The URL can be used to link to this page

PC10-046Resolution 10-046 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MENIFEE CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE #2008031068) AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR THE MENIFEE SHOPPING CENTER (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 35621, PLOT PLAN NO.2009-121, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.2009-142 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2009-143) Whereas, in March 2007 the applicant, Walmart Stores, Inc., filed formal applications with the County of Riverside (the local government authority for the project area at that time) for County Plot Plan #22674 (City Case No. 2009-121) and Tentative Parcel Map No. 35621 (the "Project") to develop a shopping center and subdivide the property into seven commercial parcels; and Whereas, on March 10, 2008, the County of Riverside publicly noticed its decision to prepare an environmental impact report (EIR) for the Project by noticing the State Clearinghouse, related agencies, and other government agencies; and Whereas, on April 21, 2008, the County of Riverside Planning Director held a duly noticed public scoping meeting regarding the preparation of the EIR to discuss and hear from the public on the potential environmental impacts, which meeting was publicly noticed by a publication in the newspaper of general circulation, an agenda posting, notice to property owners within a 600-foot radius from the Project site boundaries, at least 10 days prior to the public meeting; and Whereas, on October 1, 2008, the City of Menifee incorporated and then became the local government authority for the project area; and Whereas, between December 14, 2009 and February 1, 2010, the State - mandated 45-day public review period for the Draft EIR took effect, which was publicly noticed by a publication in the newspaper of general circulation, notice to owners within 600 feet of the Project site boundaries, related agencies and government agencies, copies of the Draft EIR sent to the State Clearinghouse, a copy placed at the City Hall public counter and a copy placed at the Paloma Valley library; and Whereas, on December 14, 2009, the Draft EIR was distributed to the Planning Commission for review; and Whereas, eleven comments were received during the public review period; and Whereas, on March 9, 2010, the Planning Commission of the City of Menifee held a duly noticed public workshop regarding the proposed project, which was publicly noticed with an agenda posting; and Whereas, the Final EIR was prepared for the project in accordance with Sections 21000 through 21177 of the California Public Resources Code (California Environmental Quality Act, CEQA) and Sections 15000 through 15387 of the California Code of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines); and Whereas, the Final EIR identified and discussed several air quality, noise and traffic impacts, which may occur as a result of the Project, and which require mitigation, but cannot be mitigated to a level of less than significant and are thereby significant and unavoidable and a Statement of Overriding Consideration of Environmental Impact is Resolution No. 10-046 EIR for Menifee Shopping Center October 12, 2010 required to be adopted prior to approval by the Planning Commission, which impacts are as follows: (a) Noise Short -Term Construction (Individually and Cumulatively) — Project specific construction noise will result in temporary or periodic increases in noise levels in the project vicinity above the acceptable levels indentified in the General Plan and will result in a substantial increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity even with mitigation measures incorporated. This impact is considered significant and unavoidable. (b) Air Quality Short -Term Construction - Project specific emissions for the following will exceed significance thresholds, contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, and expose sensitive receptors which are located within 1 mile of the project site to substantial project point source emissions and are considered significant and unavoidable (Cumulative and Individually significant). Grading - nitrogen oxide (NOx); 2. Building construction - nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 3. Architectural coatings — volatile organic compounds (VOCs) (c) Air Quality long-term operational — Project specific emissions for vehicle emissions, fugitive dust related to vehicular travel, combustion emissions associated with natural gas uses, landscape maintenance equipment emissions and architectural coatings - nitrogen oxides (NOx), respirable particulate matter (PM,o), volatile organic compounds (VOSs) and carbon monoxide (CO) will exceed daily emission significance thresholds, and are significant and unavoidable (Cumulative and Individually significant). The Project's unmitigatible VOC, NOx, and PM,o emissions exceedances, in combination with VOC, NO, and PM,o emissions generated by other sources affecting the encompassing ozone and PM,o non -attainment areas, will result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of these pollutants within the non - attainment areas. (d) Traffic — Project related traffic will contribute to threshold exceedances on Interstate 215 mainline segments and freeway ramps adjacent to the Scott Road interchange: Mainline Freeway Segments: a. Southbound lanes, north of Scott Road in the morning peak hour period; b. Southbound lanes, south of Scott Road in the morning and evening peak; hours; c. Northbound lanes, north of Scott Road in the evening peak hour period; and, d. Northbound lanes, south of Scott Road in the evening peak hour period Resolution No. 10-046 EIR for Menifee Shopping Center October 12, 2010 Freeway Ramps: a. Scott Road southbound on -ramp in the morning peak hours period; b. Scott Road northbound on -ramp in the evening peak hour period; and C. Scott Road northbound off -ramp in the evening peak hour period. Whereas, the Final EIR identified all other potential environmental impacts as either not an impact, a less than significant impact, or a less than significant impact with mitigation and a Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared for those potential impacts requiring mitigation, which is part of the Final EIR; and Whereas, other reasonable alternatives to the Project which could feasibly achieve the basic objectives of the Project have been considered and rejected in favor of the Project; and Whereas, on July 29, 2010, the Final EIR was completed and distributed -to the Planning Commission for review and distributed to those agencies and persons that submitted written comments on the Draft EIR, and copies of the Final EIR were placed at the City Hall public counter and at the Paloma Valley library; and Whereas, on August 10, 2010, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the EIR and the Project, considered all public testimony as well as all materials in the staff report and accompanying documents for the Statement of Overriding Consideration of Environmental Impact and the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse #2008031068), Tentative Parcel Map No. 35621, Plot Plan #2009-121, Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-142, and Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-143, which hearing was publicly noticed by a publication in the newspaper of general circulation, an agenda posting, and notice to property owners within 1,000 feet of the Project boundaries, and to persons requesting public notice; and Whereas, at the August 10, 2010 Planning Commission public hearing, the Commission continued the project in order for the applicant and staff to address comment letters that were received; and, Whereas, on August 24, 2010, the Planning Commission held a subsequent public hearing on the EIR and the Project, considered all public testimony as well as all materials in the staff report and accompanying documents for the Statement of Overriding Consideration of Environmental Impact and the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse #2008031068), Tentative Parcel Map No. 35621, Plot Plan #2009-121, Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-142, and Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-143, which hearing did not require an additional public notice pursuant to Ordinance 348, Section 1.11; and, Whereas, at the August 24, 2010 Planning Commission public hearing, the Commission continued the project in order for the applicant and staff to finalize the traffic conditions of approval; and, Whereas, on September 14, 2010, the Planning Commission held a subsequent public hearing on the EIR and the Project, considered all public testimony as well as all materials in the staff report and accompanying documents for the Statement of Overriding Consideration of Environmental Impact and the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse #2008031068), Tentative Parcel Map No. 35621, Plot Plan Resolution No. 10-046 EIR for Menifee Shopping Center October 12, 2010 #2009-121, Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-142, and Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-143, which hearing did not require an additional public notice pursuant to Ordinance 348, Section 1.11; and, Whereas, at the September 14, 2010 Planning Commission public hearing, the Commission continued the project in order for the applicant and staff to bring back additional information on traffic impacts; and, Whereas, on October 12, 2010, the Planning Commission held a subsequent public hearing on the EIR and the Project, considered all public testimony as well as all materials in the staff report and accompanying documents for the Statement of Overriding Consideration of Environmental Impact and the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse #2008031068), Tentative Parcel Map No. 35621, Plot Plan #2009-121, Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-142, and Conditional Use Permit No. 2009-143, which hearing did not require an additional public notice pursuant to Ordinance 348, Section 1.11; and, Whereas, the EIR was prepared for the project in accordance with Sections 21000 through 21177 of the California Public Resources Code (California Environmental Quality Act, CEQA) and Sections 15000 through 15387 of the California Code of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines); and Whereas, the City has complied with CEQA and the EIR is an accurate and objective statement that fully complies with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines and represents the independent judgment of the City; and Whereas, no evidence of new significant impacts, as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, has been received by the City after circulation of the Draft EIR which would require recirculation. Now, therefore, the Planning Commission of the City of Menifee resolves and orders as follows: 1. The Planning Commission confirms the findings set out above and hereby certifies the Final Environmental Impact Report for the project including but not limited to the Mitigation and Monitoring Plan, as contained in the record of the August 24, 2010 Planning Commission public hearing, and that the Final Environmental Impact Report was presented to the Planning Commission and that the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the information in it prior to making a decision on the project. 2. Further, the Planning Commission has identified the following significant environmental impacts which may occur as a result of the Project and which require mitigation, but which cannot be mitigated to a level of less than significant and are thereby significant and unavoidable: (a) Noise Short -Term Construction (Individually and Cumulatively) — Project specific construction noise will result in temporary or periodic increases in noise levels in the project vicinity above the acceptable levels indentified in the General Plan and will result in a substantial increase in ambient noise levels in the project Resolution No. 10-046 EIR for Menifee Shopping Center October 12, 2010 vicinity even with mitigation measures incorporated. This impact is considered significant and unavoidable. (b) Air Quality Short -Term Construction - Project specific emissions for the following will exceed significance thresholds, contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, and expose sensitive receptors which are located within 1 mile of the project site to substantial project point source emissions and are considered significant and unavoidable (Cumulative and Individually significant). 1. Grading - nitrogen oxide (NOx); 2. Building construction - nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 3. Architectural coatings — volatile organic compounds (VOCs) (c) Air Quality long-term operational — Project specific emissions for vehicle emissions, fugitive dust related to vehicular travel, combustion emissions associated with natural gas uses, landscape maintenance equipment emissions and architectural coatings - nitrogen oxides (NOx), respirable particulate matter (PM,o), volatile organic compounds (VOSs) and carbon monoxide (CO) will exceed daily emission significance thresholds, and are significant and unavoidable (Cumulative and Individually significant). The Project's unmitigatible VOC, NOx, and PM10 emissions exceedances, in combination with VOC, NOx, and PM,o emissions generated by other sources affecting the encompassing ozone and PM10 non -attainment areas, will result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of these pollutants within the non - attainment areas. (d) Traffic — Project related traffic will contribute to threshold exceedances on Interstate 215 mainline segments and freeway ramps adjacent to the Scott Road interchange: Mainline Freeway Segments: a. Southbound lanes, north of Scott Road in the morning peak hour period; b. Southbound lanes, south of Scott Road in the morning and evening peak; hours; c. Northbound lanes, north of Scott Road in the evening peak hour period; and, d. Northbound lanes, south of Scott Road in the evening peak hour period Freeway Ramps: a. Scott Road southbound on -ramp in the morning peak hours period; b. Scott Road northbound on -ramp in the evening peak hour period; and c. Scott Road northbound off -ramp in the evening peak hour period. 3. For the impacts identified in Section 2, above, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the following findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations applicable to all impacts: Resolution No. 10-046 EIR for Menifee Shopping Center October 12, 2010 (a) Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City has balanced the benefits of the Project against any unavoidable environmental impacts in determining whether to approve the Project. If the benefits of the Project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, those impacts may be considered "acceptable"; and, (b) The City has made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate or substantially mitigate the potential impacts resulting from the Project; and. (c) To the extent any Mitigation Measure recommended in the EIR or Project conditions of approval could not be incorporated, such Mitigation Measure is infeasible because it will impose restrictions on the Project that will prohibit the realization of specific economic, social and other benefits that the City finds outweigh the unmitigated impacts; and, (d) Except for the Project, all other alternatives set forth in the EIR are infeasible because they will prohibit the realization of Project objectives and specific economic, social and other benefits that the City finds outweigh any environmental benefits of the alternatives; and, (e) Having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the Project to the extent feasible by adopting the proposed Mitigation Measures, having considered the entire administrative record on the Project, and having weighed the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable adverse environmental impacts after mitigation, the City has determined that each of the following social, economic and environmental benefits of the Project outweigh the potential unavoidable adverse impacts and render those potential adverse environmental impacts acceptable based upon the following overriding considerations: The Project is a high quality land use transition from a fallow agricultural field to a commercial center consistent with the property's Scenic Highway Commercial (C-P-S) zoning and Commercial land use designation. (i) The Project represents the continuation of a logical development pattern occurring, or that will occur, in the surrounding area. (ii) The Project provides for transportation improvements, including the improvement of segments of Haun Road, Scott Road, Antelope Road and Holland Road, which will provide a benefit to the local transportation system. (iii) The Project provides backbone public infrastructure (i.e., roads and utilities) to service the site. (iv) The site will provide a high quality commercial development that will enhance the surrounding community and provide opportunities to meet the demands of local and regional area businesses and the community. (v) The Project will help the City create an improved balance between employment and housing by providing job opportunities to existing Resolution No. 10-046 EIR for Menifee Shopping Center October 12, 2010 residents that currently commute outside of the local area to work. (vi) The Project will create a positive net fiscal revenue to the City through an increased tax base. (f) The foregoing benefits provided to the public through approval and implementation of the Project outweigh the identified significant adverse environmental impacts of the Project, which cannot be mitigated; and (g) Each of the Project benefits separately and individually outweighs the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified in the EIR and therefore finds those impacts to be acceptable. (h) Economic, social and other considerations and benefits derived from the development of the Project override and make infeasible any alternatives to the Project or further Mitigation Measures beyond those incorporated into the Project. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12" DAY OF OCTOBER, 2010, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: Matthew Liesemeer, Chair I ATTEST: Kathy Bennett, City Clerk Approved as to form: Karen Feld, City Attorney G=Tr per, MENIFEE Wallace W. Edgerton Mayor Fred Twyman Mayor Pro Tern John V. Denver Councilmember Darcy Kuenzi Councilmember Scott A. Mann Councilmember 29714 Haun Road Menifee, CA 92586 Phone 951.672.6777 Fax 951.679.3843 www.cityofrnenifee.us STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF MENIFEE ) I, Kathy Bennett, City Clerk of the City of Menifee, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 10-046 was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Menifee at a meeting thereof held on the 12"' day of October, 2010 by the following vote: Ayes: Vesey, Zimmerman, Thomas, Liesemeyer Noes: Miller Absent: None Abstain: None -A4-dj-- Kathy Bennett, City Clerk Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Regarding the Environmental Effects from the Environmental Impact Report for the Menifee Shopping Center Project State Clearinghouse No. 2008031068 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1 II. PROJECT SUMMARY.................................................................................................... 1 A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................. 1 1. Site Location.................................................................................................................. 1 2. Project Description....................................................................................................... 2 3. Actions Covered by the EIR......................................................................................... 3 B. PROJECT OBJECTIVES................................................................................................ 3 III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ........................... 4 IV. INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT FINDING..................................................................... 6 A. GENERAL FINDING ON MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................. 7 V. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND FINDINGS ..................................................... 7 A. LESS -THAN -SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NOT REQUIRING MITIGATION............................................................................................................................. 8 1. Land Use........................................................................................................................ 8 a. General Plan Consistency......................................................................... ........... 8 . b. Zoning Consistency................................................................................................... 9 c. Project Consistency with Applicable Policy Areas ................................................ 9 d. Project Consistency with Applicable Local Land Use Policies ........................... 10 e. Cumulative Impacts Related to Land Use............................................................ 11 2. Seismic Safety............................................................................................................ 12 a. Known Earthquake Faults..................................................................................... 12 b. Seismic -Related Ground Failure........................................................................... 12 c. Seismic Ground Shaking........................................................................................ 13 3. Wind Erosion and Blowsand...................................................................................... 13 a. Wind Erosion and Blowsand.................................................................................. 13 b. Cumulative Impacts Related to Wind Erosion and Blowsand ........................... 14 4. Hydrology and Water Quality................................................................................... 15 a. Flooding on- or off-site........................................................................................... 15 b. Runoff Water........................................................................................................... 16 c. Treatment Control Best Management Practices .................................................. 16 d. Absorption Rates and Surface Runoff.................................................................. 17 e. Surface Water.......................................................................................................... 18 f. Cumulative Impacts Related to Hydrology and Water Quality ......................... 18 5. Noise............................................................................................................................. 19 a. Ground -Borne Vibration/Ground-Bourne Noise ................................................. 19 b. Highway Noise/Other Noise................................................................................... 20 6. Air Quality................................................................................................................... 21 a. Air Quality Management Plan Consistency......................................................... 21 b. CO Hot Spots........................................................................................................... 22 c. Health Risk Assessment.......................................................................................... 22 d. Sensitive Receptors and Point Source Emitters ................................................... 23 e. Objectionable Odors............................................................................................... 24 7. Biological Resources................................................................................................... 24 a. Conservation Plan Consistency............................................................................. 24 b. Special -Status Plant Species................................................................................... 25 c. Los Angeles Pocket Mouse..................................................................................... 26 i W875-Meuifee CA -- 528368.1 TABLE OF CONTENTS r d. Stephens' Kangaroo Rat......................................................................................... 26 e. Fairy Shrimp........................................................................................................... 27 f. Quino Checkerspot Butterfly................................................................................. 27 g. Orange -Throated Whiptail, Coastal Western Whiptail, Northern Red Diamond Rattlesnake, San Diego Black -Tailed Jackrabbit, and Northwestern San Diego PocketMouse................................................................................................................... 28 h. Rock Outcrop -Coastal Sage Scrub........................................................................ 29 i. Ruderal Grassland.................................................................................................. 29 j. Wildlife Movement, Migration, and Nursery Sites .............................................. 30 k. Local Policies or Ordinances Protecting Biological Resources ........................... 30 8. Mineral Resources...................................................................................................... 31 a. Known Mineral Resources..................................................................................... 31 b. Cumulative Impacts Related to Mineral Resources ............................................ 32 9. Cultural Resources...................................................................................................... 32 a. Historical Resources.............................................................................. ......... 32 b. Religious or Sacred Uses........................................................................................ 33 c. Cumulative Impacts Related to Cultural Resources ........................................... 33 10. Aesthetics, Light and Glare.................................................................................... 34 a. Scenic Highway Corridor....................................................................................... 34 b. Scenic Resources..................................................................................................... 35 c. Mt. Palomar Observatory...................................................................................... 35 d. Light or Glare.......................................................................................................... 36 e. Light Levels at Residential Property..................................................................... 36 f. Cumulative Impacts Related to Aesthetics, Light and Glare ............................. 37 11. Traffic and Circulation........................................................................................... 38 a. Parking Capacity.................................................................................................... 38 b. Road Maintenance.................................................................................................. 38 c. Circulation during Project Construction.............................................................. 39 d. Emergency Access................................................................................................... 39 e. Alternative Transportation.................................................................................... 40 12. Water and Sewer Systems...................................................................................... 41 a. Water Treatment Facilities.................................................................................... 41 b. Water Supply........................................................................................................... 41 c. Wastewater Treatment Facilities........................................................................... 42 d. Wastewater Treatment Capacity........................................................................... 43 e. Cumulative Impacts Related to Water and Sewer Systems ................................ 44 13. Fire Protection Services.......................................................................................... 45 a. Government Facilities — Fire Protection............................................................... 45 b. Cumulative Impacts Related to Fire Protection Services ................................... 46 14. Law Enforcement Services..................................................................................... 46 a. Government Facilities — Law Enforcement.......................................................... 46 b. Cumulative Impacts Related to Law Enforcement Services ................................... 47 15. Utilities..................................................................................................................... 48 a. Electricity, Natural Gas, Communication Systems ............................................. 48 b. Storm Water Drainage........................................................................................... 49 c. Street Lighting........................................................................................................ 49 ii W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 TABLE OF CONTENTS n d. Maintenance of Public Facilities, including roads ............................................... 50 e. Conflict with Adopted Energy Conservation Plans ............................................. 51 f. Cumulative Impacts Related to Utilities............................................................... 51 16. Solid Waste.............................................................................................................. 52 a. Landfill Capacity.................................................................................................... 52 b. Solid Waste Regulations......................................................................................... 53 c. Cumulative Impacts Related to Solid Waste ........................................................ 53 17. Disaster Preparedness............................................................................................ 54 a. Disaster Preparedness............................................................................................ 54 b. Cumulative Impacts Related to Disaster Preparedness ...................................... 54 C. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF LESS-THAN- SIGNIFICANT.......................................................................................................................... 55 1. Seismic Safety.............................................................................................................. 56 a. Risk of Loss, Injury or Death................................................................................ 56 b. Unstable Soil/Ground Subsidence............................................................ ......... 57 c. Cumulative Impacts Related to Seismic Safety .................................................... 58 2. Soils, Slopes and Erosion............................................................................................ 58 a. Soil Erosion/Loss of Topsoil ................................................................................... 58 b. Expansive Soil .......................................................................................................... 59 c. Cumulative Impacts Related to Soils, Slopes and Erosion .................................. 60 3. Hydrology and Water Quality................................................................................... 61 a. Water Quality Standards....................................................................................... 61 4. Noise............................................................................................................................. 62 a. Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels ...................................................... 62 5. Air Quality................................................................................................................... 63 a. Localized Air Quality Impacts............................................................................... 63 b. Greenhouse Gases and Global Warming Potential ............................................. 65 6. Biological Resources................................................................................................... 67 a. Burrowing Owl........................................................................................................ 67 b. California Horned Lark......................................................................................... 67 c. Cooper's Hawk, Ferruginous Hawk, Northern Harrier, White -Tailed Kite, and LoggerheadShrike.......................................................................................................... 68 d. Riparian Habitat......................................................................................................... 69 7. Energy Resources........................................................................................................ 71 a. Energy Resources.................................................................................................... 71 8. Cultural Resources...................................................................................................... 71 a. Archeological Sites/Resources................................................................................ 71 b. Human Remains...................................................................................................... 74 c. Paleontological Resources...................................................................................... 75 9. Traffic and Circulation............................................................................................... 77 a. Intersection Operations.......................................................................................... 77 b. Hazards to a Design Feature.................................................................................. 83 D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NOT FULLY MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF LESS-THAN-SIGNIFICANT.................................................................................................. 84 1. Noise............................................................................................................................. 84 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1l a. Short -Term Construction Noise (Individually and Cumulatively): Local Standards......................................................................................................................... 84 b. Short -Term Construction Noise (Individually and Cumulatively): Ambient NoiseLevels..................................................................................................................... 85 2. Air Quality................................................................................................................... 86 a. Short -Term Construction Emissions.................................................................... 86 b. Long -Term Operational Emissions....................................................................... 88 c. Cumulative Air Quality Impacts........................................................................... 89 3. Traffic and Circulation............................................................................................... 90 a. Mainline Freeway Segments.................................................................................. 90 b. Freeway Ramp Operations.................................................................................... 91 E. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES....................................................................................... 92 1. Alternative 1— No Project Alternative...................................................................... 92 2. Alternative 2 — Reduced Intensity Alternative......................................................... 93 3. Environmentally Superior Alternative....................................................... .......... 97 F. GROWTH -INDUCING IMPACTS.............................................................................. 97 G. SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES ...................... 99 VI. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ........................................ 100 VII. CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT.. 103 A. Findings......................................................................................................................103 1. CEQA Compliance................................................................................................ 103 2. Significant Unavoidable Impacts/Statement of Overriding Considerations ... 103 3. Conclusions................................................................................................................104 VIII. ADOPTION OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 104 iv W875-Menifee CA--528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations I. INTRODUCTION The Planning Commission (this "Commission") of the City of Menifee (the "City"), in approving EIR 508, Tentative Parcel Map 35261 ("PM 35201"), Plot Plan 2009-121 (PP 2009- 121) and Conditional Use Permits 2009-142 ("CUP 2009-142") and 2009-143 ("CUP 2009- 143") authorizing the construction and operation of an approximately 241,000 square foot shopping center including: a "major" retail anchor (Wal-Mart) on Parcel 1, totaling approximately 205,000 square feet, including outdoor garden center uses; a 3,200-square-foot fast food restaurant with drive -through on Parcel 2; a 2,800-square-foot convenience store with 16-pump fueling station and a drive -through car wash on Parcel 3; a 3,000-square-foot fast food restaurant with drive -through on Parcel 4; a 6,500-square-foot high turnover sit-down restaurant on Parcel 5; 13,800 square feet of retail shops on Parcel 6; a 6,680-square-foot automobile service and repair on Parcel 7; and onsite parking, circulation, and all required infrastructure (the "Project"); makes the Findings described below and adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations presented at the end of the Findings. The Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") was prepared by the City acting as lead agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). Hereafter, unless specifically indentified, the Notice of Preparation ("NOP"), Notice of Availability & Completion ("NOA/NOC"), Draft EIR ("DEIR"), Technical Studies, Final EIR containing Responses to Comments and textual revisions to the Draft EIR ("FEIR"), and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("MIVIRP") will be referred to collectively herein as the `EIR." These Findings are based on the entire record before this Commission, including the EIR. This Commission adopts the facts and analyses in the EIR, which are summarized below for convenience. The omission of some detail or aspect of the EIR does not mean that it has been rejected by this Commission. II. PROJECT SUMMARY A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Site Location The Project is located in the City of Menifee. The Project site consists of approximately 30 acres of vacant and undeveloped land, located northwesterly of the I-215 1 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations interchange with Scott Road. Specifically, the Project is located west of I-215, north of Scott Road, and east of Haun Road. At the time the NOP was circulated for this EIR (March 14, 2008), the Project -site was located in the County of Riverside ("County"). On June 3, 2008, the voters approved the formation of the City of Menifee with an effective incorporation date of October 1, 2008. The Project -site was within the limits of the new City of Menifee. Accordingly, while the County of Riverside was the lead agency for this Project at the time the NOP was filed, the City of Menifee is now the lead agency and has authority to take discretionary actions related to the Project's approval and implementation. As the City has not yet had the opportunity to formulate and adopt its own policies and standards to evaluate and regulate land use and development proposals, the City has adopted Ordinance 2008-01, which adopted all ordinances and resolutions of Riverside County, including Ordinance No. 348, the County's Zoning Ordinance, and it will review and evaluate the Project against the applicable County of Riverside land use and development criteria. Existing land uses adjacent to the Project site are predominantly vacant and undeveloped. Scattered rural residences are located within the vicinity of the Project; the nearest of these to the south, across Scott Road on Bailey Park Boulevard. The vacant property to the north is zoned Scenic Highway Commercial (C-P-S), was proposed for a Change of Zone to General Residential (R-3). The vacant property to the south, across Scott Road, is zoned Scenic Highway Commercial (C-P-S). The I-215 freeway and vacant land are located to the east. The Vacant property to the west across Haun Road is zoned Industrial Park (I-P). 2. Project Description The Project consists of EIR 508, PM 35261, PP 2009-121, CUP 2009-142 and CUP 2009-143, which collectively will authorize the construction and operation of an approximately 241,000 square foot shopping center including: a "major" retail anchor (Wal- Mart) on Parcel 1, totaling approximately 205,000 square feet, including outdoor garden center uses; a 3,200-square-foot fast food restaurant with drive -through on Parcel 2; a 2,800-square-foot convenience store with 16-pump fueling station and a drive -through car wash on Parcel 3; a 3,000-square-foot fast food restaurant with drive -through on Parcel 4; a 6,500-square-foot high 2 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations r turnover sit-down restaurant on Parcel 5; 13,800 square feet of retail shops on Parcel 6; a 6,680- square-foot automobile service and repair on Parcel 7; and onsite parking, circulation, and all required infrastructure. 3. Actions Covered by the EIR The EIR will support the following discretionary approvals: • Plot Plan approval for entire Project (PP 2009-121); • Conditional Use Permit for auto repair garage, tire sales and service (Parcel 7) (CUP 2009-142); • Conditional Use Permit for a convenience store with sale of motor fuels and alcohol for off -premises consumption and car wash (Parcel 3) (CUP 2009-143); • Tentative Parcel Map (PM 35261); • Sign Plan approval of sign program for entire Project (not currently before the Planning Commission); and • Any other City of Menifee approvals that may be necessary pursuant to applicable laws and regulations. B. PROJECT OBJECTIVES The Project Objectives include the following: • Provide development consistent with the General Plan, land uses, zoning ordinance and in conformance with municipal standards, codes and policies; • Maximize and broaden the City's sales tax base by providing local and regional tax -generating uses; • Provide development that improves and maximizes economic viability of a vacant site by transitioning the Project site into a productive mix of commercial/retail uses; 3 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations • Locate a commercial project at the intersection of a major street and an interstate freeway, maximizing access opportunities for the convenience of patrons; • Expand and provide new retail options, with updated, modern and energy efficient buildings, in close proximity to local customers by providing daytime and nighttime shopping opportunities in a safer and secure environment; • Create additional employment -generating opportunities for the recently incorporated City of Menifee; • Provide (where necessary) adequate infrastructure and public amenities. III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The City, and prior to incorporation the County, conducted an extensive review of this Project which included the DEIR and FEIR, along with the supporting technical studies along with a public review and comment period first during the circulation of the NOP/Initial Study and then through the circulation of the DEIR. The following is a summary of the environmental review of this Project: • On March 14, 2008 the County circulated a Notice of Preparation ("NOP") and the Initial Study that identified the environmental issues that the County anticipated would analyzed in the Project's DEIR to the State Clearinghouse, ` responsible agencies, and other interested parties. • On April 21, 2008, the County conducted a public scoping meeting to allow members of the public to provide comments and input regarding the scope and content of the DEIR. • The NOP public review period ran for 30 days. Written comments on the NOP were received from 10 different agencies, organizations, and Indian tribes. The scope of the issues identified in the comments expressing concern included potential impacts associated with: aesthetics; biological resources; cultural 4 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations resources; flooding, drainage and hydrology; land use; traffic and circulation; noise; air quality; soils, slopes and erosion; and, cumulative impacts. • Based on the Initial Study, included in the DEIR in Appendix A, and comments received pursuant to the NOP, it was determined that some issues need not be addressed in depth in the DEIR because previous studies of other documentation provided sufficient information and analysis to conclude that there was little or no potential for significant impacts. These environmental topics included: (1) Agricultural Resources; (2) Hazards/Hazardous Materials; (3) Population/Housing; and, (4) Recreation. • On December 14, 2009, the NOA/NOC was filed with the Riverside County Recorder and the State Clearinghouse and the DEIR was circulated for the 45 day public review, which ended February 1, 2010. • The City received a total of 8 comment letters from public agencies, 1 from a local Indian Tribe and 3 from a shopping center owner in the City of Murrieta. No other comment letters were received from individuals. The City prepared specific responses to all comments. The responses to comments are in Section III of the FEIR. • On March 9, 2010, the Commission held an agenda noticed Project Workshop to receive additional information about the Project and the EIR. • On July 29, 2010, in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21092.5, the City provided written proposed responses to public agencies that commented on the DEIR. • On July 29, 2010, Notice of the Commission hearing to consider the Project was provided in the following newspaper(s) of general and/or regional circulation: The Californian • On August 10, 2010, the Commission continued the public hearing, but did open the matter for public comment. 5 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations • On August 24, 2010, the Commission conducted a continued public hearing to consider the Project and took additional public comment. After closing the public hearing, the Commission continued the public hearing to September 14, 2010. • On September 14, 2010, the Commission conducted a continued public hearing to consider the Project. The Planning Commission continued the public hearing to October 12, 2010. • On October 12, 2010, the Commission, after considering written comments and oral testimony on the EIR and the project, including the previous two hearings, determined that no new information was presented that would require recirculation of the EIR. Following public testimony, submission of additional written comments, and staff recommendations, this Commission certified the EIR, adopted these Facts, Findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, which also adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan ("MMRP"), and the further recommendations in the Staff Report, and approved the Project, including PM 35261, PP 2009-121, CUP 2009-142 and CUP 2009-143 (collectively the "Approvals"). IV. INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT FINDING Initially, Applied Planning, Inc. ("Applied Planning") prepared the EIR under the supervision, direction and review of the County. Post -incorporation, Applied Planning has prepared the EIR under the supervision, direction and review of the City. Finding: The EIR for the Project reflects the City's independent judgment. The City has exercised independent judgment in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21082.1(c)(3) in directing the consultant in the preparation of the EIR, as well as reviewing, analyzing and revising material prepared by the consultant. 6 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations e A. GENERAL FINDING ON MITIGATION MEASURES In preparing the Approvals for this Project, City staff incorporated the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR as applicable to the Project. In the event that the Approvals do not use the exact wording of the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR, in each such instance, the adopted Approvals are intended to be identical or substantially similar to the recommended mitigation measure. Any minor revisions were made for the purpose of improving clarity or to better define the intended purpose. Finding: Unless specifically stated to the contrary in these findings, it is this Commission's intent to adopt all mitigation measures recommended by the EIR which are applicable to the Project. If a measure has, through error, been omitted from the Approvals or from these Findings, and that measure is not specifically reflected in these Findings, that measure shall be deemed to be adopted pursuant to this paragraph. In addition, unless specifically stated to the contrary in these Findings, all Approvals repeating or rewording mitigation measures recommended in the EIR are intended to be substantially similar to the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR and are found to be equally effective in avoiding or lessening the identified environmental impact. In each instance, the Approvals contain the final wording for the mitigation measures. V. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND FINDINGS City staff reports, the EIR, written and oral testimony at public meetings or hearings, these facts, findings and statement of overriding considerations, and other information in the administrative record, serve as the basis for the City's environmental determination. The detailed analysis of potentially significant environmental impacts and proposed mitigation measures for the Project is presented in Sections II to VI of the DEIR and Sections III to V of the FEIR. Responses to comments on the DEIR, along with copies of the comments, are provided in Chapter III of the FEIR. The EIR evaluated twenty major environmental categories for potential impacts including Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Disaster Preparedness, Energy Resources, Fire Protection Services, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use, Law Enforcement Services, Mineral Resources, Noise, Seismic Safety, Soils, Slopes and Erosion, 7 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Solid Waste, Traffic and Circulation, Utilities, Water and Sewer Systems, Wind Erosion and Blows and, and Cumulative Impacts. Both Project -specific and cumulative impacts were evaluated. Of these twenty major environmental categories, this Commission concurs with the conclusions in the EIR that the issues and sub issues discussed in Sections V.A and V. B below either are less -than -significant without mitigation or can be mitigated below a level of significance. For the remaining potential environmental impacts that cannot feasibly be mitigated below a level of significance discussed in Section V.C, overriding considerations exist which make these potential impacts acceptable to this Commission. A. LESS -THAN -SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NOT REQUIRING MITIGATION The Menifee Planning Commission hereby finds that the following potential environmental impacts of the Project are less -than -significant and therefore do not require the imposition of mitigation measures. 1. Land Use a. General Plan Consistency Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project is consistent with applicable provisions of the County General Plan, which currently governs land use until the City adopts its own General Plan. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to consistency with the General Plan are discussed in detail in Section II -A of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to General Plan consistency will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The General Plan Land Use designation is "Commercial Retail" with a Community Center Overlay. Commercial retail land uses proposed by the Project are permitted or conditionally permitted by, and therefore are considered to be consistent with, applicable General Plan Land Use Plans and Policies. (DEIR, pg. 11-16) Accordingly, impacts associated with General Plan consistency would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. 8 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations b. Zoning Consistency Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would conflict with the applicable zoning. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to consistency with zoning are discussed in detail in Section II -A of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to zoning consistency will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project site is zoned Scenic -Highway Commercial (C- P-S), which provides for a wide range of permitted and conditionally permitted commercial, retail and service oriented uses. _ The commercial/retail uses proposed by the Project are permitted or conditionally permitted under the site's existing C-P-S zoning. The Project has been designed in accordance with the development standards developed for the C-P-S zone. (DEIR, pgs. II-6, II-21 to 22) Accordingly, impacts associated with zoning consistency would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. C. Project Consistency with Applicable Policy Areas Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would conflict with any applicable policy areas. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to consistency with the applicable policy areas are discussed in detail in Section II -A of the Draft EIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to applicable policy areas will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project site is located within the Interstate 215 Corridor Policy Area of the Sun City/Menifee Valley Area Plan ("SCMVAP"), and is subject to applicable Policies of that Area Plan. To ensure consistency with SCMVAP 2.1 (requiring visual buffers for development proposals on properties abutting either I-215 or residentially -designated property), a 50-foot landscaped setback has been incorporated into the Project design along the site's eastern boundary. Additionally, the entire periphery of the Project will include landscaping. An eleven (11) foot high sound attenuation wall along the Project's northerly boundary will effectively screen the Project from residentially zoned property to the immediate north. Residences southerly of the Project are physically separated from the Project site by 9 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations n intervening Scott Road, acting to diminish potential views into, or from the Project site. Landscaping along the Project site's southerly boundary (northerly edge of Scott Road) acts to further screen and enhance views of the Project site as seen from southerly vantages. SCMVAP 2.2, which identifies requirements and procedures to be followed in the absence of a facilities financing program for either transportation or water and sewer facilities, is not applicable to the Project, as financing programs for these facilities currently exist. The Project is consistent with SCMVAP 2.3, which regulates the design and location of Project signage. SCMVAP 2.4, which is only applicable to the Interstate 215 Corridor South Area, acts to preserve and protect the riparian/woodland area along the Paloma Wash. The Project site is not located along, nor will it affect, the Paloma Wash. As such, the Project is consistent with applicable Policies for this Area. (DEIR, pgs. II-17 to 18) Accordingly, any impacts to Applicable Policy Areas would be less - than -significant and no mitigation is required. d. Project Consistency with Applicable Local Land Use Policies Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would conflict with applicable local land use policies. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to consistency with the applicable local land use policies are discussed in detail in Section II -A of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to applicable local land use policies will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The site is located within the Third Supervisorial District, and as such, is subject to SCMVAP 7.1 and 8.1. SCMVAP 7.1 ensures that development adheres to policies listed in the Community Centers Area Plan Land Use Designation section of the Land Use Element. The site has a Community Center Overlay and is subject to Policies LU 27.1 through LU 27.3. This Overlay allows for properties to be developed as either a Community Center or developed consistent with the underlying designated land use. The intent of the Overlay is to allow for flexibility depending on the desires of landowner. The Project Applicant has elected not to develop the property as a Community Center. The Project is consistent with the underlying zoning designation, and therefore will not conflict with the Community Center 10 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Overlay. Project consistency with the development standards for the Third and Fifth Supervisorial Districts (as required by SCMVAP 8.1) is achieved by the use of quality building materials, efficient land use, incorporation of the proposed trail into the Project design, and utilizing design features and materials that evoke a sense of quality and permanence. Prior to issuance of building permits, Project design and materials will be reviewed to ensure consistency with this Policy. The signage proposed for the Project is consistent with SCMVAP 2.3 and 17.2. Consistent with SCMVAP 10.2, the Project provides a combination of setbacks, landscaping and walls along the boundary with the residential property to the north. (DEIR, pgs. II-18 to II-19) Accordingly, any impacts to Applicable Local Land Use Policies would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. e. Cumulative Impacts Related to Land Use Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in cumulatively significant impacts to land use. Findings: Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to land use are discussed in detail in Section II -A of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no cumulatively significant impacts related to land use will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project land uses are consistent with the governing General Plan Land Use Element. The Project is also consistent with local Policy Area requirements and Local Land Use Policies articulated for the Sun City/Menifee Valley Area Plan. Uses proposed by the Project are permitted or conditionally permitted under the existing zoning designation for the site. Consistency with General Plan land use plans and zoning regulations demonstrates consistency with correlating City land use plans and regulations. With approval of requested discretionary actions identified in Section II (A)(3) of these Findings, the Project's contributions to potential cumulative land use impacts related to General Plan, Area Plan, and Zoning consistency are less -than -significant. There are no known or probable off -site development proposals that would not, or could not, comply with applicable General Plan provisions; or that would otherwise adversely compound land use approvals requested by the Project, and so be determined to be cumulatively significant. It is assumed that other 11 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations development projects within the cumulative impact area will also request appropriate discretionary land use approval where necessary thereby reducing potential cumulative impacts. (DEIR, pgs. II-16 to II-22) Accordingly, any impacts to land use would not be cumulatively considerable and no mitigation is required. 2. Seismic Safety a. Known Earthquake Faults Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would be subject to rupture of a known earthquake fault. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to known earthquake faults are discussed in detail in Section II-B of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to known earthquake faults will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project site is not located within any Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. (DEIR, pg. II-27) Although the Project site is located in a seismically active area of Southern California, no mapped faults exist on or near the site. In addition, no evidence of surface faulting has been observed. The nearest significant active fault is the Elsinore Fault Zone (Temecula segment), which is a Type B fault and is located approximately 7 miles away from the site. The nearest Type A fault is the San Jacinto Fault Zone (Anna segment), which is located approximately 16 miles away. (DEIR, pgs. II-28 to 29) Furthermore, the Project is located outside identified County of Riverside Fault Zones. (DEIR, pg. II-29) Accordingly, any impacts associated with known earthquake faults would be less -than - significant and no mitigation is required. b. Seismic -Related Ground Failure Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would be subject to seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to seismic -related ground failure are discussed in detail in Section II-B of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this 12 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Commission finds that no significant impact pertaining to seismic -related ground failure will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Borings performed as part of the Geotechnical Investigation prepared for the Project site encountered groundwater at a depth of 31 feet. At this depth, the potential for liquefaction and associated adverse effects within the site is considered low. (DEIR, pg. II-30) Accordingly, any impacts associated with seismic -related ground failure — including liquefaction — would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. C. Seismic Ground Shaking Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would be subject to strong seismic ground shaking. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to seismic ground shaking are discussed in detail in Section II-B of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The application of seismic design and construction practices, identified within the California Building Code and related City Building Codes will minimize the effects of earthquakes upon structures, to the extent feasible. (DEIR, pg. II-30) As such, the Project is not anticipated to expose people or structures to a substantially adverse level of seismic risk. (DEIR, pg. II-31) Accordingly, any impacts associated with seismic ground shaking would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. 3. Wind Erosion and Blowsand a. Wind Erosion and Blowsand Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would be impacted by or result in an increase in wind erosion and blowsand, either on or offsite. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to wind erosion and blowsand are discussed in detail in Section II-D of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to wind erosion or blowsand will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. 13 W875-Menifee CA--528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Facts in Support of the Findings: Although blowsand is an environmental consideration for certain areas of Riverside County (e.g. north of Palm Springs), it does not substantively affect the Project site (DEIR, pg. II-39) Short-term potential wind erosion impacts associated with soils exposure during Project construction have been analyzed as part of the Air Quality Impact Analysis, and mitigation has been developed to minimize such impacts until the Project site is fully developed. Once implemented, the Project will decrease the amount of exposed dirt (and therefore erosion) with the incorporation of impervious surfaces and landscaping. Potential increased erosive effects of winds, as soils are exposed during construction activities, are further reduced through compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) required fugitive dust control measures and adopted Best Management Practices (BMPs). In addition, the Project will comply with Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 (Article XV), which includes soil erosion control requirements. In combination, application of mandated SCAQMD fugitive dust control measures, compliance with County Ordinance No. 460, implementation of adopted BMPs, and application of construction related fugitive dust control mitigation measures mitigation measures (detailed at EIR Section II.G, Air Quality) will reduce potential wind erosion impacts to levels that are less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. II-40) Accordingly, any impacts related to Wind Erosion and blowsand would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. b. Cumulative Impacts Related to Wind Erosion and Blowsand Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to wind erosion and blowsand. Findings: Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to wind erosion and blowsand are discussed in detail in Section II-D of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no cumulatively significant impacts related to wind erosion and blowsand will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Wind erosion and blowsand impacts are largely localized effects, and are appropriately and effectively addressed at the Project level, thereby precluding off -site and cumulative impacts. Accordingly, the Project site and its immediate vicinity are generally considered to encompass the cumulative impact area for wind erosion and blowsand 14 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations considerations. Application of mandated SCAQMD fugitive dust control measures, compliance with Riverside County Ordinance No. 460, implementation of adopted BMPs, and application of construction -related fugitive dust control mitigation measures (detailed at EIR Section II.G, "Air Quality") will reduce potential wind erosion impacts of the Project, and therefore cumulatively, to levels that are less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. II-41) Accordingly, no mitigation is required. 4. Hydrology and Water Ouality a. Flooding on- or off -site Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would 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 that would result in flooding on- or off -site. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project relating flooding are discussed in detail in Section II-E of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to flooding will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project drainage concept provides for three post - development drainage areas. Drainage Area 1 includes the portion of the property that drains toward the northwestern corner of the Project site. Under post -development conditions, this area is divided into two (2) sub -areas, due to the improvements to Haun Road and Scott Road. Sub- area lU (unrouted) will be comprised mainly of Scott Road and Haun Road right-of-way collected by curb inlets and storm drains. This subarea will discharge directly to the Haun Road water course culvert discharge. Sub -area 1R (routed) will be comprised primarily of on -site storm flows collected in inlets, then to an underground detention basin (UDB-1) to mitigate for increased run-off. From there, the mitigated storm flows are conveyed northerly, consistent with existing drainage patterns. (DEIR, pg. II-52) Drainage Area 2 will primarily transport increased runoff from the roof of the major retail building to an underground detention basin (UDB-2), then northerly consistent with existing drainage patterns. (DEIR, pg. 11-54) Drainage Area 3 includes the eastern portion of the Project site, and will be composed of two (2) sub -areas. Sub- area 3U (unrouted) is primarily a portion of undeveloped land (future Caltrans transportation 15 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations improvement area) sheetflowing directly into the existing Caltrans drainage channel. Sub -area 3R (routed) will transport on -site storm flows that are collected in inlets to an underground detention basin (UDB-3) to mitigate increased runoff. From the UDB, flows will be discharged to the point corresponding to the discharge point of existing conditions Drainage Area 3. (DEIR, pg. II-54) As shown by the proposed drainage design, the Project is not proposing to substantially alter existing drainage patterns and has been developed in a manner that will assure that future runoff does not create any flooding issues. Accordingly, any impacts related to flooding would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. b. Runoff Water Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to runoff water are discussed in detail in Section II-E of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to runoff water will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project Storm Water Management System will be designed so that developed discharges to existing concentration points will not be substantively increased when compared to historic discharges from the undeveloped site. The Project will not result in storm water runoff that exceeds the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems. Further, implementation of the Treatment Control BMP system components described previously in this Section will ensure that the Project's potential to result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff is less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. II-58) Accordingly, no mitigation is required. C. Treatment Control Best Management Practices Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would include new or retrofitted storm water Treatment Control BMPs, the operation of which could result in significant environmental effects. 16 W875-Menifee CA--528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to Treatment Control BMPs are discussed in detail in Section II-E of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to Treatment Control BMPs will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Project -specific management and conveyance of storm water are adequately and appropriately addressed through proposed drainage system improvements. All proposed connections to, or modifications of, storm water drainage systems, to include proposed BMPs will be reviewed and approved by the City and the Santa Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB). Moreover, the Project's proposed storm water detention area will be designed so as to de -water within 72 hours, thereby minimizing the potential for increased vectors and/or intrusive odors. The potential for the Project to require or result in new or retrofitted storm water treatment control facilities or mechanisms that could result in adverse environmental effects is determined to be less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. II- 59) Accordingly, no mitigation is required. d. Absorption Rates and Surface Runoff Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in changes in absorption rates or the rate and amount of surface runoff. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to absorption rates and surface runoff are discussed in detail in Section II-E of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to absorption rates and surface runoff will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Within the Project site, drainage conveyances and detention/retention features (collectively referred to as the Project Storm Water Management System) will be designed so that developed discharges to existing concentration points will not be substantively increased when compared to historic discharges from the undeveloped site. (DEIR, pg. II-60) Under post -development conditions, however, there will be an increase in unrouted runoff discharging from the expansion of Haun Road and adjacent impermeable sidewalk areas. (DEIR, pg. II-61) Consistent with existing drainage patterns, these flows cannot be physically, and are not appropriately, drained to the Project's on -site Underground Detention 17 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Basins. Moreover, increased runoff resulting from public rights -of -way improvements are collectively addressed on an areawide basis through funding and implementation of Riverside County Flood Control District's (RCFCD) master plan drainage facilities. As such, these localized increased flows resulting from right-of-way improvements to adjacent Haun Road are therefore determined to be less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. II-62) Additionally, under proposed conditions, peak flows for 100 year storm events will be reduced, with the exception of 24 hr - 100 yr AMC III storm events from Areas 1 and 3. There is no requirement to reduce 100 year storm event flows to pre -development conditions, and increased flows can be safely routed through the underground detention basins. (Id.) Accordingly, any impacts related to absorption rates and surface runoff would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. e. Surface Water Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in changes in the amount of surface water in any body of water. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to surface water are discussed in detail in Section II-E of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to surface water will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The rates of storm water that would be generated following Project implementation would be substantially reduced compared to the site's current condition. Additionally, the Project incorporates storm water management components, including drainage facilities and structural and non-structural BMPs, which collectively act to ensure that post - development storm water discharge rates and volumes do not exceed pre -development conditions. As such, the Project's potential to substantially affect the amount of surface water in any water body within the proximity is less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. II-62) Accordingly, no mitigation is required. f. Cumulative Impacts Related to Hydrology and Water Quality Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in cumulatively significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality. 18 W875-Menifee CA--528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Findings: Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to hydrology and water quality are discussed in detail in Section II-E of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant cumulative impacts related to hydrology and water quality will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The cumulative impact area for hydrology/water quality impact considerations is generally defined as the area within the jurisdiction of the SARWQCB. In accordance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements, the Project proponent will be required to prepare a construction activities erosion control plan to alleviate potential sedimentation and construction storm water discharge contamination impacts of the Project. The Project incorporates storm water management components, including drainage facilities and structural and nonstructural BMPs, which collectively act to ensure that post -development storm water discharge rates and volumes do not exceed pre -development conditions. Moreover, the Project's proposed storm water management systems will be designed, constructed and maintained so as to ensure compliance with City, RCFCD, and SARWQCB storm water quality requirements. In these regards, prior to issuance of building permits, all proposed storm water management components are subject to review and approval by the City, RCFCD, and SARWQCB. Ancillary facilities will also be reviewed and approved by the Riverside County Department of Transportation and Caltrans. Storm water management components to be implemented by the Project, in combination with mandated compliance with State, SARWQCB, and City storm water management requirements ensures that adequate storm water conveyance and treatment facilities will be provided to support development and operations of the Project. (DEIR, pg. II-63) Accordingly, any cumulative impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. 5. Noise a. Ground -Borne Vibration/Ground-Bourne Noise Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground -borne vibration or ground -borne noise levels. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project relating ground -borne vibration and ground -borne noise are discussed in detail in Section II-F of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, 19 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to ground -borne vibration and ground - borne noise will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project does not propose activities or uses that would result in long-term substantial or even perceptible vibration levels. (DEIR, pg. II-94) However, heavy equipment employed during Project construction could potentially generate groundborne vibration resulting in annoyance at area residential land uses. The estimated 68.9 VdB received at the nearest residential property is below the Federal Transit Administration ("FTA") 75 VdB annoyance impact criteria level, and would therefore not be considered an annoyance or an interference at proximate residential land uses. (DEIR, pg. II-97) Further, impacts at the site of the closest sensitive receptor are unlikely to be sustained during the entire construction period, but will occur rather only during the times that heavy construction equipment is operating proximate to the Project site perimeter. Moreover, construction at the Project site will be restricted to daylight hours consistent with City requirements thereby eliminating potential vibration impact during evening hours. Accordingly, potential groundbourne vibration impacts due to Project construction or operations are less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. Furthermore, the operation of heavy construction equipment will not result in a significant vibration impact. As such, Project -related operations would not result in long-term substantial vibration impacts. (Id.) Therefore no mitigation is required. b. Highway Noise/Other Noise Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in significant impacts related to highway noise. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project relating highway noise are discussed in detail in Section II-F of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to highway noise will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Vehicular noise from the adjacent I-215 will continue to be the defining noise source in the Project area. (DEIR, pg. II-97) Through its General Plan process, and as reflected in the subject site's General Plan "Commercial Retail (CR)" land use 20 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations designation, the City has determined that long-term commercial/retail development is allowable and appropriate in this noise environment. (DEIR, pg. II-98) The freeway mainline is located level to the northeast corner of the Project site. The proposed new freeway off -ramp will rise approximately 11 feet above the Project site at the southeast corner. A proposed retaining wall rising from 5 feet in height at the center portion of the site will increase to 11 feet at the intersection of Scott Road, thus providing attenuation to the Project site. In addition, the estimated exterior noise levels would be experienced on a short-term basis as patrons move between parking areas and interior retail/commercial spaces. (DEIR, pg. II-98) Accordingly, impacts related to highway noise will be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. 6. Air Quality a. Air Quality Management Plan Consistency Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to the applicable air quality plan are discussed in detail in Section II-G of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts related to the applicable air quality plan and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project is consistent with, and will not impede or otherwise conflict with implementation of the Air Quality Management Plan ("AQMP"). The Project is consistent with AQMP Consistency Criterion No. 1 because it will not cause a potential increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP. (DEIR, pg. II-115) The Project will not exceed the California Ambient Air Quality Standards ("CAAQS") for localized criteria pollutants during construction operations. Further, the proposed land uses provide locally available commercial/retail opportunities acting to generally reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and associated mobile -source pollutants within the air basin. Attainment of AQMP air quality standards is also supported by energy efficiency/sustainability attributes of the Project. The Project is also consistent with AQMP Consistency Criterion No. 2 because it does not have the 21 W875-Meuifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations potential to exceed the assumptions in the AQMP in 2010 or increments based on the years of project build -out phase. (DEIR, pg. II-116) Because the Project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation of Commercial Retail, it does not exceed growth projections in the General Plan, and is consistent with growth assumptions in the AQMP. Accordingly, impacts related to consistency with the applicable air quality plan will be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. b. Carbon Monoxide (CO) Hot Spots Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in significant impacts related to Carbon Monoxide (CO) Hotspots. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to CO Hotspots are discussed in detail in Section II-G of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts due to CO Hotspots and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: A CO impact analysis was conducted to assess the localized CO impacts on sensitive receptors that are situated adjacent to congested roadways and intersections affected by Project traffic. (DEIR, pgs. II-129 and 130) None of the evaluated intersections are projected to have CO emissions that exceed the maximum allowable 1-hour concentration. (DEIR, pg. II-131) Furthermore, none of the evaluated intersections are projected to have CO emissions that exceed the maximum allowable 8-hour concentration. (Id.) Since significant impacts would not occur at intersections with the highest potential for CO hotspot formation, no significant impacts are anticipated to occur at any other locations in the vicinity as a result of the Project. Consequently, sensitive receptors would not be significantly affected by CO emissions generated by Project -related traffic. (DEIR, pgs. II-131 and II-132) Accordingly, impacts related to CO Hotspots will be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. C. Health Risk Assessment Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in or cause potentially significant air quality impacts or health risks due to exposure to gas station emissions or diesel emissions. 22 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to the Health Risk Assessment are discussed in detail in Section II-G of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts concerning the Health Risk Assessment and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Particulate emissions generated from the Project do not pose a significant health risk to receptors in the area. Risk was predicted to be 9.0 in one million, based on a 70-year exposure, high endpoint estimate. This risk does not exceed the SCAQMD significance threshold of 10 in one million. The predicted hazard quotient value for non - carcinogenic exposures is less than 1. Complementing SCAQMD Health Risk Assessment protocols, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recommends durations for evaluating risk to residents for 9 years (central tendency) and 30 years (high -end estimate). The 9-year risk estimate indicates a risk level of 6.7 in one million, and the 30-year risk estimate indicates a risk level of 3.9 in one million. Both of these risk levels are below the SCAQMD significance threshold of 10 in one million. (DEIR, pg. II-133) In addition to emissions resulting from delivery trucks visiting the Project site, emissions resulting from the proposed gas station (e.g., benzene, hexane, MTBE, toluene, xylene) have the potential to contribute to health risk in the Project vicinity. It is anticipated that no sensitive receptors in the Project vicinity will be exposed to a cancer risk of greater than 10 in one million even when combining the risk from the gasoline station (1.53 in one million) and the trucks idling on -site (4.3 in one million). (DEIR, pgs. II-133 and 134) Accordingly, impacts concerning the Health Risk Assessment will be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. d. Sensitive Receptors and Point Source Emitters Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would involve the construction of a sensitive receptor located within one mile of an existing substantial point source emitter. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to sensitive receptors and point source emitters are discussed in detail in Section II-G of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts related to sensitive receptors and point source emitters and, therefore, no mitigation is required. 23 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project proposes the development of commercial uses. None of the uses proposed within the Project site are considered sensitive receptors. As such, impacts involving the construction of a sensitive receptor are considered less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. II-134) Therefore, no mitigation is required. e. Objectionable Odors Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to objectionable odors are discussed in detail in Section II-G of the DEIR.- Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts due to objectionable odors and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project does not propose land uses typically associated with emitting objectionable odors. Potential odor sources associated with the Project may result from construction equipment exhaust and the application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities, restaurants using charbroilers and other cooking facilities, and the temporary storage of typical solid waste associated with the Project's uses. Standard construction requirements would minimize odor impacts from construction. The construction odor emissions would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of construction and is thus considered less -than -significant. It is expected that Project -generated refuse in enclosed trash areas would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with the County's solid waste regulations. Lastly, any odor emissions from the restaurant use would disperse rapidly and would likely be limited to the immediate vicinity of the restaurant use. The Project would also be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 (Nuisance) to prevent occurrences of public nuisances. (DEIR, pg. II-135) Accordingly, impacts related to objectionable odors will be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. 7. Biological Resources a. Conservation Plan Consistency 24 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state conservation plan. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to conservation plan consistency are discussed in detail in Section II-H the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts related to conservation plan consistency and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project is located within the boundaries of the Western Riverside County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), a comprehensive, multi jurisdictional Habitat Conservation Plan focusing on conservation of species and their associated habitats in western Riverside County. The Project's Biological Resources Assessment (DEIR, Appendix F) was prepared in a manner that addresses the requirements of the MSHCP, and reflects consistency with MSHCP criteria for the determination of significant impacts. The Project site is not located within an MSHCP Criteria Cell or Group. No other approved local, regional or state conservation plan is applicable to the Project. As such, the Project's potential to conflict with the provisions of an adopted HCP is considered less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. II- 186) Therefore, no mitigation is required. b. Special -Status Plant Species Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any endangered or threatened species, or on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to special -status plant species are discussed in detail in Section II-H the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts related to special -status plant species and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project site is located outside of the subject survey areas for Narrow Endemic Plant Species identified in the MSHCP. Additionally, the Project site is also located outside of the Criteria Area Species survey area. (DEIR, pg. II-187) The Project site is heavily disturbed by the previous agricultural activities, including frequent disking, and 25 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 n Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations the site contains only marginal to poor habitat for Special -Status plant species. Therefore, there is a low likelihood of any sensitive plants being present. Even in the event that plants are present, their populations would be small and isolated. On this basis, the potential for the Project to adversely or substantively impact special -status plant species is considered less -than -significant. (Id.) Therefore, no mitigation is required. C. Los Angeles Pocket Mouse Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any endangered or threatened species, or on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to the Los Angeles Pocket Mouse are discussed in detail in Section II-H the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts related to the Los Angeles Pocket Mouse and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project site is located outside of the Mammal Species Survey Area of the MSHCP. Further, the available on -site habitat is limited, isolated and marginal to poor quality for this species. As such, the Los Angeles Pocket Mouse is not likely to be present, nor would this species be able to sustain populations in the long term in this area. Accordingly, potential impacts to the Los Angeles Pocket Mouse are considered less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. II-191) Therefore, not mitigation is required. d. Stephens' Kangaroo Rat Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any endangered or threatened species, or on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to the Stephens' Kangaroo Rat are discussed in detail in Section II-H the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts related to the Stephens' Kangaroo Rat and, therefore, no mitigation is required. 26 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project site is not located within a Stephens' Kangaroo Rat core or linkage area of the Sun City/Menifee Valley Area Plan. The site also is frequently disked for weed control and is unlikely to contain this species. Accordingly, potential impacts to Stephens' Kangaroo Rat are considered less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. II-191) Therefore, no mitigation is required. e. Fairy Shrimp Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any endangered or threatened species, or on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp and Riverside Fairy Shrimp are discussed in detail in Section II-H the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts related to the Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp and Riverside Fairy Shrimp and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: There is no survey area map for Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp and Riverside Fairy Shrimp. Suitable habitat and potential survey areas for this species will be derived from project -specific riparian/riverine areas and vernal pool mapping. However, the on - site drainage features do not form the pools required for Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp or Riverside Fairy Shrimp, and these species would not be expected to be present. Accordingly, potential impacts to Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp and Riverside Fairy Shrimp are considered less -than - significant. (DEIR, pg. II-192) Therefore, no mitigation is required. E Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any endangered or threatened species, or on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly are discussed in detail in Section II-H the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts related to the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly and, therefore, no mitigation is required. 27 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Facts in Support of the Findings: The Quino Checkerspot Butterfly has a limited potential for presence within the small patches of native scrub on -site. According to the Riverside County MSHCP, protocol surveys for Quino Checkerspot Butterfly are not required for properties located within the MSHCP. However, if a permit is to be issued by a regulatory agency that is not part of the Riverside County MSHCP, such as a Section 404 permit, a survey may be required at that time as part of the Corps consultation process with United States Fish & Wildlife Service ("USFWS"). The small habitat patches present at the site do not contain this species' required food source/host plants, including Plantago erecta and Orthocarpus purpurescens, and the habitat on -site is significantly disturbed; therefore, this butterfly is highly unlikely to be present. Accordingly, Potential impacts to Quino Checkerspot Butterfly are considered less -than - significant. (DEIR, pg. II-192) Therefore, no mitigation is required. g. Orange -Throated Whiptail, Coastal Western Whiptail, Northern Red Diamond Rattlesnake, San Diego Black -Tailed Jackrabbit, and Northwestern San Diego Pocket Mouse Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any endangered or threatened species, or on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to the Orange -throated Whiptail, Coastal Western Whiptail, Northern Red Diamond Rattlesnake, San Diego Black -tailed Jackrabbit, and Northwestern San Diego Pocket Mouse are discussed in detail in Section II-H the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts related to the Orange -throated Whiptail, Coastal Western Whiptail, Northern Red Diamond Rattlesnake, San Diego Black -tailed Jackrabbit, and Northwestern San Diego Pocket Mouse and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project site is outside of the Criteria Area Species Survey Area for the above -referenced species. The pockets of scrub are unlikely to retain whiptail populations or rattlesnakes as they require larger foraging patches than those provided on the site. Jackrabbits are an obvious species when present, and since they were not observed during the burrowing owl protocol surveys, they are not considered to be present at the site. Per 28 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations the MSHCP, isolated habitat patches must be at least 62 to 198 acres to sustain native rodent populations, including the Los Angeles and northwestern San Diego Pocket Mouse. On -site habitats, as well as those on adjacent lands, are not sufficiently large enough to retain these species. Given the limited habitat available and the Project site's level of disturbance and isolation, potential impacts to these other special -status wildlife species would be less -than - significant. (DEIR, pg. II-193) Therefore, no mitigation is required. h. Rock Outcrop -Coastal Sage Scrub Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any endangered or threatened species, or on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to Rock Outcrop -Coastal Sage Scrub habitat are discussed in detail in Section II-H the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts related to Rock Outcrop -Coastal Sage Scrub habitat and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: This habitat occurs on -site in small patches that are largely disturbed and fragmented from surrounding habitats. While it has been used by burrowing owl in the past, it is not likely to sustain owl populations in the long term, and more suitable habitat for the burrowing owl exists in areas surrounding the Project site. Accordingly, the loss of Rock Outcrop -Coastal Sage Scrub patches is considered a less -than -significant impact. (DEIR, pg. II- 194) Therefore, no mitigation is required. i. Ruderal Grassland Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any endangered or threatened species, or on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to Ruderal Grassland habitat are discussed in detail in Section II-H the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts related to Ruderal Grassland habitat and, therefore, no mitigation is required. 29 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Facts in Support of the Findings: The Ruderal Grassland habitat on -site is a fallow agricultural field that is significantly disturbed from frequent and recurring disking activities. The majority of the Project site is predominated by introduced and invasive plant species. Although the site at present provides some level of open space and foraging habitat for some common small wildlife species, the loss of Ruderal Grassland habitat on -site would be less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. II-194) Therefore, no mitigation is required. j. Wildlife Movement, Migration, and Nursery Sites Potential Significant Impact: AThether the Project would interfere substantially- with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to wildlife movement, migration, and nursery sites are discussed in detail in Section II-H the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts related to wildlife movement, migration, and nursery sites and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project site does not exist within any of the mapped Cores, Extensions of Existing Cores, Linkages, Constrained Linkages, or Non-contiguous Habitat Blocks. In addition, the South Coast Ecoregion study shows that Linkage 53 exists to the i north of the site, and Linkage 58 exists south of the site, but that no linkages are mapped within or surrounding the immediate vicinity of the Project site. Additionally, urbanization of the area and impediments presented by major infrastructure systems, such as the I-215 freeway and abutting improved roadways, has precluded any meaningful function of the subject site as cohesive habitat, a potential corridor for wildlife movement, or a wildlife nursery site. On this basis, the potential for the Project to 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 wildlife nursery sites, is determined to be less -than - significant. (DEIR, pg. II-195) Therefore, no mitigation is required. k. Local Policies or Ordinances Protecting Biological Resources 30 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources are discussed in detail in Section II-H the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts related to local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: No sensitive habitats or oak trees were observed in the course of the Project biological resources surveys, and none are considered to exist -within the Project site. Therefore, the Project does not conflict with any policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. (DEIR, pg. II-200) Accordingly, impacts related to local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources will be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. 8. Mineral Resources a. Known Mineral Resources Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource in an area classified or designated by the State that would be of value to the region or the residents of the State. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to known mineral resources are discussed in detail in Section II-J of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that development of the Project will not result in significant impacts related to known mineral resources and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: No abandoned, operational, or proposed quarries or mines exist within the Project site or its vicinity. Additionally, the site is not designated for mineral uses or mining activities. Further, the Geotechnical Investigation (EIR Appendix B) indicates that no rare or unique minerals are located on the Project site. Existing soils are typical of those soils found in the geologic vicinity of the site. Therefore, it can be concluded that no unique or valuable mineral resources will be affected by Project implementation. (DEIR, pg. II-203) 31 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Accordingly, impacts related to known mineral resources will be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required b. Cumulative Impacts Related to Mineral Resources Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in cumulatively significant impacts related to mineral resources. Findings: Potential cumulative impacts related to mineral resources are discussed in detail in Section II-J of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no cumulatively significant impacts related to mineral resources will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The cumulative impact area for mineral resources is generally defined as the City of Menifee for mineral resources of local importance, and the State of California for mineral resources of statewide importance. Potential impacts to mineral resources are primarily concerned with any effects or actions that would preclude or interfere with extraction of unique or valuable mineral resources. The Project site is located in an area where the available geologic information indicates that mineral deposits are likely to exist. Notwithstanding, the Project Geotechnical Engineering Investigation indicates that no rare or unique minerals are located on the Project site. Existing soils are typical of those soils found in the geologic vicinity of the site. The Project will have no discernible effects on mineral resources. Accordingly, the Project's i potential contribution to cumulative impacts in regard to mineral resources is not considerable, and the cumulative effects of the Project are less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. II-204) Therefore, no mitigation is required. 9. Cultural Resources a. Historical Resources Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would alter or destroy a historic site, or cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to historical resources are discussed in detail in Section II-K of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds 32 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations that no significant impacts related to historical resources will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: No evidence of historic remains was found during the field survey of the site. Based on the analysis presented in the Cultural Resources Investigation, the potential for historical resources is extremely low to non-existent. (DEIR, pg. II-226) Accordingly, any impacts associated with historical resources would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. b. Religious or Sacred Uses Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would restrict existing religious- or sacred uses within the potential impact area. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to religious or sacred uses are discussed in detail in Section II-K of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to religious or sacred uses will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: There are no religious or sacred uses within the Project site per the Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Lands File response letter dated June 20, 2007; therefore, implementation of the Project will not restrict these types of uses. (DEIR, pg. II-229) Accordingly, any impacts associated with religious or sacred uses would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. ` C. Cumulative Impacts Related to Cultural Resources Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in cumulative considerable impacts to cultural resources. Findings: Potential cumulative impacts of the Project on cultural resources are discussed in detail in Section II-K of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no cumulatively significant impacts related to cultural resources will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The cumulative impact area for prehistoric, archaeological, and historic resources generally includes the City of Menifee and surrounding areas of Riverside 33 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations County. Impacts to any cultural resources within this area would be site -specific. In the event that potentially significant resources are encountered at any development sites within the cumulative impact area, specific mitigation measures would be applied before construction activities could proceed. (DEIR, pg. II-229) There are no known or probable potentially significant off -site development proposals that would interact with, or compound Project - related cultural resources impacts, that could be determined to be cumulatively significant. To the extent that each development proposal within the cumulative impact area provides appropriate mitigation during landform modification activities, cumulative impacts to cultural resources are reduced below significance thresholds. Based on the preceding, the Project's potential contribution to cumulative cultural resources impacts is not considerable, and the cumulative effects of the Project are less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. II-230) Therefore, no mitigation is required. 10. Aesthetics, Light and Glare a. Scenic Highway Corridor Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would have a substantial effect upon a scenic highway corridor within which it is located. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to a scenic highway corridor are discussed in detail Section II-L of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to a scenic highway corridor will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project site lies within the I-215 Corridor South Policy Area, and is bordered to the east by I-215. Visual changes that will result from the Project will be subject to established City of Menifee commercial site development standards that act to promote and ensure visually acceptable and compatible development of the Project site consistent with the existing Scenic Highway Commercial zoning for the site. In this regard, a 50-foot setback has been incorporated into the Project design along the site's eastern boundary. The freeway mainline is located level to the northeast corner of the Project site. A proposed and upgraded freeway off -ramp will rise approximately 11 feet above the Project site at the southeast corner. A proposed retaining wall rising from 5 34 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations feet in height at the center portion of the site will increase to 11 feet at the intersection of Scott Road. Additionally, the periphery of the Project will include landscaping. These factors synergistically screen and buffer views of the Project as seen from passing motorists along the freeway corridor. (DEIR, pg. II-237) Accordingly, any impacts to a scenic highway corridor would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. b. Scenic Resources Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings and unique or landmark features; obstruct any prominent scenic vista or view open to the public; or result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to scenic resources are discussed in detail Section II-L of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to scenic resources will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Commercial/retail development proposed by the Project is considered to be consistent with and visually complementary to existing and proposed urban land uses. Development of the Project site will result in the elimination of existing non-native ruderal vegetation and isolated patches of low-lying rock outcroppings. Non- native ruderal vegetation is not a visually or aesthetically important resource. Existing isolated patches of low-lying rock outcrops do not represent a significant visual resource and are largely unnoticed by outside observers. Nor are these rock outcrops designated by the City, County or any responsible agency as a visually significant resource. As such, elimination of existing non- native ruderal vegetation and removal of on -site rock outcrops are determined to be less -than -significant visual/aesthetic impacts. In addition, the Project will not obstruct any prominent scenic vista or result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view. (DEIR, pg. II-238) Accordingly, any impacts to scenic resources would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. C. Mt. Palomar Observatory 35 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would interfere with the nighttime use of the Mt. Palomar Observatory, as protected through City of Menifee Ordinance 2009-024. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to Mt. Palomar Observatory are discussed in detail Section II-L of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to Mt. Palomar Observatory will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The site is located approximately 26.5 miles from the Mt. Palomar Observatory and is subject to the requirements of City Ordinance No. 2009-24 for outdoor lighting restrictions. Ordinance No. 2009-24 contains approved materials and methods of installation, definition, general requirements, requirements for lamp source and shielding, prohibition, and exceptions. The Project's compliance with these performance standards will further minimize impacts from light and glare. (DEIR, pg. II-239) Accordingly, any impacts to the Mt. Palomar Observatory would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. d. Light or Glare Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to light and glare are discussed in detail Section II-L of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds, that no significant impacts related to light and glare will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Project lighting will be designed and implemented so as to illuminate the site without causing undue light or glare, and to avoid light overspill on adjacent properties. (DEIR, pg. II-239) Outdoor lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights -of -way. Furthermore, the difference in the site elevation will act to minimize the potential light and glare impacts to passing motorists along the freeway corridor. (DEIR, pg. II-241) Accordingly, any impacts related to light and glare would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required e. Light Levels at Residential Property 36 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would expose residential property to unacceptable light levels. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to light levels at residential property are discussed in detail Section II-L of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to light levels at residential property will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Residential uses, recently approved to the north of the Project site, will be screened by perimeter theme walls and landscaping, thus buffering and limiting views of internal Project features. Residential uses to the south are physically separated from the Project site by intervening Scott Road, and will be screened and buffered by landscaping treatments along the Project's southerly boundary. Additionally, Project lighting will be designed and implemented so as to illuminate the site without causing undue light or glare, and to avoid light overspill on adjacent properties. (DEIR, pg. II-241) Accordingly, any impacts related to light and glare would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. f. Cumulative Impacts Related to Aesthetics, Light and Glare Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to aesthetics, light and glare. Findings: Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to aesthetics, light and glare are discussed in detail in Section II-K of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no cumulatively significant impacts related to aesthetics, light and glare will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project as implemented will be consistent with, and visually complementary to, vicinity land uses. Furthermore, potential light and glare impacts of the Project are addressed through compliance with development standards and compliance with adopted lighting regulations, with no potentially significant local or regional effects. There are no known or probable potentially significant off -site development proposals that would not, or could not, incorporate appropriate design elements, and comply with development standards and ordinances; or that would 37 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations otherwise adversely interact with, or compound Project -related aesthetic impacts, and so be determined to be cumulatively significant. It is anticipated that other development proposals within the cumulative impact area will incorporate appropriate design elements, and comply with development standards and ordinances that effectively preclude or reduce areawide aesthetics, light/glare impacts. As such, the Project's potential contribution to cumulative aesthetic, light and glare impacts is not considerable, and the cumulative effects of the Project are less -than -significant. (DEIR, pgs. II-243 and 244) Therefore, no mitigation is required. 11. Traffic and Circulation a. Parking Capacity Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in inadequate parking capacity. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to parking capacity are discussed in detail Section III -A of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to parking capacity will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: On -site parking will be provided pursuant to the County Zoning Ordinance No. 348, Section 18.12, or as otherwise specified by the City. Parking will be provided consistent with City requirements. Concurrent with final site plan submittals, the Applicant will indicate on the site plan where handicap -accessible parking stalls are to be located, and provide dimensions for parking spaces to ensure that adequate parking width, length and aisle are provided for all parking areas. (DEIR, pg. III-49) Accordingly, any impacts related to parking capacity would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. b. Road Maintenance Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would cause an effect upon, or the need for new or altered maintenance of roads. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to road maintenance are discussed in detail Section III -A of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no 38 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations significant impacts related to road maintenance will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Roadway improvement proposed by, or realized pursuant to, the Project will be designed and implemented consistent with City requirements. Long-term maintenance of roads will be provided consistent with existing City maintenance programs, funded at least in part by fees and taxes generated by the Project. Moreover, the Project does not propose elements or aspects (e.g., high volumes of heavy equipment or heavy truck traffic) that would unduly or inordinately increase roadway maintenance requirements. The potential for the Project to substantively or adversely affect roadway maintenance requirements is determined to be less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. III-50) Therefore, no mitigation is required. C. Circulation during Project Construction Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would cause an effect upon circulation during the project's construction. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to circulation during construction are discussed in detail Section III -A of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to circulation during construction will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Throughout Project construction, the Applicant shall provide for interim management of traffic conditions on area streets affected by construction equipment and construction traffic. The City of Menifee requires that construction traffic management measures comply with California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Traffic Manual, Chapter 5, Traffic Controls. An approved construction traffic management traffic plan is required by the City prior to the issuance of grading/encroachment permits. Implementation of the approved construction traffic management plan/construction traffic control measures reduces potential circulation system impacts during construction to levels that are less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. III-51) Therefore, no mitigation is required. d. Emergency Access Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses. 39 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to emergency access are discussed in detail Section III -A of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to emergency access will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Implementation of the construction traffic management plan/construction traffic control measures, will assure adequate emergency access during the construction of the Project. The Project will not create any long-term significant impacts to local streets with implementation of mitigation. Adequate emergency access will be provided upon completion of the Project improvements and mitigation measures. Additionally, buildout of the local roadway system will improve overall emergency response to the area. (DEIR, pgs. III-51 and 52) Accordingly, any impacts related to emergency access would be less -than - significant and no mitigation is required. e. Alternative Transportation Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to alternative transportation are discussed in detail Section III -A of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to alternative transportation will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project site and vicinity are currently outside the service area of local public transit providers. Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), which provides bus services throughout most of western Riverside County, does not currently operate routes in the area. However, RTA has stated that they would likely operate bus lines on both Scott Road and Haun Road in the future. To the satisfaction of the City, and in consultation with RTA, the Project will provide facilities necessary to assure future transit access to the Project site; and also safely integrate alternate transportation modes such as bicycle usage into the site. In this latter regard, to the satisfaction of the City, the Project will provide for the parking and securing of bicycles. Within the Project site, the internal circulation concept provides a system of pedestrian walkways. These walkways will connect to similar systems existing or proposed on adjacent 40 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations properties, including the General Plan designated Community Trail along Haun Road. Accordingly, the potential for the Project to conflict with policies supporting alternative transportation is determined to be less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. III-52) Therefore, no mitigation is required. 12. Water and Sewer Systems a. Water Treatment Facilities Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would require or result in the construction of new water treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to water treatment facilities are discussed in detail Section III-B of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to water treatment facilities will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project will be provided potable water by Eastern Municipal Water District ("EMWD"), and will connect to existing water lines located in adjacent Scott Road and Haun Road. Potable water demands of the Project are consistent with demand estimates identified in the EMWD 2005 Urban Water Management Plan ("UWMP"), and water supplied to the Project and surrounding land uses is treated by existing regionally -implemented EMWD treatment facilities. No additional treatment is required specifically to meet the Project's water demands. Service and connection fees paid by the Project and other water customers, act to fund area water treatment facilities. Water lines in the Project vicinity have been sized and constructed to accommodate development such as that proposed by the Project. According to the Project Engineer, adequate capacity exists within these lines to serve the proposed Project. Any necessary local water system modifications and all Project connections will be accomplished consistent with EMWD requirements. (DEIR, pg. III-57) Accordingly, any impact related to water treatment facilities would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. b. Water Supply 41 W875-Meuifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to water supply are discussed in detail Section III-B of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to water supply will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Water supply/demand issues germane to the Project are comprehensively addressed within the EMWD 2005 UWMP. Development proposed by the Project is consistent with commercial development of the area envisioned under the General Plan, and reflected in associated commercial water demand estimates employed to develop the 2005 UWMP. (DEIR, pg. III-58) The 2005 UWMP anticipates increasing commercial sector water demands commensurate with projected General Plan population growth. Within the 2005 UWMP, future commercial development is specifically anticipated along the I-215 corridor. Further, as documented in the 2005 UWMP, water supplies available to EMWD are sufficient to meet all existing customer demands, anticipated future customer demands, (including the Project demands) under normal, single -dry -year, and extended drought conditions. Even in the event of water supply shortages, or water emergencies, EMWD has in place water shortage contingency plans which ensure provision of priority water services to all its existing and anticipated customers, including the Project. Based on EMWD planning and design criteria, water demand and wastewater flows have been calculated. Further, the Project Applicant is required to obtain a will -serve letter from EMWD, indicating purveyor capacity and commitment to provide water to the Project. This documentation will be provided prior to the issuance of building permits. (DEIR p. III-59) Accordingly, any impact related to water treatment facilities would be less -than - significant and no mitigation is required. C. Wastewater Treatment Facilities Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would require or result in the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities, including septic systems, or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects. 42 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to wastewater treatment facilities are discussed in detail Section III-B of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to wastewater treatment facilities will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project site is currently served by EMWD sanitary sewer lines, and the Project will connect to the existing EMWD sewer lines. Sewer lines in the Project vicinity have been sized and constructed to accommodate development such as that proposed by the Project. Adequate capacity exists within these lines to serve the proposed Project. Any necessary local sewer system modifications and all Project sewer system connections will be accomplished consistent with EMWD requirements. The Project's plans for connection to existing sewer infrastructure facilities will be subject to review and approval as part of the City's engineering review process, and the Project Applicant will be required to apply for service and pay a mandated Connection Fee to the EMWD. Fees paid by the Project Applicant will be applied toward maintenance and expansion of treatment facilities as determined by the EMWD. Wastewater generated by the Project is typical of commercial generators, and wastewater constituents resulting from the Project uses will not require treatment beyond that provided by existing EMWD facilities. (DEIR, pg. III-60) Accordingly, any impact related to water treatment facilities would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. d. Wastewater Treatment Capacity i Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may service the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to wastewater treatment capacity are discussed in detail Section III-B of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to wastewater treatment capacity will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: It is anticipated that wastewater generated by the Project will be conveyed to, and treated by, the Perris Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility. The 43 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Perris Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility has a current capacity of approximately 11 million gallons/day (mgd) with a planned ultimate expansion capacity of 100 mgd. Wastewater demands of the Project, conservatively estimated at 51,510 gpd, are accounted for within EMWD existing and anticipated wastewater treatment demands for the region. The Project's wastewater treatment demands represent approximately 0.46 percent (0.0046) of the Perris Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility's current 11 mgd capacity, and approximately 0.051 percent (0.00051) of the Facility's ultimate planned 100 mgd capacity. (DEIR, pg. III-61) Accordingly, any impacts related to wastewater treatment capacity would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. e. Cumulative Impacts Related to Water and Sewer Systems Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to water and sewer systems. Findings: Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to water and sewer systems are discussed in detail in Section III-B of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no cumulatively significant impacts related to water and sewer systems will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Cumulative or area wide impacts related to water and wastewater systems are documented within EMWD regional plans including water supply, water treatment and wastewater treatment. Development and demands of the Project are consistent with, and anticipated by, these plans. Connection and use fees paid by the Project will further the implementation and maintenance of these plans. There are no known or probable potentially significant offsite development proposals that would not, or could not, implement necessary improvements and/or pay mandated connection and use fees; or that would otherwise adversely interact with, or compound Project -related water and wastewater systems impacts, and so be determined to be cumulatively significant. It is assumed that other development projects within the cumulative impact area will be realized consistent with development anticipated by the adopted UWMP and regional water and wastewater treatment plans; provide appropriate water and wastewater system improvements; and pay connection and use fees providing for improvement and maintenance of serving water and sewer systems thereby reducing potential 44 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations cumulative impacts. Based on the preceding discussion, the Project's potential contribution to cumulative impacts in regard to water and wastewater conveyance/treatment services, and water supply is not considerable, and the cumulative effects of the Project are less -than -significant. (DEIR, pgs. III-61 and 62) Therefore, no mitigation is required. 13. Fire Protection Services a. Government Facilities — Fire Protection Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection services. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to government facilities are discussed in detail Section III-C of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to government facilities will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project may incrementally increase demand for fire protection services, resulting in additional staffing or equipment requirements. However, based on the availability of existing facilities and services to the subject site, the Project will not result in a potential need or requirement for new physical facilities, the construction of which would result in potentially significant environmental impacts. (DEIR, pg. III-65) Nor will the Project cause substantial adverse physical effects from the construction of new or altered government facilities needed to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for fire protection services. The Project Applicant will participate in the existing Riverside County Fire Protection Impact Mitigation Program, and will pay all required development impact mitigation fees (Ordinance No. 659 fees). Development impact fees, as well as property tax revenues, are made available to the County Fire Department, and provide funding for supplemental fire protection services serving the developing area which includes the Project site. (DEIR, pg. III-63) Accordingly, any impact related to government facilities would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. 45 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations b. Cumulative Impacts Related to Fire Protection Services Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to fire protection services. Findings: Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to fire protection services are discussed in detail in Section III-C of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no cumulatively significant impacts related to fire protection services will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project site plan and building plans are subject to review and approval by the Riverside County Fire Department. Areawide demands for fire protection and emergency medical response services are funded through payment of taxes and fees that support government services. (DEIR, pg. III-66) Tax revenues and fees generated by the Project will contribute to City funds available to improve facilities and equipment, and hire and train additional staff. There are no known or probable potentially significant off -site development proposals that would not, or could not, provide appropriate fire protection/fire prevention measures, and contribute fees and taxes toward fire protection services and improvements; or that would otherwise adversely interact with, or compound Project -related fire protection services impacts. It is assumed that other development projects within the cumulative impact area will be realized consistent with City and/or County fire protection and fire suppression requirements, and will contribute fees and taxes toward maintenance and enhancement of areawide fire protection services thereby reducing potential cumulative impacts. i As supported by the preceding discussions, the Project's potential contribution to cumulative impacts in regard to fire protection services is not considerable, and the cumulative effects of the Project are less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. III-67) Accordingly, no mitigation is required. 14. Law Enforcement Services a. Government Facilities — Law Enforcement Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause 46 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for law enforcement services. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to government facilities are discussed in detail Section III-D of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to government facilities will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Construction of new commercial/retail land uses introduced within the County acts to generally increase the demand for law enforcement services. However, expansion of Sheriffs Department/Menifee Police Department ("MPD") facilities and services occurs as the need arises, and is not linked to specific development projects. Acting to reduce incremental service demands, each project is reviewed by the Department to ensure that adequate and appropriate safety and security features are incorporated in facility and site designs. The MPD will continue to be involved in the review of development projects to ensure the MPD's concerns are addressed in the Project design. (DEIR, pg. III-69) The Project will pay all required fees as specified under Ordinance No. 659. Development impact fees generated by the Project will be allocated to finance law enforcement services. Additionally, the Project will generate sales tax revenues that will provide revenue to the City of Menifee. At the discretion of the City Commission, this revenue could be earmarked to provide additional or supplemental MPD services. (DEIR p. III-70) Accordingly, any impact related to government facilities would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. b. Cumulative Impacts Related to Law Enforcement Services Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to law enforcement services. Findings: Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to law enforcement services are discussed in detail in Section III-D of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no cumulatively significant impacts related to law enforcement services will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project site and building plans are subject to review and approval by the MPD. Areawide demands for law enforcement services are funded through 47 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations payment of taxes and fees that support government services. Tax revenues and fees generated by the Project will contribute to City funds available to improve facilities and equipment, and hire and train additional staff and officers. Service providers, in combination with City decision - makers, will ultimately determine the most effective use of revenues generated by the Project, and how these may be employed for the provision and enhancement of police protection services. (DEIR, pg. III-70) There are no known or probable potentially significant off -site development proposals that would not, or could not, provide appropriate security and safety measures, and contribute fees and taxes toward police protection services and improvements; or that would otherwise adversely interact with, or compound, Project -related law enforcement services impacts. It is assumed that other development projects within the cumulative impact area will be realized consistent with City and/or County law enforcement requirements, and will contribute fees and taxes toward maintenance and enhancement of areawide law enforcement services thereby reducing potential cumulative impacts. As supported by the preceding discussions, the Project's potential contribution to cumulative impacts in regard to law enforcement services is not considerable, and the cumulative effects of the Project are less -than - significant. (DEIR, pg. III-71) Accordingly, no mitigation is required. 15. Utilities a. Electricity, Natural Gas, Communication Systems Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would impact electricity, natural gas, or communication systems facilities requiring or resulting in the construction of new facilities or the expansion of existing facilities; the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to electricity, natural gas, or communication systems are discussed in detail in Section III-E of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to electricity, natural gas, or communication systems will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: All dry utilities with sufficient capacity are available to serve the Project. Project connections to these utilities will be realized consistent with the 48 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations affected purveyor's requirements. In this regard, it is recognized that existing electric, gas, or communications distribution and service lines may be affected by Project development. Standard subsurface construction practices, including calling "Dig Alert" to determine whether subsurface lines exist in the vicinity of proposed construction activities, would ensure that utility services are not disrupted. (DEIR, pg. III-74) Accordingly, any impacts related to electricity, natural gas, or communication systems would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. b. Storm Water Drainage Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would impact storm water- drainage facilities requiring or resulting in the construction of new facilities or the expansion of existing facilities; the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to storm water drainage are discussed in detail in Section III-E of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to storm water drainage will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Storm water drainage improvements necessary to serve the Project will be designed implemented and maintained consistent with responsible agency requirements. With implementation of proposed improvements, developed storm water discharges will be detained and conveyed in a manner that does not adversely affect on -site or off -site uses. (DEIR, pg. III-74) Accordingly, any impacts related to storm water drainage would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. C. Street Lighting Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would impact street lighting facilities requiring or resulting in the construction of new facilities or the expansion of existing facilities; the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to street lighting are discussed in detail in Section III-E of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to street lighting will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. 49 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Facts in Support of the Findings: Street lighting will be provided and maintained consistent with applicable provisions of County Ordinance No. 461. Roadway improvements proposed by, or realized pursuant to, the Project will be designed and implemented consistent with City requirements. Long-term maintenance of roads will be provided consistent with existing maintenance programs, funded at least in part by fees and taxes generated by the Project. Moreover, as designed and implemented, commercial/retail uses proposed by the Project are considered to be compatible with vicinity land uses, and uses proposed by the Project do not incorporate or exhibit elements or aspects that would result in substantial effects related to street lighting, roads, or other governmental services. (DEIR, pg. III-75) Accordingly, any impacts related to street lighting would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. d. Maintenance of Public Facilities, Including Roads Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would impact maintenance of public facilities, including roads requiring or resulting in the construction of new facilities or the expansion of existing facilities; the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to maintenance of public facilities, including roads are discussed in detail in Section III-E of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to maintenance of public facilities, including roads will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no i mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: The Project will comply with California Building Code (CBC) and Uniform Fire Code (UFC) requirements. CBC and UFC requirements applicable to the Project identify mandatory building design and construction techniques that reduce, or eliminate, potential impacts related to provision of public utilities and services. These include, but are not limited to, fire protection measures incorporated in the CBC and UFC; and energy and water conservation measures outlined in the CBC. Roads adjacent to the Project site will be improved as part of the site development. Areawide roadway improvements are financed on a pro-rata basis, based on the Project's contribution to the County -wide TUMF Program and the City's Development Impact Fee. Street maintenance is financed through a contribution of 50 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations various use and general fund taxes. (DEIR, pg. III-75) Accordingly, any impacts related to maintenance of public facilities, including roads would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. e. Conflict with Adopted Energy Conservation Plans Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in significant impacts related to a conflict with adopted energy conservation plans. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to a conflict with adopted energy conservation plans are discussed in detail in Section III-E of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to a conflict with adopted energy conservation plans will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Potential utilities and service systems/energy impacts of the Project are addressed under existing State statutes which expressly require use of energy efficient and water conserving technologies. These statutes include, but are not limited to: Title 24 Energy Conservation Standards, Health & Safety Code Section 17921.3 (low -flush toilets), and Government Code Section 7800 (water efficient faucet fixtures in public facilities). With specific regard to energy conservation, as discussed in detail at EIR Section II.J, the Project incorporates design features and operational aspects which in combination, provide energy conservation efficiencies that meet or surpass the State's Title 24 performance standards. (DEIR, pg. III-75) ` Accordingly, any impact related to a conflict with adopted energy conservation plans would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. f. Cumulative Impacts Related to Utilities Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to utilities. Findings: Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to utilities are discussed in detail in Section III-E of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no cumulatively significant impacts related to utilities will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required 51 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Facts in Support of the Findings: There are no known or probable potentially significant offsite development proposals that would not, or could not, implement necessary improvements, provide funding toward services and improvements; or that would otherwise adversely interact with, or compound Project -related utilities systems impacts, and so be determined to be cumulatively significant. It is assumed that, like the Project, other development proposals within the cumulative impact areas will similarly participate in the funding, modification, and improvement area utilities, and that all development will be designed, implemented, and operated consistent with oversight agency requirements, thereby reducing potential cumulative impacts. Based on the preceding discussion, the Project's potential contribution to cumulative public services/utilities impacts is not considerable, and the cumulative effects of the Project are less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. III-76) Therefore, no mitigation is required. 16. Solid Waste a. Landfill Capacity Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project is served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to landfill capacity are discussed in detail in Section III-F of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to landfill capacity will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Waste generation factors available from California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) indicate that the Project will generate approximately 13 pounds of solid waste per 1,000 square feet of commercial development. (DEIR, pgs. III-77 and 78) Using this factor it can be estimated that the Project will generate approximately 3,133 pounds (or 1.6 tons) of solid waste per day. Based on this calculation, solid waste generated by the Project would comprise approximately 0.04 percent of the landfill's permitted daily throughput. In addition to the above estimates of solid waste generated daily by the Project when fully occupied, it is estimated that Project -related construction activities will generate approximately 16 pounds per 1,000 square feet of building construction. This equation results in an estimated 2 tons of construction refuse likely to be 52 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations generated throughout the Project construction period. Assuming buildout of the entire Project within one year, total construction -related solid waste generation from the Project represents approximately 0.05 percent of the landfill's permitted daily throughput. Based on the preceding discussion, solid waste generated by the Project does not represent a substantial portion of the El Sobrante Landfill's existing capacity, nor will waste generated by the Project noticeably affect daily operations of the landfill. (DEIR, pg. III-78) Accordingly, any impacts related to landfill capacity would be less -than -significant and no mitigation is required. b. Solid Waste Regulations Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would comply with federal, state,, and local statutes and regulations related to solid wastes (including the County Integrated Waste Management Plan, "CIWMP") Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to solid waste regulations are discussed in detail in Section III-F of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to solid waste regulations will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Cities are required to prepare a Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) for approval by Cal Recycle. Counties must also develop Integrated Solid Waste Management Plans incorporating the plans for all cities located within the subject county. (DEIR, pg. III-78) Existing City and County Ordinances and the County SRRE address ` the storage of refuse within the Project boundaries; collection and disposal of any household and commercial hazardous wastes; and collection and disposal of construction wastes. In compliance with State law, the Project will comply with and implement applicable recycling programs and SRRE requirements. Accordingly, the potential for the Project to conflict with federal, State and local statues and regulations related to solid waste is considered less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. III-79) Therefore, no mitigation is required. C. Cumulative Impacts Related to Solid Waste Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to solid waste. 53 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations r Findings: Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to solid waste are discussed in detail in Section III-F of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no cumulatively significant impacts related to solid waste will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Project -related impacts to solid waste management systems are less -than -significant. There are no known or probable potentially significant offsite development proposals that would not, or could not, comply with local SRRE mandates; or that would otherwise adversely interact with, or compound Project -related solid waste management systems impacts, and so be determined to be cumulatively significant. Potential cumulative impacts of the Project and all other uses served by the Landfill are reduced through mandated compliance with local Source Reduction and Recycling Elements. In the long-term and on a regional basis, new landfill areas are created and/or are expanded to meet projected demands. Based on the preceding discussions, the Project's potential contribution to cumulative solid waste management systems impacts is not considerable, and the cumulative effects of the Project are less -than -significant. (DEIR pg. III-79) Therefore, no mitigation is required. 17. Disaster Preparedness a. Disaster Preparedness Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in significant impacts related to disaster preparedness. Findings: Potential impacts of the Project related to disaster preparedness are discussed in detail in Section III-G of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no significant impacts related to disaster preparedness will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Project design and operational elements, provisions of the existing Riverside County Multi -Hazard Functional Plan, and compliance with General Plan Safety Element Policies act to effectively reduce potential hazards and support the Project's disaster preparedness. Project -related impacts to, or affecting, disaster preparedness are therefore determined to be less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. III-82) Therefore, no mitigation is required. b. Cumulative Impacts Related to Disaster Preparedness 54 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Potential Significant Impact: Whether the Project would result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to disaster preparedness. Findings: Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to disaster preparedness are discussed in detail in Section III-G of the DEIR. Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that no cumulatively significant impacts related to disaster preparedness will occur as a result of development of the Project and, therefore, no mitigation is required. Facts in Support of the Findings: Disaster preparedness and disaster response planning have been undertaken on a Countywide basis as part of the Riverside County Multi -Hazard Functional Plan, which establishes the responsibilities of various County agencies in times of -a disaster. This Plan is prepared under the extensive guidelines of the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services to ensure the effective management of emergency operations. (DEIR, pg. III-82) There are no known or probable potentially significant offsite development proposals that would not, or could not, incorporate necessary physical and operational attributes minimizing exposures to hazards, implement provisions of the County's Multi -Hazard Functional Plan, and comply with General Plan Safety Element Policies; or that would otherwise adversely interact with, or compound Project -related disaster preparedness impacts, and so be determined to be cumulatively significant. It is anticipated that other development proposals within the cumulative impact area will similarly incorporate design and operational attributes that minimize hazards exposure, will implement provisions of the existing Riverside County Multi -Hazard Functional Plan, and will comply with General Plan Safety Element Policies. Based on the preceding discussions, the Project's potential contribution to cumulative disaster preparedness impacts is not considerable, and the cumulative effects of the Project are less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. III-83) Therefore, no mitigation is required. C. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF LESS - THAN -SIGNIFICANT Public Resources Code Section 21081 states that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been completed which identifies one or more significant effects unless the public agency makes one or more of the following findings I. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project 55 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. II. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency. III. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR, and overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the Project outweigh the significant effects on the environment. The following issues from nine of the environmental categories analyzed in the EIR, including Seismic Safety; Soils, Slopes and Erosion; Hydrology and Water Quality; Noise; Air Quality; Biological Resources; Energy Resources; Cultural Resources; and Traffic and Circulation were found to be potentially significant, but can be mitigated to a less -than - significant level with the imposition of mitigation measures. This Commission hereby finds pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 that all potentially significant impacts listed below can and will be mitigated to below a level of significance by imposition of the mitigation measures in the EIR; and that these mitigation measures are included as Conditions of Approval and set forth in the MMRP adopted by this Commission. Specific findings of this Commission for each category of such impacts are set forth in detail below. 1. Seismic Safetv a. Risk of Loss, Injury or Death Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death. Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to seismic safety, including risk of loss, injury or death to a less -than -significant level: II. B.1 The Project Applicant shall comply with all design and construction recommendations presented in the Geotechnical Investigation addressing over - excavation and re -engineering of loose soils and/or fill within the Project site. A 56 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations qualified geotechnical engineer shall be retained on site to ensure that Project implementation is realized consistent with specifications and requirements identified in the Project Geotechnical Investigation, and summarized at Attachment I to Table V-1. II. B.2 Prior to the issuance of construction permits, and to the satisfaction of the City, the Project Applicant shall ensure that the recommendations, performance standards and requirements established within the Project Geotechnical Investigation which address potential seismic settlement hazards are incorporated into the Project design and construction plans. A qualified geotechnical engineer shall be retained on site to ensure that Project implementation is realized consistent with specifications and requirements identified in the Project Geotechnical Investigation, and summarized at Attachment I to Table V-1. Facts in Support of the Finding: Similar to most areas in Southern California, the potential exists for seismic ground shaking to occur on the Project site. Application of seismic design and construction practices, identified within the California Building Code and related City Building Codes will minimize the effects of earthquakes upon structures, to the extent feasible. Further, the Project is located outside identified County Fault Zones, as well as existing State -designated Alquist-Priolo zones. In addition, the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation concluded that the potential for liquefaction and associated adverse effects within the site is considered low. However, based on site subsurface conditions and the moderate to high seismicity of the region, any loose fill materials at the site would be vulnerable to seismic -induced settlement. (DEIR, pg. II-26) However, with implementation of Mitigation Measures II.B.1 and II.B.2 this impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (DEIR, pg. II-27) b. Unstable Soil/Ground Subsidence Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially 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 ground subsidence. 57 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures II.B.1 and II.B.2, enumerated in Section C(1)(a) above, will reduce potential impacts to unstable soil/ground subsidence to a less -than - significant level. Facts in Support of the Finding: Based on site subsurface conditions and the moderate to high seismicity of the region, any loose fill materials at the site would be vulnerable to seismic - induced settlement. (DEIR, pg. II-31) However, with implementation of Mitigation Measures II.B.1 and II.B.2 this impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (DEIR, pg. II-27) C. Cumulative Impacts Related to Seismic Safety Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to seismic safety. Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures II.B.1 and II.B.2, enumerated in Section C(1)(a) above, will reduce potentially significant cumulative impacts related to seismic safety to a less -than -significant level. Facts in Support of the Finding: No unique geologic features are present within the Project site or vicinity. Similar to most areas in Southern California, the potential exists for seismic ground shaking to occur at the Project site. Application of seismic design and construction practices, identified within the California Building Code and related City Building Codes, in addition to those required by Mitigation Measure II.B.1, will minimize the effects of earthquakes upon structures, to the extent feasible. Accordingly, the Project's potential seismic safety impacts are less -than -significant as mitigated. (DEIR, pg. II-31 and 32) 2. Soils, Slopes and Erosion a. Soil Erosion/Loss of Topsoil Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to soil erosion/loss of topsoil to a less -than -significant level: 58 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations II. C.1 During clearing, grading, earthmoving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease. H. C.2 During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the late morning, after work is completed for the day, and whenever winds exceed 15 miles per hour. H..C3 Immediately after clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavation is completed, the entire area of -disturbed soil shall be treated until the area is- paved or otherwise developed so that dust generation will not occur. H. C 4 Soil stockpiled for more than two (2) days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. II.CS Trucks transporting soil, sand, cut or fill materials, and/or construction debris to or from the site shall be tarped from the point of origin. Facts in Support of the Finding: Mitigation Measures II.C.1 to II.C.5 will minimize short- term potential erosion impacts associated with soils exposure during Project construction until the Project site is fully developed. Once implemented, the Project will decrease the amount of exposed soils (and therefore erosion) with the incorporation of impervious surfaces and landscaping. Accordingly, the Project's potential soil erosion/loss of topsoil impacts are less - than -significant as mitigated. (DEIR, pg. II-35 and 36) b. Expansive Soil Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property. Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to soil erosion/loss of topsoil to a less -than -significant level: II. C. 6 Prior to the issuance of construction permits, and to the satisfaction of the City, the Project Applicant shall ensure that the recommendations, performance 59 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations standards and requirements established within the Project Geotechnical Investigation which address potential soils settlement hazards are incorporated into the Project design and construction plans. A qualified geotechnical engineer shall be retained on -site to ensure that Project implementation is realized consistent with specifications and requirements identified in the Project Geotechnical Investigation, and summarized at Attachment 1 to Table I.E-2. Facts in Support of the Finding: On -site soils, described above, together with the alluvial/colluvial soils, have relatively low strength characteristics and are potentially highly compressible when saturated. Below these surficial soils are considered moderately compressible denser gravelly, silty sand and gravelly sand soils, which are considered moderately strong to strong and slightly compressible under saturated conditions. Due to the relatively low strength characteristics of these on -site soils, the majority of the surficial soils will be removed, and may be saturated, compacted, and reused as engineered fills within the Project site. With implementation of Mitigation Measure II.C.6 this impact will be reduced to a less -than - significant level. (DEIR, pgs. II-36 and 37) C. Cumulative Impacts Related to Soils, Slopes and Erosion Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to soils, slopes, and erosion. Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures II.C.1 to II.C.6, enumerated in Sections i C(2)(a) & (b) above, will reduce potentially significant cumulative impacts related to soils, slopes and erosion to a less -than -significant level. Facts in Support of the Finding: The Project's potential soils, slopes, and erosion impacts are less -than -significant, or less -than -significant as mitigated. On -site soils are considered moderately compressible under saturated conditions. The majority of the surficial soils on the Project site will need to be replaced with engineered fill prior to Project development. As such, mitigation has been proposed to reduce potential excessive soil settlement and potential soils - related impacts. The Project site does not contain valuable or unique soils, and will have no impact in this regard. (DEIR, pg. II-37) The Safety Element of the General Plan presents broadly applicable information regarding potential slope and soil hazards, while the Land Use Element 60 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations provides policies that guide development away from hillsides and areas of known geotechnical instability, and, where significant slopes are encountered, requires appropriate engineering solutions. The Project site is essentially level, with no substantive internal or adjacent slopes. The Project's potential impact related to slopes is less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. II-38) Potential erosion impacts at the Project site are mitigated through Project design and operational features, and conformance with applicable regulatory requirements. More specifically, Mitigation Measures II.C.1 through II.C.5 will minimize potential erosion impacts associated with soils exposure during Project construction until the Project site is fully developed. Throughout Project construction, water erosion impacts are effectively reduced through implementation of mandated Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program requirements and associated BMPs. On this basis, the Project's potential impacts related to erosion are less -than - significant. (DEIR, pg. II-38) 3. Hydrology and Water Ouality a. Water Quality Standards Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements; and/or otherwise substantially degrade water quality. Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to water quality standards to a less -than -significant level: AE.1. The Treatment Control BMP System shall be implemented as stipulated in the final Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the Project, or as approved by the City of Menifee. Facts in Support of the Finding: Storm water runoff from paved surfaces within the Project area could carry a variety of urban wastes, including greases and oils and small amounts of metals which are common by-products of vehicular travel. In addition, storm runoff will likely contain residual amounts of fertilizers and plant additives washed off from landscaped areas within the Project site. The preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the Project indicates that the following Treatment Control BMP system components will be incorporated into the Project design to address storm water filtration: (1) Bioretention Cells - 61 W875-Menifee_CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Thirteen bioretention cells have been sited throughout to remove sediments, trash, metals, bacteria, organics, oils and grease and nutrients from the storm water; (2) Grate Inlet Skimmers - Fifteen grate inlet skimmer boxes have been sited to filter water that will enter the underground retention basins. The skimmers use a hydrocarbon boon to actively absorb oils and grease before the water enters the underground basins; (3) Trench Drain Filter Inserts - Two trench drain filter inserts, using a hydrocarbon boon process, will be placed by the loading docks to remove trash, debris, oil and grease from entering the storm water system. The Treatment Control BMP system also includes the use of underground detention ponds. These ponds, while not intended to treat storm water, serve to retain pre -filtered water, prior to release into the area flood control system. Accordingly, with implementation of Mitigation Measure ILEA this impact will be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (DEIR pgs. II-55 to II-58) 4. Noise a. Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity, primarily to the residentially zoned vacant property to the north, above levels existing without the project. Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to ambient noise levels to a less -than -significant level: ` H..E 6 A noise barrier, minimum 11 feet in height, shall be constructed along the northern property line prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy. This noise barrier shall be a continuous structure without gaps or gates, constructed to either: (a) provide a minimum surface density of four (4) pounds per square foot, and be lined with sound absorptive panels on the side facing the Parcel 1 building; or (b) use sound absorptive masonry blocks (e.g., SoundBlox) to provide an equivalent degree of noise protection. RE 7 Truck delivery and dock activities shall be prohibited after 8: 00 p.m. H.E8 Trash compactor usage shall be prohibited after 8: 00 p.m. 62 W875-Menifee CA--528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Facts in Support of the Finding: Mitigated daytime noise levels will be reduced to 50.4 to 51.5 dBA Leq at the nearest sensitive receptors. When added to the daytime ambient noise level, the Project will contribute 0.9 to 1.2 dBA Leq. These noise levels are below the City's standard of 65 dBA Leq. In addition, mitigated noise levels would create a barely perceptible (less than 3.0 dBA) noise increase. (DEIR, pg. II-92) The quietest nighttime ambient noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors are currently 52.9 dBA Leq and 50.0 dBA Leq, respectively. These ambient noise levels already exceed the City nighttime standard of 45 dBA. With the acoustical reductions from the recommended 11-foot wall, the noise levels at the adjacent homes will range from 51.1 to 53.5 dBA Leq, resulting in a Project contribution ranging from 0.6 to 1.1 dBA Leq. Although these levels will still remain above the nighttime standard of 45 dBA Leq, Project operations would create a barely perceptible (less than 3.0 dBA) noise increase. (DEIR, pgs. II- 92 and II-93). Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measures II.F.6 to II.F.8 will reduce Project impacts related to a permanent increase in ambient noise levels to a less -than -significant level. 5. Air Oualitv a. Localized Air Quality Impacts Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially exceed Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs). Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to localized air quality to a less -than -significant level: H. G.1 Adhere to best management practices which include the application of water on disturbed soils three times per day, covering haul vehicles, replanting disturbed areas as soon as practical and restricting vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph or less, to control fugitive dust. H. G.2 During construction activities, construction equipment shall be properly maintained to ensure proper timing and tuning of engines. Equipment maintenance records and equipment design specification data sheets shall be kept on -site during construction activity. 63 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations H. G.3 Contractor shall ensure use of low -sulfur diesel fuel in construction equipment as required by the California Air Resources Board (CARE)1SCAQMD Rule 431.2 (diesel fuel with sulfur content of 15 ppm by weight or less). H. G.4 Contractor shall utilize Zero-VOC paints (assumes no more than 103 gram/liter Of VOC). H. G. S Wheel washers shall be installed where vehicles enter and exit the construction site onto paved roads or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip- H. G. 6 A construction relations officer shall be appointed to act as a community liaison concerning on -site construction activity including resolution of issues related to PM10 generation. H.G.7 Non -toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied according to manufacturers' specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten (10) days or more). II. G.8 Water shall be applied three (3) times daily, or non -toxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications, to all unpaved parking or staging areas or unpaved road surfaces. H. G.9 All roads and road shoulders shall be paved. H. G.10 Traffic speeds on all unpaved roads shall be 15 mph or less. H. G.11 Streets shall be swept at the end of each day if visible soil is carried onto adjacent public paved roads. Reclaimed water shall be used, if feasible. H. G.12 Electricity from power poles shall be used rather than temporary diesel or gasoline power generators. H. G.13 Dedicated turn lanes shall be provided for the movement of construction trucks and equipment on- and off -site. Construction equipment shall meet or exceed Tier 2 standards and be equipped with oxidation catalysts and particulate traps. 64 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 r Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations H. G.14 Construction activities that affect traffic flow on the arterial system shall be scheduled to off-peak hours to the extent practicable. Facts in Support of the Finding: Unmitigated localized construction emissions will exceed applicable thresholds for PM1o. (DEIR, pg. II-127) As indicated in Table II.G-l1 of the EIR, compliance with the SCAQMD Rules and application of Mitigation Measures II.G.1 through II.G.14 (for construction impacts) will ensure that Project construction emissions will not exceed the Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs). (DEIR, pg. II-129) Accordingly, impacts in this regard are considered less -than -significant. b. Greenhouse Gases and Global Warming Potential Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially result in a significant impact to global climate change. Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to global climate change to a less -than -significant level: II.J.1 Energy efficiencies that meet or surpass California Title 24 energy efficiency standards shall be achieved through building construction and design. H..J.2 Installation of skylights and energy efficient lighting that exceeds California Title 24 standards shall be installed where feasible throughout the Project, including the use of electronic dimming ballasts and computer -controlled daylight sensors in the Wal-Mart building. H..J.3 Exterior signage that utilizes light -emitting diode (LED) lighting that is approximately 70 percent more efficient than fluorescent signage shall be utilized by the Wal-Mart building. II.J.4 Space conditioning systems that exceed California Title 24 energy efficiency standards shall be installed throughout the Project. Furthermore, a system to capture waste heat from refrigeration equipment for use in heating water for kitchen uses shall be installed in the Wal-Mart building. H..JS The Wal-Mart building shall install a white roof membrane to reduce the building's cooling load. W875-Menifee_CA -- 528368.1 RE, r Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations II.J.6 Low flow, sensor activated faucets as well as high -efficiency toilets shall be installed in restrooms. II.J.7 An energy management system shall be installed in the Wal-Mart building to allow for remote monitoring and adjustment of building energy usage, including lighting, HVAC, and refrigeration systems to maximize efficiency. H..J.8 Integrally colored concrete floors shall be utilized instead of carpet and vinyl throughout the Wal-Mart building, and elsewhere within the Project where feasible, thereby reducing environmental concerns resulting from the manufacture and disposal of these products, along with reducing the need for chemical cleaning agents, wax and wax strippers. II.J.9 The Wal-Mart building shall be constructed with 100 percent recycled structural steel produced by suppliers who use high efficient electric arc furnaces that require 50 percent less energy than traditional methods. II.J.10 The Wal-Mart building shall utilize recycled plastic for base boards and for the majority ofplastic shelving. Facts in Support of the Finding: Project design attributes and elements will act to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. These attributes and elements included enhanced energy conservation, surpassing the Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards by a minimum of five percent; and compliance with state and federal regulatory programs promoting the efficient use of energy. (DEIR, pgs. II-163 to II-168). Accordingly, the potential for the Project to contribute to a significant global impact by conflicting with or obstructing state goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions as dictated by AB 32 is less -than -significant. (DEIR, pg. II- 168) Likewise, the Project's potential to substantively contribute to global climate change through GHG emissions is determined to be less -than -significant. In addition, it is conservatively estimated that inclusion of the Project design features presented in Section II-G of the EIR and listed as Mitigation Measures II.J.1 through II.J.10 will yield a net reduction in commercial energy use emissions, commercial water use emissions, and commercial natural gas use emissions by approximately 20 percent. (DEIR, pg. II- 168). Accordingly, impacts in this regard are considered less -than -significant. 66 W875-Menifee_CA -- 528368.1 r Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations 6. Biological Resources a. Burrowing Owl Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could have an adverse effect on the Burrowing Owl, a special -status wildlife species. Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to the Burrowing Owl to a less -than -significant level: H..H.1 A preconstruction presence/absence survey will be conducted by a qualified biologist, currently holding an MOU with the County, and the results must be submitted to the Riverside County Environmental Programs Department (EPD) for review and approval. If any owls are observed and cannot be avoided per the CDFG Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines then a burrowing owl relocation plan shall be prepared and submitted to EPD and appropriate wildlife agencies for review and approval. All relocation plans and mitigation will be in accordance with the MSHCP and CDFG Burrowing Owl Guidelines. Facts in Support of the Finding: Per the MSHCP, (Section 6.3.2 and Appendix E, "Summary of Species Survey Requirements"), for locations with positive burrowing owl survey results that are within the Criteria Area, if the site contains, or is an area supporting less than 35 acres of suitable habitat, or the survey reveals that the site and the surrounding area supports fewer than three pairs of Burrowing Owls, then on -site Burrowing Owls can be passively or actively relocated following accepted protocols. The Project site conforms to the above guidelines in that only limited isolated patches of "habitat" exist, and owl burrows were unoccupied as observed during surveys of the subject site. (DEIR, pg. II-189) Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measure II.H.1 will reduce Project impacts related to the Burrowing Owl to a less -than -significant level. b. California Horned Lark Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could have an adverse effect on the California Horned Lark, a special -status wildlife species. W875-Menifee CA--528368.1 67 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to the California Horned Lark to a less -than -significant level: H..H.2 All initial ground disturbing activities shall be limited to the time period between September I and February 1. If initial Project specific site disturbance, grading, and vegetation removal cannot be conducted during this time period, pre - construction surveys for active nests within the limits of the Project shall be conducted by a qualified biologist. Surveys shall be conducted two weeks prior to any construction activities. The results of the pre -construction survey shall be submitted to EPD for review and approval prior to any site disturbance. H.H.3 If active nests or roosts are located, then all construction work must be conducted outside an established non -disturbance buffer zone at a distance established in consultation with the CDFG. No direct disturbance to nests shall occur until the young are no longer reliant on the nest site as determined by the approved qualified biologist. The approved biologist shall conduct monitoring of the nest until all young have fledged. Facts in Support of the Finding: This California Horned Lark was observed calling and foraging on and off -site during surveys of the site. No nests were observed on -site, and given the site's limited marginal habitat and the level of disturbance associated with agricultural activities, the California Horned Lark would not be expected to nest at the site. The amount of available foraging resources at the Project site is limited, and unlikely to provide for a significant proportion of any individual bird's needs. (DEIR, pgs. II-190 and II-191) Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measures II.H.2 and II.H.3 will reduce Project impacts related to the California Horned Lark to a less -than -significant level. C. Cooper's Hawk, Ferruginous Hawk, Northern Harrier, White - Tailed Kite, and Loggerhead Shrike Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could have an adverse effect on the Cooper's Hawk, Ferruginous Hawk, Northern Harrier, White -Tailed Kite, and Loggerhead Shrike. 68 W875-Menifee_CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures II.H.2 and II.H.3, enumerated in Section C(5)(b) above will reduce potential impacts to the Cooper's Hawk, Ferruginous Hawk Northern Harrier, White -Tailed Kite, and Loggerhead Shrike to a less -than -significant level. Facts in Support of the Finding: Five (5) special -status raptor and other bird species may forage at the Project site, including Cooper's Hawk, Ferruginous Hawk Northern Harrier, White - Tailed Kite, and Loggerhead Shrike. These birds are likely to forage on -site since they are reported nearby in the Riverside County MSHCP and reported by the California Natural Diversity Database ("CNDDB") in the Project vicinity. These raptor species are not expected to nest on -site due to a lack of required nesting/roosting habitat. Although regional availability of other foraging habitat exists nearby, removal of on -site resources may adversely affect these species. Therefore, potential impacts to these five raptor species would be considered potentially significant. (DEIR, pgs. II-193 and II-194) However, with implementation of Mitigation Measures II.H.2 and II.H.3 Project impacts related to the these five species will be reduced to a less -than -significant level. d. Riparian Habitat Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could have an adverse effect on a riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Finding: Implementation of the following Mitigation will reduce potential impacts to riparian habitat to a less -than -significant level: H.H.4 Prior to any earthmoving activities, the Project Applicant shall complete and submit to CDFG a notification package pursuant to Fish & Game Code section 1602, together with the requisite fee. Based on its review of the notification package, CDFG shall determine requisite Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA) measures. Such measures may include but are not limited to: • Avoiding potential impacts altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; • To the extent feasible, impacts will be minimized by limiting the degree or magnitude of disturbance; 69 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations • Rectifying any impacts by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environment; • Reducing or eliminating impacts over time by preservation and maintenance operations conducted over the life of the Project; and • Compensation for any impacts by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments. H.H.5 Prior to the issuance of grading permits or any site preparation activities, Best Management Practices (BMPs) must be installed by a qualified biologist to prevent downstream impacts to riparian/riverine habitat. BMPs will include, but are not limited to silt fencing. Once BMPs are in place, the Environmental Programs Department (Mr. Jared Bond (951) 955-0314) must be contacted directly for a site visit to verify proper BMPs. H.H.6 Should any grading or construction be proposed within or along the banks of any natural watercourse or wetland located on -site or on any required off -site improvement area, the permit holder shall provide written notification to the Planning Department that the appropriate Department of Fish & Game notification pursuant to Sections 160111603 of the Fish & Game Code has taken place. Or, the permit holder shall obtain an Agreement Regarding Proposed Stream or Lake Alteration" (Section 160111603 Permit). Copies of any agreement shall be submitted with the notification. Facts in Support of the Finding: Approximately 0.19 acres of the Project site are determined to be California Department of Fish & Game (CDFG) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) jurisdictional areas. No wetlands or riparian habitat exist within the Project site. The Project jurisdictional areas do not exhibit a preponderance of hydrophytic vegetation, and in most cases do not show evidence of hydric soils. (DEIR, pg. II-196) The referenced 0.19 acres of jurisdictional areas is determined to be nonwetland waters of the U.S., and does not constitute CDFG riparian habitat. All 0.19 acres of CDFG/SWRCB jurisdictional areas will be removed as a consequence of Project implementation. Because of the historical and cumulative loss of wetlands in the region and statewide, the permanent loss of 0.19 acre of CDFG jurisdiction and 70 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations waters of the State is considered a potentially significant impact. (DEIR, pg. II-198) Nevertheless, with implementation of Mitigation Measures II.HA to II.H.6 Project impacts related to riparian habitat will be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (DEIR, pg. II-200) 7. Energy Resources a. Energy Resources Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially result in or cause the inefficient or unwarranted uses of energy resources, or otherwise restrict use of available energy resources by others. Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures II.J.1 through II.J.10, enumerated in Section C(4)(b) above, will reduce potential impacts to energy resources to a less -than - significant level. Facts in Support of the Finding: To ensure their implementation throughout Project development and operations, standard Walmart building practices, design features, and operational attributes are incorporated into the EIR as Mitigation Measures II.J.1 through II.J.10. The Project, as a whole, will meet or exceed all Title 24 standards, and will provide and promote energy efficiencies beyond those required under other applicable State or federal standards and regulations. (DEIR, pgs. II-213 to II-217) Accordingly, with implementation of Mitigation Measures II.J.1 through II.J.10, Project impacts related to energy resources will be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (DEIR p. II-217) 8. Cultural Resources a. Archeological Sites/Resources Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially alter or destroy an archaeological site; and/or cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource. Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to archeological sites/resources to a less -than -significant level. H..K.Ia Archeologist Retained. While CA-RIV-635 could not be relocated and may have been mis-mapped by a previous investigation, it has been established that the 71 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations project area has a high sensitivity for prehistoric cultural resources. To mitigate for this potential, and pursuant to the recommendations of the Phase I Cultural Resources study (PD A-4506) prepared by McKenna et.al., dated June 25, 2007, the subject parcel has a moderate level of sensitivity for buried prehistoric resources. Therefore, prior to the issuance of rough grading permits, a qualified archaeologist (pursuant to the Secretary of the Interior's standards and County guidelines) shall be retained by the land divider for initial monitoring and mitigation services on the proposed grading with respect to potential impacts to archaeological and/or cultural resources. A pre -grade meeting between the archaeologist, the Native American tribal representative(s), and the excavation and grading contractor shall take place to discuss appropriate grading and ground disturbing methods within and around those archaeologically and culturally sensitive areas within the project. During grading operations, the archaeologist, the archaeologist's on -site representative(s) and the Native American tribal representative(s) shall actively monitor all project related grading and shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect, or halt grading activity to allow recovery of archaeological and/or cultural resources. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a copy of a fully executed contract for archaeological monitoring and mitigation services, including the NAME, ADDRESS and TELEPHONE NUMBER of the retained archaeologist shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Engineering Division. The extent of the monitoring will be determined after the grading plan has been finalized. (PLI-4) II.K.1 b Native American Monitoring. Tribal monitor(s) from the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians shall be required on -site during all ground disturbing activities, including grading, stockpiling of materials, engineered fill, rock crushing, etc. The land divider/permit holder shall retain a qualified tribal monitor from the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit a copy of a signed contract between the above mentioned Tribe and the land divider/permit holder for the monitoring 72 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations of the project, and which addresses the treatment of cultural resources, to the Planning Department and to the Engineering Department. The Native American Monitor(s) shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt the ground disturbance activities to allow recovery of cultural resources, in coordination with the Project Archaeologist. Should an agreement between the Tribe and the Applicant/Permittee not be established within 45 days of the date the Applicant/Permittee initiates such an agreement with the Tribe, Native American monitoring shall not be required. (PLI-4) H.K.3. Inadvertent Archeological Find. If during ground disturbance activities, unique cultural resources are discovered that were not assessed by the archaeological report(s) and/or environmental assessment conducted prior to project approval, the following procedures shall be followed. Unique cultural resources are defined, for this condition, as being multiple artifacts in close association with each other, but may include fewer artifacts if the area of the find is determined to be of significance due to its sacred or cultural importance in consultation with the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians. 1) All ground disturbance activities within 100 feet of the discovered cultural resources shall be halted until a meeting is convened between the developer, the archaeologist, the Native American tribal representative and the Planning Director to discuss the significance of the find. 2) At the meeting, the significance of the discoveries shall be discussed and after consultation with the Native American tribal representative and the archaeologist, a decision shall be made, with the concurrence of the Planning Director, as to the appropriate mitigation (documentation, recovery, avoidance, etc) for the cultural resources. 3) Grading of further ground disturbance shall not resume within the area of the discovery until an agreement has been reached by all parties as to the appropriate mitigation. (PLI-4) II.K.4 Cultural Resources Disposition Agreement. Prior to grading permit issuance, the applicant shall provide the Community Development Director evidence of a fully executed agreement with the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians that addresses the treatment and disposition of all cultural resources impacted as a 73 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 n Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations result of the development. The Developer shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including all archaeological artifacts that are of Native American origin, found in the project area to the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians for proper treatment and disposition. Should an agreement between the Tribe and the Applicant/Permittee not be established within 45 days of the Applicant's initiation of such an agreement, curation will be required in an approved curation facility within Riverside County. The Applicant/Permittee shall be responsible for all curation costs. (PLI-4) II. K.5 Archeological Monitoring Report. Prior to final inspection or occupancy, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Department one certified paper copy and two (2) PDF formatted CD copies of the Phase IV Cultural Resources Monitoring Report. The report shall follow the posted report scope of work on the Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency (TLMA) website and be certified by a Riverside County Registered Archaeologist. (PLI-4) Facts in Support of the Finding: The mitigation measures set forth above have been established in response to comments received from the Pechanga Bane of Luisefio Indians to ensure that the Project's potential cultural resource impacts are successfully mitigated. (FEIR, pg. IV-2) Accordingly, with implementation of mitigation Project impacts related to archeological resources will be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (DEIR, pgs. II-226 and II-227 and FEIR, pgs. IV-2 to IV-8) b. Human Remains Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially disturb human remains, including those interned outside of formal cemeteries. Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to human remains to a less -than -significant level. II.K.2 Human Remains. If human remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.989(b), remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final 74 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted within 24 hours. Subsequently, the Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the "most likely descendant" within 48 hours. The most likely descendant shall then make recommendations and engage in consultation concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. (PLI-4) Facts in Support of the Finding: The mitigation measure set forth above has been established in response to comments received from the Pechanga Bane of Luiseiio Indians to ensure that the Project's potential -cultural resource impacts are successfully mitigated. (FEIR, pg. IV-4) Accordingly, with implementation of mitigation Project impacts related to human remains will be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (See DEIR, pgs. II-227 and II-228 and FEIR, pg. III-38 to III-45) C. Paleontological Resources Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially affect a paleontological resource. Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources to a less -than -significant level. II. K.6 Paleontological Monitoring. This site is mapped in the County's General Plan as having a high potential for paleontological resources (fossils). Proposed project site grading/ earthmoving activities could potentially impact this resource. Hence, prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist approved by the County of Riverside to create and implement a project -specific plan for monitoring site grading/earthmoving activities (project paleontologist). H..K.7 PRIMP Requirements. The project paleontologist retained shall review the approved development plan and shall conduct any pre -construction work necessary to render appropriate monitoring and mitigation requirements as appropriate. These requirements shall be documented by the project paleontologist in a Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program 75 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations (PRIMP). This PRIMP shall be submitted to the County Geologist for review and approval prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. Information to be contained in the PRIMP, at a minimum and in addition to other industry standard and Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards, are as follows: A. The project paleontologist shall participate in a pre -construction project meeting with development staff and construction operations to ensure an understanding of any mitigation measures required during construction, as applicable. B. Paleontological monitoring of earthmoving activities will be conducted on an as - needed basis by the project paleontologist during all earthmoving activities that may expose sensitive strata. Earthmoving activities in areas of the project area where previously undisturbed strata will be buried but not otherwise disturbed will not be monitored. The project paleontologist or his/her assign will have the authority to reduce monitoring once he/she determines the probability of encountering fossils has dropped below an acceptable level. C. If the project paleontologist finds fossil remains, earthmoving activities will be diverted temporarily around the fossil site until the remains have been evaluated and recovered. Earthmoving will be allowed to proceed through the site when the project paleontologist determines the fossils have been recovered and/or the site mitigated to the extent necessary. D. If fossil remains are encountered by earthmoving activities when the project paleontologist is not onsite, these activities will be diverted around the fossil site and the project paleontologist called to the site immediately to recover the remains. E. If fossil remains are found; fossiliferous rock will be recovered from the fossil site and processed to allow for the recovery of smaller fossil remains. Test samples may be recovered from other sampling sites in the rock unit if appropriate. F. Any recovered fossil remains will be prepared to the point of identification and identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible by knowledgeable paleontologists. The remains then will be curated (assigned and labeled with and corresponding geologic and geographic site data will be archived (specimen and site numbers and corresponding data entered into appropriate museum repository catalogs and computerized data bases) at the museum repository by a laboratory technician. 76 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The remains will then be accessioned into the museum repository fossil collection, where they will be permanently stored, maintained, and, along with associated specimen and site data, made available for future study by qualified scientific investigators. The County of Riverside must be consulted on the repository/museum to receive the fossil material prior to being curated. G. A qualified paleontologist shall prepare a report of findings made during all site grading activity with an appended itemized list of fossil specimens recovered during grading (if any). This report shall be submitted to the County Geologist for review and approval prior to building final inspection as described elsewhere in this conditions set. All reports shall be signed by the project paleontologist and all other professionals responsible for the report's content (e.g., Professional Geologist, Professional Engineer, etc.), as appropriate. Two wet -signed original copies of the report shall be submitted directly to the office of the County Geologist along with a copy of this condition and the grading plan for appropriate case processing and tracking. These documents should not be submitted to the project Planner, the Plan Check staff, the Land Use Counter or any other County office. Facts in Support of the Finding: The mitigation measures set forth above have been established in response to comments received from the Riverside County Chief Engineering Geologist to ensure that the Project's potential paleontological resource impacts are successfully mitigated. (FEIR p. IV-6) Accordingly, with implementation of mitigation Project impacts related to human remains will be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (FEIR III-10 to III-14) 9. Traffic and Circulation a. Intersection Operations Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street (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); or exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion 77 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations management agency for designated road or highways. Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts related to intersection operations to a less -than -significant level. III A.1 The Project proponent shall be responsible for the design of traffic signals at the intersections of ■ Haun Road at Driveway B (aligned with the proposed commercial driveway for PP22279 located on the west side of Haun Road); ■ Antelope Road at Scott Road (modification); ■ Haun Road at Scott Road; and ■ Haun Road at Holland Road. Traffic signal interconnect shall be installed as approved by the Transportation Department, with no credit given for Traffic Signal Mitigation Fees or as approved by the Transportation Department. X..A.2 All improvements along Haun Road between Scott Road and the north property boundary shall be consistent with "Exhibit S D Conceptual Striping for Haun Road" prepared by Urban Crossroads, in the Project Traffic Study and dated June 2, 2008 (also presented in "Exhibit 27 Conceptual PP22279IWal-Mart Access Layout, " prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. and dated 1011012007) ` with the exception that the eastbound intersection approach on Scott Road shall have two (2) left -turn lanes, four (4) through -lanes, and one (1) right -turn lane. III A.3 The intersection of Haun Road at Driveway A (northern driveway) shall have right -turn in and right -turn out access only and shall be improved to provide the following geometrics: Northbound: One (1) through -lane, one (1) shared through/right-turn lane. Southbound: One (1) through -lane. Eastbound: One (1) right -urn lane. 78 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 e Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Westbound: NIA Note: At this driveway, only right turns in and out will be permitted. Left turns in and out will be prohibited. A full -width raised median will need to be provided to prevent left turns. III. A.4 The intersection of Haun Road at Driveway B (middle driveway) shall be aligned with the proposed commercial driveway for PP22279 to the west and shall be improved to provide the following geometrics: Northbound: Two (2) left -turn lanes (150' storage length plus taper for each lane), two (2) through lanes, one (1) right -turn lane. (The full -width raised median will be required to be constructed prior to Project opening with two (2) 150 foot long left -turn lanes for the future commercial driveway for PP22279) Southbound: Two (2) left -turn lanes (150' storage length plus taper for each lane), two (2) through lanes. Eastbound: N/A Westbound: Two (2) left -turn lanes, one (1) right -turn lane. The intersection shall be designed to accommodate the following ultimate geometrics: Northbound: Two (2) left -turn lanes (150' storage length plus taper for each lane), two (2) through lanes, one (1) right -turn lane. Southbound: Two (2) left -turn lanes (150' storage length plus taper for each lane), three (3) through lanes, one (1) right -turn lane. Eastbound: One (1) left -turn lane, one (1) through lane, one (1) right -turn lane. Westbound: Two (2) left -turn lanes, one (1) through lane, one (1) right - turn lane. W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 79 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations III. A. S The intersection of Haun Road at Driveway C (southern driveway) shall have right -turn in and right -turn out access only and shall be improved to provide the following geometrics: Northbound: Two (2) through lanes, one (1) right -turn lane. Southbound: Two (2) through lanes (the eastern through will become a left -turn lane at the intersection of Haun Road and Scott Road). Eastbound: N/A Westbound: One (1) right -turn lane. Note: At this driveway, only right turns in and out will be permitted. Left turns in and out will be prohibited. A full -width raised median will need to be provided to prevent left turns. III.A.6 The intersection of Haun Road at Scott Road shall be improved to provide the following geometrics: Northbound: One (1) left -turn lane, one (1) shared through/right-turn lane. Southbound: Two (2) left -turn lanes (the east lane with 400' of storage and the west lane shall extend north through the intersection with driveway B as the third Southbound through lane), one (1) through lane, one (1) right -turn lane. Eastbound: One (1) left -turn lane, one (1) through lane, one (1) right -turn lane. Westbound: One (1) left -turn lane, one (1) through lane, two (2) right -turn lanes with right turn overlap. Note: If at the time of Project opening, PP22279 has been constructed, then the geometry provided on the eastbound approach shall be two (2) left -turn lanes, two (2) through lanes, one (1) right -turn lane. 80 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations e The intersection shall be designed to accommodate the following ultimate geometrics: Northbound: Two (2) left -turn lanes, two (2) through lanes, two (2) right - turn lanes with right turn overlap phasing. Southbound: Two (2) left -turn lanes (the east lane with 400' of storage and the west lane shall extend north through the intersection with driveway B as the third southbound through lane), two (2) through lanes, one (1) right -turn lane. Eastbound: Two (2) left -turn lanes, four (4) through lanes, one (1) right - turn lane. Westbound: Two (2) left -turn lanes, three (3) through lanes, two (2) right - turn lanes with right turn overlap phasing. III. A. 7 The intersection of Haun Road at Holland Road shall be improved to provide the following geometrics: Northbound: One (1) left -turn lane, one (1) shared through/right-turn lane. Southbound: One (1) left -turn lane, one (1) shared through/right-turn lane. Eastbound: One (1) left -turn lane, one (1) through lane, one (1) right -turn lane. Westbound: One (1) left -turn lane, one (1) shared through/right-turn lane. III.A.8 The intersection of Antelope Road at Scott Road shall be improved to provide the following geometrics (or as approved by the Transportation Department). Northbound: Two (2) left -turn lanes, two (2) through lanes, one (1) right - turn lane. Southbound: One (1) left -turn lane, one (1) through lane, one (1) right - turn lane. W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 81 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Eastbound: One (1) left -turn lane, two (2) through lanes, one (1) right - turn lane. Westbound: One (1) left -turn lane, two (2) through lanes X..A.9 All improvements required by mitigation and Conditions of Approval are requirements for interim conditions only. Full right-of-way and roadway half sections adjacent to the property for the ultimate roadway cross-section per the County's Road Improvement Standards and Specifications must be provided. Any off -site widening required to provide these geometries shall be the responsibility of the landowner/developer. III.A.10 The Project proponent shall be required to provide traffic signal interconnect between the traffic signal at the intersection of Haun Road and Driveway B and the traffic signal to the south at Scott Road. The Project proponent shall also provide interconnection conduits extending north from the intersection of Haun Road at Driveway B to the project's north property boundary along Haun Road and shall make all provisions necessary for the ultimate interconnection of the traffic signal at Garbani Road. X.A.11 The Project proponent shall be required to provide traffic signal interconnect between the traffic signal at the intersection of Haun Road and Scott Road and the traffic signal to the east at the I-215 Southbound Ramps (or as approved by the Transportation Department). ` III A.12 All traffic signals shall be installed and operational prior to any building occupancy (unless otherwise approved). III A.13 Concurrent with the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall pay fees toward offsite improvements recommended in the final approved Traffic Impact Analysis and reflected at EIR Table HI.A-10. Fees shall be assessed and collected pursuant to applicable funding programs (DIF, TUMF, and/or RBBD). Facts in Support of the Finding: The Project will generate a net total of approximately 15,702 trip -ends per day with 878 vehicles per hour during the AM peak hour and 1,335 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. (DEIR, pg. III-25) Under Opening Year (2011) traffic 82 W875-Madfea CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations conditions, the following Study Area intersections are projected to operate at unacceptable levels of service during peak hours, under existing roadway configurations: (1) Murrieta Road at Scott Road; (2) Tucker Road at Scott Road; (3) Haun Road/Zeiders Road at: (a) Newport Road, (b) Holland Road, (c) Garbani Road, (d) Wickerd Road, (e) Scott Road, and (f) Keller Road; (4) I- 215 Southbound Ramps at Scott Road; (5) I-215 Northbound Ramps at Scott Road; (6) Antelope Road at: (a) Newport Road, (b) Scott Road, and (c) Keller Road; and (7) Menifee Road at: (a) Newport Road, (b) Garbani Road, (c) Wickerd Road, and (d) Scott Road. (DEIR, pgs. III-34 and II-35). Under Opening Year Conditions, all Study Area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service "D" or better during the peak hours with implementation of the identified improvements. (DEIR, pg. III-35) The above -reference mitigation measures have been designed to assure that all Study Area intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service with the addition of project traffic. (DEIR, pgs. III-35 and III-41) Accordingly, with implementation of Mitigation Measures III.A.1 through III.A.13, all Project -related traffic impacts at intersections will be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (DEIR, pg. III-46) b. Hazards to a Design Feature Potential Significant Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts related to hazards to a design feature to a less -than -significant level. X..A.14 The final approved Site Plan shall incorporate access and circulation improvements consistent with the Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency and City Conditions of Approval, recommendations presented in the Project TM (EIR Appendix G), and reflected graphically in the Project Site Access/Circulation Plan (EIR Figure HI.A-3). Where discrepancies or conflicts may occur within the above -referenced requirements, the City Engineer's direction shall take precedence. Facts in Support of the Finding: The mitigation measure set forth above will ensure adequate and appropriate site access and circulation. (DEIR, pg. III-48) Accordingly, with 83 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations implementation of mitigation Project impacts related to hazards to a design feature will be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (DEIR, pg. III-49) D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NOT FULLY MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF LESS -THAN -SIGNIFICANT The Menifee City Commission finds the following environmental impacts identified in the EIR remain significant even after application of all feasible mitigation measures: short-term construction noise impacts (individually and cumulatively); short-term construction air quality impacts; long-term operational air quality impacts; cumulative air quality impacts; cumulative traffic impacts to mainline freeway segments and freeway ramp operations. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15092(b)(2), the City Commission of the City of Menifee cannot approve the project unless it first finds (1) under Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3), and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), that specific economic, legal, social technological, or other considerations, including provisions of employment opportunities to highly trained workers make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the FEIR; and (2) under CEQA Guidelines section 15092(b), that the remaining significant affects are acceptable due to overriding concerns described in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 and, therefore, a statement of overriding considerations is included herein. 1. Noise a. Short -Term Construction Noise (Individually and Cumulatively): Local Standards Significant Unavoidable Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially result in the exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Finding: Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that this impact is potentially significant but will be reduced to the extent feasible through mitigation measures. The Commission finds that Mitigation Measures II.F.1 through II.F.5, presented below, are incorporated into the MMRP for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein. However, the Commission finds that even with application of these mitigation measures, short- 84 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations term construction -related noise impacts — both individually and cumulatively — are considered significant and unavoidable. HE Construction activities shall not occur between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. (June through September) and 6: 00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. (October through May), consistent with County of Riverside Ordinance 847, Section 2 (i). RF.2 During all Project site excavation and grading, all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with the manufacturers' standards. H.F.3 All stationary construction equipment shall be placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest sensitive noise receptors. H.F.4 During construction, equipment staging areas shall be located in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction -related noise sources and noise sensitive receptors. H.F.S Haul truck deliveries shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., unless otherwise restricted by City staff. Facts in Support of the Finding: Even with implementation of Mitigation Measures II.F.1 through II.F.5, the Project would exceed applicable noise level standards. Because maximum noise levels will exceed those presented in General Plan Noise Element Policy N 4.1 (namely, 65 dBA 10-minute Leq between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.), construction noise is considered a significant and unavoidable impact of the Project. (DEIR, pg. II-83). Cumulative noise impacts for the duration of construction activities are also recognized as significant. As such, short-term construction noise impacts are determined to be individually and cumulatively significant notwithstanding mitigation. (DEIR, pg. II-99) b. Short -Term Construction Noise (Individually and Cumulatively): Ambient Noise Levels Significant Unavoidable Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. 85 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding: Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that this impact is potentially significant but will be reduced to the extent feasible through mitigation measures. The Commission finds that Mitigation Measures II.F.1 through II.F.6, enumerated in Section D(1)(a) above, are incorporated into the MMRP for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein. However, the Commission finds that even with application of these mitigation measures, short-term construction -related noise impacts — both individually and cumulatively — are considered significant and unavoidable. Facts in Support of the Finding: Even with implementation of Mitigation Measures II.F.1 through II.F.5, the Project would result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity. It is expected that that residential land uses proximate to the Project site will experience temporary noise level increases during the grading phase of construction. (DEIR, pg. II-87). Average noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors will range from 64.9 to 67.6 dBA Leq, while maximum levels could reach 79.5 to 83.0 dBa Leq. Maximum levels would exceed those contained within General Plan Noise Element Policy N 4.1 (namely, 65 dBA 10-minute Leq between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.). As such, residential receptors located southerly of the Project site would likely experience a significant temporary/periodic increase in noise due to Project construction activities. Residentially zone property to the north of the Project site, however, is currently vacant and absent sensitive receptors, and therefore would not be adversely affected. (DEIR, pg. 1I-88) Cumulative noise impacts for the duration of construction activities are also recognized as significant. As such, short-term construction noise impacts are determined to be individually and cumulatively significant notwithstanding mitigation. (DEIR, pg. II-99) 2. Air Ouality a. Short -Term Construction Emissions Significant Unavoidable Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially violate an air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation; expose sensitive receptors which are located within 1 mile of the project site to substantial project point source emissions. 86 W875-Menifee CA--528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding: Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that this impact is potentially significant but will be reduced to the extent feasible through mitigation measures. The Commission finds that Mitigation Measures II.G.1 through II.G.14 are incorporated into the MMRP for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein. However, the Commission finds that even with application of these mitigation measures, construction emissions -related air quality impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. II. G.1 Adhere to best management practices which include the application of water on disturbed soils three times per day, covering haul vehicles, replanting disturbed areas as soon as practical and restricting vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph or less, to control fugitive dust. II. G.2 During construction activities, construction equipment shall be properly maintained to ensure proper timing and tuning of engines. Equipment maintenance records and equipment design specification data sheets shall be kept on -site during construction activity. II. G.3 Contractor shall ensure use of low -sulfur diesel fuel in construction equipment as required by the California Air Resources Board (CARB)/SCAQMD Rule 431.2 (diesel fuel with sulfur content of 15 ppm by weight or less). II. G.4 Contractor shall utilize Zero-VOC paints (assumes no more than 103 gram/liter Of VOC). ` II. G. S Wheel washers shall be installed where vehicles enter and exit the construction site onto paved roads or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip. II. G. 6 A construction relations officer shall be appointed to act as a community liaison concerning on -site construction activity including resolution of issues related to PM10 generation. II. G. 7 Non -toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied according to manufacturers' specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten (10) days or more). 87 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations II. G.8 Water shall be applied three (3) times daily, or non -toxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications, to all unpaved parking or staging areas or unpaved road surfaces. II. G.9 All roads and road shoulders shall be paved. II. G.10 Traffic speeds on all unpaved roads shall be 15 mph or less. II. G. I I Streets shall be swept at the end of each day if visible soil is carried onto adjacent public paved roads. Reclaimed water shall be used, if feasible. II. G.12 Electricity from power poles shall be used rather than temporary diesel or gasoline power generators. II. G.13 Dedicated turn lanes shall be provided for the movement of construction trucks and equipment on- and off -site. Construction equipment shall meet or exceed Tier 2 standards and be equipped with oxidation catalysts and particulate traps. II. G.14 Construction activities that affect traffic flow on the arterial system shall be scheduled to off-peak hours to the extent practicable. Facts in Support of the Finding: Even after compliance with applicable SCAQMD Rules and implementation of Mitigation Measures II.G.1 through II.G.14, Project construction activities will exceed SCAQMD daily emissions thresholds for VOC and NOx. (See DEIR Table II.G-6) Project construction -related impacts that exceed the daily emissions thresholds for VOC and NOx are therefore determined to be significant and unavoidable air quality impacts notwithstanding mitigation. (DEIR, pg. II-123). b. Long -Term Operational Emissions Significant Unavoidable Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially exceed SCAQMD daily emissions significance thresholds. Finding: Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that this impact is potentially significant but will be reduced to the extent feasible through mitigation measures. The Commission finds that Mitigation Measures II.G.15 and II.G.16 are incorporated into the MMRP for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein. However, the Commission 88 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations finds that even with application of these mitigation measures, operational emissions -related air quality impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. II. G.15 Provide on -site improvements such as sidewalks or pedestrian walkways to promote pedestrian activity and reduce the amount of vehicle trips related to multi -stop visits. II. G.16 Use of zero ozone depleting refrigerants for refrigeration equipment and air conditioning. Facts in Support of the Finding: Even after compliance with applicable SCAQMD Rules and implementation of Mitigation Measures II.G.15 and II.G.16, as well as Mitigation- Measures II.J.1 through II.J.10 enumerated in Section C(4)(b) above, Project operational activities will exceed SCAQMD daily emissions thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, and PMIo. (DEIR Table II.G- 8) Project operational -related impacts that exceed the thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, and PMio are therefore determined to be significant and unavoidable air quality impacts notwithstanding mitigation. (DEIR, pg. II-126) C. Cumulative Air Quality Impacts Significant Unavoidable Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that the Project could potentially result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). Finding: Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that this impact is potentially significant but will be reduced to the extent feasible through mitigation measures. The Commission finds that Mitigation Measures II.G.1 through II.G.16, enumerated in Sections D(2)(a) & (b) above, are incorporated into the MMRP for the Project, and will be implemented as specified therein. However, the Commission finds that even with application of these mitigation measures, the Project will result in cumulatively significant and unavoidable air quality impacts. Facts in Support of the Finding: Even after compliance with applicable SCAQMD Rules and implementation of Mitigation Measures II.G.1 through II.G.14, the Project will result in the 89 W875-Menifee CA--528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations following cumulatively significant and unavoidable air quality impacts: (1) Short-term Project construction activities that exceed the regional thresholds for VOC and NOx emissions are cumulatively significant for the duration of construction activities; (2) Long-term operations of the Project that exceeds the regional thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO and PM10 emissions are cumulatively significant; and (3) The Project's VOC, NOx, and PM10 emissions in combination with VOC, NOx, and PM10 emissions generated by other sources affecting the encompassing ozone and PM10 non -attainment areas, will result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of these pollutants within the nonattainment areas. (DEIR, pgs. II-171 and II-172) 3. Traffic and Circulation a. Mainline Freeway Segments Significant Unavoidable Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that Project could result in significant and adverse volume to capacity impacts; or exceed either cumulatively or individually a level of service standard established by the county congestion management plan. Finding: Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that this impact is potentially significant and there are no known feasible mitigation measures that could reduce this impact to a level of less than significant. Accordingly, Project -related impacts to mainline freeway segments will remain significant and unavoidable. Facts in Support of the Finding: The EIR determined that, under the 2011 Existing plus Ambient plus Cumulative plus Project ("EACP") scenario, Project traffic will would contribute to a LOS that is already below the threshold LOS "D" at the following mainline freeway segments: (1) Southbound lanes, north of Scott Road in the morning peak hour period; (2) Southbound lanes, south of Scott Road in the morning and evening peak hours; (3) Northbound lanes, north of Scott Road in the evening peak hour period; and (4) Northbound lanes, south of Scott Road in the evening peak hour period. (DEIR, pg. III-37) Improvements necessary to maintain acceptable levels of service on the I-215 in the Project vicinity include the addition of a third northbound and southbound mix -flow lane. These improvements are consistent with the preferred alternative (Alternative 2) identified in the Project Study Report/Project Development Support in Riverside County on I-15 from San Diego County Lines to I-1511--215 Separation and on I-215 from 1-1511--215 Separation to Nuevo Road (prepared by the Riverside County 90 W875-Mmifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Transportation Commission [ROTC] in cooperation with Caltrans District 8, December 2006). Specifically, Alternative 2 identifies the construction of a mixed -flow lane on I-215 between the I-154-215 junction and Nuevo Road in both the southbound and northbound directions, in the existing median. Currently, RCTC is calling this improvement the "Central I-215 Project." This project has State funding programmed and committed for environmental clearances now underway. This segment is included in the RCTC Measure A 10-year delivery plan, with a commitment to complete the improvements by 2019. Funding has also been secured and programmed through State sources to construct one (1) additional mixed flow lane in each direction between I-15 and Scott Road. The I-215 South segment (from Scott Road south to I- 15) has completed the preliminary -engineering and environmental review phase and is currently in the final engineering phase, with anticipated completion date of late 2010. Construction is expected to commence in early 2011 and to finish in early 2013. Although construction of the recommended improvements on I-215 would result in LOS D or better with Project -related traffic, it is not possible to ensure that these improvements will be in place prior to the Project's anticipated opening in 2011. Nor is it within the jurisdictional authority or purview of the City or Developer to adopt or enforce mitigation measures requiring the construction of improvements by, or upon facilities within Caltrans' jurisdiction. As such, there are no feasible mitigation measures that will reduce the Project's mainline freeway impacts below significance thresholds. (DEIR, pgs. III-37 and III-38) b. Freeway Ramp Operations Significant Unavoidable Impact: The EIR evaluated and concluded that Project could result in significant and adverse volume to capacity impacts; or exceed either cumulatively or individually a level of service standard established by the county congestion management plan. Finding: Based on the entire record before us, this Commission finds that this impact is potentially significant and there are no known feasible mitigation measures that could reduce this impact to a level of less than significant. Accordingly, Project -related impacts to freeway ramp operations will remain significant and unavoidable. Facts in Support of the Finding: The EIR determined that, under the 2011 EACP scenario, Project traffic will contribute to a LOS that is already below the threshold LOS "D" at the 91 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations following freeway ramps: (1) Scott Road southbound on -ramp in the morning peak hour period; (2) Scott Road northbound on -ramp in the evening peak hour period; and (3) Scott Road northbound off -ramp in the evening peak hour period. (DEIR, pg. III-40) It is anticipated that the planned interchange improvements discussed in Section D(3)(a) above will also improve freeway ramp operations during the peak hours under EAPC (2011) traffic conditions. However, it is not possible to ensure that these improvements will be in place prior to the Project's anticipated opening in 2011. Nor is it within the jurisdictional authority or purview of the City or Developer to adopt or enforce mitigation measures requiring the construction of improvements by, or upon facilities within Caltrans' jurisdiction. As such, there are no feasible mitigation measures that will reduce the Project's freeway ramp operations impacts below significance thresholds. (DEIR, pg. III-40) E. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES The EIR analyzed two alternatives to the Project as proposed, and evaluated these alternatives for their ability to meet the Project's objectives as described in Section II.B above. CEQA requires the evaluation of a "No Project Alternative" to assess a maximum net change in the environment as a result of implementation of the Project. CEQA also requires evaluation of alternatives that can reduce the significance of identified impacts and "feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the proposed Project." Thus, in order to develop a range of reasonable alternatives, the Project Objectives must be considered when this Commission is evaluating the alternatives. 1. Alternative 1— No Proiect Alternative Description: The No Project Alternative is considered to be equivalent to a "No Build" scenario. That is, if the Project or some similar development proposal is not implemented on the subject site, and there are no other known or probable scenarios for the subject property, the site would likely remain in its current undeveloped state for the foreseeable future. (DEIR, pg. VI-6) Impacts: The No Project Alternative would result in a significant lessening of impacts when compared to the proposed Project. (DEIR, pg. VI-18) Similar to the Project, the No Project Alternative would result in less than significant impacts in the following areas: Land Use; 92 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Seismic Safety; Soils, Slopes, and Erosion; Wind Erosion; Hydrology and Water Quality; Biological Resources; Mineral Resources; Energy Resources; Cultural Resources; Aesthetics, Light, and Glare; Water and Sewer Systems; Fire Protection/Law Enforcement; Utilities; Solid Waste; Disaster Preparedness. (DEIR, pgs. VI-17 to VI-36) However, under the No Project Alternative, the Project's significant and unavoidable construction noise impacts and construction and operational air quality impacts would not occur. (DEIR, pgs. VI-23 and VI-25) Under the No Project Alternative, potential traffic/transportation impacts would be representative of existing conditions. The No Project Alternative would reduce the aggregate amount of fee contributions available for long-term traffic improvements when compared to fee contributions realized under the Project. Additionally, the No Project Alternative would not realize Project - specific road widening/lane reconfiguration and signalization improvements as detailed in the Project Traffic Impact Analysis. For the foregoing reasons, traffic/transportation impacts could ultimately be greater than if the Project were constructed. (DEIR, pg. VI-31). Objectives: As no new or additional commercial/retail facilities would be realized under this Alternative, the No Project Alternative would not achieve any of the Project Objectives. (DEIR, pgs. VI-36 and VI-37) Finding: Under the No Project Alternative, development of the Project will not occur. This Alternative will avoid the significant and unavoidable construction noise impacts and construction and operational air quality impacts identified in the EIR. However, the City Commission finds that the No Project Alternative would not fulfill any of the Project Objectives. Because the No Project Alternative will not fulfill the Project Objectives, the City Commission 1 hereby rejects the No Project Alternative. 2. Alternative 2 — Reduced Intensity Alternative Description: The Reduced Intensity Alternative assumes elimination of all the Project's outpad uses, while leaving the site's major retail anchor tenant intact. (DEIR, pg. VI-6) Implementation of the Reduced Intensity Alternative would yield approximately 205,000 square feet of development, a reduction of approximately 35,000 square feet of approximately 15 percent, when compared to the approximately 241,000 square -foot Project analyzed in the EIR. (DEIR, pg. VI-19). 93 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Impacts: The Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in similar, albeit slightly less, impacts as compared to the Project. (DEIR, pg. VI-18) Similar to the Project, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in less than significant impacts in the following areas: Land Use; Seismic Safety; Soils, Slopes, and Erosion; Wind Erosion; Hydrology and Water Quality; Biological Resources; Mineral Resources; Energy Resources; Cultural Resources; Aesthetics, Light, and Glare; Water and Sewer Systems; Fire Protection/Law Enforcement; Utilities; Solid Waste; Disaster Preparedness. (DEIR, pgs. VI-17 to VI-36) Under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, maximum construction -related emissions from site preparation and grading would likely be the same as for the Project. In this regard, the maximum daily site disturbance and amount of equipment employed concurrently would likely be similar to the construction scenario envisioned for the Project. As with the Project, mitigated construction -related emissions would still exceed SCAQMD emissions thresholds. Because the scope of development would be reduced under this Alternative, the duration of construction activities and construction emissions may be reduced when compared to the Project. Based on its reduced scope of development and associated reductions in vehicle trips and vehicular emissions, long-term operations under the Reduced Intensity Alternative would be reduced by approximately 30 percent when compared to the Project. Operational VOC, NOx, CO, and PM10 emissions under this Alternative, however, would still exceed applicable SCAQMD regional thresholds. Accordingly, as with the Project, this Alternative would result in cumulatively significant emissions contributions to existing non - attainment conditions for ozone and PM1o. (DEIR, pg. VI-25) The Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in an approximate 15 percent reduction in development intensity, and 30 percent reduction in trip generation when compared to the Project. On this basis, traffic impact mitigation fee payment requirements otherwise realized under the Project would also be reduced. However, the overall extent and configuration of the physical traffic mitigation improvements, (e.g., road widening, lane configurations, signalization), would likely remain substantively unaltered in that these traffic improvements will be designed and constructed to their ultimate "buildout" configurations, irrespective of the scale of the Project. (DEIR, pg. VI-31) On this basis, the Reduced Intensity Alternative may require less extensive traffic improvements, although the reduction in trip generation may not be sufficient to realize any discernible difference in the extent or configuration of required traffic improvements. As with the 94 W875-Meuifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Project, all necessary site -specific traffic improvements, to include road widening/lane reconfiguration and signalization, would be required under the Reduced Intensity Alternative. Because the freeway mainline currently operates at deficient levels of service, any additional traffic would add to these deficiencies. As such, freeway impacts under this scenario would still be considered significant. (DEIR, pg. VI-32) Consequently, this Alternative would not result in the elimination or substantial reduction of any of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project. Objectives: The Reduced Intensity Alternative would, to some degree, realize the Project Objectives. More specifically: • Provide development consistent with the General Plan, land uses, zoning ordinance and in conformance with City Standards, codes and policies. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would create a development that is consistent with the land use intent of the General Plan, albeit at a lesser intensity; • Maximize and broaden the City's sales tax base by providing local and regional tax - generating uses. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would broaden the tax base by providing new and additional sources of tax revenues; • Provide development that improves and maximize economic viability of a vacant site by transitioning the Project site into a productive mix of commercial/retail uses. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in new uses that would improve the economic viability of the vacant site. However, the scale of the reduction in intensity would not maximize or realize the economic potential of the site; • Locate a commercial project at the intersection of a major street and an interstate freeway, maximizing access opportunities for the convenience of patrons. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in a major anchor being built proximate to the Scott Road/I-215 interchange. Notwithstanding, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would also result in a loss of opportunity to also provide other support goods and services normally provided to the motoring public at similar locations, such as restaurant and motor fueling facilities; 95 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations • Expand and provide new retail options, with updated, modern and energy efficient buildings, in proximity to local consumers by providing daytime and nighttime shopping opportunities in a safer and secure environment. Based on the reduced scope of development and comparatively limited mix of commercial/retail and service uses, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would diminish capacities and capabilities to satisfy existing and projected unmet market demands within the trade area, as discussed within the Project Economic Impact Analysis; • Create additional employment -generating opportunities for the City Menifee and surrounding communities. Based on the diminished scope of development, and limited variety of uses, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in comparatively fewer opportunities to provide commercial/retail and support service jobs, as compared to the Project.; and • Provide (where necessary) adequate infrastructure and public amenities. The transition of the site from its vacant state to one of commercial/retail development will require commensurate supporting infrastructure improvements. The extent and type of improvements will vary, and be dependent on the specific uses that are proposed. In this regard, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would require similar types of infrastructure upgrades as compared to the proposed Project, though the demands on these systems would likely be reduced. (DEIR, pgs. VI-37 to VI -38) Finding: Under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, an approximately 35,000 square feet, or 15%, reduction in size would be realized as compared to the Project. The City Commission hereby finds that the Reduced Intensity Alternative will not avoid or substantially reduce the significant and unavoidable construction noise impacts and construction and operational air quality impacts identified in the EIR. Furthermore, this Alternative would not meet four Project Objectives to the same extent as the Project: (1) the scale of the reduction in intensity would not maximize or realize the economic potential of the site; (2) the Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in a loss of opportunity to provide support goods and services normally provided to the motoring public at similar locations, such as a restaurant and motor fueling facilities; (3) Based on the reduced scope of development and comparatively limited mix of commercial/retail and service uses, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would diminish capacities and capabilities to 96 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations r satisfy existing and projected unmet market demands within the trade area; and (4) The Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in comparatively fewer opportunities to provide commercial/retail and support service jobs, as compared to the Project. Therefore, the City Commission rejects the Reduced Intensity Alternative on the basis that it fails to avoid or substantially reduce the significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project and does not meet the Project Objectives as well as the Project. The City Commission also finds that each of these considerations constitutes a ground for rejecting this alternative that is independently sufficient to support he City Commission's rejection of this alternative. 3. Environmentally Superior Alternative The environmentally superior alternative is the No Project Alternative. (DEIR, pg. VI-39) CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 indicates that if the "No Project" alternative is the environmentally superior alternative then another alternative must also be identified. The Reduced Intensity Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative without taking the No Project Alternative into account. (DEIR, pg. VI-39). Based on estimated reductions in air pollutant emissions, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in the reduction in environmental effects when compared to the Project. Although not achieving SCAQMD regional thresholds for the criteria pollutants VOC, NOX, CO, and PM1o, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would realize incremental reductions in these emissions compared to those emissions resulting from the Project. (Id.) Furthermore, freeway traffic and interchange impacts under this scenario would still be considered significant. (DEIR, pg. VI-32) Nonetheless, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would also generally reduce other environmental effects of the Project, and to a limited degree, realize attainment of the basic Project Objectives. (DEIR pg. VI-39) Development of the Project or the Reduced Intensity Alternative would contribute to area employment and the City's overall tax base. However, because scope and variety of land uses would be substantively reduced under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, the resulting effective realization of the Project Objectives, to include economic benefits to the City and region, would likely be similarly diminished. (DEIR, pg. VI-40) F. GROWTH -INDUCING IMPACTS CEQA requires a discussion of ways in which the proposed Project could be growth W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 97 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations inducing. Specifically, CEQA Guidelines Section 1512602(d) states than an EIR must describe the ways in which the proposed Project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. The types of employment opportunities offered by the Project (both management and regular employees) are relatively common throughout Southern California and are unlikely to generate significant population migration (if any). Any Project -related employment demands would likely be filled by the existing surplus personnel pool within the Menifee area, and/or neighboring communities, especially with the currently low 0.47 jobs per household ratio and high unemployment rate. The Project would not foster growth or a concentration of population in excess of what is assumed in pertinent master plans, land use plans, or in projections made by regional planning. (DEIR, pg. VI-42) Currently, the Project site is vacant and undeveloped. However, urban utilities, such as community water and wastewater systems are in place to serve the Project site and adjacent lands. Expansions of water and wastewater systems are programmed to serve the vicinity consistent with anticipated development of the City and region. In order to accommodate forecasted growth of the City and region over the long term, it is anticipated these improvements will be implemented regardless of the City's ultimate decision on the Menifee Shopping Center Project. The Project is not considered to provide an inducement to other lands within its vicinity to undertake unanticipated development due to the availability of new or expanded infrastructure systems. (DEIR, pg. VI-43) ` Notwithstanding, development of the Project as envisioned will entail upgrade/modification of infrastructure in the immediate Project vicinity, including abutting roadways, the local water distribution and sewer collection systems, and storm drainage conveyance facilities. Infrastructure improvements necessitated by the implementation of the Project may facilitate and encourage development of nearby properties. However, the characteristics and intensities of development that could occur on these properties are governed by the General Plan and the Sun City/Menifee Valley Area Plan. Development of these properties within the context of the approved General Plan should not result in unforeseen impacts or impacts that cannot be mitigated. (Id.) 98 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Additionally, it is recognized that provision of services, e.g., utilities, fire protection, and law enforcement, may be expanded or otherwise enhanced to meet additional demands of the Project. Project design and payment of impact mitigation fees reduces individual and cumulative impacts in these regards. Services expansion or enhancements based on incremental demands of the Project will not result in substantial additional capacity that could be considered growth inducing. (Id.) Investment in the Project would have local and regional economic impacts which may result in indirect growth -inducing effects. The Project's potential economic benefits could indirectly result in employment growth in the region. This growth, in combination with other anticipated employment growth in the region, could indirectly result in population growth and an increased demand for housing. (Id.) Such growth has a variety of potential effects on the physical environment, including but not limited to, effects on air quality, ambient noise levels, traffic impacts, and water quality. It is not anticipated that the additional employment opportunities created by the Project would be substantial enough to produce noticeable population growth within the City and region. (DEIR p. VI-44) G. SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES Public Resources Code Section 21100(b)(2)(B) and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15126(c), 15126.2(c), and 15127, require that for certain types or categories of projects, an EIR must address significant irreversible environmental changes that would occur should the project be implemented. As presented at CEQA Guidelines Section 15127, the topic of Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes needs to be addressed in EIRs prepared in connection with any of the following activities: (a) The adoption, amendment, or enactment of a plan, policy, or ordinance of a public agency; (b) The adoption by a local agency formation commission of a resolution making determinations; or (c) A project which will be subject to the requirements for preparing of an environmental impact statement pursuant to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. Sections 4321-4347. 99 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The proposed Menifee Shopping Center Project does not propose any of the actions or elements identified under CEQA Guidelines Section 15127. A discussion of Significant and Irreversible Environmental Impacts of the Project, therefore, is not required. (DEIR, pg. VI-47) VI. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The Menifee City Commission adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the significant unavoidable impacts associated with adoption of the Project as addressed in the EIR, specifically: 1. Short -Term Construction Noise (Individual and Cumulative); 2. Short -Term Construction Air Quality Impacts (Individual and Cumulative); 3. Long -Term Operational Emissions (Individual and Cumulative); 4. Traffic Impacts — Mainline Freeway Segments (Cumulative); and 5. Traffic Impacts — Freeway Ramp Operations (Cumulative). The Menifee City Commission hereby declares that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Commission has balanced the benefits of the proposed Project against any significant and unavoidable environmental impacts in determining whether to approve the proposed Project. If the benefits of the proposed Project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, those impacts are considered "acceptable." i The City Commission hereby declares that the EIR 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 impacts can be mitigated to a level of less than significant except for the unavoidable and significant impacts discussed in Section V(D) herein. The City Commission hereby declares that it has made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate or substantially mitigate the potential impacts resulting from the Project. The City Commission hereby declares that to the extent any mitigation measures recommended to the City are not be incorporated, such mitigation measures are infeasible because they would impose restrictions on the Project that would prohibit the realization of 100 W875-Menifee CA--528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations specific economic, social, and other benefits that this City Commission finds outweigh the unmitigated impacts. The City Commission further finds that except for the Project, all other alternatives set forth in the EIR are infeasible because they would prohibit the realization of the Project objectives and/or specific economic, social or other benefits that this City Commission finds outweigh any environmental benefits of the alternatives. The City Commission hereby declares that, having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the Project, to the extent feasible by adopting the proposed mitigation measures, having considered the entire administrative record on the Project and having weighed the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable significant impact after mitigation, the City Commission has determined that the social, economic and environmental benefits of the Project outweigh the potential unavoidable significant impacts and render those potential significant impacts acceptable based on the following considerations: ■ The Project will provide development consistent with the General Plan, land uses, zoning ordinance and in conformance with municipal standards, codes and policies; ■ The Project will maximize and broaden the City's sales tax base in excess of $500,000, by providing local and regional tax -generating uses; ■ The Project provides development that improves and maximizes economic viability of a vacant site by transitioning the Project site into a productive mix of commercial/retail uses; ■ The Project is located at the intersection of a major street and an interstate freeway, maximizing access opportunities for the convenience of patrons; ■ The Project expands and provides new retail options, with updated, modern and energy efficient buildings, in close proximity to local consumers by providing daytime and nighttime shopping opportunities in a safer and secure environment; ■ The Project creates additional employment -generating opportunities for the recently incorporated City of Menifee and surrounding communities; and 101 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations ■ The Project provides adequate infrastructure and public amenities, including upgrading and widened streets, signal upgrades and utility improvements. As the CEQA Lead Agency for the proposed action, the City of Menifee has reviewed the Project description and the alternatives presented in the EIR, and fully understands the Project and Project alternatives proposed for development. Further, this Commission finds that all potential adverse environmental impacts and all feasible mitigation measures to reduce the impacts from the project have been identified in the Draft EIR, the Final EIR and public testimony. This Commission also finds that a reasonable range of alternatives was considered in the EIR and this document, Section V(E) above, and finds that approval of the Project is appropriate. This Commission has identified economic and social benefits and important policy objectives, Section V(H) above, which result from implementing the Project. The Commission has balanced these substantial social and economic benefits against the unavoidable significant adverse effects of the Project. Given the substantial social and economic benefits that will accrue from the Project, this Commission finds that the benefits identified herein override the unavoidable environmental effects. California Public Resource Code 21002 provides: "In the event specific economic, social and other conditions make infeasible such Project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects can be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof." Section 21002.1(c) provides: "In the event that economic, social, or other conditions make it infeasible to mitigate one or more significant effects of a project on the environment, the project may nonetheless be approved or carried out at the discretion of a public agency..." Finally, California Administrative Code, Title 4, 15093 (a) states: "If the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered `acceptable."' The City Commission hereby declares that the foregoing benefits provided to the public through approval and implementation of the Project outweighs the identified significant adverse environmental impacts of the Project that cannot be mitigated. The City Commission finds that 102 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations each of the Project benefits outweighs the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified in the EIR and, therefore, finds those impacts to be acceptable. VII. CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT The Menifee City Commission finds that it has reviewed and considered the FEIR in evaluating the Project, that the FEIR is an accurate and objective statement that fully complies with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, and that the FEIR reflects the independent judgment of the City Commission. The City Commission declares that no new significant information as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15089.5 has been received by the City Commission- after the circulation of the DEIR that would require recirculation. All of the information added to the FEIR merely clarifies, amplifies or makes insignificant modifications to an already adequate DEIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(b). The City Commission hereby certifies the EIR based on the following findings and conclusions: A. Findings 1. CEQA Compliance As the decision -making body for the Project, the City Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Findings and supporting documentation. The City Commission determines that the Findings contain a complete and accurate reporting of the environmental impacts and mitigation measures associated with the Project, as well as complete and accurate reporting of the unavoidable impacts and benefits of the Proposed Project as detailed in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. The City Commission finds that the EIR was prepared in compliance with CEQA and that the City Commission complied with CEQA's procedural and substantive requirements. 2. Significant Unavoidable Impacts/Statement of Overriding Considerations: The Project will have significant adverse impacts even following adoption of all feasible mitigation measures which are required by the City Commission. The following significant environmental impacts have been identified in the FEIR and will require mitigation 103 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1 Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations but cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance as set forth in Section V(D) of these Findings: Short -Term Construction Noise (Individual and Cumulative); Short -Term Construction Air Quality Impacts (Individual and Cumulative); Long -Term Operational Emissions (Individual and Cumulative); Traffic Impacts — Mainline Freeway Segments (Cumulative); and Traffic Impacts — Freeway Ramp Operations (Cumulative). The City Commission has eliminated or substantially reduced environmental impacts where feasible as described in the Findings, and the City Commission determines that the remaining unavoidable significant adverse impacts are acceptable due to the reasons set forth in the preceding Statement of Overriding Considerations. 3. Conclusions a. All potentially significant environmental impacts from implementation of the proposed Project have been identified in the FEIR and, with the implementation of the mitigation measures defined herein and set forth in the MMRP, will be mitigated to a less -than -significant level, except for the impacts identified in Section V(D) above. b. Other reasonable alternatives to the proposed Project that could feasibly achieve the basic objectives of the proposed Project have been considered and rejected in favor of the proposed Project. C. Environmental, economic, social and other considerations and benefits derived from the development of the proposed Project override and make infeasible any alternatives to the proposed Project or further mitigation measures beyond those incorporated ` into the proposed Project. VIII. ADOPTION OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Commission hereby adopts, as conditions of approval of the Project, the MMRP set forth in Section V of the Final EIR. In the event of any inconsistencies between the mitigation measures as set forth herein and the MMRP shall control, except to the extent that a mitigation measure contained herein is inadvertently omitted from the MMRP, in which case such migration measure shall be deemed as if it were included in the MMRP. 104 W875-Menifee CA -- 528368.1