PCR recognizes the CDFG's mitigation preference for restoration activities over enhancement activities to compensate for impacts, it has been their experience that a higher ratio (greater than the 2:1 proposed) may be warranted for enhancement activities than would typically be required by the CDFG for restoration activities to satisfy mitigation requirements. Response No. G6 The developer will make every attempt to schedule the project so that all vegetation clearing occurs outside of the breeding season. If it is still not feasible, the developer will attempt to phase the vegetation clearing so that a thorough nesting bird survey can be completed prior to clearing. Once one phase is complete, the next phase will be surveyed and cleared. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-28 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Comment Document H COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATION AND lAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY December 21, 2006 G~org~ A. JO/UISlIlt. P.E. Direcror of Transporla/iOll Wendy Worthey Principal Environmental Planner City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 SUBJECT: Response to Notice of Availability of a Draft Environmental Impact Report for Canyon Hills Estates (General Plan Amendment #2006-Q4, Annexation No. 75, Zone Change/Pre- Zone No. 2005-09, Annexation by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, and Tract Map 34249) Dear Ms. Worthey: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed project. l The Transportation Department is highly concerned about adding development traffic to currently unimproved roads in the County, including Lost Road and Cottonwood H1 Canyon. It is our general position that development that connects to unimproved roads needs to be responsible for improving the roads to a standard that can adequately carry the additional traffic and that can be maintained by a public agency. [This development proposes to make a connection to Lost Road (via Navajo Springs), H2 and to Cottonwood Canyon, both unimproved dirt roads. The project also appears to have an emergency connection to Turtle Green, Crab Hollows, and Crooked Arrow. H3 The study indicates that in 2025, at such time as Lost Road and Cottonwood Canyon are anticipated to be improved, 28% of the project traffic will use Lost Road to the south and 17% will use Cottonwood Canyon. However, given the level of congestion at the Railroad Canyon/I-iS Interchange, the fact that these dirt roads are drivable today(and carry significant traffic levels for a dirt road in the case of Lost Road}, and that they are convenient short-cuts to access Wildomar, Bundy Canyon Road, 1-15 and 1-215 to the south, It is expected that some level of project traffic will immediately use these roads. 4080 l..emoll Street. 81h Aoor' Riverside. Califomi. 92501 . (951) 955.6140 P.O. Box 1090' Riverside. Cnlifomia 92..'i02-I090' FAX (951) 955-3198 Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-29 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR H4 [ H5 [ H6[ H7 H8 [ Therefore, The Transportation Department requests that the project be designed and conditioned to mitigate its anticipated impacts as follows: 1. Pave Navajo Springs and Lost Road (north of Navajo Springs) to County standards. 2. Participate financially in a funding mechanism for the paving of Lost Road southerly to Lemon. The County is considering establishing a funding mechanism for development in the County to participate, which should also indude a substantial contribution from this project that will directly access Lost Road and is anticipated to use it substantially In the future. 3. Participate financially in a funding mechanism to improve Cottonwood Canyon Road (south to Bundy Canyon). The Transportation Department would be pleased to work with the City to jointly develop a funding mechanism for improving Cottonwood Canyon Road. 4. The traffic study identifies that project traffic will use Holland Road to the east and references that the Pardee Homes project is responSible for the paving of Holland. It also states that the road will be paved up to the Oty boundary. The project should be conditioned to provide the paving In the event the Pardee project does not move forward (if the paving has not already been done) and the paving should extend east to meet the existing paved section beyond the City limits. 5. If it is found that it is not feasible to improve either Lost Road or Cottonwood Canyon, alternative forms of access for the project need to be explored. We appreciate the opportunity to comment, please do not hesitate to contact us should you wish to discuss our comments. G Juan C. Perez Deputy Director CC: Supervisor Bob Buster George A. Johnson, Director of Transportation JCP:dlp Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-30 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response to Comment Document H County of Riverside Transportation and Land Management Agency, Transportation Department December 21, 2006 Response No. H1 The Project proposes to connect to Lost Road and Cottonwood Canyon Road, but only as means of providing vehicular access to the improved segments of those arterials in the City of Lake Elsinore. Concurrent with Project construction, both Lost Road and Cottonwood Canyon Road would be improved to City of Lake Elsinore approved equivalent road standards (Le., the equivalent of County standards) from the project access points northward to connect to the currently improved segments in the City. All related improvements to those roadway segments will be complete by project occupancy, which is anticipated to be Year 2010. As summarized in Section 3.3 (Traffic and Circulation) of the Draft EIR and in the following responses, the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) recognized and analyzed the potential for project-related traffic to travel southbound on Lost Road and Cottonwood Canyon Roap during the interim period between Project completion and improvement of those roads to their County Circulation Element standards. The TIA and the Draft EIR both indicate that the Project traffic contribution to those roadways will not cause an intersection Level of Service standard to be exceeded. Therefore, operational impacts will be less than significant under short-term (Year 2010) cumulative traffic conditions. The comment, however, focuses more on the physical conditions on Lost Road and Cottonwood Canyon Road, and implies that the Project's contribution to their use is reason enough to "participate financially in a funding mechanism" to improve both roads. Following are several of the points that the City and the applicant consider pertinent to a reasonable evaluation of the issue: 1) On the basis of traffic volumes and local circulation efficiency, the Project alone does not warrant improvements to the two County roads. 2) The approach to implementing the improvements is not consistent with the City's approach to major infrastructure investments, which relies on a thorough needs assessment; evaluation of risks and benefits; financial review; and planning and environmental considerations. 3) The suggested roadway paving improvements are not only disproportionate to the Project's traffic impacts, but they have no direct nexus with the Project's circulation system impacts. 4) The roadway paving improvements would invite higher traffic volumes through Wildomar, and the "receiving ends" of these arterial improvements are not prepared to handle those higher volumes (Le., signal warrants could be met sooner than anticipated, particularly at Cottonwood Canyon Road/Bundy Canyon Road). 5) The County is suggesting improvements that the applicant has no ability to implement and for which a funding plan has not been formulated. 6) Improvements could have other environmental effects not adequately considered to this point, such as growth-inducement in the areas to the south in Wildomar. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-31 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response No. H2 The Project proposes to improve Navajo Springs Road and Lost Road (north of Navajo Springs Road), as well as Cottonwood Canyon Road through the Project Site, according to City and County equivalent roadway standards. These improvements will provide project residents with direct access to improved roads in the City of Lake Elsinore. In addition, the Project will construct all emergency access roads pursuant to the Riverside County Fire Department's required standards for vehicular access and response. Proposed improvements to Turtle Creek Road are for emergency access purposes only, and will provide the Fire Department with a new access connection to Crab Hollow Circle. This access improvement will permit Fire Department vehicles to access the Project Site from several unimproved roads that ultimately lead to the site's southern boundary. By the same token, the Turtle Creek Road emergency access will provide the Fire Department with improved roadway access through Canyon Hills Estates to the County residential properties along Crab Hollow Circle. The Project does not propose any new roadway connections to, and would not contribute any project-related trips to, Crooked Arrow Drive. Any use of Crooked Arrow Drive would be incidental to emergency vehicle response and/or evacuation situations. Response No. H3 Draft EIR Section 3.3 (Traffic and Circulation) summarizes a sensitivity analysis conducted as part of the TIA that assumed up to five percent of the total Project traffic could use the dirt segments of Lost Road and Cottonwood Canyon Road south of the Project Site as an alternate route to destinations south of the Project Site under Year 2010 conditions. The following two intersections were analyzed for potential project-related traffic impacts: · Orange Street (NS) at Lost Road/Lemon Street (EW) · Cottonwood Canyon Road (NS) at Bundy Canyon Road (EW) The TIA determined there will be no additional impacts to intersections along Lost Road or Cottonwood Canyon Road under the assumption that up to five percent of the project traffic will use the dirt portions of Lost Road and Cottonwood Canyon Road to gain access to the 1-15 Freeway or other areas to the south. If Project implementation led to unexpected increases in the use of those roads by Project residents, then the County might be justified in seeking some form of participation in a road maintenance agreement. Response No. H4 As discussed in the Draft EIR Project Description and in Responses H1 and H2, Navajo Springs Road and portions of Lost Road and Cottonwood Canyon Road will be improved to City of Lake Elsinore approved equivalent road standards (i.e., the equivalent of County standards). Those improvements will be completed prior to project occupancy. Response No. H5 Although the number of Project-related trips will remain constant, Project trip distribution would change under long-term (Year 2025) conditions as a result of anticipated future improvements to Lost Road and Cottonwood Canyon Road by the County. Those roadways are not currently programmed in the City TIF or the County TUMF; therefore, the precise timing of those future roadway improvements is currently unknown. Upon completion of those future roadway improvements, the Project would incrementally contribute to future LOS deficiencies at the Lemon St. (EW)/Orange St. Canyon Hflls Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-32 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR (NS) and Cottonwood Canyon Rd. (NS)/Bundy Canyon Road (EW) intersections. Those future LOS deficiencies would occur with or without the Proposed Project and there are presently no City or County mitigation programs or other financial mechanisms in place to accept fair-share contributions for future improvements to those intersections or the roadway segments. Furthermore, an EIR must demonstrate that impact mitigation fee contributions will result in specific programmed improvements that will directly minimize or avoid the project-related effect{s). At the present, the Draft EIR cannot point to any mechanism by which the Project can mitigate its incremental future impacts at those intersections. Specific, feasible improvements can be implemented to reduce the Year 2025 intersection capacity impacts under cumulative conditions, both with and without the Project. Contributions to a near-term road paving program are not among those feasible improvements. While the Project would be willing to contribute its fair-share (ranging from <1% to <4% of total vehicle trips) toward the identified intersection improvements in the County, it is unlikely that a funding mechanism will be in place by the time building permits are issued. Since it cannot be assured that the Project impacts will be mitigated to below a level of significance, the City must prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations, supported by Findings of Fact, pursuant to CEQA. Response No. H6 Please refer to Response No. H5 above. Response No. H7 As indicated in Table 3.3-11 of the Draft EIR, Holland Road will be improved to one lane in each direction from just east of Cottonwood Canyon Road to the City limit. This improvement is underway by Pardee and expected to be completed within two years. Project-related traffic will be primarily drawn toward the west due to the location of 1-15, public services and facilities, and retail opportunities. However, the trip distribution in the Traffic Analysis indicates that up to 32 percent of the project trips, or approximately 1,000 daily trips, would travel east along Holland Road in 2010. That figure would decrease in the Year 2025 to approximately 19 percent (Le., 600 daily trips), or less than two percent of the total average daily traffic. The Proposed Project and most other recently-completed and planned development projects would only incrementally affect the future capacity of Holland Road and, unlike Pardee, would not be individually responsible for major arterial improvements. Rather, it is the City's intent to mitigate the incremental effects of cumulative development by including Holland Road in the City of lake Elsinore's Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) program. At the City's discretion, the Project's TIF contributions may be directed toward future improvements on Holland Road. Ultimately, all TIF- programmed circulation improvements will be based on development projections and traffic models maintained by the City. Response No. H8 As discussed in Response Hi, both lost Road and Cottonwood Canyon Road would be improved to City of lake Elsinore approved equivalent road standards (Le., the equivalent of County standards) from the project access points northward to connect to the currently improved segments in the City. The TIA determined these improvements are sufficient to accommodate Project traffic to access the existing improved roads and public services that are north of the Project Site. Therefore, no other forms of Project Site access are necessary. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-33 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Comment Document I * tWiN Protecting Wi/damsr Independence Wildomar Incorporation Now (909) 330-0355 1 P.O. Box 14781 Wlldomar, CA 92595 December 27,2006 Kirt A. Coury Project Planner City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Ret Draft EIR for Canyon Hills Estates (state Clearinahouse # 2006051073) Mr. Coury: Below is my response to the DEIR referenced above. Please respond in writing to my questions and concerns. A. Scope of Project I request a clarification on the scope of the project At the April 11, 2006 City of Lake Elsinore City Council meeting. Rolf Preisendanz (Director, Community Development) informed all present that Tract Map 34249 had been Withdrawn from documents pertaining to this project (General Plan Amendment 2005-8, Zone Change (Pre-Zone) No. 2005-09, Annexation No. 75 and Negative Declaration No. 2006-02), the application money had been returned to the developer (Trumark) and that no tract was being processed. At the LAFCO 501 hearing, it was stated there was not a project - the consideration for LAFCO Commissioners was undeveloped land only. 11 Without benefit of a scoping meeting or public hearing of any type specific to the current project as it is described in the DEIR noted above, we now have a draft EJR for something called Canyon Hills Estates, which is deemed a specific plan. The DEIR indicates it is using concerns and comments brought up at previous public hearings related to this project. Those concerns and comments were specific only to those conceptual plans presented at that time; clearly the scope of the project has changed. How can the City possibly believe they are meeting their legal obligation under CECA statutes when there has been no public presentation, hearing or scoplng meeting to present the revised project plan and revised project scope and obtain comments/questions! concerns specific to these changes? Canyon Hf/ls Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-34 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Kit Coury - Project Planner Canyon Hills Estates DEIR - Comment Ltr. Dec. 27, 2006 Page 2 [ I do not believe it would be appropriate to submit comments on the Canyon Hills Estates 12 DEIR and Technical Appendices other than what I have outlined in this letter until there has been a public seoping meeting/hearing on the revised project plans. [ I would therefore request that th e City of lake Elsinore extend the comment period for the 13 Canyon Hills Estates DEIR until such time as the legal public hearing process has been held and public comments are duly noted and responded to in a revised DEIR. I look forward to your written response to these comments. Respectfully submitted, WILDOMAR INCORPORATION NOW Sheryl Ade Secretary cc Rolf Preisendanz, Director, lake Elsinore Comm. Devel. Dept. Robert Brady, City Manager Bob Buster, Supervisor, 1 sl District, County of Riverside George Johnson, Riverside County Transportation and land Management Agency Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District Bob Cashman, Chair,Wildomar Incorporation Now Rick Estes, President, Wildomar Chamber of Commerce Dan Wildish, Wildish & Nialyis File Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-35 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response to Comment Document I Wildomar Incorporation Now (WIN) December 27,2006 Response No. 11 As discussed in Chapter 1.4 Scoping of the Draft EIR, the City of Lake Elsinore issued two Notices of Preparation (NOP) - one in May 2006 and one in June 2006, with a 30-day public review period for each as required by CEQA. The May and June 2006 NOP comments and the comments on Negative Declaration No. 2006-02 (circulated in January 2006) were used to establish the scope ofthe issues addressed in the Draft EIR. These NOPs identified the Proposed Project that is the subject of the Draft EIR analysis. WIN submitted three comment letters on the May 2006 NOP. WIN did not submit any comment letters on the June 2006 NOP. All May and June 2006 NOP comments and Negative Declaration No. 2006-02 comments were included in Appendix A of the Draft EIR. The collective "scoping comments" included in Appendix A were addressed in each environmental topic subsection of the Draft EIR, as applicable. WIN's comment letters on the May 2006 NOP requested that the Draft EIR provide information regarding land use compatibility with Wildomar's pending incorporation effort before LAFCO, land use density, traffic, growth-inducing impacts, aesthetics, wildlife, blueline streams/springs, and project scoping. In addition, WIN requested that previous public comment letters on Negative Declaration No. 2006-02 be addressed in the Draft EIR. All of these topics have been addressed in the Draft EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15082 @(1), in order to expedite the consultation regarding the scope and content of the environmental information in the EIR, the City held a duly noticed scoping meeting. Response No. 12 The City of Lake Elsinore has met the CEQA requirements for scoping as discussed in Response 11. Response No. 13 The public review period will not be extended, as discussed in Responses 11 and 12. CEQA Guidelines Section 15105(a) provides that the public review period for a draft EIR shall be not less than 45 days. The Draft EIR was made available for public review on November 10, 2006, and the public review period lasted 46 days through December 27, 2006 (Draft EIR, Section 1.6). CEQA does not require formal hearings at any stage of the environmental review process (CEQA Guidelines Section 15202). However, the City held a scoping meeting on October 5, 2006, and the Planning Commission and City Council will consider the EIR at future public hearings (CEQA Guidelines Section 15087(i)). Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-36 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR ~ Comment Document J PECHANGA INDIAN RESERVATION Temecula Band of Lulseilo Mission Indians General Counsel . John L. Maearro OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL Post Ol!lce Box 1477 . ~mecula. CA 92593 Telephone (951) 676-2768 Ext. 2138 Fax (951)587-8162 Deputy General Counsel James E. Cohen Laura Y. Miranda February 8, 2006 Sent via Email Wendy Worthey, Principal Environmental Planner City of Lake Elsinore Planning Department 130 Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Re: Pechanga Tribe's comments on Canyon Hills Estates DEIR, November 2006 Dear Ms. Worthy: This conunent letter is submitted by the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians (hereinafter, "Pechanga Tribe"), a federally recognized Indian tribe and sovereign government. The Pechanga Tribe is formally requesting, pursuant to Public Resources Code ~21 092.2, to be notified and involved in the entire CEQA environmental review process for the duration of the above referenced project (the "Project"), and requests to receive notices of all public comment periods and public hearings. We submit the following comments on the above listed document for the Project. We request that all comments be part of the official record for the approval of this Project. The Pechanga Tribe is not opposed to this development project. The pechanga Tribe's primary concerns stem from the project's likely impacts on Native American cultural resources. The Pechanga Tribe is concerned about both the protection of unique and irreplaceable cultural resources, such as Luiseiio village sites and archaeological items which would be displaced by ground-disturbing work on the project, and on the proper and lawful treatment of cultural items, Native American human remains and sacred items likely to be discovered in the course of the work. J1 [ THE LEAD AGENCY MUST INCLUDE AND CONSULT WITH THE TRIBE IN ITS REVIEW PROCESS Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-37 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR It has been the intent of the Federal Governmentl and the State of Califomia2 that Indian tribes be consulted with regard to issues which impact cultural and spiritual resources, as well as other govenunentaJ concerns. The responsibility to consult with Indian tribes stems from the unique government-ta-government relationship between the United States and Indian tribes. This arises when tribal interests are affected by the actions of governmental agencies and departments such as approval of General Plans, Specific Plans and EIRs. In this case, it is undisputed that the project lies within the Luiseiio tribe's traditional territory. Therefore, in order to comply with CEQA and other applicable Federal and California law, it is imperative that the Lead Agency consult with the Tribe in order to guarantee an adequate basis of knowledge for an appropriate evaluation of the project effects, as well as generating adequate policies and mitigation measures. J1 In addition, if the Project requires a 40 I or 404 permit or some similar action which triggers federal law, then the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. ~~ 470 et. seq) requires that a Section 106 review be performed for all Federal undertakings. (16 V.S.C. 47Ow(7); 36 CFR ~800.16(y)j The issuance of permits such as a Section 401 or 404 permit are considered undertakings under Section 106. Id. As such. the Army Corps, and the City as applicant, must initiate the Section 106 review process, which includes consultation with, among others, federally-recognized Indian tribes. (Id. at *800.16(f) and (m)). Consultation is required whether the property in question is on or off tribal lands (ld. at ~800.2(cX2)(ii)). THE ClTY OF MURRIETA MUST CONSULT WITH THE PECHANGA TRIBE PURSUANT TO CAL. GOVT. C. ~~ 65351.65352.65352.3. AND 65352.4 (SENATE BILL 18 - TRADITIONAL TRIBAL CULTURAL PLACES LAW) J2 The Lead Agency, the City of Murrieta, is required to consult with the Pechanga Tribe pursuant to a State law entitled Traditional Tribal Cultural Places (also known as sa 18) (Ca!. Govt. C. 9 65352.3) prior to adoption or amendment of a general plan or a specific plan and when a scared site is placed in Open Space. Such consultation shall be for the purposes of identifying any Native American sacred places and any geographical areas which could potentially yield sacred places, identifying proper means of treatment and management of such places, and to ensure the protection and preservation of such places through agreed upon mitigation (G-al. Govt. C. 65352.3; sa 18, Chapter 905, Section 1(4)(b)(3)). All official consultations shall be government-ta-government, meaning they shall be directly between the Tribe and the Lead Agency; and seeking agreement where feasible (Cal. Govt. C. ~ 65352.4; sa 18, Chapter 905, Section I See Executive Memorandum of April 29, 1994 on Govemmcnt-to-Govemmenl Relations with Native American Tribal Governments and Executive Order of November 6. 2000 on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments. 2 See California Public Resource Code ~5091.9 et seq. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-38 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR 1 (4)(b)(3)). The DElR states that the City and/or Applicant have received no request for SB 18 consultation (DEIR, November 20M, Page 3.11-2). This is not true. The Pechanga Tribe submitted a request for consultation pursuant to SB t 8 to City Planner Kirt Couty on 2/21/06. To this date the Tribe has not received a response to this letter nor have we received any contact from the City or the Applicant about colI1ll1encing with the SB 18 consultation. Further, the Tribe noticed the 2121106 letter was not part of the public record of approval for this Project. We request that it be made part of the public J2 record and that the City and the Applicant contact us to begin such consultations. We further request that such consultations be completed prior to any approval of this Project. Lastly, any such information c()nveyed to the Lead Agency concerning Native American sacred places shall be confidential in terms of the specific identity,location, character, and use of those places and associated features and objects. Such information shall not be subject to public disclosure pursuant the California Public Records Act (Cal. Govt. C. 6254(r)). THE PECHANGA TRIBE IS CULTURALLY AFFILIATED WITH THE PROJECl' AREA The Pechanga Tribe has a legal and cultural interest in the proper protection of sacred places and all Luiseno cultural resources. The Tribe is concerned about both the protection of unique and irreplaceable cultural resources, such as Luiseno village sites and archaeological items which will be displaced by development, and on the proper and lawful treatment of cultural items, Native American human remains and sacred items likely to be discovered in the course of development and improvements within the City. J3 The PechangaILuiseiio people traditionally occupied the geographical area known today as the City Lake Elsinore and the surrounding area for thousands of years. This is verified through stories and songs of the Pechanga people that are cultural evidence ofthe Tribe's cultural affiliation with these lands. Occupation is also evidenced through anthropological studies, archaeological studies, and histories of the area, including the archeological assessments prepared for this Project (Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Canyon Hills Estates, September 22, 2006, Pg. 3). In addition, Tribal ties to these territories have been maintained to the present day through cultural and governmental actions. The Tribe would welcome the opportunity to meet with the City and/or Applicant to further explain and provide documentation concerning our specific cultural affiliation to lands within your jurisdiction. PROJECT IMPACTS TO CULTURAL RESOURCES J4 The Pechanga Tribe asserts that the Project area contains cultural resources that must be properly evaluated and assessed pursuant to the CEQA. It is the Tribe's position that the DEIR has failed to do this, and that the conclusions and mitigation measures contained with the DEIR are inadequate. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-39 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR J4 Per the Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, there is at least one archeological site on the property with another site, CA-R1V 4154, located either on the edge of the property or within the Project property (phase I Report, Page 8). Thus far, the only archeological evaluation that has been completed is a Phase I surface survey and a site records search. The site records search resulted in the conclusion that "none of the Project APE has been previously surveyed" (phase I Report, Page 7). This fact coupled with the fact that this area has not been subject to a Phase II test program leads the Tribe to believe that the proposed mitigation measures are likely inadequate or incomplete mitigation pursuant to the CEQA. Until the Phase II program has been completed the City cannot set appropriate mitigation as the specifics 'of the sites are not fully known. It is not prudent to defer the Phase II testing to post-project approval as this could be construed as "deferred mitigation" pursuant to CEQA. which is only allowed in certain circumstances. Here we have a situation where the due diligence concerning the nature of the cultural resources can be completed to prior to Project approval, which will give the City has a full understanding of the impacts to cultural resources and the potential for inadvertent discoveries. It is prudent to gather all information possible prior to Project approval so that all issues can be dealt with through the CEQA process. For example, if the Phase II is allowed to be completed post-project approval the City may not be able to condition the project appropriately without going through another approval process. In addition, ifresources are uncovered ofanature not analyzed or assessed in the DEIR another DEIR pl'OCe$S may be required anyway. The only type of mitigation concerning cultural resources that may make sense to defer is a process for inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources, but even in that case the process should be as detailed as possible. In the interest of time and the goal to accurately and adequately perform an environmental assessment, the Tribe asserts that the Phase II must be completed prior to Project approval, so that a clear understanding of Project impacts can be analyzed and appropriate mitigation can be set The DEIR recommends that the sites be treated as "significant" or "unique" until the Phase II proves otherwise. It is the Tribe's contention that the Phase II will likely result in the cultural resources being "unique" or "significant" pursuant to CEQA. As such, any Phase II testing and mitigation measures should be created accordingly. This area is a number of cultura1 resources sites in the vicinity as well as two sites on and immediately surrounding the Project property. In addition, the topography and vegetation is indicative of subsurface resources. As stated above, the area known as, and immediately surrounding, the City of Lake Elsinore is culturally important to the Tribe as many of our oral histories, including our creation stories tell of Luiseno places in the area. These places are likely to contain resources that are of an archeological and cultural importance to the Tribe. J5 [We commend the City for proposing a mitigation measure to preserve the archeological/Cultural site known as TS-o 1. However, the DEIR calls for only avoidance of certain portions of the archeological/culturaI site designated at TS-Ol. The Tribe is in disagreement with this conclusion for two reasons. First, the full nature of the site is not Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-40 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR J5 J6 [ J7 [ known without a Phase II. In addition. because Phase II subsurface testing has not been completed the exact site boundaries are not known. The City should make provisions for determining this exact site boundary and the full nature of the site, and should make provisions for the possibility that part of the site may be subsurface and may extend beyond what is believed to be the current boundary. Second. the Tribe is also in disagreement because the emphasis is only on preserving the portion of the site that contains a large feature, a bedrock mortar feature (DEIR. November 2006, Page 3.11-4, mitigation measure PDP 3.11-1). This is not appropriate mitigation because the other portions contain artifacts and resources that are no less important than the bedrock mortar. This emphasis on the scientific value of the site rather than both the archeological value and the cultural significance is insulting and an inappropriate form of mitigation. Moreover, if one was going to attempt to make a value judgment regarding the "most important" portions of the site there is an argument that the most important part may not even be the bedrock mortar, but a different portion. This value judgment has been made by only the archeologist and does not employ any input by the Pechanga Tribe or any application of the cultural significance of the area. The Tribe is in support of preservation of the entire site, surface and subsurface, currently known and unknown. In addition, the Pechanga Tribe requests that in the case of discovery of new or additional sites or resources that the Lead Agency commit to re-evaluating the Project impacts to cultural resources and adopting appropriate mitigation measures to address such inadvertent discoveries. The Pechanga Tribe intends to assert its legal rights with respect to additional finds of significant sites or cultural resources which are of sacred and ceremonial significance to the Pechanga Tribe. The Tribe would also like to point out that a preferred method of treatment for archeological sites according to the CEQA is avoidance (California Public Resources Code ~21 083.1), and that this is in agreement with the Tribe's practices and policies conceming cultural resources. PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES INADEOUATE The Pecbanga Tribe asserts that the proposed mitigation measures are inadequate to bring this Project in compliance with the CEQA. The mitigation measures do not take into account the cultural significance of the resources, but focus on the scientific value and practices of archeology. All of the J8 mitigation measures do not provide for treatment of the resources in a culturally appropriate manner, i.e. no mechanisms to take into account Tribe's treatment practices and preferences, and no acknowledgement that all resources, including ceremonial and sacred resources should be treated in accordance with tribal customs and traditions as they are affiliated to a present-day community that retains practicing beliefs and customs associated with such resources. Moreover, it is common practice of the lead agencies in our area to require repatriation of the resources back to the affiliated Indian tribe and to protect sacred and ceremonial places. The Pechanga Tribe requests the same here, and Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-41 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR J10 J11 J12 J13 J8 [ requests a requirement that the resources, especially sacred and ceremonial resources be relinquished to the Pechanga Tribe for appropriate treatment. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-42 J9 The Pechanga Tribe is adamantly opposed to any type of scientific testing on Native American human remains, ceremonial cultural resources and sacred cultural resources. Such testing is not required or necessary to meet the legal obligations of this Project, and should not be required in any mitigation measures or conditions for this Project. The Pechanga Tribe requests that any requirement for the resources be curated or housed at a curatorial facility pursuant to federal law be removed from the mitigation measures and conditions. There is no such federal requirement for a project of this nature. FlJrther, the Pechanga Tribe believes that ifhuman remains are discovered, State law would apply and the mitigation measures must account for this. According to the California Public Resources Code, ~ 5097.98, if Native American human remains are discovered, the Native American Heritage commission must name a "most likely descendant," who shall be consulted as to the appropriate disposition of the remains. Given the Project's location in Pechanga territory, the Pechanga Tribe intends to assert its right pursuant to California law with regard to any remains or items discovered in the course of this project. Because the cultural resources and Project area are within the traditional territory of the Pechanga Tribe, it is prudent for the City to include the Pechanga Tribe as a partner in mitigating the Project impacts to cultural resources as the CEQA authorizes such action (CEQA Guidelines, 15086(b)). The current mitigation measures fail to include Pechanga in a consistent manner. Not clarifying the role of the Tribe positions the City for a possible violation of State law, including CEQA. The Tribe must be allowed to be involved and participate with the Lead Agency and the Project Applicant in developing all monitoring and mitigation plans for the duration of the Project. Further, given the potential for archaeological resources within the Project area, it is the position of the Pechanga Tribe that Pechanga tribal monitors should be required to be present prior to and during all ground-disturbing activities conducted in connection with the project, including any archeological testing performed, not just for the areas immediately surrounding known archeological sites. It is further the position of the Pechanga Tribe that an Agreement regarding appropriate treatment of cultural resources be drafted and entered into. In addition, since no subsurface archeological surveys were conducted for the purposes of the cultural resources assessment, grading may reveal additional significant archaeological resources and sites which may be eligible for inclusion in the historic site register, and may contain human remains or sacred items. Therefore, we request that the Lead Agency commit to evaluating Project environmental impacts to any cultural sites that are discovered during archeological testing and grading, and to adopt appropriate mitigation for such sites, in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe. CEQA authorizes a Lead Agency to adopt provisions for responding to "accidental discoveries" or State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR J13 [ inadvertent discoveries during construction. We ask for mitigations measures to account for inadvertent discoveries of this nature as we believe there is a good likelihood of such discoveries. REQUESTED MITIGATION Given that Luiseno cultural resources will be affected by the Project, the Pechanga Tribe, for the reasons stated above, requests the following changes to the cmrently proposed mitigation measures (strike-outs are deletions and underlines are additions): J14 MM 3.11.1&: Pfler te the issaamle of any gmttiRg Jll!Rl1its, a pFeservatieR easemell:t shall be established te l'esmlll: the USe Md de','elOllMeBt of LOella 3 sf TS-Ol shall be avoided and oreserved..--A including alO meter buffer surroundinl! the boundaries of TS-OI setside the LOGUS area &hall be established to protect the delineated site area and any associate subsurface components. Protective fencing during construction shall be provided to protect ~IS:Ql. 1ft adS$&ft, BRy sufiaee lWIIer subsurfaee artifaets shall be eelIeeted, ilBalyiles, IIBS reported te a'leis the IBsireet impaet& re9UItiftg nem \It'Ia\rtherizea eeHeetiag. These rees'"ered artifaets shall be housed at a e\ffatorial faeility in eElHlpli~ee .".jtJi Jll CFR 79. J15 MM 3.11-1b: Prior to Project approval the issullflee of aay gradiag pefHlits, a Phase II cultural resources testing and evaluation program shall be conducted for TS-OI and TS- 02. The Phase n evaluation plan shall contain a research design and field methodology designed te reeiYJel' del lIlf1eadahle te te!HiRg the site's aeility te yiels anS'lIef9 te llHesaoss of iRt_st te the pllblie aBEt .'ar sGientifie eammunityevaluate the silmificance of the sites nursuant to apnlicable law. includine CEOA. and in accordance with general archeoloeical reoortinll standards for such. Te!itiBg slIall iRelllde s1IpplemeiHaI ffiBpfliBg, swfaee eelleeHeBs with SJlatial eeBtfels, subsmfaee eKe&'llltieRs, rees'fery sf SJleeial s8mJlles (e.g. _heft 1Il'I6I<< sail SlIlf1ples), analysis, ms r-epeFt preElHetien pre5e1l:tmg the results sf the P.J1ase II smllies. If Phase n testing determines the presence of a "unique archaeological resource" under Public Resources Code Section 21083.2, the report shall include recommended measures to avoid or mitigate impacts to the sites. Where ayoidllflee af sigBifieall:t FeSeBrees is Ret feasible, Phase III i&';estigatieBs (Elata reea','ery) shall be eeHlflleted. J16 All testing and evaluation shall be supervised by an individual or individuals meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards as a qualified prehistoric archaeologist for Site TS-OI and as an historic archaeologist for Site TS-02 and/or a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RP A) with similar qualifications. l MM 3.11-1c: If the Phase 11 cultural resources evaluation program determines that a given resource is eligib Ie for listing on the California Registry of Historic Resources (CRHR) and/or local listings and therefore meets the definition of an "historical resource," or if there is a determination bv the City in consultation with the Pechanlla Tribe that a resource is "uniaue" nursuant to CEOA or other aooIicable law, an impact Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-43 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR J19 J20 J16 J17 J18 [ determination shall be made prior to i5SUaliee af gfllEIiBg pemlitsProiect aooroval. If the impacts are determined to be significant, a tl'eatmeHt plan shall eeaDorooriate mitil!ation measures shall be desilined in consultation with the Pechan2a Tribe imjllemeMed to mitigate impacts to below a level of significance with Dreservation as the oreferred mitistion. If preservation. tl:tta. easem.eat is not feasiWethe chosen alternative. a data recovery program shall be implemented. The data recovery program shall entail, at a minimum, the collection of surface materials and a sufficient sample of buried materials, analysis. and reporting of recovered materials consistent with the Cultural Resources Treatment and Mom't0rin2 Aereement by and between the Proiect ADolicant and the Pechant!a Tribe reauited in MM 3.11-2a. 86 ,:,reU as eUfQtiaB af these materials at a ewatefial fIIeility Hi eemplianee with 36 CPR 19. MM 3.1l-1d: As ~ed is. the Prior to issuance of grading permit(s) for the Proiect. the Proiect ADDlicant shall retain an archaeological maBiteriBg shall be eeftElueted as part af allY gfalmEl disturbanee iael$iiag tej'igeil ElistlHhaBees monitor to monitor alll!rOund- disturbinll activities with special emphasis on the vicinity ofTS-Ol and TS-02 in an effort to identifY any unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation (see MM 3.11-1b AND3.l1-1c). MM 3.11-1e: Mitigation Measures 3.1I-2a through 3.11-2c include provisions for Native American consultation and monitoring, and 8~a11 apply to all activities undertaken with respect to Site TS-o I. MM 3.11-2a: At least 30 days prior to seeking a grading permit, the project applicant shall contact the Pechanga Band of Luiseiio Indians for the purpose of notifYing the Tribe of the grading. excavation, and monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Lake Elsinore and the Pechanga Band of Luisei'l.o Indians to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the treatment of known cultural resources. the designation, responsibilities, and participation of Native monitors during grading, excavation, and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation; and treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. The City of Lake Elsinore shall be the final arbiter of any disputes concerning the Drovisions included in the Agreement. MM 3.1l-2b: Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the project archaeologist shall file a pre-grading report with the City and County (if required) to document the proposed methodOlogy for grading activity observation. Said methodology shall include the requirement for a qualified archaeological monitor to be present and to have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. In accordance with the Agreement required in MM 3.11-28., the archaeological monitor's authority to stop and redirect grading will be exercised in consultation with the Pechanga Band of Luisefl.o Indians in order to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. Tribal monitors from the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians shall be allowed to monitor all Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-44 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR J20 [ grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities, and shall also have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities in consultation with the project archaeologist J21 MM 3.11-2c: If human relnilins ate encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 shall apply and no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The Riverside County Coroner shall be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAllC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or hislher authorized representative, the MID may inspect the site discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection and provide its recommendations pursuant to Public Resourced Code 5097.98 withiR 24 haUl'll af Betmeatias By the }1J'.HC. The MLD may reeemmend seientifie I'eme';al aB6 88fiElestfUetive 8fIalysis eflNlmaB reJBllins atld itea:ls BS!lfJeiated with }lative .^ .meriea8 burials. Adherence to Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 is required as a matter of course. J22 [ In oddilinn, we _to odd tho foil""" ""'" (3) mltigatinn """"''''' J23 [ All sacred sites within the Proiect area are to be avoided and oreserved. J24 If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeological resources are discovered during ~radinl!. the Developer. the Proiect archaeololZist. and the PechanlZa Band of Luiseno Indians shall assess the silZDificance of such resources and shall meet and confer ree:arding the mitigation for such resources. If the Developer and the Pechanga Band cannot BlZree on the shmificance or the mitil!ation for such resources. these issues will be presented to the City Planninll Director for decision. The Planninl! Director shall make his decision based on the orovisions of the California Environmental Oualitv Act with resoect to archaeololUcal resources and shall take into account the relilZious beliefs. customs and oractices of the Pechanl!a Band. The decision of the Planninl! Director shall be aopealable to the City of Lake Elsinore. The Pechanga Tribe looks forward to working together with the City of Lake Elsinore in protecting the invaluable Luiseiio cultural resources found in the Project area. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (951) 676-2768, Ext. 2137. Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-45 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Sincerely, Deputy cc: Dale Foster, Pechanga Cultural Resources Analyst Jeremy Krout, RGP Planning &. Development Services Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-46 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response to Comment Document J Pechanga Indian Reservation, Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians December 27, 2006 Response No. J1 The City of Lake Elsinore has and will continue to consult with the Pechanga Tribe. The City of Lake Elsinore sent the May and June 2006 NOPs to the Pechanga Tribe. In addition, a SB18 Consultation Letter was sent to the Tribe on September 6, 2006. The City (Wendy Worthey, Principal Environmental Planner) also held a consultation meeting on January 8, 2007 with Laura Miranda, Deputy General Counsel and Dale Foster, Pechanga Cultural Resources Analyst of the Pechanga Tribe, Brian Glenn, applicant's cultural resources consultant (BonTerra Consulting), and Jeremy Krout and Sue Lamoureux, applicant's entitlement and CEQA consultant (RGP Planning and Development Services). The main purpose of the meeting was to discuss the Tribe's comment letter on the Canyon Hills Estates DEIR. The Project will require a 401 and 404 permit which requires a Section 106 review under the National Historic Preservation Act. Therefore, the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) with the City as the applicant will also initiate the Section 106 review process which also involves consultation with the Pechanga Tribe. Response No. J2 The City sent a SB18 Consultation Letter to the Tribe in February 2006 regarding a previous project approved by the City Council in April 2006. These April 2006 approvals included a sphere of influence change for the Project site. The City and Pechanga representative Stephanie Gordon agreed that because there was no development footprint for the sphere of influence project, the Tribe would defer comment until subsequent CEQA documentation on a development plan and more specific information was available regarding cultural resources. In addition, the City sent a SB18 Consultation Letter to the Tribe on September 6, 2006 regarding the current Proposed Project. Further, a consultation meeting was held on January 8, 2007 with the City and the Tribe (see Response No. J1 above). It is noted that any information conveyed to the Lead Agency concerning Native American sacred places will be confidential and will not be subject to public disclosure. The City will continue consultation with the Pechanga Tribe regarding cultural resources mitigation measures and subsequent cultural resources surveys/testing, etc. Response No. J3 The City recognizes the Pechanga Tribe's cultural affiliation with the Project Area and will continue to consult with the Tribe regarding the cultural resources on the Project site. Response No. J4 The City acknowledges the Tribe's position that a Phase II test program is necessary to adequately assess the cultural resources impact conclusions and mitigation measures. As a result of the consultation meeting held between the Tribe and City on January 8, 2007, an extended Phase I evaluation was conducted on January 12, 2007 on the T5-01 site. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-47 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft. fiR The DEIR acknowledges that TS-01 is a "significant" or "unique" under CEQA. Phase II testing was not conducted previously because of concerns regarding disturbance of sensitive cultural resources prior to any Project approvals by the City and the potential for disclosure of confidential site location. Per Society for California Archaeology v. County of Butte (3d Dist. 1977) 65 Cal.App.3d 832, 838 {CaI.Rptr. 679}, "when comments suggest that further data be gathered, it is not 'mandatory for an agency to conduct every test and perform all research, study and experimentation recommended to it to determine true and full environmental impact, before it can approve a proposed project..Just as an agency has the discretion for good reason to approve a project which will admittedly have an adverse environmental impact, it has discretion to reject a proposal for additional testing or experimentation." (Remy, Michael H., Tina A. Thomas, James G. Moose, and Whitman F. Manley, Guide to the California Environmental Oualitv Act (CEOA). 1999 [Tenth] edition, p. 317. Response No. J5 The planning approach for Canyon Hills Estates was mitigation-by-design which resulted in the avoidance of Locus 3 of TS-01. However, the preservation and avoidance of all three loci of TS-01 is not a feasible alternative as discussed in Chapter 4, Project Alternatives, Reduced Footprint Alternative (Section 4.5.3, pp. 4-3, 4-17). This alternative would have preserved the known . boundaries of Loci 1 and 2. This alternative was rejected because of fire safety concerns which required a roadway connection between the eastern and western portions of the Proposed Project. In addition, much of the impact to Drainage A in the northern portion of the site is due to the expanded detention basin area that is necessary to mitigate pre-existing stormdrain deficiencies downstream in the existing Canyon Hills development. The expanded detention area became a Project Design Feature toward the latter stages of site planning and preliminary engineering; otherwise, Drainage A would have included additional preservation area. Response No. J6 The City will continue to consult with the Pechanga Tribe regarding new or additional sites or resources. The Pechanga Tribe will be invited to participate in Phase II testing and any cultural resources monitoring on the Project site. The City acknowledges that the Tribe intends to assert its legal rights to cultural resources on the site. The Project will require a 401 and 404 permit which requires a Section 106 review under the National Historic Preservation Act. Therefore, the Army Corps with the City as the applicant will also initiate the Section 106 review process which will also involve consultation with the Pechanga Tribe. Response No. J7 The City acknowledges that preservation or avoidance is the "preferred" method for mitigating cultural resources impacts. However, analysis of Project alternatives determined that avoidance of Loci 1 and 2 of TS-01 was infeasible due to the concerns state above in Response No. J5. Therefore, mitigation measures have been included that require Phase II testing, Phase III recovery, if necessary, and other mitigation measures. Response No. J8 The Tribe requests repatriation of cultural resources to the Tribe for appropriate treatment. The Project will require a 401 and 404 permit which requires a Section 106 review under the National Historic Preservation Act. Therefore, the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) with the City as the applicant will also initiate the Section 106 review process which will also involve consultation with the Pechanga Tribe. The ACOE will determine the affiliated Indian Tribe as part of this process and this to will allow for repatriation of cultural resources. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-48 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response No. J9 The DEIR does not recommend scientific testing on Native American human remains, ceremonial cultural resources and sacred cultural resources. The Section 106 process discussed above in Response No. J8 above will determine the disposition of any cultural resources on the Project site. MM 3.11-1a states "recovered artifacts shall be housed at a curatorial facility in complete with State 36 CFR 79. MM 3.11-1a has been revised as shown in Response No. J14. Response No. J10 The DEIR states that California Public Resources Code S 5097.98 would apply if human remains are found. It is acknowledged that the Pechanga Tribe intends to assert its rights to any Native American human remains per California Public Resources Code, S 5097.98. Response No. J11 The City recognizes that the Pechanga Tribe is the probable Indian affiliate for the Project site. This determination will ultimately be made during the Section 106 process by the ACOE. The Pechanga Tribe was specifically mentioned in Mitigation Measures 3.11-2a to 2c (see pp. 3.11-7 and 8 in the DEIR). The City has initiated S818 consultation with the Tribe and will continue to involve the Tribe in the cultural resources mitigation measures following Project approval. The City will revise the cultural resources mitigation measures per some of the recommendations of the Tribe as shown in Response Nos. J14 - J24 below. The Tribe will also be consulted in the preparation of a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement (see Mitigation Measure 3.11-2a on page 3.11-7 of the DEIR). Response No. J12 Tribal monitoring was included in MM 3.11-2a in the DEIR. MM 3.11-2a has been revised as discussed in Response No. J19. Response No. J13 Undiscovered cultural resources and recommended mitigation measures are discussed on pp. 3.11- 7 and 8 in the DEIR. MMs 3.11-2a through 2c have been revised as shown in Response Nos. J19 through J21 below. Response No. J14 Mitigation Measure 3.11-1a addresses the preservation of Locus 3 of TS-01. The Tribe would like this mitigation measure be revised to include all of TS-01. As discussed in Response No. J5 above, the DEIR determined that it was infeasible to preserve all of T5-01 due to fire safety concerns that require a through connection between the eastern and western portions of the Proposed Project. However, MM 3.11-1a has been revised as follows per the Tribe's recommendations: MM 3.11-1a: P-Fief--te-thc i~~u:Jn6c of ;:my g~efffiits, Cl prcscrvCltion eClscment ShCll1 be e&ta-8+i5r'ted to rC~trict the u~e ClrtEl-€levelBFffieAt of Locus 3 of T5-01 shall be avoided and preserved where ~feasible includin~ QA 10 meter buffer oot&t€J-e the Lo:::;us Jrca-surrounding the boundaries of TS-Ols-A-a-f~es-ta-b+isA-ee- _to protect the delineated site area and any associated subsurface components. Protective fencing during construction shall be provided to protect --be€-\:l-S--6TS-Ol where feasible. l-A---a4dition, Cln)' ~LlrfClCC Clnd/or subsurfClce--a.'iffa.€.ts s-hat!-ge---€9Uee-ted. :m:Jlyze4,-aR>-~teEl--te-avefd-tA-~pClcts rcSBiffRg--ffeffi Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-49 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR 1:l-A-a-I:Jthorizod collectin~. Thes~Any recovered artifacts shall be housed at a curatorial facility in compliance with 36 CFR 79 or given to the affiliated Tribe as determined bv the Section 106 process in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act. Response No. J15 Mitigation Measure 3.11-1b addresses a Phase II cultural resources testing and evaluation program for TS-01 and TS-02. The Tribe suggested revisions to this mitigation measure to require Phase II testing prior to Project approval. Per Response No. J4 above, Phase II testing was not performed at part of the DEIR because the cultural resources were determined to be "significant" and "unique" under CEQA. Phase II testing was also not conducted previously because of concerns regarding disturbance of sensitive cultural resources prior to any Project approvals by the City and the potential for disclosure of confidential site location. However, MM 3.11-1b has been revised as follows per the Tribe's recommendations: MM 3. 11-1b: Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, a Phase II cultural resources testing and evaluation program shall be conducted for T5-01 and TS-02. The Phase II evaluation plan shall contain a research design and field methodology designed to evaluate the significance of the sites pursuant to applicable law and in accordance with general archaeological reporting standards for such. recover d3t3 ~meR-a-bJ.e-to testin~ the site's Clbility to yield Clns\'.'ers to questions of iFtteFest to the public ~nd/or scientific community. +es-tit1g shCll1 include supple-mentClI mClj9ping;, SUffaBe collections with spClti~1 con-trel&; &tlf:l.s.tI-FFaBe-8-*8aVat-ions, reGe-Very-of spec~mples (e.g;. cClrbon Clnd/or soil c~mples), ~nCllysis, Clnd I'ef*lrt productio~eseffiffi.g--+Re-Fe&ults of the PhClse " studies. If Phase II testing determines the presence of a "unique archaeological resource" under Public Resources Code Section 21083.2, the report shall include recommended measures to avoid or mitigate impacts to the sites. Where avoidance of significant resources is not feasible, Phase III investigations (data recovery) shall be completed. All testing and evaluation shall be supervised by an individual or individuals meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards as a qualified prehistoric archaeologist for Site T5-01 and as an historic archaeologist for Site TS-02 and/or a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA) with similar qualifications. Response No. J16 See Response No. J15 above. MM 3.11-1c has been revised as follows per the Tribe's recommendations: MM 3.11-1c: If the Phase II cultural resources evaluation program determines that a given resource is eligible for listing on the California Registry of Historic Resources (CRHR) and/or local listings and therefore meets the definition of an "historical resource," or if there is a determination by the City in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe that a resource is "unique" pursuant to apolicable law. an impact determination shall be made prior to issuance of grading permits. If the impacts are determined to be significant, a---tfea-tmont p[3n Sh311 be aopropriate mitigation measures shall be designed in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe i-ffij9femeA-tee-to mitigate impacts to below a level of significance with preservation as the preferred mitigation if feasible. If preservation t-R-fetfgh cClscmcnt is not--feas.i.Bte the chosen alternative, a data recovery program shall be implemented. The data recovery program shall entail, at a minimum, the collection of surface materials and a sufficient sample of buried materials, analysis, and reporting of recovered materials consistent with the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement by and between the Proiect Applicant and Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-50 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR the Pechanga Tribe as reauired in MM 3.11-2a, CIS wall CIS curCltion of these motoriols ot ;] curotorijl focility in complionce with 36 CFR 79. Response No. J17 MM 3.11-1d has been revised as follows per the Tribe's suggestions: MM 3.11-1d: ,^.s required in tho Prior to issuance of grading permit(s) for the Proiect, the Proiect Apolicant shall retain an archaeological monitoring sholl ~ucted ;]s port of ony ground disturbonce including topsoif-El.is.llirbonces monitor to monitor all ground-disturbing activities with special emphasis on the vicinity of TS-01 and TS-02 in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation (see MM 3.11-1b and 3.11-1c). Response No. J18 No revisions for MM 3.11-1e were recommended by the Tribe. Response No. J19 MM 3.11-2a has been revised as follows per the Tribe's suggestions: MM 3.11-2a: At least 30 days prior to seeking a grading permit, the project applicant shall contact the Pechanga Band of Luisefio Indians for the purpose of notifying the Tribe of the grading, excavation and monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Lake Elsinore and the Pechanga Band of Luisefio Indians to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the treatment of known cultural resources. the designation, responsibilities, and participation of Native American monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation; and treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. The City of Lake Elsinore shall be the final arbiter of any disputes concerning the conditions included in the Agreement. Response No. J20 No revisions for MM 3.11-2b were recommended by the Tribe. Response No. J21 MM 3.11-2c has been revised as follows per the Tribe's suggestions: MM 3.11-2c: If human remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 shall apply and no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The Riverside County Coroner shall be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection and provide its recommendations pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. within 21 h8urs of Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-51 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR flB'l:.ific;Jtion by the N/\HC. Th-e--MbQ-m;Jy recommend scien-tific remov;J! ::md nondestructive ;JnJlysis ~n remJins Jnd items JssociJtcd with ~btivo ,^,meric::ln buri::lls. Response No. J22 The following mitigation measure recommended by the Tribe will be included as Project mitigation: MM 3.11-2d. The landowner agrees to relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including all Luiseno sacred items, burial goods and all archeological artifacts that are found on the Project area to the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians for proper treatment and disposition. Response No. J23 The following mitigation measure recommended by the Tribe will be included as Project mitigation with revisions: MM 3.11-2e. All sacred sites within the Project area are to be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation if feasible. If preservation is not the ch.osen alternative. a data recovery program shall be implemented. The data recovery program shall entail. at a minimum. the collection of surface materials and a sufficient sample of buried materials. analysis. and reporting of recovered materials consistent with the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement by and between the Proiect Applicant and the Pechanga Tribe as reauired in MM 3.11-2a. Response No. J24 The following mitigation measure recommended by the Tribe will be included as Project mitigation: MM 3.11-21. If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeological resources are discovered during grading, the Developer, the Project archaeologist, and the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians shall assess the significance of such resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources. If the Developer and the Pechanga Band cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for such resources, these issues will be presented to the City Planning Director for decision. The Planning Director shall make his decision based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources and shall take into account the religious beliefs, customs and practices of the Pechanga Band. The decision of the Planning Director shall be appealable to the City of Lake Elsinore. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-52 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR ~iOIHil[RN C\tlfl)aNl^ ~.~~ "':,;<: ., ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS Main Office H1B We:.-, S~~"'onth Srr'!'('t 1 "):h Fk:(}r l.():. Anfjeks. (;!lifornl.:; %U17-3435 'l'2n~ J.;1fS,.!HOO fr;~u} ~:HHH2~ w't;W:;'I:;-;~J.(.,).90'! Comment Document K December 15, 2006 !il~\I-;.'. .:~-_. ; , ;-. .. i i-'.(r . 1111' IJW I L..__ ! c;'; ~';'-i"_,PJ . I q ii ;ir .:1 Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-53 Dffiteu: s:..t\.lfi,~ '~li 11IFh". k", Anotin(OII!ly.i.~VI(r~.(WO}tlfttl. >>l~i1~ntHnl'(lMIIv' ~.tIC!V.lf fIIMll1m Jito.:..JN Dr.tt: t;v.o i~ . ir'ln'~t "an 1'!~\Idmlltoth~"tl~" lAt,eri.1 (owt\r- Wtll~' {..II..... IhlP""'" im~Il:}',,*IMrJlii.~, lo& M9fm {,,'Yo 'i~_ t Jilm.... It'! ~~(ClI) .1" ''''Hfr.q :~ ~~l (IInr.Itanw.Il}l'f.~St.Ui\.i\lrI: ~ ~,,:,-"-'.P.u~,..k~ (~,,'lt>. )BddCantpbrt!b1Hli .k"!"iC.-:<<H\ III ~f~ . ~u (;aI..... 1.. IL.... ~. . k9li':" h~~, litr.cn:c .. .;.r...; ~ r.r~.IJoi..fhpft1/o1t""i\Nlt-juIty ~,,*".Il1t.o.R.Y.-~",itM\l'IiI"Mh . I~: \ioJ1..... ~~ . ir~ WK!"i;' ((', I...~.' ~\" lil:~~. i~ ~~. !~l: ~:,~~7~~~~ .;..ion 1..- in_ . io\.!-lb;~.~~;.'tcr.I K1 "'~.I'~l.llflu.i *I.lIpt~.f"'f'.ti.tJt6C.I_~lltl:.!lIol'IIi:"'I.it-. !>,uill", il~, i!fIlW'1n . iftlllli. p".t.; l(.,: A~'I.v>~,!IIJ'."~.If~tt!'. ",~.g;:;!r:IN-~'lh!.rOlo~'('''''; ~ll"'" ;l, 11lMh' ~ \.,.~. ~l"'-:: . :",." l.>t.,~~I'.~~'*'wll!1!tI[~MlQl.lor.:; 1l.r.llCt:.lnlc;fI(.'~~"".I..~"'lIl'l:'" !kcI1ll \"""':lIr~ l~,,~ . w~ ~~ Il~ I"::l!.;r, . !~" L ~~v.:.. i:. 1.0: MltT.' . h.,.l:n~.III\;..k-, Orqt'(IUINF(h:~ h;witt c...'r.J+L'~.~;-' (b',"'k: I!;;no<:-:. 101 r"'n.~ . llll:~ !l~-."" !"<"'!0I.!Un-.i:I\~l\.4ItfiJll'3l" !iw.w..V.lII' ;~;;~:'"~I, ~~:~:r~~I~.:;. Sincerely. ~?~~;~~:;~;,~~.: (:;x(lll.-'-.t?-ht..-tL (J1)-7l-.t2,v oI-{J------__ Hlfbol!'!'r. M.~t. 'f'Mk:' . k(II~ I~:r. / 7 I ....." ..... '-nl'. ,_.. "" .,. SYLVIA PA TSAOURAS :~~::.:: (,..... ...,.." ", Manager, Environmental Division 8trnr,)o*....(G.M1.1,..~rl.~Dra!.:.&.'lnIM':. r'..-.il.w.n.A:'lMI(!;P' 'I~r flOali.ttw. (tIMlG irltolf. .lMp,u~ 1.~/J,".JlIMVmr'fA<~ t'J{"lltGlllilnd' Ek'ilIUbllMtl'llGe.Il.w. .,U"I~~(MIar'"J "MM\Ini<etmtr-.IItItrMdtl!.~""e&Il!'!! . [,It It ~ffll~ )In, 'l.1II~. C.i l&lId__ \bI~lI.lIliI.jgn;~flrt~I~I!.' OI~.c...'rllM11JOt\.l'ionAlrnl"'''r. Hili (1lI~1I, (lid," ill.. RM!nWt"(OImlJT~ (OMnIlssioll:li"'"ltoWt.Itf!H, Vmt"(",",JT'~ll$pOf'ali.. (.-.nissitn:: j;eeliI_rtW'./.htllfoll~ Ms. Wendy Worthey Principal Environmental Planner City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 .-----..:-.:. RE: SCAG Clearinghouse No. I 20060754 Canyon Hills Estates Dear Ms. Worthey: Thank you for submitting the Canyon Hills Estates for review and comment As areawide clearinghouse for regionally significant projects, SCAG reviews the consistency of local plans, projects and programs with regional plans. This activity is based on SCAG's responsibilities as a regional planning organization pursuant to state and federal laws and regulations. Guidance provided by these reviews is intended to assist local agencies and project sponsors to take actions that contribute to the attainment of regional goals and policies. We have reviewed the Canyon Hills Estates, and have determined that the proposed Project is not regionally significant per SCAG Intergovernmental Review (IGR) Criteria and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Section 15206), Therefore, the proposed Project does not warrant comments at this time. Should there be a change in the scope of the proposed Pr<~ect, we would appreciate the opportunity to review and comment at that time. A description of the proposed Project was published in SCAG's November 1-30, 2006 Intergovernmental Review Clearinghouse Report for public review and comment. The project title and SCAG Clearinghouse number should be used in all l.:OIre:;pomience with SCAG concernillg ill!;; Proj<:ci. COIH:;spondence 5hOulC: b6 sent to the allenlion of the Clearinghouse Coordinator. If you have any questions, please contact me at (213) 236-1856, Thank you. I)or # 129346 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response to Comment Document K Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Dec. 15, 2006 Response No. K1 No response is required because the comment does not address environmental issues. Canyon HlIIs Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-54 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Comment Document L Ms. Wendy Worthey Principal Environmental Planner City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore. CA 92530 -~ 1995 MARKET STREET t.tl'lJ~I'\ "1-.... ~q,\ RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 f 't\ 951.955.1200 : rl 951.788.9965 FAX ~~ !iI www.l1ll(}(lt:ontrul.co.ri\.c:rsidc.l.-n.IL.\ ~tAJ~ r-_ RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTRqti~iirii;~1T--i(\;!j'-i:H';,,:::::,-, AND WATER CONSERVATION D1STR%~{r _. ..... ',' ;. ,j!,~-) n]f If! U.J :!! /fi December 26. 2006 I'"' 'ii!)'1 I ! . ,...-Ii I L__., i .--__.1 WARREN D. WILLIAMS G~ncnll MlIIlII!!~T-Chicf Engin<''CT Dear Ms. Worthey: Re: Notice of Availability of a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Canyon Hills u;tates Project This letter is written in response to the Notice of Ayailability of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Canyon Hills Estates Project. The proposed project would consist of General Plan Amendment 2006-04; Annexation No. 75; Zone Change/Pre-Zone No. 2005-09; approval of Tentative Tract Map 34249; and annexation of the project site by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. The project is bounded by the existing Canyon I-Hils Specific Plan development to the north, Pine Avenue to the east, and Crooked Arrow Drive and Crab Hollow Circle to the west and south. respectively. The site is located in unincorporated Riverside County adjacent to the southern City limits of the city of Lake Elsinore. The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) has the following comment/concern that should be addressed in the DEIR: L1 Page 3.7-19 of the DEIR states that all dminage facilities shall be constructed to District standards. It should be noted that the Di~1rict does not normally plan check or recommend conditions for land use cases in incorporated cities. lbe District will only assume an advisory role and comment on items of specific interest to the District, including MDP facilities or other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be considered a logical component or extension of a master plan system, upon written request from the Cities. Thank you for the opportunity to review the DEIR. Please forward any subsequent environmental documents regarding the project to my attention at this office. Any further questions concerning this letter may be referred to Jason Swenson at 951.955.8082 or me at 951.955.1233. Very truly yours, /1.1 ~ J-, TERESA TUNG Senior Civil Engineer c: TLMA Attn: David Mares JDS:mcv P8\111244 Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-55 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response to Comment Document L Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) Dec. 26, 2006 Response No. L 1 The City of Lake Elsinore Engineering Division will condition the Project to submit grading plans and Hydrology/Hydraulic Reports for approval by the City Engineer. Plans for extended detention/water quality basins will also be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval, though the basins must be designed consistent with RCFC&WCD standards. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-56 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Comment Document M November 15, 2005 City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Wendy Worthey, Principal Environmental Planner Wendy, In respOnse to the Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report received by the District on November II, 2006 regarding the Canyon Hills EstateS project, located by the existing Canyon Hills project to the North, Pine A venue to the East and Crooked Arrow Dr. and Crab Hollow Circle to the West and South, totaling approximately 246.4 acres of land and a potential 302 SFRs, the Lake Elsinore Unified School district offers the following response: The Lake Elsinore Unified School District is currently operating at capacity. Additional development projects will impact existing schools and create a need for additional facilities. School impact fees shall be paid pursuant to state law. Even after such payment, district schools. will become increasingly impacted and overcrowded. Based on information provided in the Draft Environmental Impact Report, the following is a projection for the number of students this project may generate: M1 K-SII> 302 X .3698 ; 112 students 6_81h 302 X .1640 = 50 students 9_1211> 302 X .1776= 54 students =total of216 students generated from project. Please contact me should you have any questions and/or comments at (951) 253-7015 or kira.falsetto!a)leusd.kI2.ca.us. Respect!. fuu,'YlY, " fl./L/-~ Kira Fa]sello Assistant Director Facilities Planning Lake Elsinore Unified School District fJJeYT Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-57 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response to Comment Document M Lake Elsinore Unified School District November 15, 2006 Response No. M1 The comment reiterates the student generation calculations provided in the Draft EIR. Those calculations serve as the basis for the Project's school impact mitigation fees, which are to be paid prior to construction of the proposed residential units. While the fees will not eliminate the overcrowding in District facilities that is the result of cumulative development, the fees will reduce the project-related effects to levels that are less than significant. The Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD) prepared a School Facilities Needs Analysis on February 15, 2006 to provide the factual basis for LEUSD to consider and, if desired, adopt alternative school facility fees that may be collected from residential development in the District consistent with Section 17620 of the Education Code and Sections 65995.5, 65995.6, 65995.7, and 66000 et seq. of the Government Code. The Alternative No. 2 Fee, which is the maximum Alternative Fee that may be imposed during periods when State funds for new construction are available, is currently being levied by LEUSD. The School Facilities Needs Analysis determined the maximum Alternative No.2 Fee that can be adopted by LEUSD and imposed on residential units is $3.18 per square foot, which is intended to cover the cost of construction of the new school facilities that would be required as new development occurs. This fee would be collected at the time of issuance of building permits as homes are built. Although according to State Law, the $3.18 per square foot fee is the maximum required fee to offset development impacts, the Project will also be forming a Communities Facilities District (CFD) with LEUSD, which will increase the school facility fee from $3.18 to $4.35 per square foot and ensure that the entirety of the school facility fees will be paid at the time of issuance of the first building permit. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-58 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Comment Document N December 28, 2006 o.t:.......~ ('~l $.~.~ Seon Walsh Direclor S TAT E OF C A L I FOR N I A Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor Wendy Worthey City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Slreet_ Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 :", ....1 ~2;~__,J!lif L-.____.__ Subject: Draft EIR for General Plan Amendment #2006-04, Annexation No. 75, Zone Change/Pre.Zone No. 200S-09, AlUlCxalion by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. and SCH#: 2006051073 Dear Wendy Worthey: The Slate Clearinghouse submitted the above named Draft EIR to selected slate agencies for review. Olllhe enclosed Document Details Report please note thai the Clearinghouse has listed lhe slate agencies that reviewed your document. The review period closed on December 27, 2006, and the cOlIl1flents from the responding agency (ies) is (ore) enclosed. Tfthis comment package is nol in order, please notify the State Clearinghouse immediately. Please refer to the project's ten-digit Slate Cleariughouse number in future corre.~pondence so that we may respond promptly. Please nole Ihat Section 21104{c) of the California Public ResourceS Code states that: N1 "A responsible or other public agency shall only make substantive comments regardiug those activities involved in a project which are within an area of expertise of the agency or which are required to be carried out or approved by tbe agency. Those comments shall be supported by specific documentation." Tbese comments are forwarded for use in preparing YOII( final environmental document. Sbould you need more information or clarification of the enclosed comments, we reconunend that you contact the commenting agency directly. This lelter acknowledges that you bave complied with tbe State Clearinghouse review requirements for drall environmental documents, pmsunnt to the California Environmental Quality Act. Plcase contact tbe State . Clearinghouse at (9l6) 445.0613 ifYOll have any questions regarding the environrnentall'eview process. J~~ Terry Roberts Director, State Clearinghouse Enclosures cc: Resources Agency 1400 TEN'J.'I-I STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95812-3044 TEL (916} 445.0613 FAX (916} 323-3018 www.opr.ca.goY Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC.59 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Base S~ 2006051073 Project Title Draft EIR for General Plan Amendment #2006-04, Annexation No. 75, Zone Change/Pre-Zone No. Lead Agency 2005-09, Annexation by Elsinore Vaney Municipal Water District, and lake Elsinore. City of Type EtR Draft EI~ Description (1) General Plan Amendment #2006.{)4 - Change the project site land use designation from Very Low Density Residential (VlDR) and M<lunlalnous (M) to low Density Residential (lOR); (2) Annexation No. 15 - COmpletion of the lInnexatlon of the project site into the City of lake Elsinore; (3) Zone ChangeIPra-Zone No. 2005-09 - Adoption of the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan in conformance with pre-zoning; (4) Tract Map 34249 - Approval of a Tentative Tract Map to panni! subdivision of the project site: and (5) Annexation of project site by Elsinore Vahey Municipal Water District (EVMWD). Lead Agency Contact Name Wendy Worthey Agency City of Lake Elsinore Phone (951)674-3124 x288 email Address 130 S. Main Street City lake Elsinore Fax State CA ZIp 92530 Project Location County Riverside City Lake Elsinore Region Cross Streets Parcel No. Township Canyon Hills RoadlLost RoadlNavajo Springs Road and Canyon Hills Rd.lColtonwood Canyon Rd. 365-220-026,027; 365-230-001, 005, 006. 007. 009 through 013 6S Range 4W Sect/on 13 Ban SB Proximity to: Highways 1-15 Airports Railways Waterways Canyon lake Schools COttonwood Canyon ES, Canyon Lake MS Land Use Z: Specific Plan GP: Very low Density (VLD) Residential and Mountainous (M) Project Issues AesthetfclVisual; Agricultural land; Air Quality; Archaeologic-Hlstorlc; Biological Resources; Cumulative Effects: Drainage/Absorptfon; Flood Plain/Flooding; Forest LandfFire Hazard; Geologic/Seismic; Growth Inducing; Landuse; NOise: Public Services; Schools/Universities; Sewer Capacity; Soil Erosion/COmpaction/Grading: Solid Waste; Toxic/Hazardous; Traffic/Circulation; Vegetation; Water Quality; Water Supply; WeUandfRiparian: WildUfe Reviewing Resources Agency; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 8; Department of Parks and Agencies Recreation: Native American Herftage COmmission: Office of Emergency Services; Departmenlol Health Services: Office of Historic Preservation: Department of Forestry and Fire Protection; Department of Fish and Game, Region 6; Department of Waler Resources; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 8; Department of T oodc Substances COntrol Date ReceIved 11/13/2006 Start of RevIew 11/13/2008 End of Review 12/27/2006 Note: Blanks In data fields result from insufficient infonnatlon provided by lead agency. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-60 State Clearinghouse No. 2006051073 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR Response to Comment Document N State of California - Governor's Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse Dec. 28, 2006 Response No. N1 No response is required because the comment does not address environmental issues. Canyon Hills Estates City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Page RtC-61 ,- ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CANYON IDLLS ESTATES SPECIFIC PLAN State Clearinghouse Number 2006051073 SECTION I BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION A. PROJECT OVERVIEW A Draft Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") was prepared for the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan ("Specific Plan") and related discretionary actions in the City of Lake Elsinore. The Draft EIR addressed the potential environmental effects associated with the development of a 302 unit residential community on a total of 246.4 acres.1 The community includes 302 single-family dwelling units (DU) on 91.1 acres, a 5.4 acre public park, and 149.9 acres of open space. Implementation of the Project will require the following discretionary approvals by the City of Lake Elsinore: . General Plan Amendment No. 2006-04 - Change the Project Site land use designation from Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) and Mountainous (M) to Low Density Residential (LDR); . Annexation No. 75 - Completion of the annexation of the Project Site into the City of Lake Elsinore; . Zone Change/Pre-Zone No. 2005-09 - Adoption of the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan in conformance with pre-zoning; . Tract Map 34249 - Approval of a Tentative Tract Map to permit subdivision of the Project Site; and . Annexation of Project Site by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). B. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND EIR SCOPING This document complies with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA," Public Resources Code ~21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Cat. Code Regs., Title 14, ~15000 et seq.). In compliance with CEQA, the City of Lake Elsinore has solicited and considered comments from Responsible and Trustee Agencies, members of the public, and other interested parties during the Project's various environmental review processes: . The City held two public hearings on Negative Declaration (NO) No. 2006-02 for General Plan Amendment No. 2005-08, Zone Change (pre-Zone) No. 2005-09, and Annexation No. 75 for the Project Site in February 2006 and April 2006 (ND 2006-02 adoption hearing). . The City issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft EIR for a period of 30 days beginning on May 12, 2006. lThe 246.4 acres only includes onsite acreage; 3.1 acres of off site road improvements are also part of the Project. Exhibit A Environmental Findings Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 1 As indicated in Section III (Enviroinnental Findings), two environmental effects of the Project cannot be reduced to less than significant levels by the adoption of feasible mitigation measures or feasible environmentally superior alternatives. Short-term air quality impacts and cumulative transportation and traffic impacts have been identified as unavoidable and significant and require the preparation of a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Those effects are described in Section III and outline the City's findings with respect to the environmental effects of the Project. The Statement of Overriding Considerations is provided as Exhibit B. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REpORTING PROGRAM A Mitigation Monitoring and Report Program (MMRP) has been prepared to monitor and report the . implementation of the mitigation measures, Project Design Features, and Standard Conditions (SCs) identified for the Project. The MMRP will be adopted concurrently with these findings, and will be implemented through the final design, construction and post-construction periods. To the extent that these findings conclude that all mitigation measures outlined in the Draft EIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded, or withdrawn, the City hereby binds itself to implement these measures. These findings, in other words, are not merely informational, but rather constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City Council formally approves the Project. CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL EIR AND ADoPTION OF FINDINGS The City Council will review and consider the information contained in the Final EIR, as well as submissions from public officials, public agencies and the general public. Prior to Project approval, the City Council shall certify that the Final EIR reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis. Having considered the foregoing information, as well as any and all other information in the record, the City Council shall make findings pursuant to CEQA Section 21081. In accordance with the provisions ofCEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City Council shall adopt the Findings as part of its certification of the Final EIR for the Project. Exhibit A Environmental Findings Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 3 1. Design a planned community that implements the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan development goals for this portion ofthe City. 2. Create a planned residential development of appropriate density, scale, and infrastructure which respects the existing topography and environmental sensitivity of the Project Site and surrounding land uses. 3. Maximize the efficiency of infrastructure services by connecting to the closest existing public services and utilities in the adjacent planned community of Canyon Hills in the City of Lake Elsinore. 4. Anticipate and provide for the needs of the community residents through annexation of the site into the City of Lake Elsinore to allow for the timely provision of facilities and services. 5. Provide areas for active and passive recreation. 6. Provide a comprehensive circulation system that includes vehicular circulation, pedestrian walks, and bike paths. 7. Maintain the integrity of the natural environment through design, preservation and conservation to the extent possible of open space areas and natural resources. 8. Ensure a high quality lifestyle by providing for public facilities such as a neighborhood park and high quality architectural design. 9. Provide for a mix of market rate residential products and densities in neighborhood clusters so that implementation of the plan can respond to changing market demands. 10. Enhance and advance the image of Lake Elsinore in the region. 11. Exhibit respect to the existing Canyon Hills residents through thoughtful design and interface methods. 12. Create visual diversity within the community through a mix of architectural styles. E. DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS Implementation of the Project will require the following discretionary approvals by the City of Lake Elsinore: . General Plan Amendment No. 2006-04 - Change the Project Site land use designation from Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) and Mountainous (M) to Low Density Residential (LOR); . Annexation No. 75 - Completion ofthe annexation of the Project Site into the City of Lake Elsinore; . Zone Change/Pre-Zone No. 2005-09 - Adoption of the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan in conformance with pre-zoning; . Tract Map 34249 - Approval of a Tentative Tract Map to permit subdivision of the Project Site; and . Annexation of Project Site by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). Because the Project Site lies outside the City's corporate boundary, several planning actions were initiated in January 2006 and were approved by the City of Lake Elsinore in April 2006. On April 11, 2006, the City exhibit A Environmental Findings Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 5 F. LAND USES The CHE Specific Plan divides the Project Site into three basic land use categories: Residential, Public Park and Open Space. Table 1 shows the CHE Specific Plan Land Use Statistical Summary. The Residential category has two subcategories: Single Family Residential-l (SF-I); and Single Family Residential-2 (SF-2). TABLE 1 CANYON Hn..LS ESTATES SPECIFIC PLAN - LAND USE STATISTICAL SUMMARY Density Target Plan Range Density Target Land Use Desi2nation Acresl (DU/ac)2 (DU/ad Yield RESIDENTIAL Single Family - 1 SF-l 81.7 2-4 2.9 238 DUs Single Family - 2 SF-2 9.4 6-12 6.8 64 DUs. PUBLIC PARK Neighborhood Park P 5.4 OPEN SPACE Open Space OS 149.9 TOTAL ACREAGE 146.-f MAXIMUM RESIDENTIAL YIELD 1.23 302 DUs. Notes: I Gross acreage. 2 Dwelling units per acre. 3 The 246.4 acres only includes onsite acreage. Approximately 3.1 acres of off site road improvements are also part of the Proiect. Sins!le Familv Residential 1 (SF -I) The SF-l designation is allocated to the majority of the development area, comprising 33.2 percent of the Project Site. The SF-I area will contain a maximum yield of238 single family detached DU at a target density of 2.9 units per gross acre. The residential products planned for this area are detached homes of one and two stories on a mix oflot sizes ranging from a minimum of 7,200 SF to over 20,000 SF. The largest lot sizes are located on the southwesterly and southerly portions ofthe Project Site. SimIle Familv Residential 2 (SF-2) SF-2 is allocated to a 9.4 acre area in the northeasterly portion of the Project Site adjacent to Cottonwood Canyon Road. The SF-2 use comprises approximately 3.8 percent of the Project Site. SF- 2 will cont~n a maximum yield of 64 single family units at a target density of 6.8 units per gross acre. Residential products may be made up of detached homes compact lots or other similar residential products. The location of the SF-2 area in Canyon Hills Estates is reflective of the adjacent existing Exhibit A Environmental Findings Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 7 Navajo Springs Road is "unnecessary for present or prospective public use" (Streets & Highway Code, ~8324; Riverside County Resolution No. 85-330). The Riverside County Fire Department has already recommended the County deny the vacation. Should the Riverside County Transportation Department deny the vacation of the offer of dedication on Navajo Springs Road, it is expected that the County will accept the offer of dedication once Navajo Springs Road is improved. This existing connector will have its existing road section enhanced to 24 feet, including 2-foot shoulders where possible, providing one travel lane in each direction with a 4- foot sidewalk. exhibit A Environmental Findings Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 9 MM 3.4-2: Project construction operations within 57 feet of any off-site residences shall utilize a smaller dozer for this portion of construction so that vibration impacts will be lessened to below the City of Lake Elsinore Noise Ordinance standard, or the dozer operations within 57 feet of the residence must be performed when the residence is temporarily unoccupied. Such work shall be monitored by a qualified acoustical consultant to ensure that the vibration standard of the Noise Ordinance is not violated. Facts in Support of the Findin2: Use of a smaller dozer during construction in areas within 57 feet of any off-site residences or limiting dozer operations within 57 feet of the off-site residence to times when the residence is temporarily unoccupied would avoid the noise ordinance vibration threshold to be exceeded. (OEIR pp. 3.4-6 - 3.4-10). 2. AIR QUALITY a. Impact: Construction-related enusslons will exceed the criteria pollutant thresholds established by the SCAQMD for VOCs during construction. The primary source of VOC emissions during construction is painting. (from DEIR Impact 3.5-1:) Findin2: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate the significant effects on the environment. The VOC impact will be mitigated with implementation ofthe following mitigation measure: MM 3.5-1 b: The following measures shall be implemented during all phases of construction, including paving and architectural coating applications, in order to reduce construction- related emissions of VOCs: . Only Zero- VOC paints (assumes no more than 100 gramlliter ofVOC) shall be used for architectural coatings during initial construction; and . No more than 18 homes per week shall be painted. Facts in Support of the Findin2: Project-related VOC levels would be reduced below the SCAQMD threshold of75 pounds per day through the use ofZero-VOC paint. The use of coating application equipment that improves transfer efficiency above that of typical air atomized spray equipment would further reduce VOC emissions. In addition, mitigation limiting the daily number of homes that can be painted will ensure that VOC emissions are kept below levels of significance for the duration of project construction. (OEIR pp.3 .5-17 - 3.5-18). 3. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a. Impact: The Project would remove 46 coast live oak trees during site grading. (OEIR Impact 3.8-1) Exhibit A Environmental Findings Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 11 Findin~: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s): MM 3.8-2: Potential impacts to migratory bird species shall be mitigated below a level of significance through one of the following two ways: · Vegetation removal activities shall be scheduled outside the nesting season to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds. The nesting season is typically February J 5 through August 15. This would insure that no active nests would be disturbed and that habitat removal could proceed rapidly. · Prior to commencement of clearing or grading during the nesting season, all suitable habitat shall be thoroughly surveyed for the presence of nesting birds by a qualified biologist. To minimize impacts, if any active nests are detected, a buffer of at least J 00 feet (300 fiet for raptors) shall be delineated, flagged, and avoided until the nesting cycle is complete, as determined by the biological monitor. Facts in Support of the Findinl!: The methods for reducing impacts to migratory birds during nesting season are consistent with the standard of professional care exercised throughout the State of California by wildlife biologists. The survey and mitigation protocols indicated are supported by California Department of Fish and Game and U;S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and are promulgated in the Western Riverside County MSHCP. c. Impact: Potentially suitable Stephens' kangaroo rat habitat occurs within the study area and the Project may impact this species. (OEIR Impact 3.8-3) Findinl!: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following ri1itigation measure: MM 3.8-3a: The Applicant shall pay fies in accordance with the USFWS approved Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for Stephens' kangaroo rat. MM 3.8-3b: The Applicant shall pay the required standard Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) developer impact fees. Facts in Support of the Findinl!: The MSHCP functions as a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) pursuant to Section lO(a)(l )(B) of the FESA and as an NCCP under the NCCP Act of 200 I. The USFWS and CDFG have authorized the take of a number sensitive plant and wildlife species within the MSHCP Plan Area in exchange for the assembly and management of a coordinated MSHCP Conservation Area. The HCP authorizes incidental take of the Stephens' kangaroo rat during otherwise lawful activities conducted within the established plan area. In addition, Stephens' kangaroo rat is a Exhibit A Environmental Findings Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 13 the balance of the mitigation necessary to offset impacts to CDFG jurisdiction that cannot be accomplished on-site, the Project biologist is coordinating with the CDFG and investiga~i~g mitigation bank options for a combination of restoration and enhancement opportumtIes within the watershed and surrounding areas. 4. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS a. Impact: Previously unsampled building materials contained within the existing residential structure and outbuildings could contain unknown quantities of asbestos-containing materials and/or lead-based paint. (DElR Impact 3.9-1) Findin2:: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s): MM 3.9-1a: Documentation of the ACM and LBP survey per SCAQMD and State regulations shall be submitted to the City of Lake Elsinore upon characterization of potentially hazardous materials. If one or both of these substances are found, appropriate remediation measures shall be undertaken pursuant to Mitigation Measures 3.9-1 band/or 3.9-1c, as applicable. MM 3.9-1b: If determined necessary as an outcome of the ACM survey, and as part of structural demolition activities, a State-licensed abatement contractor shall abate any material with asbestos content of one percent or greater by transportation under manifest and disposal at a State-licensed disposal facility consistent with SCAQMD Rule 1403. Documentation shall be submitted to the City of Lake Elsinore upon characterization of potentially hazardous materials and upon completion of abatement operations. MM 3.9-1c: If determined necessary as an outcome of the LBP survey, and as part of structural demolition activities, a State-licensed abatement contractor shall abate any LBP materials by transportation under manifest and disposal at a State-licensed disposalfacility. All other types of hazardous materials shall be characterized and quantified, with removal, transport and disposal methods specified for each waste type. Documentation shall be submitted to the City of Lake Elsinore upon characterization of potentially hazardous materials and upon completion of abatement operations. Facts in Support of the Findin2:: The regulations and programs noted in the mitigation measures above would be implemented as necessary during demolition activities associated with the existing single family residence and outbuildings. Compliance with the regulations indicated above would ensure that construction workers and the general public would not be exposed to any unusual or excessive risks related to hazardous materials during demolition activities. As such, impacts associated with the exposure of construction workers and the public to hazardous materials during demolition activities would be mitigated to a level that is less than significant. (DElR p. 3.9-8). exhibit A Environmental Findings Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 15 qualified prehistoric archaeologist fqr Site TS-O I and as an historic archaeologist for Site TS-02 and/or a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RP A) with similar qualifications. MM 3.11-1 c: q the Phase II cultural resources evaluation program determines that a given resource is eligiblefor listing on the California Registry of Historic Resources (CRHR) and/or local listings and therefore meets the definition of an "historical resource, "or if there is a determination by the City in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe that a resource is "unique" pursuant to applicable law, an impact determination shall be made prior to issuance of grading permits. q the impacts are determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be designed in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe to mitigate impacts to below a level of significance with preservation as the preferred mitigation if feasible. q preservation is not the chosen alternative, a data recovery program shall be implemented. The data recovery program shall entail, at a minimum, the collection of surface materials and a sufficient sample of buried materials, analysis, and reporting of recovered materials consistent with the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement by and between the Project Applicant and the Pechanga Tribe as required in MM 3.11-2a. MM 3.11-1 d: Prior to issuance of grading permit(s) for the Project, the Project Applicant shall retain an archaeological monitor to monitor all ground-disturbing activities with special emphasis on the vicinity ofTS-OI and TS-02 in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation (see MM 3.11-1 band 3.11-1 c). Facts in SUDDort of the Findin2: Treating TS-O I and TS-02 as significant and requiring a defined further evaluation process itself would require that a professional archaeologist expose the cultural resources and artifacts sufficiently for examination in order to determine whether they constitute historic resources as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 and Public Resources Code Section 21 082.2(g). This process would likely require some level of resource excavation and handling by a registered archaeologist, subject to the oversight authority of a Native American monitor. This process will avoid disturbing buried cultural resources unless ground disturbance activities are imminent. Evaluation will take place prior to the issuance of any grading permits. If it is clearly demonstrated that there is a high probability that the resource meets one of the criteria, then the resource will be subject to the mitigation measures requiring preservation. (DEIR p. 3.11- 5). b. ImDact: Ground disturbance activities such as site clearing, grading, excavation, and archaeological site testing have the potential to adversely impact undiscovered cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains. (DEIR Impact 3.11-2) Findin2: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s): Exhibit A Environmental Findings Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 17 MM 3.11-2f: If inadvertent discoveries of subsuiface archaeological resources are discovered during grading. the Developer. the Project archaeologist. and the Pechanga Band of Luiseiio Indians shall assess the significance of such resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources. If the Developer and the Pechanga Band cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for such resources. these issues will be presented to the City Planning Director for decision. The Planning Director shall make his decision based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources and shall take into account the religious beliefs. customs and practices of the Pechanga Band. The decision of the Planning Director shall be appealable to the City of Lake Elsinore. Facts in Support of the Findinf!: Since Luisefio/Pechanga resources are known to exist within the City of Lake Elsinore area, and given the presence of a prehistoric cultural resource site on the Project Site, the presence of a Native American monitor is warranted during site grading and excavation, as well as during evaluation testing and any subsequent studies of the known archaeological sites. In order to address the potential for accidental discovery of sub-surface cultural resources during ground-disturbing activities, the project applicant will be required to negotiate an agreement with the Pechanga Band of Luisefio Indians that addresses the participation of Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and other ground disturbance activities, and in decisions regarding the treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the Project Site. Due to the close relationship of the Pechanga Band of Luisefio Mission Indians to this area, the agreement will be between this Tribe and the developer. The City also held a consultation meeting on January 8, 2007 with Laura Miranda, Deputy General Counsel and Dale Foster, Pechanga Cultural Resources Analyst of the Pechanga Tribe. At this meeting, the Pechanga Tribe presented proposed clarifications to the mitigation measures, which have been largely incorporated. (DElR pp. 3.11-7 - 3.11-8). c. Impact: Grading activities in Pleistocene older fan deposits could destroy or otherwise adversely impact unknown paleontological resources. (DEIR Impact 3.11-3) Findinf!: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. The impact will be mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure(s): MM 3.11-3a: Prior to the issuance of any grading permits.. a reconnaissance survey of the Pleistocene older fan deposits shall be required. This survey shall determine the paleontological sensitivity of these deposits through analysis of soil lithology. MM 3.11-3b: As required in the grading permits, any paleontologically sensitive deposits shall require the preparation and implementation of a paleontological mitigation plan that may include full- or part-time monitoring by a qualified paleontologist. as well as protocols for recovery, identification. analysis. reporting and curation of significant resources should exhibit A Environmental Findings Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 19 to the P~oject TIA are prepared, some geographic areas and types of transportation facilities do not have well- defmed lmpro~em~t plans, s~hedules, or funding sources. The Project will contribute an incrementally minor volume of vehicle trips to vanous roadways and intersections that lack definite plans, schedules, and funding source~. The transportation improvement uncertainties are few in the Year 20 I 0, but increase substantially by the honzon Year 2025. Therefore, the ability to predict the entirety of the Project's incremental effects and fair- share funding obligations are similarly constrained. a. Impact: Year 20 I 0 Transportation Improvements: The Project will participate in the Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) transportation improvement programs; however, the possibility exists that some of the necessary Year 20 I 0 intersection improvements might not be constructed by 20 I O. As such, a significant impact could remain after Project mitigation (fee payment) and until the improvements are constructed. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which partially mitigate the significant effects on the environment. The Project's fair-share financial responsibility toward mitigating the Year 20 I 0 intersection impacts will be fulfiUed through participation in the TIF and TUMF programs. However, those necessary improvements may be delayed such that Project effects extend out for a period of time until the mitigation is implemented. Facts in Support of the Findine: The Project must participate in the TIF and TUMF programs. Building permits are contingent upon development fee payment, so TIF and TUMF contributions need not be monitored in the project MMRP as Standard Conditions because these existing laws require payment before the Project can be constructed. However, the Project applicant has no control over the timing of mitigation improvements under the TIF and TUMF programs. b. Impact: Year 2025 Transportation Improvements: The Project wiU contribute incrementaUy (from <1 % to approximately 6.3% of total trips) to cumulative level of service deficiencies at five study area intersections in Year 2025. Findine: Specific economic and legal considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. The Project cannot feasibly mitigate its share of those future cumulative impacts because those intersections are not scheduled for improvements under a City or County fair-share funding and implementation program, nor can the Project feasibly implement the fuU scope of improvements required at each of the cumulative impacted intersections. Facts in Support of the Findine: Specific, feasible improvements can be implemented to reduce the Year 2025 intersection capacity impacts under cumulative conditions, both with and without the Project. The future LOS deficiencies identified on Table 3.3-9 of the Draft EIR would OCcur with or without the Project. Although feasible from a program-wide perspective, there are presently no City or Exhibit A Environmental Findings Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 21 Facts in Support of the Findinr:: Potential sensitive receptors in the Project vicinity include adjacent residential uses located to the north in Canyon Hills and the future residents of the Project. As shown in Table 3.5-11, Localized Significance Summary (Construction -- Unmitigated), CO and NOz emissions do not exceed localized thresholds for construction activity. However, the LSTs for PMI 0 and PM2.5 would be exceeded during site grading and excavation activities, assuming that no emissions control mitigation measures are in use. The quantities of cut and fill that would occur in close proximity to existing residences would create airborne dust and equipment exhaust particulates that, when dispersed, would create ambient PMIO and PM2.5 emissions levels above the allowable localized standard of lOA 1Lg/m3 for both pollutants. (OEIR p. 3.5-18) Compliance with SCAQMD Rules 403 and 402, combined with additional project-specific mitigation (MM 3.5-la), would substantially reduce PMIO emissions from an unmitigated concentration of 212.0 1Lg/m3 to a maximum concentration of approximately 56.27 lLg/m3 after mitigation. Likewise, the mitigation measures will reduce PM2.5 emissions from 44.5 1Lg/m3 to 11.8 1Lg/m3. However, Table 3.5-12, Localized Significance Summary (Construction - Mitigated), shows that it will not be possible to achieve the allowable threshold of IOAILg/m3 for either PMIO or PM2.5, even with aggressive control measures in place during grading. (OEIR p. 3.5-19) The SCAQMD recommended that the Air Quality Analysis for the EIR be prepared in accordance with the. SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook and the CARB-approved URBEMIS 2002 Model. In addition, SCAQMD recommended a localized significance analysis and a mobile source health risk assessment (for heavy duty diesel-fueled vehicles). The Canyon Hills Estates Air Quality Impact Analysis was prepared in conformance with these recommendations (with the exception of a Health Risk Assessment) and in consultation with the SCAQMD. A Health Risk Assessment was not prepared because the Project is a residential development and there would be no heavy diesel-fueled vehicles expected to routinely access the Project once constructed. C. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT CEQA requires that the EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the Project, or to the location of the Project, which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the Project and to evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. Section 15126(d)(l) of the CEQA Guidelines states that the "... discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly. " The Project has been compared to three alternative development scenarios, including the No Project alternative as prescribed by CEQA. These alternatives include: (I) No Project/County of Riverside Development (the No Project alternative; (2) No ProjectINo Development; and (3) Reduced Footprint. 1. NO PROJECT/COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEVELOPMENT (NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE) Exhibit A Environmental Andlngs Canyon Hills Estates SpecifiC Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 23 le~el. ofless than s~gnific~t ~th mitigation incorporated. This alternative would not mitigate the pre- ~XI~tIng storm dra~ deficIen~Ies downstream of the existing Canyon Hills planned development. As IndIcated above, this alternative would not meet the Project objectives established by the applicant. NO PROJECTINO DEVELOPMENT 2. ~ t~is alt~rnative, the ~roje~t site would remain undeveloped for the foreseeable future. However, the Project sIte IS desIgned for resIdential development under the City of Lake Elsinore and County of Riverside General Plan and is not consider habitat desired for conservation under the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Summary of Major Environmental Effects As a result of no development, none of the environmental consequences identified in Chapter 3.0 of the EIR would occur. However, the pre-existing storm drain deficiencies would continue for the existing Canyon Hills development. Project Objectives The Project objectives would not be met by implementing the No Project/No Development altemative. Feasibility Implementation of the No Project/No Development alternative would involve no alterations to the site in the short-term. However, it is unlikely that the property owner would maintain the site in its existing condition in the future and would probably seek development entitlements at a later date or sell the property. Public or private purchase of the site as open space in not a feasible alternative to private development of the property because any purchase price would reflect the highest and best use of the site as residential development. Future development of the site is assumed, as indicated in the County and City's General Plan designation for the site, and any entitlement restrictions would be legally and economically infeasible for the County or City to consider. Comparative Merits The No Project/No Development alternative has very little merit since development will eventually occur on the Project site and some level of environmental impact will ultimately result. The pre- existing storm drain deficiencies will continue for the existing Canyon Hills development. 3. REDUCED FOOTPRINT ALTERNATIVE This alternative development scenario avoids more of jurisdictional drainage A and sensitive cultural resources. The Reduced Footprint Alternative would have the same number ofDU (302) as the Project. This alternative has two distinct development areas without connecting access. The western development area would have approximately 147 DU and the eastern development area would have approximately 155 DU. This alternative reduced the overall development footprint by approximately 2 acres. Summary of Major Environmental Effects exhibit A Environmental Findings Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 25 SECTION IV REcORD OF PROCEEDINGS For purposes ofCEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the Project consists ofthe following documents, at a minimum: . The May and June 2006 NOPs issued by the City in conjunction with the Project; . The November 2006 Draft EIR and Final EIR, including appendices and technical studies included or referenced in the Draft EIR; . All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the 45-day public comment period on the Draft EIR; . All comments and correspondence submitted to the City with respect to the Project, in addition to timely comments on the Draft EIR; . The mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the Project . All findings and resolutions adopted by the City decision makers in connection with the Project, and all documents cited or referred to therein; . All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents relating to the Project; . All documents and information submitted to the City by responsible, trustee, or other public agencies, or by individuals or organizations, in connection with the Project, up through the date the City Council approved the Project; . Matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to federal, state, and local laws and regulations; . Any documents expressly cited in these findings, in addition to those cited above; and . Any other materials required to be in the Record of Proceedings by Public Resources Code section 21167.6, subdivision (e). The custodian of the record of proceedings is the City of Lake Elsinore Planning Department, whose office is located at 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530. The City has relied on all of the documents listed above in reaching its decision on the Project, even if every document was not formally presented to the City Council decision-makers as part of the City's files generated in connection with the Project. Exhibit A Environmental Findings Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 27 The City has determined that the unavoidable adverse impacts that will result from Project implementation are accept~ble . and outweighed by specific social, economic and other benefits of the Project. In making this determmatlOn, the factors and public benefits specified below were considered. The City further finds that except for the Specific Plan, all other alternatives set forth ih the EIR are infeasible because they would prohibit the realization of Specific Plan objectives and/or of specific economic, social and other benefits that this City Council finds outweigh any environmental benefits of the alternatives. Having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the Specific Plan to the extent feasible by adopting the mitigation measures; having considered the entire administrative record on the Specific Plan; and having weighed the benefits of the Specific Plan against its unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation, the City Council has determined that the following social, economic, and environmental benefits of the Specific Plan outweigh the potential unavoidable adverse impacts and render those potential adverse environmental impacts acceptable based upon the following overriding considerations: Environmental Benefits of the Project · The Open Space conservation easements will benefit biological resources through preservation of approximately 126 acres of natural hillside and riparian areas in perpetuity and designation of an additional 24 acres of open space. (Draft EIR, p. 3.8-17) · The Open Space conservation easements will benefit the City by contributing to the City's overall conservation acreage under the MSHCP program. (Draft EIR, p. 3.8-27) · The Project will benefit biological resources and provide quality Ripari3nlRiverine habitat through the enhancement of Cottonwood Creek and existing riparian oak woodland, including the removal invasive non-native plant species and revegetation with appropriate native species. (Draft EIR, p. 3.8- 35) · The Project will enhance the .value of Cottonwood Creek as a wildlife movement corridor extending beyond the Project Site via a 155.3-acre open space and park plan. (Draft EIR, pp. 2-8 - 2-11,3.8-35) · The Project will eliminate existing erosion conditions that have compromised the structural facilities and have caused siltation and temporary capacity reductions in the existing debris/detention basin in Tract 30492. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.7-19, 3.7-24) · The Project will provide water quality and flood control benefits by reducing and detaining some of the existing storm flows passing through the Project Site, much of which originates from existing and developing residential properties upstream in the study area watershed. (Draft EIR, p. 3.7-32) · Through expanded detention/water quality basin design, the Project will negate more than its incremental share of runoff volumes by releasing stormwater from the Project Site at rates that are below the tOO-year storm flow capacities of downstream storm drains in the Canyon Hills development. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.7-19, 3.7-32) Social Benefits of the Project · The Project will improve local traffic circulation and emergency vehicle access to the Project Site and surrounding properties through the road improvements. (Draft EIR, p. 2-11, 2-15 - 2-16; 3.9-3) · The Project will remove a potential health risk through demolition and clean up of debris, including possible asbestos-containing materials and lead-based paints. (Draft EIR, p. 3.9-7 - 3.9-8) Exhibit B Statement of Overriding Considerations Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 29 EXHIBIT C CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL EIR The City of Lake Elsinore has reviewed and considered the Final EIR in evaluating the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan. The City fmds that the Final EIR is an accurate and objective statement that fully complies with CEQA, State CEQA Guidelines and the City's local CEQA Guidelines; and that the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City of Lake Elsinore; and that no new significant impacts as defined by State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 have been received by the City after circulation ofthe Draft EIR which would require recirculation. The City Council certifies the Environmental Impact Report based on the following findings and conclusions: A. Findings. The following significant environmental impacts have been identified in the EIR and, although subject to all . applicable and feasible Project Design Features, Standard Conditions and mitigation measures, the impacts cannot be mitigated to less than significant: I. Traffic and Circulation: Although the Project will commit to TIF and TUMF transportation improvement program funding, the timing of some improvements necessary to mitigate Year 20 I 0 Project-related impacts remains uncertain. Additionally, incremental Project traffic contributions to cumul~tive level of service deficiencies at five study area intersections in Year 2025 cannot be mitigated because they are not currently included in City or County transportation improvement programs. Moreover, the improvements cannot be feasibly implemented by the Project arone. 2; Air Ouality: Short-term emissions of PMIO and PM2.5 will exceed localized significance thresholds during earthmoving activities that are adjacent to the existing residences in the Canyon Hills development. B. Conclusions. 3. All significant environmental impacts from the implementation of the Specific Plan have been identified in the EIR and, with implementation of the mitigation measures identified, will be mitigated to a level of insignificance, except for the impact( s) listed above and described in Exhibit B (Statement of Overriding Considerations). 4. Other reasonable alternatives to the Specific Plan that could feasibly achieve most of the basic objectives of the Specific Plan have been considered. Since the alternatives considered did not serve to reduce or avoid any potentially significant impacts, and because the alternatives offer no feasible means of avoiding the significant effects identified in Exhibit B (Statement of Overriding Considerations), the alternatives are rejected in favor of the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan. Environmental, economic, social and other considerations and benefits derived from the development of the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan override and make infeasible any alternatives to the Specific Plan or further mitigation measures beyond those incorporated into the Specific Plan. Exhibit C Certification of the Final EIR Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan, City of Lake Elsinore Page 31 Canyon Hills Estates Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program CI..TY.... OF .. ..~ LAK.F ~LSff1Q~ . .. .. .. e DREAM EXfReME Prepared by: City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, California 92530 January 2007 T able of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Description of Proposed Canyon Hills Estates project................................................................................1-1 1.2 Mitigation Matrix ...........................................................................................................................................1-2 1.3 Mitigation Monitoring Procedures ................................................................................................................1-2 1.3.1 Coordination with Contractors ......................................................................................................1-2 1.3.2 Recognized Experts .......................................................................................................................1-2 1.3.3 Arbitration/Dispute Resolution .....................................................................................................1-2 1.3.4 Enforcement ..................................................................................................................................1-3 Appendix Appendix A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist Canyon Hills Estates Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Introduction 1.0 INTRODUCTION Pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15097, public agencies are required to adopt a monitoring or reporting program to assure that the mitigation measures and revisions identified in the Environmental Impact Report (ElR) are implemented. As stated in Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code: ....the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project which It has adopted, or made a condltlon of project approval, In order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. . Pursuant to Section 21081(a) of the Public Resources Code, findings must be adopted by the decision maker coincidental to certification of the EIR. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) must be adopted when making the findings (at the time of approval of the project). As defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15097, "reporting" is suited to projects that have readily measurable or quantitative measures or which already involve regular review. "Monitoring" is suited to projects with complex mitigation measures, such as wetland restoration or archaeological protection, which may exceed the expertise of the local agency to oversee, are expected to be implemented over a period of time, or require careful implementation to assure compliance. Both reporting and monitoring would be applicable to the proposed project. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the Canyon Hills Estates project (SCH #2006051073), provided an analysis of the environmental effects resulting from construction and operation of the project. A thorough scientific and engineering evaluation of each alternative was undertaken in compliance with CEQA, including the identification of measures designed to avoid or substantially reduce the potential adverse effects of each alternative. 1.1 Description of Proposed Canyon Hills Estates Project The Proposed Project is a residential planned community development on a total of 246.4 acres, known as the Canyon Hills Estates (CHE) Specific Plan. The CHE includes 302 singfe family dwelling units (DU) on 114.4 acres, a 5.4 acre pUblic park, and 126.2 acres of open space. The entitlement approvals for the Proposed Project include: · General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 2006-04 to re-designate the Project Site from Very Low Density Residential (VLOR) and Mountainous (M) to Low Density Residential (LOR); · Annexation No. 75 - Completion of the annexation of the Project Site into the City of Lake Elsinore; · Zone Change/Pre-Zone No. 2005-09 - Adoption of the Canyon Hills Estates SpeCific Plan in conformance with pre-zoning; and · Tract Map 34249 - approval of a Tentative Tract Map to permit subdivision of the Project Site; · Annexation of Project Site by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). In addition, the following ministerial actions are included in the discussion of the Proposed Project: · Grading Permit(s) · Building Permit(s) Implementation of the Proposed Project may include the following discretionary approvals by other responsible and/or regulatory agencies: · California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), Fish and Game Code Section 1600 · U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) · Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 404 · Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Federal CWA, Section 401 Water Quality Certification · RWQCB, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) · City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside's Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and Natural Community Conservation Planning Program (WRC MSHCP/NCCP) Canyon Hills Estates Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1-1 City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Introduction . South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) . Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) . Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) 1.2 Mitigation Matrix In order to sufficiently track and document the status of mitigation measures, a mitigation matrix has been prepared and includes the following components: . Mitigation measure number . Mitigation measure (text) . Implementation Action . Monitoring Method . Responsible Monitoring Party . Monitoring Phase . Verification/Approval Party . Mitigation Measure Implemented? (Y/N and date) . Documentation Location (Monitoring Record) Mitigation measure timing of verification has been apportioned into several specific timing increments. Of these, the most common are: 1. Prior to issuance of grading permit 2. Prior to issuance of building permit(s) 3. . During construction 4. Prior to issuance of certificate of use and occupancy 1.3 Mitigation Monitoring Procedures The City of Lake Elsinore Community Development Department is the designated lead agency for the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan project. The City is responsible for review of all monitoring reports, enforcement actions, and document disposition. The City will rely on information provided by the monitors (e.g., archaeologists, biologists, etc.) as accurate and up-to-date and will field check mitigation measure status as required. 1.3.1 Coordination with Contractors The construction manager/superintendent is responsible for coordination of contractors, and is also responsible for contractor completion of required measures in accordance with the provisions of this program. 1.3.2 Recognized Experts The use of recognized experts as a component of the mitigation monitoring team is required to ensure compliance with scientific and engineering based mitigation measures. While the mitigation monitoring team assesses compliance with required mitigation measures, consultation with the City of Lake Elsinore planning staff shall take place in the event of a dispute. 1.3.3 Arbitration/Dispute Resolution If the mitigation monitor has identified an action which, in the opinion of the monitor, has not been implemented or has not been implemented correctly, the problem will be brought to the attention of the City of Lake Elsinore Community Development Director for resolution. The City will have the authority to issue stop work orders until the dispute is resolved. Canyon Hills Estates Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1-2 City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 Introduction 1.3.4 Enforcement Agencies may enforce conditions of approval through their existing police power, using stop work orders, fines, infraction citations, loss of entitlements, refusal to issue building permits or certificates of use and occupancy or, in some cases, notice of violation for tax purposes. Criminal misdemeanor sanctions could be available where the agency has adopted an ordinance requiring compliance with the monitoring program, similar to the provision in many zoning ordinances which affirm the enforcement power to bring suit against violators of the ordinances provisions. Canyon Hills Estates Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1-3 City of Lake Elsinore January 2007 APPENDIX A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist ~1i) ><= 0- ~ -Co c: (I) (I).c: 8=0 ~E E 0) ~ 0- 0) c: ~ o c. (I) Q:: -C c: cu 0) c: OE: o ~ c: o ~ c: o ;; cu 0) ;; :e c: o bO +:; C_ !I g 'C: "0 5i~.g8 EOC:CD ~S~a: o ~ o ~CD c~S1U :8:3C:0 gj,IIlCDc/:l EmE~ . :i:~z :i: ~~ 'C:-_ Otu Bi)~ .,.. Ci.~ 'E~ ~ 1;; :s! o CD t3 E ~ a.. bO c: :e o a. CD a: '0 c: tu bO c: 'C .8 02 o :i: c: o i ~ ~ ~bO .ac: 'iijo~ "" c:....1: 0-_ tu ~Sa.. ~:i: bO 02 "8 .8-5 .- CD S:i: :i: c: o ~ !lc: C:o CD'fl ~<( Q. .s ..-i d ..t z m rti o :i: z :i: bO c ~:BC j':; ~ ......lIl.... o Q) ffi aoe. <3.!: ~ (/) [jj Q) ..... .xQ)b05i Ij5.!:E ......c"Ot ~]! 'S ~ .~ LU III Q) U 0 l& tu .s::. a.. bO c oc .8 '2 o :i: ..... 1d~ " 5 tu Q) Q) '+:J bOa.. 0 0 c'o.OC2 "- c ro .f-I "0 ._ ijl III tU"OfJ)C: 03-8 III 5 ..... o ~ ..... c: o U c: ~ co 'C Q. :;J a ;:c :p2 c.g g"w:8 g It.... ... 0 ~ tl ti 8. 1;) C Q) (/) C 8-5.!: 8 .8 C ........0 oc:p gE2 b~t) C Q. C 8 J:~ 8 (/) CIl (/) Q) . ..."0 :;J Q) fJ)= CIl19 Q) Q) E"O co (l) '0 '+- >.O(/) C UJ O+-'Q) (/) .a~.g.....o ~tu 1::~ocU gQ)a:lc g~Q)~.c>-.Q)(ijlijo +:i'~ "-19 c: Q) (J){g.s 0 o"t: E >= C CIl '?.8"5.Q.x.- C .a.:;J:3 Q)':; Q.~ "':j::'- (/)t)j Q) CD.... E ~~ ~ o-E:a Q)OCC:;J OECQ)(/) WQ)O 8->,Oo,,-oc g.....Q)oQ.'-uQ ccE01;;>-.~E::;Q)5c -OQ) o CIl Q)(ij c'~:a 8 fJ).!::! (/) 00e<li5.~ "P '0 J:l .~ 8 u It.... ~ 5 :p m +:i.2= (j) (fJ 0 o.....'iijt)Q)Q)o o:;JE~t).t:cz 2cu ~.c:.c(l)Q)->. ::J<o,,-Q)cn t)~~ 8~~.~~ ~ CU(5-C c:~B~ Co (/)CIltuO0<:;:JEpQ)o"" _'_ 8 0 2l "0 .s::. ~ Z . ~ C C :E B .... ~ U +-'~ c.~ ~.~ ~~ o.g 8 '0.02 ~:s~ ~ .~ ~ ~ :; = g 10 ~ ~ Q) -E 1;) a. U) ....., ~:E~IllfJ)Q)--Q)Q)~-cEm:E ct .~ ~ 5- ~ ~ &J .~ :E g. g .s 8 2 E .~ CD ... :3 fJ) m :i: c o i ~ ~ bO C Q) "- +-' .x'oC j'S~ ......lIl~ ~~~ .~ g Q) u'iijo [jj Q) ..... .x C j *.~~ ......c"O~ o Oiii = III ~[jj ~ g- U 0 ..... -g .~ " a CIl Q) Q)'- bO a.. 0 t) c'o.Qc2 .- c co...... '00_ iil (/) tU"O(/)C 0'S-8 III ... o t) ~ ..... C o U C bO tu C li .~ a ;: c :p ~ c .2 g'iij.Qt) "- ."0 2 t)tjtUt) al ~ a U 0 .!: 0 o .... ........0 QC:+J o<l>O CIl E 2 ...Q).... ....- (/) CQ.c oEO U._ 0 C ~ (/) ~u :;J Q) (/)= CIllll E~ ~ ro ... ~(jj.c ,g fJ)..!!1 0 NQ)~ Q)(/) Q) C (ij co;.31_o:E"O ~:;JQ).~ .Q Q) E 0 .a "0...... Q) >-. - 0 .s::. 0 1ij.~(/) :;:J.8~l~E'E1!~~Z. Q;::gC1J,+-~"OQ)"""Q)o~(/)umQ)u ~o~o~~~~~i&~~55; >-.= C Q) C -,... Q.E 0._ Q)......_ gC:;:J.Q1ijfJ)'iii"ELOQ) ~ro50.Q :;:Jlll:;J~:ElB[jjCllc:.a2.c:3fJ)"E> go'iij &.00; Q)-g:C;t).~ g ~5i~b b1U.c(J)UJ.o..::s:::19~:3(1,)C/')>-.occ fJ) Q) fJ) :c; C = j (/) ~ E g -0 .a .... 19 .~ a~ lB......g.~'15 Q) ~ Q) Gl.!!!"O 1:: (/) Q) o 0"'0 ooo"OQ.Q)tUCO t)~ ~~ 2t1.elij:;:J ~'iii ~B-s..g lij Q):c;"O Q) t) tUu.!:~"O ~ 0'2 fJ) l1l.!: '0' +J "in N s:: 0- 0> "'C Q) Ow Q) 0 0 C .E u ct .~ ~ .g 8 .E :E 0 g. ~ :E 5 E 8 '> 0 (\j ..t rti :i: :i: ~s CO _N .!!~ W '" CD '" .ll: C <<J '" ..J-' - o a- u .-I o:i: c Q) E t:: '" c. Q) 0 c Q) E c. E 0 0; ~ > Q) ~ 0 ~ t>> 02 :@ :;J E 0 E :i} 0 0:: U "tl e c:: 0 <Il c: t>> 'iii 'e jjj ~ Q) '" .>< Q) c:: '" tii ~ ..J ...... Cii c:: 0 W ~ 4!! ~ U <Il J: .\2> I 15~ . 0 >-'<1:: 0 5g U . <(1;; ><-- -- 32 ""Co c: CD CD.J: ~O ~E ca ~ C) o ~ D- C) c: ~ o ~ CD 0::: ""C c: ca C) c: "t: o :!::::: c: o :E c: o 10 C) E :E c: o 'aD ~c:c:~ ,p o'C:~ ~~~C5 EOC:~ 5.9~0:: o ~ o ~~ 5~~1Il +>=,C:O ~UlCl)oCl E13~z ~~c.-..... .5C 'C:-_ .2 ~ "" ~e'iij ~ Ii 0.. CI)<C > .!!!'aD .oc: '~'5~ 8. ~ III Ul50.. ~~ 'aD 'E "8 g.c .- 10 5~ ~ c: o +> ~c: C:o CI)'- ~~ c. .5 'aD l!! .... 'aD 0 c: CI)'~ .... 0 0 Q) .- +-' .:s::"'OC: c N .:s::"'OC: ~'5E .. ~ ~~E iii 1\I '5~~ ~ =' '5~~ c: .... III 1\I >'00. l'lI >'00. .~ c: Ql .J ...., .~ c Q) 0'00 0 0'00 0 ... w 0 w ~ <3 Q) 'C ~Q)'aD<I> ...J C5,~ E .....c:"'O~ 0'00= III :ew &l g- O 0 CI) Ul III .c 0.. 'Cl// c: 'C: g 'c o ~ .... -g '~ " 5 1Il~~tl 'aD C::J .~ ~~ p iil:Ogjl!! (5'5-8 o::l C5 '0 ~ .... c: o o c: ~ ro 'C C. :J 5 ~c tl~c:2 :J '00,20 It-. .... t) 2 1;)~Q)t) 5 ~ lil" 5 o 0 ,c: 0 g c: ........0 OCP t)<1>U 10 E 2 ....Q).... ....-l/l c: 0. c: o E 0 0,_ 0 l/l lO l/l Q) . ...."'0 :J Ql Ul = lO 10 Q).... E~ l/l Q) .8~ b =-5. l!! .Jg S "'Oc: ~ .2 l/l w :J l/l l/l'aDIIl"'Ol/l ~'E 'oD~'E :J :J,~ 0 Q) "'0"'0"'0...."'0 ~~~Q;~ o .- 'aD"'O lO a.~'aDoa:;~ ~ ~ 'E .~ ~ ~ '~ 'C l3 5 :8 ~ .f!C1>o'+:igc C;EQ)lO....1O ~~.~~t)o Q)o.l/loc:~ ~ ,~ '5 ~ 8 0.. ~ lO ::J .-I d<c1i> Z5c<l 0:: ~ C( ~ <I> 5 l\l <I> ~ c: o ! E ~ 1l .<:-0 >, <I> = ~.s.~:g -a;al !!!~ c: ~.{g'~~~~:g-gl/l .sg.~ Ullil'Cc:.oEo<l>"iii ~<I>'aD Q)O'Q)lO=o.....E~ ....E>- Ol/lEl/llO._"'OEIIl .....'C._c: tIOCI).9-Ciiii&1ij8E'5 OO~lO :JE:J'O>,Q)>,CI)....l/l UlOc:c: Ul+=>O"lOOc:;::....<I><I> 3l=='Uj _Ql<l>.....c:OQlUl....Ul IIlIll'OUl 'g ~ c: 5'~ tl g. lO B ~ c.s::. C ~ .!!! .s::. .2.-0:::J...."'O 10 0.00.0._.... "'0"" '0 l/l..... ....0.Q)....._:p=..,,~0 CI)"'O :J'!!! Q) 'in Q).~:J"iii 0 lO U l/ll/l of! ~ .P E tia c:.o ~ ~ 'O.OS be 5 ~.! a~ ~ Q) Ci; 8lij.~ E.~ ~'2 ~=ai ~:; ,!!! 10 0 03: c: = .s::. lOE >, :J 0 :J 0 .c 'E- 0 O:;:O_Q)<(Ul .o"'OoOOUl .c . . . . Q) .... .:s::Q)'aDal ~ C5 ,~ E .....c:'O~ ~]i '5 ~ ~'uJ o::l Q) o 0 .... -g '~ '- 5 lOCI)Q)+> 'OD0.. 0 0 C:'aDlij2 :o.~ i11 'in lO"'O Ul c: (5'5-8 o::l C5 '0 ~ .... c: o o 'aD ai .2 c. :J 5 ~c p.:g c.Q g'oo.2 t) .... ..'0 2 ~-n 8,'in OQ)UlC: o 13 .c: 8 o .... .........0 oc:p o<l)O 10 E 2 ....Q).... 'Cc.l!! oEo o. 0 c: l(l Ul ~-ci :J Q) l(l~ E~ cuo-g~ 1 .0 UlQ) ~. 0 c: _ .....:p 0 ~l(l.~~tl.. Ul-5.~:aga Ul-'ODo.UlO ~"iiic:IIlc:> i11~:o~8'5 13'~-5~ 2ll!! E"'O.~ 8-5.2 'OD"'O C - Q) gj .5.!o~"""- 3: c:'-:J 0 E o Q)'O'O:: <I> '5E2~CI)"O ~~ti'-"E.! Q)0.c:13 010 ~ .~ 8 Iii .c: ~ .0 .-I Ii> c<l ~ ~ lfl'5 E.... 'aD .... ;j ..~ .~ 8. gj::::::. :J Ul .!!!..~.... "O-g Q) . J!Hill.E <<lJ III gal .~ 0 "0 .~ C .s::. 'C III <1>..... 0 o::l'- o.~ ~ :g tl .-I ~ oC:<I>~=,C:<I> glll.o~~~~ b5=:Jl!!....."iii ....Q)~OOCl).s::. ~o(/).!~oU) ~E6:c~E~ c:ooe.-OQ) OC:>IIl.~Z3: . . C\I J:: 'E Q) ~ 1\I a. Q) o 'E Q) E a. o ~ Q) o ~ 'c :J E E o o l!! o c: 'fii W ~ 1\I ...J '0 ~ (3 I . o o o . E ~ ~ l:>> .5; 15 ~ 0:: "0 c: 1\I l:>> .g (I)~ Q) c: s~ .n c: cn~ ~.~ g~ >'<1::: ~ e 00 <(1;) ><= "- ..lll:: "00 c: CI) CI)~ 8:0 <(E n:s L. 0) E C- O) c: ~ o a. CI) 0:: "0 c: n:s 0) c: "C o .:!:: c: o ~ c: o ;; n:s 0) ;; :i c: o "011 +:lcc S 0 'c '0 5i~:@ 8 EOCOl 5.3~a:: o ~ o ~Ol C:~.!1il :8::JcO gj,IIlOl~ -mE~ ~:::!!E~Z :::!!E ~~ "C:- om +>:>>., ~Et:: ~ c..~ Ol~ > ~~ 'in 'C ~ g.,g CIJ c..Ca.. mo a:::::!!E "011 '2 "8 :@-s c Ol 0:::!!E :::!!E c o +:l Sc: Co OlE ~~ a. ~ "011 ! t- C 0 Cl>'- +-' 0 0 ..ll:"C C '" i< co == Q) iii 0 ....J::lE ~ 0 .....rot iii III 0 ;:~~ <II ::l ~ t: .~ g <b III III -, o 'in 0 ...I ... i:iJ 0 ~ (3 i< o o o I &. "011 C 'C .s '2 o :::!!E .... o'~ CQ) 00. E"OII "t: C'- 0" o~ Cl i< o o o Q).. g CQ)C: ._ .!!!'=.!!!UJo a.t)a..g2 a .~ 5 :p t) 'ggj,:;::;gg 2C1J~5l'o t) is 3l .S ~ CCl>Q)cv"t: O..c,-+-,~ o 0 a.. 'in " :2.... Q)C:Q)1Il ~ .J!! Ii: '611 ~ _I-Q.oOQ) . Cii- C ....(5.>Cii 'lil~oc:O~> ...... ~ ~ 9! >'-1( ~ 1IlQ)::>~.ooc.. .611......0"::> a. oCOOl31a-;oco (5 g.:8.o'><:" m a.cl: ~ ~ ~ ffi S c1il ~ Q) sQ) Ol" ~1Il~~~ ~~ Ol"Olla. ~~~~~o~~ CIJ.... "011 "OII~ ~~~ OlCiiIi:~a.~~~o 'lils~~E.... c~ Cii"'~ .o~~Q)co"~~,, ..ll:,,~~c:g E.o,,~~c o (/) ..... > (1) Q) ::J Q) C Q) co Q) UJ Q) .!!! "cy co OJ c en.~ en +-'~c~..c>o~co~oou..c~'-~uam~u~o UJc-c~O- ~~Q)Q)c+-'Q)~~cro-cQ)'-Q) Q)~"co~E1il~:B~2~~0~Q)""'cooIOl>ow Q)roOl....roOl...COlQ)-" ....I-~. -1Il0EO....... ~~~~~-E!~~UUJ~~d~~~~EQ)~~n I"OIISOE~Olc......~CIJ""ClJCIJ~!Q)roOl~a.os 0~"~~;~81Io~I~~~".~=~:~~ (J) ~ ::l1ij;:Cii"lU 0 xS.19c 'PE::l g g 8 g ~ ~ ~ c.o.;:: ~ UJ=" OC"OII.J!!OCCOlCoa._-~_ro""crona.o o ...." 1:1 Q) li=:;::; 0..0 0 0 E 0:0 ....1il III ... 1il C = 0"Cl Q) n C a::ro III Ol ~ W 0 'E ~ ~ 0 0 Q) "Cl .... g c: g .8 0 0 <( :;::; Q) W Ol S ::J >.-....... occoQ)o....Q)._~li:EIIi<ll~.......a. o 0 0 c c..... = n.S 0 0.J!! c .!t!.:c III .... "OII~ E co .~.!!! a.:c Q) ~ 0 E Q) Ol.Qjg'<t..t1ij1ij a.(\l 0 0 ~ ~'(j) 0 0 Q),<:::> Q) 0 g ii: <( ~~fi E.1Il CON "OII"OII~a.E.~Q.E cEo. E ~fi~ co ...I c:s~ d a ~ Z9M o :::!!E iii :::!!E ~ ::l III (\l Q) :::!!E C o ! +> ~ Q) C IQ)'QOQ) ....J ~.S E .....C"Clt ~l!i'5 ! ,<: UJ ro Q) o 0 .... -g .~ '- g (\lQ)Ol:;::; "011 a.. 0 0 c'Ql)~2 :O.!: ~ t) ro "Cl III C ~'5-8 ro ~ n ~ .... C o o C 'QO co C a. .~ g ~ '" 'g.!c.g ::J "(ii.2 u '-u.tJ2 1ntjCl>t) ~~ ~5 o o.S 0 s C .......0 oc:p t)<bO ro E 2 ~a~ 8.s 8 (/) ro (/) Q) . ..." ::l Q) (/)== coco Q).... E~ (/)~ ~ Q) .... ~. (/) ~. ~ 1l " ~ Q) "NJ....... -'----' "a. 't- ...... E~ .s'~gijl:2(ij(\lO"Oll .:::'- 1;)o'-C:::J.~'-+JC -0 !1 :!2 Q) cn ~ .- 0 .a "0 ai"t: co::lOCCOIO"Cl::coQ)E-5 (6~it;.s~T"f~!l::~Q)'t)l) i:i~B!l~~:::BjgE g.s E-5 c 1il:;::; ~.!i! c.... a.Q)"Cl Q)~oa.:B...~Q)"Cl:2E~ ~-5l3Ec.gt-:~~gE"OII ocn~=Q)u..lOU"'OoOo '- ro~>.~coQ)_o"Oll 19 Q) "011:;::;1-=.... 0.0 co 0 Q)~,E C iii ~ gj C ~d; <;:::,~ "011 co (/) 2 "Cl "a. "011 1il t) E .2 III ~'lil ~ 8.:5a~fiu ~cto . N 00 M :::!!E :::!!E . ("I) <i: "E Q) E 1:: III a. Q) o "E Q) E 0- o ~ Q) o a '2 ::l E E o o e o C 'w jjj Q) ~ III ....J - o a <3 I . o o o . E ~ ~ t:>> ~ o 5} ct: 't) c: III t:>> .~ .2 11 'c: IlI~ "lii UJ c: ,g ,lg III J:,~ g~ >.'*:: :ii e OQ ~u; ><= 0- ..:.:: -Co c CI) CI).s:: 0..0 ~E C'O .... C) o .... a.. C) c ~ o a.. CI) c:t:: -C C C'O C) C 0': o :: c o ::E c o 1;; C) ;; ~ C .0 IlO ~5.ES' c13.9a Gl~-u E05Gl ~...J~O:: o o b$ CGl$1II ~SCO 1II11lGlci'J IlOIIIE..... E~~Z ~ ~?;: 'i::-_ 011I +:I>~ Belli ,.: a. ll. 'C ~ ~ ~1lO .cc .~~~ o~ III f65ll. ~~ IlO IlO 2! l"- e (1).f: +"" Q) .S ~ 0 e c N .x"C .x'OC "0 ~ 1II = Gl ~'5~ iii ...J&lE '" 'O~1ij 'O~~ .: :J C >.o~ '" ~oa. l'II ...., .- C Gl 5.s c3 ..J O'WO - <Jl 0 jj] jj] l;' <3 Gl lQ .s::: ll. IlO C "t: 2 '2 o ~ IlO C-o 'Co 25 .- Gl 5~ ~ C o +:I .l'!Ic Co ~~ a. .E e :l m ~ C o I +:I ~ 'I- ~ +.I~ _'0.0 _ ~ >.0" 1II l{lB"E r3 .c :c 8 .~ a.E ~ g. ~ ill 'Iib .l9llOc:!;:._ ....~IlOC 0 ':;:::IGllll Gllll~lII '0 <Jl 0 1Il :::I l!l ~ ..... 0 q:: Gl <Jl .- _:s e 0'.-1II O.....-ci'.t: 1II.c -.s:::a.lIIE<Jl...4:jGl.... ,Q) 1II.... .-...Q)Q)....=Gl.s:: 'Gl Q) >..S <Jlll::.....1IIc:........ 5.c-S.cE:g:::loOl:::I~>' <Jl=...1Il .co.s"a..c 1II111.E'E~~1II<')(i;Q)E'O 2Hii " :a ..; :g -ci' ::: -0 :Q 8 ~ . ~'lil ~~.~lIIs3:~ g,!!1'E C5 __ +-' tU._ 0 >.O1+-_ co Q)~:t:' t):Ce:t)_cSOiij-o-Sc ~~~~~~~~~ffi~~E d Z Ol c: .x Gl IlO Ol ~ C5 .s E .....c"~ ~:!a '5 :g, ~UJlDQ) o 0 .... E 0;23 ll.c 1lO1II .s iil :s!.!!l ':; 10 .... C 1lOQ) .S E ,,~ =1II :Jc. 1DQ) o ..... o _Gl 8$' iijiQ C'- ~.s:: ~E ....<Jl lll~ 5i~-d .- IlO IlO E 'iij B .S .S ~ E a. ...""lII,.:c .g'5'55l-53: ll..clDOu.c _'00 iij c: 't: .l!i .s::Gla.......- <JlE<JloE t:>.<l>Q)~ Gllll~O~ IlO E c." C IlO c~~~~c :2l11's':;lll:2 .- a. 0' 0"- .- &lc3~~B,g c 1II o:~ .!: g ~ CI)(/)~ e 3:a:e:~ .....(/)OlC iO':::l~~ a.Q)O, =.s::01ll (Q......+Jc .s::.s:::lIIGl ~ .~ 15 -g, C IIIOl 58J:t;) :::C"O"- 8:~ ~.E <:sea:- Gl 0 0.0 ~ lil g.;s 1II ~ C1i :2: :2: Ol .... .xGlIlO5i ~ :s .S E .....c"~ O'w= 1II ~ jj] ~ 5l- o 0 .... 'E Q;~ ll.c 1lO1II .S ~ :s!.!!l 'S 10 .... C 1lOQ) .S E 'O~ =1II :::10. lDGl o ..... o _Q) 8$' ~iQ C.- ~.s:: ~E ~<Jl III ~ 5i~:2 '0 IlOIlO E E 1II ~~~1ij.~ ~ .g:ss g-g ~ ll..olDOo.o _'00 iij c: .t: .l!i .L: CD 0......_ ~E8loE cOl iO' Gl 8 Ol .....ca. IlO E ~ "2 1II IlO C:~,-_:JC :2 1II ':; ':; III :2 .- a. 0' 0"- .- :::IOlOlGlo:::l CDO,,-,-........a "2~ "35 g8 ~~ a:- .t:.- 0 ~~~J: . :g,.~ :a ~ 8l O::lII~Ol 'aicJ:c::; .c'-CI)alu <Jl$.~ii:~ c:8l~cE 5 3: a. ~ .;: =,,(/)IIIGl 8:lii~~8- ~-gE~~ .s::.l'!I~OGl t-lI)'::;O'O .0 <') cb C1i :2: :2: '0 +oJ:>" 0-0111 +-' c'+-g ......Q>.€ C Q)OQ)C c.c.o Gl <JlEQ)IlOO GlElII E 'O<JlGl<Jllll+:l EIII.s:: Q) c~lil~c~ 8~ffi o COo-ofU- (Q1i)"C .!!! ~c5l-s""~ 1II a.lDQ)O"'C.lIIE a.iija. e()m~.!Q)~'S ~g'c $O'~""iii.s::'O'iji :~'fl"2 'iji3:- lIIl1!: ~~:t:: <{l:;::;....1II :t=O::~'lilo'Ooo ll::~ Q'OO<Jl .:::IC'O Q.fg'g -offi:g'OTIg,g~ 'O.:!..lll ffiUJ'O..ffi~;;;;; ~e.x ffi(!1l11 c8.fg4:j lII~E 8:ffi <,:~-g o<.:!..~5<JlElII.ooolll . . ....,. 00 C1i :2: :2: :{ 'E Gl E 1:: '" C. Gl 0 'E Gl E c. E 0 ~ e 0> Gl ~ 0 ~ 0> '2 ~ :::I E 0 E 2- 0 It 0 "t> Gl c: C5 <a C 0> '0; .~ iii g Gl '" ~ .!l c: '" ~ ..J '" .... ., c: 0 UJ ~ ~ ~ (3 11I J: ~ I g~ . 0 >-ll::: 0 :ii e 0 . 00 <(~ ><32 =t;u c: CI) CI).c: 0.0 ~E ~ C) e a.. C) c: ~ o 0. CI) 0:: "'C c: ns C) c: "C o :: c: o == c: o ~ C) E :E c: .g '00 J9 lH~ s c::po.... Q) 111 ~ 0 Eoc:g 6.3~cr o ~ o ~.!l 5~.!l11l :p~c:O gJ,(/)Q)~ EmE~ , ::E.!! Z ::E ~~ ~- 0111 ~~~ ~ a~ 'l::~ ~ ; fi. '00 c: ';:: B 'c o ::E .!!'llO .Qc: ,-,;:: ~B~ 8.c~ IRo cr::E '00 ,~ '0 00 ~~ 5::E ::E c: o :p J9c: c:o Q)~ ~4( a. oS ~ ~ m ::E c: o I :p ~ :t:Q) '0 '211J 6 >, J?~ - ijl(/) o~ ~ l1Iu ID c~ -~E CD-l1I ~ "-cO (/) cO'.!!!>, e"lU Q)"lU~ ~lijl1:?_u. ~goa Q) o~~~""~E ~5~Q)'2~a.11I~0 N-:P~~~ :Pcr~"lUQ)lij- ~ O~l1I(/)Q)cou Ci~l1IC~c~~cE~U~ c~o"lU'llO~.Q~:P~ ~~(/)E~2E~So~~~'Oalij~i~~E~=~~~ ~ Ec ~~u~o O~'-ro~~cU~mQu.- (/)- Q)c8~Q)c-....col1l~~11I5oQ)Q)~~11I. (/)~~'llO~:p~~cia~.'llO~(/)EccQ)>IIlQ)Q)"lU Q)E ro~~~~._~ ~cc'-~-o~~P~~u~ ; Q)C'llO'llOOC~~l1I~o~crcE OUl1I~_~~ CB~l1I:P:PIll~i-lij~fiQ)~~~ijlccc~ool1lc 0~~"lU~~l1:?Q) ~ Q)u~l1:?Q)~~.g~~.Q~E~~ :P~~ CDQ)oo8o~~uoOOl1l~11I11l'llOC~=co ~l1:?~~~~ol1llij:pu~.C:~ol1llij~o~~E!o.~~ I1ICD UP(/) ~l1Iu -~~ ~EtuCD~l1Il11ul1IlIl --Q)l1:?~~~cl1:?c~oel1:?~c c~~J9~Wc~~ 11I~5000NQ)Ol1lE~l1IU~CDl1:?Q)Q)1Il1ll~11I111~a . ci Z -I< o o U -I< o o U Q) Oc Co ~E.'!l (/)0'- .!!! E E OQ)CD ~"OQ. 0- ;to "i:UIIlt5 111 CD U.--I< ,g.iij~~g &:a; 111 gu <( .... ~ ij} -Jc'O.f1 _ 0 Q)'_ Cc ooE ~l1Ill.uc~ :.:....1IJQ)11I~ &:'E ..J 5 ~ C l1I.QU 0._.2 +-'~c;:o:!: ~_coQ)~o 'O'(ij~ C: 0 E ~.r:U :::I"L: Q) ll. 1Il<( III ~u t)~Q;~ - .-u~2! lij (ij <( >, l/) ol1l'oc~u :.: Q)11I5c~ &:.!: ij}Q) (/) 111 C 11I2!(/)~ll.O.2 o l1:?u g.1IJ~"lU Q)-~......JO'- 'O'(ij N 0.'0 () 6b o:i:i~B~cn~ ~ ~ (/) :; ..J S 0 l1:?0:tJ- '2Q)uc>,~uiil-c l1I....Q)o=OCl1l~l1I ~ l5.r:! a..!!! :g g ~ ~ ~ u<("CB~tQ) o~ c: ~a, C::J'-+-,~'-O:::J . J? 111 III g 8. ~ 111 ~ o.~ ....0 Q)'iii~~ 1<<:0 ~ l1:? ~~~i:ii 0,;:: g Q)~ ~ c~(ijQ)g.!lmE~~ .Qu.r:.-'s::~ co 13 ~ Q) Q) "lUl/)~j~E.gQ)u~ of--I.....c~._t/)(/J+-'c:c c Q) 0 0 ~ ~ ,!!! ~ 0 ~ o.:p~o.g 5l aQ):p ~iD'~u~~~e~~ gC:'llOQ)l1IN_o.l1I:P o iill1:?5"fi~~ g.~~ 111 U)~ o d> ~i ft-- 08 eN 14 c:- Ui m GI :J ...: c I'll m ...-' ... o ~ (3 L() <l: 'E CD E 1:: m ~ Q) o 'E Q) E a. o ~ Q) o ~ '2 " E E o u e o c ';;; iij Q) .>< m ...J - o ~ (3 I . Cl o U . E ~ ~ l>> ,S ~ '} It "0 <:: <ll l>> ,~ .E 3l '<: CQ~ Ui ill <:: ~~ J:,~ g~ >-<1::: lij e UQ <CUi ><= :c~ s::: Q) Q)J::, 0.0 ~E C'O I- C) o I- 0- C) s::: t= o a. Q) 0:: "'C s::: C'O C) s::: ";:: o ~ s::: o :E s::: o 1;; C) .. :i C o blI Bcc~ ~01::'U ~~~8 EocII) ~.9~a: o ~ a ~S CII)SlIl ~5ca 3l3l1)alS EII)~~ ",,::E_Z ~ ~~ ....... c_ Olli +:I>~ ~elll !g li D- II)<C > ~blI .oc u; 1:: ;>:. cj:l1:: S,,2.f 810 a:::E blI -E~ S5 .~~ ::E I ~ "ClO C 'C S '2 o ::E C o +:I ~6 ID:e ~< c. .5 nD blI ! r- c 0 Q) .~ ..... Q) .- ..... 0 0 .,:.::"Oc C N .,:.::"Oc 'ii III = Q) III = Q) ~ .JdlE .J&lE iii III oQ)~ o~iij ~ :;) c: ~o~ III >-00. III ..., .~ c Q) .~ c Q) oJ u'iija u'iija ... W W 0 ~ (3 Q) ... ":'::Q)blI~ ~ 5.!:: E _c"Ot:: o'iij= III .~w&l g- U a Q) ... ":'::Q)blI~ ~ 5.!:: E _c'Ut:: ~]i S ~ ~- W m Q) U a G;- o c c c 0 .g~tl =(/):;) o (/) ~ E::tl 11)'- c aEo diu D- G;- o c c c 0 ~~tl ~::l2 E- ... ...(/) Q)'- c aEo ~u Cl... ~ ~ ... c o U ~ il ~ ... c o U c o en 'E c :;) .2.p g~ 5l-8 cnD ,- c ,~.~ en'U t> ... Q) ~ 'E' E C:'iij~~ ~~.lll.o ...: lJl...enl1lo ~lijl1l-gt> 0.2 c ~ ~ ~8:'~~g :t:co~=o c o fJ)t; c :;) o~ ~C;; ~15 (/)0 cbll .- c Q)"i:: :!::::::J en "0 t> ... Q) ~ 'E' E 0.= d> Q) . .:g ... 'ro ~ (/).lll.o . lJl...en 111 5 Sllijlll-gt> ~ g .~ ~ ~ cli.l9~15 ~ro~=o <0 c:I:: ~ :3 l3 II) ai ::E :0 6 111 1i! .~ Qc. E 1it ::E l3 0- .-t m M m c -0 U "0 ~2:l lij ~c clij .o15 tl 5 'e8.>-c ~ >.c ~ 0 >-~'O'~ .o::>'iij 8. 11I!J!.2'011I~.o'2C1l1: ijl~~';:... ~~~~~tl~lIl~1I) CIlOCllCc l1I~OEC~II)"lilECIlo'1i.! .o'~OlllCllE (/) Q)o.oll)~ (/) '--o.(/) (/):::ECIlOt>(/)6itIDTC(t)(ijW -Q) ~U'U~lIllll 'OSOO~CIl'O~"lil CIl<C'iij...~555.l9o:!i(/).,:.::c~.o ~~:itS 15.~c: cen~CIl15~.g"lil~ CIl~t> O'iij CIl.211l'0'3+:1'O III E 0 ~o2~~'i::e~~~~~b~cn~~ ECIltl(/)CIlS~t::--aCll-CIlg+:lO ~E_~El1ICIl8.lJllJl:::EEut>'O~+:l ...003sEc(/)00a::>~~~o.~ ~Bt::~lIl>-olij5l-5l-~g"'lIlNECIl ~g~11I~lij'O~~~enaj:l~.:g8~ U) 5 _!!!. ~O 5 c: co Q) ro o't-c: :pJ!J.Q) '0 ...tiil1l<.- o.'Uo'O:3.!!!E CC ~~~~~ ~~'P ~~s l1I~c 11I8.'iij~11I l1I-.l9~s'rol1l l3~B"O'iij(/)~~E'O~~~uOE.o >"'Q)~C _(/)c -a. CIll1l 111 ~~~(/)(/)~5l-_::>l1I(ij(/)E~~~o lJl~E~5~~lJl~-g~~~~~oc (/)D-CIlo....o"OO~NEOO... ~o ~m"09~(/)c5l-~1::Q)~a'Ugllli ~~~~.P~co.-coS-~~Q)~N- CCIl5.l9C1::tl~~~5Eo.~:3.:go. -g5t>en8S~Q)o.~'iij~~~~~ c'O::>l1I...l1IE'c~(/)..c _(/)CIl::>O(ijO ~Q).P~~ roQ)~o~ouoo.~pc t: E (/) CIl E D- E ,~ ~ CIl Ii= 5l- III CIl .!!l c 0 ~ooEQ)~_~_n'Pu~nw2~ Q)Bt::2"lil>-~...CIl'iijlij"O~~I8."O ~g~g~lij5tS~~~lijm~~olij 1: 0) E t:: III a. 0) 0 "E 0) E a. EO 0 ~ t, 0) & a ~ 0> '2 ~ :;) E 0 E lit 0 0:: U "0 ~ c: 0 III C 0> 'iij .~ iIi g 0) '" .>< ~ c: III ~ .J ~ - c: 0 W ~ ,:g ~ C3 III :f ,0> I a~ . 0 >-4:;: 0 lij e U . UCl d Z .0 .-t m M :::E :!: o .-t m M :::E :::E <C:en ><32 =t;u C Q) Q)..c 8:0 <CE ca ... 0) ~ Q. 0) C ~ o c. Q) a:: "C C ca 0) C "C o :: C o :! C o ~ 0) E :! C ,Q IlO 19 s'~'C 5i~,g8 EocGl 5.9~a: o ~ o bGl cf!~la ,g ::J cO mmGlc<l EQl~~ ;.,,:E_z c; ~~ "'='- 0111 +:l~~ B"'11I li: a. 0.. 'c~ ~ ~1lO .cc 'jg 's ~ O~ 111 fi}So.. ~:E IlO Coo "Co O.c ~tl O:E :E C o +:l .l9c Co Ql~ ~c( a. ~ ~ ::J I/) 111 Gl :E C o ! +:l ~ ~ o +:l lU Qj a. o ci z Gl I/) 111 .c 0.. IlO oE .s '2 o :E IlO I!! r-. c 0 Q) .- +-' 0 0 .x'Oc c N lU=Gl -l< .. c:- ..J::JE -l< ......1Ilt: 0 0 jjj al OGllU 0 0 Gl :J ~oa. U U c: ~ al .- C Gl '" ...., u'oo 0 ..J - iJj 0 ~ (3 Gl 1:: .xGlIlOGl S ls ,S E ......c'Ot: ~]!'5l1 .~ UJ III Gl U 0 .. -g .~ '- a mOJO>:;:::; IlO 0.. 0 0 cllOc2 "- c ~.... -g'OlZ:!! ~'5-8 III .9 o ~ .. c o U c ~ co "C: 0. ::;, a ~ c +:i Q) c.2 g'~.Q 0 '- ... 0 2 1;) ti 8. t) a~:!! a U 0,_ 0 .s c .....0 OC+:i ~~2 .P~ti c a. c 8,~ 8 I/) lU I/) Gl . ...'0 ::;, Gl 1/)= lU.19 Gl Gl E'O E :a"E .... OlU lU I/) -g Gl GlI1lGllu ~ti:;'iib cu~(ij~-g ~~:=Q)cu :;:::; 9-.S 0 1: ::;,..cI/)"IlO' -:2.D"'liil=lIJ Ri ..c ~ c ...... .- ..c '0 IlO +:l 0 t: ~~,s~a8. ~(j)1::=+:;e 'O':c ,~~ III a. .t :!!i~'E,~ ~~~~:~:g 1-'Ot)OEo ~~ f5 ~ J: '" m :E c( :E -l< o o U .. o Gl '~ IlO ~c 0.'- 1lO-g oE bD ::;, o ~ , I/) 1::~'~-l< ~EoO =lUGlO o...lUU .'t~fi ... <( _ <Ii . Ri-g,!!!IlO~lU ~ I/) ..c::;,'~clUllO';:; a ~e~'coE,s ~ ~ .!aIlO~,~~-g'iijlU -u '0 ~'iij ~ a I/) '0 'b ~ 5i !!! g ls:c E ~'~~'s eE ~ 1! 'E :; ~ 3l ~ ;:"E lU g ~oOt)..lUo.=O'Oo O'luE'O<'5.~~E:ii~ c 'm lU ~b 01/) "Gl .. 0 0 ffi'~~o OGlq:Gl =1/)=1! o.Gl.lUo a..c :::t '- c( .. 0' lU +-' I/) .~ I/) ~GlGl a:lU +-' '0-5-5 1lO~.El u..1l :i. ~O,~_oQl ,s GloRiu'>:::g~c >. 0 .c.l!!"C<Of-~..o 'OC'O"c cGl~'-oC')'O..c+:l c celli Q).c~t:lO..cGlc.~lU lU~::>o.,o......= lU....~...Q~~ 'O:eeoCQ)GllUQ'O::J~,!!!o Q) GlI/)'-....lUoi;ti(i)~oGlEGl81/) ~m~~lUlUOc:GllUOlUWC~ ~......'-<j>~5~00~lOffiGlGl~O" m ~ ~ ~ <U UJ e':e 2 0"0 ::: :5 -5 o.~ Q)Q)~.....Q)..cQ.~E~4>o. >.0C5 .c..c~o~~ui~o.>.I/)E.s.co_ -~'-Ul ~l/)oc::;'oc'OI1I,!a ~RiooQlQl'O~cc_c(~oGlQlcJ: .... .J::Q).....i::Q)....O>ou. c>c'-_ U 1/)". Gl lU 10 lU co Gl Gl Gl'-'~'- UllU a: ~ '- E'O Gl'13 0 1lO'O:a.c~... E Ul c ::I r> 3lo c c 0 Eo..s';:;'u;== 0 Qj 8,Q o~~~g~lZo:;em1!~m~ezlO fa I- a. lU.c '0 lU 0'0 a....... Ul............,o a. ~ ~ ~~ ~ 5'" ::):E U ~ -l< o o U .cd Q) '+- .- ..cOE -Q)'- ooQl ....co. ...lUllO O::;'c ;t .la :g 6il -l< o o U ~ ~ ~ -go,~ ~ =(UU)ro+-'~ (J) ~&~~-Ca(ij .~ I/)GlllOo~"""> IlO .....c.o:;:::;>~ e 0 c....o lU'bo 0.'00 ~..c Gl.g Q)O o.~ Gl =,!a1!= o.U 11I=1! 2:~~~8~-g~~ <(....lUO'Ul_lUO'lU c 0 IlO ~ 'ml1l..c -c 0 ~...... ~ m'-cd-J L..O t)<<J:st)o~ Bm .~t)3~~o .....0 O::JO(/)::S~ ffi'~~o-g= ~ro E OGlq:GlOGl'->m =Ul=1!OUlgGlQ o.GlI1l0-lUl/)'00 .'t-5 5-lu~ct ~:ii n ~ c0 ~ '0 0'- lU ~ --0 cu .:! IlO ~...... c m >._~~=~ ii'; lIJ 1ije!~OGlc::!2O~ 'bEGl.gm8~~:: ::;''0 c..c_ Gl Q)ocoo..-'Oc-5 g= m 0 Gl1! c 1lO...... 111 Q)IlOGl.c UlI1l'U; 0 ::J Ul,S.c1- c c Gl Gl 1/)11I...._N m 1lO'O 0 ,!a ct lIJ Ri ~ 0. 'm GO :ii ~m-;;;~ C'O.Q.g .... Q) E 0 ..c 0 '- 020 'O+:lo'Oc .....-:; ~ c <<J Co o:~ lsEollOm-=Gl-5Ul '>::QjUlO~~UlGlGl 0.. o.~ no Gl ~ E-5 .c ~ ~ ~ '" :E :2 /'- <t 'E Gl ~ al C. Gl o 'E Gl E a. o ~ Gl o ~ 'c ::> E E o U e o c 'il; iij Gl -"<: al ..J ...... o ~ i:3 I . o o U . E ~ ~ l:>> ~ o 5} n:: 1) c: Cll l:>> .~ .2 t/l '- Gl c: s~ .n 8 en ~ ~ ,~ 5~ >.'*" lii e UCl <(1;) ><= "- ~ -Co C cu cu.s:: 0.0 ~E ns ~ C) o ~ a.. C) c ~ o 0. cu 0::: -C C ns C) c "C o ~ c o :E c o 10 C) ~ :E e: o +:l S ~'2u e:+:lO.... Q)m~8 Eoe:Q) 5.9~0: o ~ o 1lO ~Q) e:Q)~'ro -85e:O ~lQQ)c<:l EQ)E~ , ::i:~z ::i: ~~ ........ e: _ om +:l>~ Bem lj: a. Q. ~~ > ~1lO .oe: 'i!!'~~ o ~ m 0.e:Q. mo o:::i: Q) lQ s:. Q. 'llll e: 't: 2 'c o ::i: 1lO -2 "0 00 ~~ ~::i: ::i: ~i< VlO mO s:.U"O Q.Q)e: Q) s:. m :5~~(ij ~ e'~ i:) > 0 .... "- eg.o~ a. "- 'I- ro e: o +:l ~e: <1)0 ~~ 9 0.. ~ ..5 "0 e: m ~ =' VI III ::i: e: o 'I E ::i: (/) .9 cU c:U _ (/) :n a; Q) ro Q) Q) .(;; -g -g m~Q){ii:;:5 III - (Q <0 'l-O-o~~.....o ~~-g ~ t'j'llllOVlUOOQ) 0....... .!!!ro'llll.g8~ g.Ej!}'Oc:~~ ....Coo _en\- OQ)(/')tI)c. ~ Q)'_ Q) ~ m Q) "0 CIl 0'- e: E .oe:~""'VI.o~Q)Q)o.e:VlOO .~_.p.&.= Q)ijj)=,:5-g E CIl Q)+:l 0 \MIa> Q) -..2 0 "(l.)--:Q e co <1> 0..€-=ll!~gl3C'!E~~6];O:: g.~m.c:.c:CIlO:~E~mVlVl- o Q).20-~"5.20 O+:i ~ ~ ~~ ..... u ~:= Q) ....:c ~ OQ) 'E- Q) ..... .S: VI +-'c- _CCU:3N_ ..cC_- lij.jg g-5'-E Q)Q. c: Q)::;~ B= ~ ::1"-<<0::1 ::1_0"'0 tt=Q)Q) VI O.c: Vllii.2'~:g:l:!2 <Ii'cll! i5 :; g ~ 04> 3 c Glg g.~.~.c ~ 0.<0 m't-""C:a ::JW. co (/) (1)0.. "- ci z - o +-' 0 ~ VI....... ~ '~.g -g ~ ~~t ~(5~~'E VI m Q) _ CIl ~:c 0 _ .(;; ~-5(/)~(/).c:e:<hCll.c: "+:i':; Q) o"E ~ <0...... 5.~ CIl~ :5'(;; CIl CIl VI Q)'(;; ~ ='e:'llll(/)"Oom~VI~ ro .- e: <I) e: 'C "0 (/) Q) <( i> ffi'~eti5~ ffi oe&: "0 >oQ)Q. (/l:C~:::;Q.:; . lij.o E.(/) c: ~<i'.!!l'O,!!l ~ 1lO 1l !!J. .S!.g a. (/) ~ ~ ~.2 .S .~ ~ G> ~ -g ~ (5 * <5 ~ t'j ~'O""'lj:'-"'" Q).- Q)lj: 2l &:~.s'aj~Ui~ 'gjl~'aj _;J"O<<>::J::1....ea::e::J <( (/) .e: :5 0' O'.E CIl CIl <( 0' Q) .0 i< o o U i< o o U -0 Q) '~'llll e e: 0.'- llOal e: .... 'C 'Q1) :J o ~ I (/l C 1l'~i< ~ .S: (5 0 :a~~g ~""-5 < _ <Ii ro-g.~'llll~CIl ~ .c: =' .~ e: CIlE 1lOc: :.....~ (/) 0 >.- t'j.... 't';::; E~~ lil 'ijj) llO CIl .~ :l .:! _ llO ~.2~~~(/)uoe: ~o ....ECIl.s:llO.C>o ~Q)::;:O <li -ooe: =~.~:;~(/)'i5:b'~CIl ~ U ot'j.....m 0.'- 0'0 O'a;E~.::('li~~Elij e: 'fi CIl ~o . - ~ 213 llO c: .~ '0 ..Q CIl ~ Q) 0 .~ 5l!E ~ o..Q)ro-5 ~5 6- (ij 'ro _.... (/):5 ooj!} Q)(/) ~"""'Q) o C1>'-tl-gt1>_ :; .S: .8 '611 CIl E B gEQ)Q)~Q)'c .S: a.>G3:ca::J:oBmp .= Q) :~ .~ a:: tu ~ .~ (3 ~"CQ)E~:U:l Q)4> ~ ~.!!l.e ~:5lij <u:5 ::; 6ilQ)'aj u'O_:5~ ~o~u:;ffio~c Q)5.6~g~~::;.2 (l)cm+JQ)c"'p:: 1U ~.2.... e:ll:+:l'C <lie: 0.. 10 ai ~.g ~ ~ e'E Q)::::J>co-"O:J~ :5 ~ o6h~ ~ ~ Q) g ~ \to- <D co.-J: 0:5 ~u o ~ ~ ~ M ~ ::i: I!!t- 00 c~ .. ~ iii 01 j E ca 01 ...I' - o ~ (3 00 <I:: .... c: Q) ~ 01 a. <II o .... c: Q) E 0. o j <II o ~ '2 ::I E E o o l!! o c: 'iii [j Q) .>< 01 ...J - o ~ C3 I . o o u . E i 0> ~ o al- 0:: "0 I:: <Il 0> I:: 'I:: .2 f/) Oc tl~ u; W I:: ~~ J: .~ l5~ >Oil::: lij e 00 <CUi ><= "- ~ "Co s:: (I) (l)oC 8:0 <CE E tn e a.. tn s:: :e o c. (I) Q: "C s:: ca tn s:: "i: o :: s:: o :E s:: o ;:; ca tn .. :i c: ,S! \:lD ~ 5'~u C::;:l0'" GlIll:t=8 EOC:Gl 5.3~a: o ~ C ~Gl .5_ ~ 2 10 .....::Jc:c ~!8Gl~ =GlE~ .l; ~ .!! z ~ ~~ 2_ o III :;:l~~ B"'1ll q:: a. 0.. 'C ~ ~ Gl l(l .t: 0.. \:lD c: 'C g '2 o ~ .!!'QO .Qc: '0 '5 ~ 5:t= III o.e:o.. UlO ~~ ui c \:lD 0 '2"0 ~ o 0 "0 ~~ ~ o~ E ~ E o <.> ~ e: o :;:l Be: e: 0 Gl:g ~<( ii. .5 ~ ::J UI 13 ~ e: o i :;:l :E <I> <I> . "0 ~ </lCi </l~c ~~ ~ ; ~ ~s Ill~ ~ <1>0_ Ill-<I> ~~~~ ~ ro <U"O ~~~~ro -~i~ gl(l! S~e:~<I> o<l>~~g~ <U'c- ..- ~ c: rd:: ......-~.c :>-.c:- o'i-=" .r::....., W::::J .t:::J.~~~ro<l>~S~ro~o~<I>ro_::J$"''''''Eroo~ al' ~.t: ~ ro~ E g.8a; ~.~~ g? E-Jii ~ :::.~'1551i1S=al!? ~~<I>U/o8c:co~~U/s.....82E="OS\:lD~l!?""'~U/ <I><I>DgcO\:lDOc~-<I>""''''''l!?Eo.<u8cro€'''''~~.....1ll 5~B:;:l~!!i~roro~JgB_.<I>roEo~~Eal~ .t:g=~~.E_.Q-~<I>~..t::t=U/<uGle5$"Oo.UoGlW~ .~ f/) a. '- .~ .'!:: c: aJ..Q.~ E .~ 'C .0 a. ...~.~ ~ 'ii) :; ~ Q: J- ~l!?i~S~SE~fi~."O~<Uic:-ES::J"Ogg~<I>~~ o<UOS........"O<I>~<I> <I>~..... -.t: <I>::Jro.oCOGl\:lD.t: cC\/ :;:llil~Gl~~~liI"Oo..Sg~~~UI~~E'15~U/a:c""'ro~ ~.t:~~~~-&<I><I>~B~GliE~SGl<l>$~~'5~fi~ ::JUI~::Jo<l>_Eo.o5Uq::"-</lc<U"'EOii.~"'''''''''Gl<l>M -U/ro"OE~...= ro-o.<I>....ro roE-Gl::J~.o.. g~~o.Ero~~~~Eo.E~<I>~~e1il25 ~1iI30~<I>~ 0~o._Eo."O<U</l.-</l5~roo."O<uU/~roEu~.o5~ o z i< C C U i< C C U 8 ~~'E ;;~Q; .....co. ...ro\:lD O::J C 'C f/) :0 0.. .!!l ro . ::>- , U/ <: i '~i< B.Soc =<UGlC ~~~u <( 0 < \:lDt; .5 Q) iC U...... "0'(5' 0 c<( ro"'-o </lro'\:lD ~Q. (ij () +.,., en ~ c '4-Q)..c. u.~co.t: ~ 05~~ ~ ~2 ..g +-'<1> "c"""'-ocu"-c Sg..g)B~B<I>.g~o "- ro E=.-l!? ro= o.E o::J...c.> .t:roo 'C en Q) a.e2 ~:J o~ ~.!!l 0.<( c...... ro ~U/..... e: 'iij ro ~ '0 .~ S~ \:lD .....0 0 ~'~io o Glq:: <I> =</l=~ ~~ ~ ~ <(..... ~ ro >. o~o ~ c.-t=.po c rocU/.-..... >. l!1.SEo......!!1.5-e C<l> '00 t:; co ._'_ 0 <t: ~ .5: U)o.~>~ en::J "'O.....,..~+-'t)Cl>Q) cuo ~~=octJ:5c e(/) 'D.O'~co...... tIDe co C::::J ~ ~~~.g.S o.S ~ g~ ~<I>~E~~~~~B e:5B~urochc~::; ~ 0'5,.2:.0-5.1-'- ;'.2 0 lll~o.~-o E"O c ~i .- U/<(o c <I> c <Uo'" S.:2't;al5~::~alg? o ~.~.t: .'g9~.t: 8 ;t 8.ct ~i g.~~ ~~ "0 .-l ~ .-l cv5 ~ ~ fr-- 00 c~ 'iii ~ iii as Gl ::J ... C <<I as ...J-' ... o ~ <3 m <t 'E <I> E t:: as a. ~ 'E <I> E a. o ~ <I> o b '2 ::J E E o U l!? o C '0 W <I> ... as ~ ... o b (} I . o o U . E: ~ ~ bl .S 5 at n:: 'l:l c: '" Ol .g .9 gp= 1il~ 1ii w .~ ~(Q i:,g> g~ >'<1::: lij l!! UQ <(1;) ><= .- ~ "'Co c: Q) Q)..s:: 0.0 ~E co s- O) o s- o.. 0) c: 1:= o a. Q) 0::: "'C c: CO 0) c: .C o :!:: c: o :E c: o 1;; 0) ;:i ~ e:: o '00 S5-E:C ~i,g8 Eoe::Q) g3~a:: o ~ o b~ 5~~1Il +l ::3 e:: 0 ~1IlQ)~ +llll~~ ._::;:.:!:z ::;: ~~ ~- g~~ ~elll q:: a. a.. 'c~ ~ ~'OO .De:: 'c;;'5 ;>:. e::....1: 0.- III a.e::a.. III 0 ~::;: Q) III III &. '00 .E S 'c o ::;: '00 oE -g S5 .- Q) 5::;: ::;: ~ III .~ ul 1Il'OO > e:: E e:: +l 0 E =g'iij:ll i iil13'O'OO -g III ,S "oIl'2 >- ~ IDt'.2.f!ffiE 1118.~5u 8 -E.~{gEffi~ e:: o +l .fie:: e:: 0 Q)13 ~< a .E 0> 0> .!!!- III e:: ~ B~.-:.. III 1> ~ ~ m .~m~ ::;: .g ~ '""! e:: l/l l/l (I") o 0> Q) U ! .c 0 e:: 5 III mo.c E ~ lll<-;l ::;: ~.= ~ 'jg ~ cvi a.::: ::;: ~g~ o Z l! l- e 0 e C '" iC iii ~ iC iii 0 0 <\I ~ 0 0 CIl C 0 0 ..I< <\I III -, ..J ... 0 ~ <3 iC U U o ~ ~'O'E ....08 Q) ....e::a. ~IIl"oll O::3e:: 'C gj :c a.. ,_ III @, iC o o o ES .....(1) ro- c s::. "C ~.Q '+- ui ~+'""coo.o.~ 'B.~lIlo.iC 2:lE 0.'- e:: '000 e:: 0> <( ~.2,SO III c. .....-1000=''00 lilC.>~Q)gj.s '0' lii ~ 5 5 0; -g !t~~ES5@, =0>~:l1 'S;:.~ S e:: ;;-......-(0 1il~5-5 l/l '611 0> E 0> 1:"O~1U~~ r3~ o>,S.~.c:: " ~~~~Cii~.8 ~5-~ 8~'~~ ~ 0 oc..... .- 0 >- .~ :p a. 1Il>.fIc..c:: ~~-m~ .-lo.ijl=3= .-lo>e::lIlc cvi-g 8~J,l " ~ge::-g~B ::l .- ~ III 0> ch l/l 0 'C _~ u t- IIlNQ)~e::o> O>..iE.:::3;!:: E'""!<(slll(/) 5(1")~'cES P fo +l oE .~ 1> :l1::l1ll 1>0> ._oZulllc. :~,-....c-f/) ~5.ElIlm~ 0> .-l .-l .-l M ~ ::;: iC o o o ~ 0> 'O'E 50>li> EgO. ~IIl"oll O::l e:: &: .\8 :g @, iC o o o ES ..... Q) ~.Q '*-- l/l" e::1Il-hU .....~ u.......cea.o~ 'B.~lIlo.iC 2:lE 0.'- e:: "oil 0 c 0> <( ~.2.S0 III C. t)a.(OB()~~ .Q) = 10 'c ~ .!!! :c 8COoo.....Q)(Q !t~~ES5@, ..... 0> '02 ~ 5 'OEco "0 en.- 0 .c Q) "'0 fJ) :; ~ ~~o~~~ ~~ S~~~ ~ .c:: m-Q)Q)e::1Il c3= um-::l III l/lQ) -gl/l.c:::CC'OOIIlQ)J,lC -golll.....,ooi ..... 5 :l1- 0..... III 0 C . ~ III III :l1- III 0> C C Q) c.....co~~@,p~Ec~Q)cOO'~O>~E r3~IIl~::3-o>ISIIl:C""'~IIl~.2::lESo> =......c::~c.~.c::IIl~@,~oc.c::~Q)o~~Q) o.co_Q)........oooo~~o_>l/lQ)o..... ~8~35g'O~Eo.80W~3~~~~~ l/l -g '0 U '0 ~~ mffi~ co c co c c~ .-.... -E~ ~ ~Q)c Q)~ ro ~.c"C~s~~~~ ~ c.c::~ ~~IIl~ Q) ~~~@,~~a.c::~ ~.....Q)~~JB'+- aQ)Q)5~~.~uo~~1O~~: l/llil.c::~ElIluO~.2g~l/l::lO~~@,~::3Q)ffilll.c:: o. ....Q)~oc~cQ)1Il l/l....p ou8u~ ...... ....~1>~p~IIl~!>Q)~Q)311l!~co.o>~'Olllc -a.m~O 0 Q)~c-oc ceo ~- .....0 ~Q)~~e::~~Q)lilulIlo>~c~-goc~affis~u c..J:: 0 '0 '0 .S 1Il.c:: a.. S Q) ~ III 3= III III E .2 .!!! .... ".',p u ~ (/).....0-0 uto.....Q)cn~Q)=o-o ..c+-'~cc.u;Q)Q) ~~'iijffi$;efi5ffi~@,!iQ)I~I~~g8.g~ u.....~m~o>C.3=-g:clll<(~'O~~li>~:llgm~~~ g~....,ooIIl::35~.....IIlQ)IIlEa::~CQ)~l/lQ)~EQ)'OOc~~~~o>u c 0. - ~ -- l/l<(~ >c.1Il III 1il~r3ffiQ)'O~E.....~~~E~~cQ)cBO>EC~c ro._._~~~~ug~~~~~~o>._~uo~~.~ ~iao~.cg~-~:::5~lIlgi+li....uougE ~@,~~.E~E8~38~~~~~~@,~ffi'Offi~~ III N ..i .... M ~ ~ o .-l c:l: 'E 0> E 1: <\I c- O> 0 'E III E c. E 0 gi l.'.! Ol III ~ 0 ~ Ol 'c c: ::> 1:: E 0 E li} 0 0:: 0 "0 ~ c: 0 '" c Ol 00; c: jjj '!:: 0> '" g -'" oS c: <\I ~ ~ s - l/l ~ 0 w ~ gJ 0 '" J: .S!> 1 g~ . 0 >-11:: 0 ~ l.'.! 0 . 00 <(1i) ><= "- ~ "'Co c: CD Cb.c: 0.0 ~E cu .... 0) o .... a.. 0) c: ~ o a. CD 0:: "'C c: cu 0) c: "i: o :: c: o :E c: o ;:; cu 0) ;:; :i C o 'lID :ecc~ ~0"t:'O ~~~l5 EOc~ ~.9~a: o ~ o ~~ a2!~OIll i!::JC Q18(1)<i!j ECI)~~ ""'::E_z .c ~~ e_ ~~~ l:$....1II ~ a. a.. '1::..2' ~ ; f. 'lID C "t: S 'c o ::E .!!!'lID .QC '~'5~ o~ III a.ca.. gJo a:::E 'lID '2 '0 00 ~~ 5::E ::E c o +:l .Bc Co ~~ ii ~ '0 CI) QJ '0 5 -5 ~.8l1l.!: ~(ij~~ m -5j ~~ ::E ~:;:;-g 5 g ~ g i :e'iiilllQ)Q) QUio5E E Q)l;::'lID9! ::E ~~c~ ~ ~ 'c 60 ........c( O~BQJ clllc5 C3 .E g .c ci z e ,... 0 0 0 c C\/ it it -.; ~ 0 0 iii '" 0 0 CIl :::J U U ~ c: '" ca -, ...J ... 0 c (3 it o o U III .... ~o'E +-'(1)0; Sga. ....1II'l1D O::J C &.18 ~ 60 it o o U '0== C ~ ~ ~C3 S... ui 'ffi2:a~~oo:t:: ....lIllllt:;~.-Q)E ~ '6lJ 6o.c cliO ~ ..!,,2 cb.~ c_~ a. cO....;::::J'O::J'lID ~Q)a.eO~lIlc =~ III oU's,!!!:;:; ~~.!!! c.-g O'Q) ~ c(c(~~l1l~5'l1D al 'iij 'lID'~ c.ccu '(ij ~ :;:; ~ ~ 1i)'~f!+J- 'r~'lID.cc. 1:o~'~5'O ~Q)a. o~ =~l1l5u.S a.OQ)c.'Ocr ~ :(ii= ~ ai ~ o ~ 0 ~ E s 'Oal'O~ +J~+J W ~ 0~ u ~ roc~a~~c ~.~.~~ 'f~ ,g g.!: 'O.~~-E~ :g&lg+:luiS'w :;:;oe.... +:lOl1lC 1)l1l'O COCol1l ~l1ll1l~QJ~QJ"" m~o3 o~~o~~~(I)~mQ;~C~ ~~(I)roP~~~ _ma.cr ro~~E~.~~.~~~xo'_~~~c~~~~~.~ ~~~~~.~S~~i~Sg~~~~~g~~~'iij~~~~ii l1l....c~lIlo'OQ)E.l1l'Ol1l....00.QQ)~l1l::JEQ).c'llD'lIDl1l'llDQJ ...III-~ l1lE .ccc....Q)....-.c'OOOc.a..lIlc .c o~'O~a..... Q)~ l1l-Cl1l~=....C~lIl lIl:;:;EQJE.... ulll CO'llD,o....o 0 'Q).c~~ -~QJQ)Q)Cl1l~5'O.c ~~~~~~~.5(1)+Ja.~E~~~~o~~S5ro~ro ro~ aiE'8Q)"'wg~-g~Eml1l5E;::~~~cE:;:;~~~6o;::~ ::Ja.li'05~d=~~0~~~~ia~~~oES~~~1)gl ~~l1lc""~~.cl1lc""o~"" 6o+:l3....oal...ol5cO~+:l0 -....Q)IIICO........'OQ)~l1l -~ m Q)O....lIl~....::JlIl-l1l0 o ...-= b Q) "t:J ro Q) Cl> VJ.~ 'aD Q) ~ C5 t) ~ '0..... <l> Q) 0 Q) '2 e _ u ~ Q) ....~~C3EO~'O~2!oc5.....Q)::J'O~l1l~....~0'llDl1l~::Jl1l l5~'iijQ)B~m2~C.5~5~~~~c~ti~~3E'O'iij'O~ti &~i5~E~~~.8~6o~~E!g&l~~:;:;EoSaiiaig~ .Q (\/ .!I T-l ~ ~ ::E 1) QJ '~'lID Ec 0.'- 'lIDi c ..... 'i:: 'DO ::J o :;::,. , III 1: ~ '6lJ ~.!: ~ =l1lQ) ~~~ c( 0 ..... c( =='0 l1l c .c::J III 0 .~ ~ 'lID- o- 'O-l1l QJ 0 .... ~ m.g ~tia 6~E c '(ij l1l ~b o III ....Q) ....0 ai '~ al l.)Q)ij: .- lIl'- iiQ)~ a..c ::J c(....0' '0 0 Q) C ~ '0 C:Q)c ::J '0 l1l oo~ oUCi. ~cg. ~~= l1lw~ ~'O III '(ij ai I!'! E.c 0 ~~:g cm,... l1l:I: c E QJ .Q E!9g ~ww o (\/ rl T-l ~ ~ ~ it o o U T"i T"i <t E QJ E 1:: '" Co QJ o E QJ E Co o Qj > QJ o .c:- 'c ::J E E o U ~ o c 'il; ijj Q) .>0:: '" ....J ... o .c:- C3 f . o o ~ E ~ ~ Ol ~ o l6- 0:: '0 c: '" Ol .~ .8 ~ 'r: ii1~ 1ii w c: ,!g .2 :f .~ l5~ ~<I:: ~ ~ UQ <3:U; ><= -- ~ "'Co c: Cl) Cl)..c: 0.0 ~E co .... tn o l- n. C) c: 1:= o 0. Cl) 0:: "'C c: CO tn c: -I: o ~ c: o :?E c: o 1;; tn +:i :E e: .Q 'ClO 196'2'0 ~ig8 EUe:CD i3.9~a:: o ~ o ~S ,9 CDS III ...~e:0 IllII)CD~ ~lllE~ -:::E.!!Z :::E ~?;: ~- o III +:l>~ ~elll L- Q. a.. 'E~ ~ .!!'ClO .De: ,- 'e: .jC ~g~ 0 0.- III U Q. e: a.. U !BO a:::::E l!! ..... 0 0 0 C N .jC .jC iii ~ 0 0 jjj to 0 0 ~ ::> c U U to III ....., ...I .... 0 z:. 0 I .c: a.. 'ClO e: .;:: g '2 o :::E 'ClO '2 "8 g.c: .- ii 6:::E :::E <Ii .!!!'ClO~(O z;. <Ii 'S; .~ III '00 'S: 5 i3B~'o5::s1ijg ~ (0.- ::> ~ 'oOe:enoo~ ~ e: ~ (0.5 '00";:: >'E :c . -ooe: ~eIl51~-~lllE tl5lll8.~5-g8 u<-E.~{lE(O~ e: o +:l Se:ti ~~ "~ ~< <5 i5.. ~ .5 -5 (ij :p _ . cu c oom~.c~ ~ ~ S 00 ~ro ~~~B~ -~ oEb~ o~ ::Sell u~~u"Ogell~~ SeIlE~"'''''' Hi ~O~eIl~='oO tlell~e:~o-"'m oE-g::smoE-E~~-505eellll)uell~o 1ijenllla..c5E~~~~:::E.c:~~CD=~::sm .c:lll~g.QU-SeIl~~lll~"O~5~~!CD en.c:~...o~-gCDge:~~~c~oen~~"8 8~5~~S~~5~~~6~"O~g"Oenu ce:_::SellOCD~U-ce:~eIlCDen:::Ee:Cen llleO!"Ou5lllell~z"O:::E5~~ lll.Q8 eoc~o~~w~E-c-~o~cuc~- ::su.Qo.u"OO~"'CClll-o.c:(O~.Q"O~ tlz;.1ii e: lI)'Ui"O III Oell.2 CD C C:J E .0 C en uc~88~!E~2~~{l~lllO~&~& -8~E~~~~~U~'-Eiw~~~~ u ~ ~ooa::gell~zE~u~.c::::Eo~E= ~eIl...~enCD 5e1lCDE_II)~~eIl~CD8.c ~5~u&~~~~58~~&~5u5~~ CD ~ II) III CD :::E e: o ! +:l ~ d z .jC .jC 0 0 0 0 u u 0 0 CD CD "~ '00 "e' ~ e C 0."- 0.'- 'oOi "0 'oOlll C ~ C ~ .~ 'aD 'C '0.0 ::s ::s 0 0 .jC o o u .jC o o u Eg """0> (0'- e .c u ~.2 '+- ui ~"""'coa..o.~ :a~(O~.jC 8E o."s:co~Oc~ C 0._._0 III ~ t}o.rtiB()~~ .eIl= iii'c~.!!1u (5'cuoo+-'Q)co o:~~EB-E~ E +-'Q) ~ C ..c "0 '00 ~"""ce =eIllllo. 8:~ 5 ~ ~ e~'~ ~~>~ "~lii III C e..c~O a.. en eIlE ~~ _en- '3 "~E tlen~ o .~ al 8 .~o h ~ eelllll"O a..lll~5 ~~lllH ~<U'p(Q C o 'g ~ '0' Q) 6:"O"O~ ~~~~ +-'-OQ)~ :2-8~~ .~"g ~il ~:5111 .t! .c ~ ::: en 0 .- u+-''''CC ~~~8 ~lllellWo enlll~E <C (ij ~ E CD N .-!l ..-l M :::E :::E ell "- ~ (0 0 ~ ~ :;; ~'QOtC"""''- ~ -~lij51 "3g~ _'00 oen..c's eIlell '00"; :6 0 ..c .9- ell 0 ~ C g a:: c: C C .~ (5 .~ .c. -= Q) '+- .- co - Q) "C Q) eCD::S!llla..O::g"O~EoE o..coO"Q)~Q)-oroo::1+-,~Q) Q)-5.~ c~5 C:o o~ m 5 ~ ~(ij~~5g&lEal8.=:::E~ ..cui.- "0 .~ 8 E.~ lij O':;~~Q)co ~~:Oo:6m,Q5 ~~~mccg.c o_o..colll~o ...... ~ co ~-o-fi a.:e en::senlllCeIl-en 3l_o_::>a..,Eo ~:;'5ilii,E Ql (/) ~ co ~ .~. -0 ~ :5 ; :0 ~ co ::1 C co 0 .- '"0 <1> ,+--1 <O......+-''"O C CO=enllllllElll ~o.lll"O..cello_ .g:2~g~rolai~ C en "- '00 0 0 en E ~Q;U"ffiroQ).S""" <1> c ~'i: ~ 'O'-J <0 r= ~.~~~6:o~ "0 N .-!l ..-l M :::E ~ N ..-I <l: "E CD E t ell C. ell Cl "E Q) E c. E 0 a; e > t>> ell ~ Cl z;. t>> '2 c: ::> 'e E 0 E l 0 U "0 l!! c: 0 III C t>> Iii .~ Ui g Gl '" .>0: !! c: as ~ ....J oS - en c: 0 w z;. ~ ~ <3 <\I I .2> I g~ . Cl >'<1:: Cl lii e V oc <(1;) ><= "- ~ "'Co c: CI) CI).c: 0..0 ~E <<J ... C) E a.. C) c: ~ o 0.. CI) 0:: "'C c: <<J C) c: "C o ~ c: o :E c: o .. <<J C) .. :i C o 1lO E g02'O ~i~8 EOcCD 5.9~o:: o ~ o ~.<<!l CCD.<<!l1ll :8~co ~KlCD~ ECDE~ o ~~Z ~ ~~ e_ o III :p>~ ~EIll I;:: a. a.. Or:: .!t ~ I ~ 1lO C ;g C o ~ ~1lO .ac OJ o~ ~ g~ III a.r::a.. :gO o::~ 1lO C"O "Co J35 ~~ ~ o .... .... o . .~ 'O.~ iC CD E ogG; Ol1Jo. U=>110 CD ~.~ .c '- "0 ....Q)11J o.c .... ........1lO C o :p l!Ic Co ~~ is. .5 <fl Q) o :;"0 o C ~~'QO"'; O::ccc Q)'- Q) ~EBE :J.......-<O ......nJC<1> "5~o~ UI-::"" l!? ::J t/l m ~ C o i E ~ 5 .. ~..c III E<fl ::'..-.=...."O"Oc "0 ::J - "0 - ~ C C C._ I1J ~E.~Q).~....Q)l1Jro"O ~'c CD'~-e C E >'c: Q) ~. oo-1ij.ao21ij.oro'= .- Q)oEE.....g..!!lQ)....c.~i5- tU~'-<<J o~U)'- -4) r::_ 11J.... ~ Q)"O 8';;; ~ li.... m~1U~cuc.~(.)~<D~m -t/l"O='t:E .<fl....~0Q) ro Q)g=>ro.!!lIii=>llOQ).o c E.c c <fl <fl <fl'C o"".~._ m(Ot-<L>bc:~.s~tll)e.= o ~ U 'iij c CD ~ ro 0:: .~ a.. I1J . 13 E 2.c-2:~ ro E Iii a ~ ~~ CD o.c<fl1:)lI=uj"O.....-.=....ro ' .c~CDE~=>Iii~.E5c.c~ ....Q)Ero-<fl.-Q)::J Q)~. o>Q)~gl1Jq;>U::~a..(Y) cgiS.oQ)"OiilgQ)"O....Q):: .!!l ~.~ Ci5:ii E ~5 :ii~5:: o z iC o o U iC o o U .... o CD 'e- ~ 0.'- llOal c .... "i:: '0.0 ::l o -Ie o o U E.s ......Q) (0.... c ..c "0 bD.2 '+- <Ii ~"""cea.o.~ =a ~ III o.-Ie ~ E a.'::; 8 ~o C ~ ""o._._OI1J t)a.ro.so~~ .!!!.= ~'c ~.!!l '6 OI1JOO....Q)ro d:~~EJ35~ Q) .c<fl =...... ~~ .~~ - ....:;"0 tl-e'O I1J .~OC 1:)'611 ~ III Q) .~.~ Q) lfl ~ 1lO..J Q)o2"O.!!! 002 <fl go:: c C c .~ 0 (U '- (Qi 0 G> ro _ <1> 'i:: (l) EQ)cQ)'t:Q)~"OroEoE a. m:;:: ~:J CO:J '- 5+-'.~ co Q).crooll.cog....rocQ) ..c~~.~::s~~u"5~.g~ I-ro...."O<flI1J....I1JUI-.o::"" 1:) .... ~~Q) 'Og_ ~ ~~~ .c ~ko~~D~~~~~ i 'cd::ii= g-g:802 2.... uj~ c::~.~::.~o .CD c 'O_~Q)13~<fll1JroQ)roa~....~~~g~c:~5~ ~li~t:'Oi'~~~~~I~Ki~~!'OI~ i~q;q;Q):ii~EEQ):ii:ii<flQ)2"O'iijQ)~~i'O~"O'iij >->o..c-c CD.cmo c.... .c ro~IIlOCD o~go2;-g~'iij.c"" ~~~s~....go'iij~B~~ ~(o0<1>C-~..c"""~~CU(l)""""~>"""..c~ro .... '613'6lro~~<fl~~C~iCi~.s"O~o<fl=Ciu.s c:~eo~m'~~~~:~(l)!~~.~!~~~~~ Q)CDroCD.- roro....O.c.....'O_-roclllroQ)cm_ -e0!/l503CD!/l1lO6~''''c=OO.a''''CD!/l.croroO Q) I1J CD.- 5 Q) CD <fl C o'~ 1lO1lOcS .... CD.... ujllOllO >te'O.Og'Owe~~<DoP .~.5o=seC:EcE ali::lSro"O~::lQ).c5Q)~~ccOja~::l~o!c CDou~CwO~o~!p~CC~ ......ooUoc ~i~;~~~~gi:ii~~~ll~~~~~a~l N ~ .-I cvi :: :: fl"- og CN Ui ~ iii t1I ell ::l ~ C t1I t1I .....-' ... o ~ <3 M .-I <!: E CD E 1:: t1I 0. CD 0 E Q) E 0. E 0 ~ ~ CD e c Q :;. '" 02 ~ => E 0 E ~ 0 0::: U "0 !!! c: 0 t1l C '" 'iii .~ W CD III .g ... .!! c: t1I ~ ..... .l!l 00- <II c: 0 W :;. :l!1 ,g D t1l :f .~ I a~ . c >'<1::: 0 lij ~ U . UQ <(1;) ><= -- ~ "0 s::::: <I> <I>..c: 8:0 <(E co ~ t>> o ~ c.. t>> s::::: ~ o c. ~ " s::::: CO t>> s::::: -c o ~ s::::: o :!E s::::: o +== CO t>> +== ~ c o +' s~H~'O ~~~8 EOcCl) G.3~a:: o ...... o '00 ~s 5~Sas +':::Jco ll'DUlCl)~ "- m E~ ~:!:CI)Z :!: l~ "1:-- oas +'~~ lIJ....as lj:: a. Q. "t:~ ~ ~'OO .oc "il; '5 ~ 5.t:: as a.CQ. mo a:::!: Q) lQ .c Q. '00 c ";: g "2 o :!: '00 02 -g g-5 ":5 ~ :!: c o +' j9c co ~~ a. .5 e l'- 0 0 0 C N iC iC iC S ~ 0 0 0 W <ll 0 0 0 ~ :> U U U c: <ll ~ -, ... 0 ~ (3 Q) ~ ~ <ll :::J ...J Ul ...... m 0 ~ :!: 0 c 0 Q) +' .s::: ~ ... 0 E ... Q) :!: :0 CIl ~ ro 0 Q) C a..- a..!!!. CIlW d z iC o o U ~ ~b'E ~~Q; ...ca. ....CIl'OO 0:> C it .~ :g tiD t) -E -0 .~ -tc CIl~oO g'(ij 1:: 0 a......oU ~~~'- CIl a. =CIlUl '00 jg iC ~ Q) .S ",0.- Q).s:::'O ......0"0 o~ ~ .~U"S c.....'OO 'QO<1>"'- <<li~'t- .Q .s::: .~ :Jl .2 0 -gS+J;:<1>"coQ:?j . '+= c~ o-E c >.c.~ 'ai g.s; >. E 5 ~ ~ E ::1-0 0.0 oi:-(/)'- 0' ~ 0.. 8 ~ ~ ~ .w 8. c 0 '(ij CIl ~ Q) ~o .~rog B ~ ~'O III 'E:'~uo.g.~ CIl~Q)""'CCll .Q $ ~ 5 8 2 ~ a.Q)ro~-8~ ~-E g.~~ ~ ~ ~o (/)= 'fa uii>.~~ 5 ~2:~(/)_.c 'OO:Ja.>.CIl'" i;'~~ ~.~.~ CIlOC:>OUl 'O:5~~B8.ia (/) _._ c Q) 0 Q)"'Q).co'Oo g'(ij:QI-~Q).s::: ~2~-g~~~ ~ 8 c.= Q) :5 =a ';u~~.~-So(/J .s:::CIlg~~~'O ....., .. en .- f/) g.~]!2'E~'(jj ....EO"=(j;.il;.?:> .g Cii <1> ~ 1ii ~ ~ 0.. a.-E "''0 UlCll CIl (V') ~ .-i cvi :!: :!: iC o o U '0 Q) '='00 e c a.'- 'OO-g c .... -.:'00 :::J o ~ ..!.. "0 '60 C Q) 0 iC ~ .S 0 0 =CIl"'O fta>5U <(-~ CIl a. = 00 jg-g.!!!'OO~as ~ ~ Ul:J'~.S~~:~ 0 .~~'~BE:O=o ~ ~='OOCIl'c:J.:!~~ '0 as oUlOOc ~ ~ B .....s E CIl.S 'OO'c >. E ~ 5.g~ Q) 5f~.Q.g:5 E ro~5t)-ECIl8.~5'08 &~E'O~-a~~E:5~ c: '(ij CIl !!'O ~ o '" 'bi) ::: ~ ..Q C'- '0 0 ~~~1:: '-Ul--O Q.Q)ro~ ~-E g. ~ '0 J!l..~ 1:: Cl> ~ 8:5e 8~~ B ~~~~~-g ~ "; .~ .~ c. +? ~ ~'c . ~ i ~ ~ ~ -5 0 ~ ~ a.~ ...c~ a~~5~'OCIlro~CIl:Jt)Q) 0 ~(/) coro CWQ.__::1 <1>~~5 ~ Ei~~~~~~.Q'Og~'OO:!-E+'.Q"""Q) -g:=~=?~~15~~2>'~Eg~~~~ '00....-.... a..-E= CIl >'-'-.c'O >..0..... Ul 0 .....c~ ro3E :J:::J>~~...-CIl'OO~'O'OQ):Ja.Ul !~i-ro:cr~1::5'O~EE~IEro~e5 ~~~~~uro~~o3o~~~ro;~c~.- c__asbi).:!>.",-'Ooo_~",.cO"t:lQ)a."'" . .-OCll oO.o.bi)-c.s:::...Ulc._Q)....Q)-5as~co '01::.c"'coOC'ClOO~CIlUlg~o~.o:Jlj::Q)UlC- C1)0 _...-c-Q) '" ......E-~O= Q)Q)..... ~Q)8~c>.-.:g>!Q)8Q) g....~CIlE~Ee :Jro_....oCllEoco_~-ugcO....:JEas :J ia.~CIl~ ~0~~:J~:J003=cr....EEo ....>.a.~~~5~~8.ga.~-E~~:JlCll$"t:l8"t:l i:5~aCll-EE~~~~~a~~5~~~:5~:5 .0 (V') ~ .-i cvi ~ :2: iC o o U '0 Q) 'e- ~ a..- 'ClO'O .S ~ 5 o ~ -E u "6'b CIl Q) 0 oC:o :aE~ a.Q)O c:(....Q) ro a. ro'O .s=c "':> ...0 Ul .... -bi) '00 0= 'OOCll Q)....... lj::C:O 'ai~'E :>CIlO O'a.E c '(ij CIl ~o o Ul ...Q) ...0 c --"t:l CIl~Q) OQ)Q:: .- Ul'- Q.Q)ro a..s::: :J c:(.....cr '" Q)"O .s~~ .?:>gro ~~g. ~roas Sl'~~ ro .9 -g cB""" .- c .s 5 g'c ~ro~ >a. ~.S 2 ~~"iij <c8~ u (V') ~ .-i cvi :!: ::E q- ..-l <l: E Q) .g III Q. ~ E Q) E Q. o ~ lJ) o ~ '2 :::l E E o () l!! o c 'iij iii ~ j - o ~ o I . o o U . E e t:J> ~ t:J> c: ~ 2- 0:: 'tl c: III t:J> .~ .2 ; "c: 1lI~ 'lii w .~ ~1U J: .~ g~ >'il::: lij e UCl <C}ii ~~ s::: (1) (1).s::: 8:0 <CE cu ... C> e a.. C> s::: 1:= o c. (1) 0::: ~ s::: cu C> s::: 'C o ~ s::: o == s::: o +:i cu C> E == c o tlO :e c c ~ ~o-'::u &i~~B EocGl ~.3~o:: o ~ o ~Gl CGl$1il :8 5 cO gJ.CIlGlc<l Elll~~ ;"':::E_Z ~ ~~ 'C:-_ :8~~ ~EIIl !E ~ a.. ....<( ~ Gl CIl III .r::: a.. tlO c ';:: g '2 o :::E .!!!tlO .oc 'in '15 ~ -I< 5:!:! III 8 tit 15 a.. u ~:::E tlO '2 -g ~~ 15:::E :::E ui Q.) C:-<1l ~ ui E ~ <1l tlO .:; 5 1; ';:: E.!:: is +=> 1d~~-g'iij<1l .gJ tlO5C1l0'O~ ai E E ~.~ ~.~ 2 E s~5115>,'~IIl~ t)+-' co 0.= 0" 0 'O~-a~.gJElij~ c o +=> .., g C 1Il Co 'So Q.)u 0 ~ <( B a. c .E g ro a. .... c Q.) Bo ~.~ +-' ~~ 0 '-+J co+-, mco mo .5~ 5i P1ll5 .00$ ~Q.)u uo Q.) E ti'*-o =iSE ~IIl';::~~Q.) roc 5 ro'~~.5EB==:2a. .-OG>E'E.a'OEQ.) 1~~rn~~~B~~B~~~~~~~b~~ :::E ~~~8 ~~;;;; g 8 ~~ :!?i';:= c~ 5 al:l cg.a~u~~mE:!:!~8~~c:-=:~&8~~ :8 5 'iij ~ '~ Q.) <1l CIl ,!!1 f ~ 5 '0 B ..g 15 .!:: ~ Q.) ~ E . co G>,Cf/)(tJ"-+-'.......c. Q) Q) tna.uoo..c.+-, en tlOrolll=oofo~Bc~a.uoQ.)~~~u~Q.) +:i 0.- (J)+-,+-,+-, (J) (1)"0 (/) u (J) C O'....o..-S C (J) g :E $..g l!lu-gJ1.!:: Q.) ~ <1lSU <1l ~<(,!:: .u III ~ Q.) ~g~~roai~~Q.)~g~~E~w~~~~~ .aEtlO~CIlEQ.).a=:+=>Q.)>~~tlOtlO__~~ Q.) ro ro ~,_.... Q.) 0,:;.... 0 ~ Q.) ro,!:: c E.... c.r::: ~Q.)~Q.)~uQ.)~a.+=>~oai~5U~.a~~~ ~~m5~~~~~~lij~~E~EE~~8~ o Z e'" og eN Ui~ iii '" CIl ::J .ll: C " '" ..J' ... o .z:. <3 LO T"'i I <( 'E Ql E ~ '" a. Ql o 'E Ql E a. o Qj > Ql o ~ '2 ::J E E o u l!! o c 'u; iIi Ql -" '" ..J '0 ~ (} I . o o u . E I 0> ~ o 5} 0:: "0 c: '" 0> ,~ cng Gl c: jg~ '" c: ~~ !f .~ 5~ ~<l:: ~ e un