Loading...
PC23-594RESOLUTION PC 23-594 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MENIFEE, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A MAJOR PLOT PLAN (PLN22-0015) FOR AN INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS MAPES AND SHERMAN COMMERCE CENTER LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MAPES ROAD AND SHERMAN ROAD. WHEREAS, on February 4, 2022, the applicant, CIVF-VI-CA4B02, LLC filed a formal application with the City of Menifee for a plot plan application (PLN22-0015) for the construction of a concrete tilt -up building totaling 277,578 square feet (sq. ft.) on a 13.34 gross acre project site near the southwest corner of Mapes Road and Sherman Road -,and WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study ("IS") and Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND") have been prepared to analyze and mitigate the project's potentially significant environmental impacts; and WHEREAS, between May 15, 2023 and June 5, 2023, the 20 day public review period for the Draft IS/MND took effect, which was publicly noticed by a publication in a newspaper of general circulation, noticed to owners within 300 feet of the Project site boundaries, related agencies and government agencies, and to persons requesting public notice; and WHEREAS, on June 14, 2023, the Planning Commission of the City of Menifee held a public hearing on the Project, considered all public testimony as well as all materials in the staff report and accompanying documents for the adoption of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for Plot Plan PLN22-0015; and which hearing was publicly noticed by a publication in The Press Enterprise, a newspaper of general circulation, an agenda posting, notice to property owners within 550 feet of the Project boundaries, on -site posting at the project site, and to persons requesting public notice; and WHEREAS, the City has complied with CEQA and the IS/MND is an accurate and objective statement that fully complies with CEQA, 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, have been received by the City after circulation of the draft IS/MND which would require re -circulation; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Menifee makes the following Findings: Section 1: The Planning Commission finds on the basis of the evidence presented and the whole record before it, including the IS/MND, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A", and any comments received, that there is no substantial evidence that the project, as mitigated, will have a significant effect on the environment. Section 2: The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan ("MMRP") and a copy of IS/MND for Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center PLN22-0015 June 14, 2023 which is attached hereto as an appendices to Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, will assure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. Section 3: The Planning Commission further finds that the adoption of the MND reflects the Planning Commission's independent judgment and analysis. Section 4: The MND, all documents referenced in the MND, and the record of proceedings on which the Planning Commission's decision is based are located at City of Menifee City Hall at 29844 Haun Road, Menifee, CA 92586 and the custodian of record of proceedings is the City of Menifee City Clerk. Section 5: The City of Menifee Planning Commission adopts an MND for the Project including, but not limited to the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, as attached to the MND. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this the 14th day of June, 2023: Attest: Rachel Valencia, Acting Deputy City Clerk Approved as to form: Thai an, Assistant City Attorney 2 e, Chairman G%1Y OR �~ CITY OF MENIFEE �MENIFEE CEQA Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project title: Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center 2. Lead agency name and address: City of Menifee, Community Development Department, 29844 Haun Road, Menifee, CA 92586 3. Contact person and phone number: Fernando Herrera, Associate Planner: 951-723-3718 4. Project location: The project site is located approximately 0.5 mile east of Interstate 215 (1-215), 0.6 mile north of State Route (SR) 74, on the southwest corner of Mapes Road and Sherman Road, in the City of Menifee (City), County of Riverside (County), California (Assessor's Parcel Numbers [APNs]: 329-030-003, 329-030-048, and 329-030-049). Refer to Exhibit 1, Regional Location Map and Exhibit 2, Local Vicinity Map. A. Total Project Area: 13.34 gross acres Residential Acres: 0 Lots: 0 Units: 0 Projected No. of Residents: 0 Commercial Acres: 0 Lots: 0 Square Feet of Building Area: 0 Est. No. of Employees: 0 Office Acres: 0 Lots: 0 Square Feet of Building Area: Est. No. of Employees: 0 10,000 (estimated office employees contained within industrial number below) Industrial Acres: 13.34 Lots: 3 Square Feet of Building Area: Est. No. of Employees: 603 267,578 Other Acres Lots: 0 Square Feet of Building Area: 0 I Est. No. of Employees: 0 (Office/Retail): 0 B. APNs 329-030-003, 329-030-048, and 329-030-049. C. Section 10, Township 5S and Range 3W of the San Bernardino Base and Meridian D. Longitude: 33045'21.1 "N, Latitude: 117010'53.49"W 5. Project Applicant/Owners: CIVF-VI-CA4B02, LLC Representative: Andrew Warren, 3161 Michelsen Drive Suite 100, Irvine, CA 92612 6. General Plan Designation: Economic Development Corridor (EDC)' Refer to Exhibit 3, Existing Land Use Designation 7. Existing Zoning: Economic Development Corridor -Northern Gateway (EDC-NG)2 Refer to Exhibit 4, Existing Zoning Designation City of Menifee. 2022 Land Use Map. Website: https://cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenterNiew/14673/Exhibit_LU-2_Land-Use-Map_101221 Accessed May 10, 2022. City of Menifee. 2022 Zoning Map. Website: https://cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenterNiew/11042/Zoning-Map—February-2022?bidld=. Accessed May 10, 2022. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 1 8. Description of Project: CIVF-VI-CA41302, LLC (Applicant) proposes the development of an approximately 277,578-square-foot light industrial warehouse space on a ±13.34-gross acre site. The proposed project would consist of a 267,578-square-foot warehouse; a 10,000-square-foot office; and 308 vehicle parking spaces, including two Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) van spaces, six ADA standard spaces, 31 electric vehicle (EV) spaces, and 37 Clean Air vehicle spaces. The proposed project would also include 69 trailer parking spaces, four short-term bicycle parking spaces, 10 long- term bicycle parking spaces '3 and 36 dock doors. Refer to Exhibit 5, Site Plan. Site Access and Circulation Regional access to the site is provided via SR-74 as well as 1-215 by way of Exit 15 (SR-74 toward Hemet). Local access would be provided via Trumble Road, Mapes Road, and Sherman Road. Access to the site would be provided via one 40-foot and one 26-foot driveway along Mapes Road as well as a 30-foot primary car entry driveway and a 39-foot secondary truck entry driveway along Sherman Road. Truck traffic would be prohibited to travel north on Sherman Road, past Mapes Road, which is designated as a collector roadway by the General Plan. Therefore, truck traffic to and from the project site would be routed via Mapes Road to Trumble Road, both of which are designated as major roadways. Trumble Road connects to SR-74, which subsequently provides access to 1-215. A 26-foot- wide fire lane is proposed to fully surround the warehouse to the north, west, south, and east and would provide emergency and fire truck access. Building and Design The proposed warehouse and office space would be composed of tilt -up wall concrete panels with finished aluminum siding on the exterior. The building would also incorporate other materials, including wood paneling and tempered glass. Cold storage is not proposed as part of the project. Off -site Improvements The proposed project would include the widening of Mapes Road by 21 feet and the installation of streetlights, 6-foot-wide sidewalk, 8-inch curb and gutter, a Class II bike lane, and parkway landscaping along the project frontage. As a condition of approval, the proposed project would also be required to construct a raised median (or an alternate design as approved by the City Engineer) and approximately 12 feet of pavement along the north side of Mapes Road along the project frontage. Finally, the proposed project would include the widening of Sherman Road by 11 feet and the installation of streetlights, 6-foot-wide sidewalk, 6-inch curb and gutter, a Class III bike lane, and parkway landscaping along the project frontage (Exhibit 6). As another condition of approval, the City would also require the project to pave 12 feet past the centerline along Sherman Road. Street trees would line the project frontages along Mapes Road and Sherman Road. For a detailed list of proposed landscaping, see Exhibit 7. Landscaping The proposed project would include approximately 55,438 square feet of landscaping. The proposed landscaping and irrigation would be consistent with Article 3 Chapter 9.195, Landscaping Standards, of the City of Menifee Development Code4 and Section 15.04, Landscape Water Use Efficiency Requirements of the City of Menifee Municipal Code.5 The proposed landscaping plan is shown in Exhibit 7. As shown on Table 9.220.040-5, Bicycle Spaces for Bicycle Parking Facility Class, of the Menifee Development Code, commercial and industrial facilities must include two employee bicycle spaces (Class I or Class II) for every 25 parking spaces. Anything in excess of this requirement may be Class III. City of Menifee. 2021. Development Code. Article 3: Zones. Chapter 9.195, Landscaping Standards. Website: https:Honline.encodeplus.com/regs/menifee-ca/ereader/index.htmi. Accessed June 1, 2022. City of Menifee. 2021. Municipal Code Title 15: Water and Sewers. Chapter 15.04, Landscape Water Use Efficiency Requirements. Website: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/menifee/latest/menifee_ca/0-0-0-3057https://online.encodeplus com/regs/menifee- ca/ereader/index.html Accessed June 1, 2022. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 2 Phasing and Construction The proposed project would be constructed in a single phase that would last approximately 10 months, estimated to begin in October 2023, with construction expected to be completed in July 2024. Operation and Employment The proposed project is anticipated to employ approximately 603 employees and is expected to be operational in late 2024. Cold storage is not proposed as part of the project. Public Services The following public services are available to the proposed project: • Fire Protection Services (City of Menifee through contract with the Riverside County Fire Department); • Police Protection Services (City of Menifee Police Department); • Public Schools (Romoland Elementary School District and Perris Union High School District) • Library Services (Riverside County Library System) • City Administrative Services (City of Menifee). The following utilities/infrastructure systems and services are available to the proposed project • Electricity —Southern California Edison (SCE) • Natural Gas —Southern California Gas Company • Potable Water —Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) • Wastewater—EMWD • Solid Waste —Waste Management of the Inland Empire (WM) • Cable —Charter Communications The proposed project would connect to existing utilities as described below. All dry utilities would be undergrounded. Water The proposed project would connect to and be served by an existing 12-inch water line located in the right-of-way in Sherman Road and Mapes Road. Wastewater The proposed project would connect to and be served by an existing 15-inch sewer line located in the right-of-way in Mapes Road. Recycled Water The proposed project would connect to and be served by an existing 12-inch recycled water line located in the right-of-way in Mapes Road. Electricity and Natural Gas The proposed project would underground all existing overhead utilities along the project frontage on Sherman Road. The proposed project would not connect to any gas lines. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Environmental Setting: The project site is currently vacant and undeveloped. The site slopes gently from southeast to the northwest, with elevation ranging from approximately 1,423 to 1,434 feet above mean sea level (msl).6 Review of past uses of the site indicate that the site has been undeveloped since as early as 1967.7 Land uses in the surrounding area vary ELMT Consulting, Inc. 215 East Commerce Center. Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Consistency Analysis. HEI Corporation. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. June B, 2021. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 3 between roadway rights -of -way, vacant land, commercial uses, and rural residential single-family homes. The adjacent General Plan Area Plan(s), Land Use Designation(s), and Zoning(s) if any: Surrounding Land Uses Direction General Plan Designation Zoning District Existing Land Use Project Site Economic Development Economic Development Vacant Land/Undeveloped Corridor (EDC) Corridor -Northern Gateway (EDC-NG) North Business Park (BP) City of Business Park (BP) City of Big League Dreams (2155 Perris General Plan Perris Zoning Trumble Road) and a water pumping station (27576 Mapes Road) South Economic Development Economic Development Vacant Land/Undeveloped Corridor (EDC) Corridor -Northern Gateway (EDC-NG) East Rural Residential (RR1) Rural Residential, 1-acre Single family residences minimum (RR1) West Economic Development Economic Development storage yard and Corridor (EDC) Corridor -Northern Gateway undeveloped land (EDC-NG) Sources: City of Menifee. 2021. General Plan Exhibit LU-2 Land Use Map. Website: https://www.cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenterNiew/14673/Exhibit_LU-2_Land-Use-Map_101221. Accessed October 12, 2022 ; City of Menifee. 2019 Zoning Map. Website: https://www.cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenterNiew/9432/Zoning-Map. Accessed October 12, 2022.); and HEI Corporation, June 2021 Phase i Environmental Site Assessment, Three Undeveloped Parcels of Land Southwest Corner of Sherman Road and Mapes Road Menifee, California; City of Perris. 2022. City of Perris Interactive Zoning Map. Website: maps.digitalmapcentral.com/production/vecommunityview/cities/perris/index.aspx. Accessed October 12, 2022. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 4 San Bernardino National Forest Sri BEAUMONT I MORENO VALLEY 4lJ BANNING 5 Mystic Lake Perris 10serwar Cmm) Project Site site SAN JACINTO e _ PERRIS Railroad I HEMET Canyon 1<< rn urr CANYON LAKE MENfFEE ` LAKE ELSINORE C U+an,ond ,I I alley lake , t �,ke Elsrnnrr gym` ■19 I i 11L'DOMAR Cleveland rI National Reservoir Forest Reservoirir \MURRI TA TEMECULA i ego C . y Rainbow Cleveland National Forest Fallbrook Legend Pala City of Menifee Source: Census 2000 Data, The California Spatial Information Library (CaSIL). FIRSTCARBON e 5 2.5 0 5 SOLUTIONS' Miles 36090006 • 07/2022 1 1_regional.mxd Exhibit 1 Regional Location Map CITY OF MENIFEE MAPES AND SHERMAN COMMERCE CENTER PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Source: Bing Aerial Imagery. EPD Solutions, Inc., June 2022. FIRSTCARBON 1,000 500 0 1,000 Exhibit 2 SOLUTIU`JS e Feet Local Vicinity Map 36090006 • 07/2022 1 2_local_vicinity.mxd CITY OF MENIFEE MAPES AND SHERMAN COMMERCE CENTER PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK S�— p � e � { Rva1Ig0�1q�n0aa 10 aC nan IRMI Rval RaaafsMal 5 ea — 1RRS) Rural Residential 2 ac min IRR2) Rural Reaidenkal I ac min (RR1) Rural Residential 112 ac min IRRl12) 2 1.5 du/ac Residential (2 1-5 R) 1 rrL 0 t—, i I I F Sauiu ,al Marine 2021 5 1-8 du/ac Residential (5 1-8 R) t Heavy Industrial (HI) 0 15 -0.50 FAR Water (OS-W) c 1 8 1.14 dulac Residential (8 1-14 R) ■ Bus,ness Park (BP) 0 25 - 0 80 FAR Pubs./Quasi Public Femld— (PF) . 14 1-20 d.lac Residential (14.1-20 R) . Economic Oevelopmenl Corridor (EOG) Specific Plan (SP) ■ 20 1-24 dulec Residential (20A-24 R) Agriculture (AG) . Public Uldily Conidor(PUC) ■ Commercial Rated (CR) 0 20 - 0 35 FAR ■ Conse lallon (OS-C) ■ Railroad Commercial Office (CO) 025-10FAR ■ Recreation(OS-R) Source: Kimley-Horn, 10/5/2021. City of Menifee, 2021. FIRSTCARBON e JULU I IVIv 7 Exhibit 3 Existing Land Use Designation 36090006 • 07/2022 1 3_existing_LU.cdr CITY OF MENIFEE MAPES AND SHERMAN COMMERCE CENTER PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK I- �17 bource: city of Menitee, February 2022. FIRSTCARBON SOLUTIONS"' 36090006 - 07/2022 1 4_exIsting_zoning.cdr Exhibit 4 Existing Zoning Designation CITY OF MENIFEE MAPES AND SHERMAN COMMERCE CENTER PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ^ x H .v si 11 H • •• ' 3NY1 3U! 34 i 1 , 1, i 1 i - 1 G � � v 1 I 1_ O � cc 1 ; r , I 1 2 LL (''M t m ILo O N ON mN C I C � W 1 H � 1 -- II 1 1 I1 1 .+ 1 3NYl 3tll! 3dM �YL E a v o d s 3 a v w )IHVd sserssns-as SIUM i0 Ally ern c 4/ x 4J W (n Z O= Nm�/ cn Qo Ln D J _ O LL cn THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK - - --, t - Legend Project Site ® off -site Roadway and Frontage Improvements 1.61 acres % We c at .►a -Allmaz y J� tl '•'�.•:• ii':` :"!'.. 1!l A.. :ice Source: Bing Aerial Imagery. EPD Solutions, Inc., June 2022. FIRSTCARBON e 200 100 0 200 J v LGI I I 1 J I v J MMMM%mmmFeet 36090006 • 07/2022 1 6_offsite_rdwy_frontage_improv.mxd w Exhibit 6 Off -site Roadway and Frontage Improvements CITY OF MENIFEE MAPES AND SHERMAN COMMERCE CENTER PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK R a y gq I¢E$ s7:�is?gpy7pli I�SI�p i {q'! aEgggggg e !- BI Eftl`j Iill '' 1a 'fig i, 1 \ J � \ k'jwl I I J /-'•'77 iT�T _ J. ��Ifs� �}t i1F33 t Y���;�. ri31 � • t rg P f fl P 1-YeYI is PAe I h51 Eil13i yyBi �!sl� tit I I f!I 'd1 IIII -- i, v tzll�� ��eY`� b plroe ���� � „ • � ..... a 9ia1 E INN M !N � � !1o1 Ilit of 4i'@i. IgI' H FL • y Er 3 j t t.6i6 i�I�'g iHIY! li�!Ig ; gi! [gII$ ! � �• PQa • !t9P it ! ! gg Ilsl !{ 1( 72 8'31� w • 'EI1P � E ���ie;peptg'g i �Er � 'iBj {Bgis j) 114 s `s+li�iiiillt iti `• 'sr;.�. E i �! � I i nq I � ! •! � • �_ +�`�'.11� :I.�1n ntEal�at o .,,� , 1,.� P1911.f11 � I 1 �'• `; o GYON 93dvW a I• • � T: �-.T:n �� Y r i Bii 9' �!• , Itf @ �i ,ij , �) � i ! ! �r � ' ' t ' ' � � I � 1 ! �' I � � i i !d i1 a� �� to tl 5b� tl 11 I�t� r � 1 � t � I Ir i ! � � t �1.� � t 1 I ' '� yr (I; �• , L j iye g iP 19Y �a � � i E � �pt �� 1 t !1 I! t t ! ! tt f ��; . 1 t '. ' I'.i' tf �' f • ;t f t t t I �,E;I!• f�L �!. i, I, � ! 3 I\ �c�r,,.t 4 \V i W X C•�L W m U In c fp J Q U c O U Z f mu-) Z Q O_ H ~ Ln J WO LL U� THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below (x) would be potentially affected by the proposed project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Hazards and Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population and Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Tribal Cultural Resources ❑ Utilities and Service Systems ❑ Wildfire El Mandatory Findings of Significance The environmental factors checked below (x) would be potentially affected by the proposed project, involving at least one impact that is a "Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality ® Biological Resources ® Cultural Resources ❑ Energy ® Geology/Soils ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Hazards and Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population and Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation ® Tribal Cultural Resources ❑ Utilities and Service Systems ❑ Wildfire ® Mandatory Findings of Significance The environmental factors checked below (x) would be potentially affected by the proposed project, involving at least one impact that is a "Less Than Significant" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ® Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ® Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ® Energy ® Geology/Soils ® Greenhouse Gas Emissions ® Hazards and Hazardous Materials ® Hydrology/Water Quality ® Land Use/Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ® Noise ® Population and Housing ® Public Services ® Recreation Z Transportation ❑ Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities and Service Systems ® Wildfire ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance The environmental factors checked below (x) would have "No Impact" by the proposed project as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ® Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ® Cultural Resources ❑ Energy ® Geology/Soils ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Hazards and Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning ® Mineral Resources ❑ Noise El Population and Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation ❑ Tribal Cultural Resources ❑ Utilities and Service Systems ❑ Wildfire ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 19 DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the lead agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: 71 1 find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑x I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 71 1 find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 71 1 find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. 71 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. > (nature Fernando Herrera Printed Name 4/24/2023 Date For Cheryl Kitzerow, Community Development Director Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 20 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project - specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analyses," as described in (5) below,_may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. State CEQA Guidelines §15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 21 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Less Than I I I. AESTHETICS Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact I No Impact Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic ❑ ❑ F"I ❑ vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock ❑ ❑ 0 outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway? c) In non -urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from El El El El publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or ❑ El0 ❑ nighttime views in the area? Sources: City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit C-8 Scenic Highways, City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit LU-1 Community Structure; City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit LU-2 Land Use Map; City of Menifee. 2022. Zoning Map. City of Menifee. 2013. City of Menifee General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR); California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2022. California State Scenic Highway System Map.; City of Menifee. Ordinances 2009-24 (Dark Sky; Light Pollution) Menifee Municipal Code Chapter 6.01. Administrative Nuisance Abatement (MMC Chapter 11.20). Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal C-6 Scenic highway corridors that are preserved and protected from change which would diminish the aesthetic value of lands adjacent to the designated routes. Policy C-6.4 Incorporate riding, hiking, and bicycle trails and other compatible public recreational facilities within scenic corridors. Policy C-6.5 Ensure that the design and appearance of new landscaping, structures, equipment, signs, or grading within Eligible County Scenic Highway corridors are compatible with the surrounding scenic setting or environment. Goal CD-3 Projects, developments, and public spaces that visually enhance the character of the community and are appropriately buffered from dissimilar land uses so that differences in type and intensity do not conflict. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 23 Policy CD-3.1 Preserve positive characteristics and unique features of a site during the design and development of a new project; the relationship to scale and character of adjacent uses should be considered. Policy CD-3.3 Minimize visual impacts of public and private facilities and support structures through sensitive site design and construction. This includes, but is not limited to: appropriate placement of facilities; undergrounding, where possible; and aesthetic design (e.g., cell tower stealthing). Policy CD-3.5 Design parking lots and structures to be functionally and visually integrated and connected; off-street parking lots should not dominate the street scene. Policy CD-3.9 Utilize Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) techniques and defensible space design concepts to enhance community safety. Policy CD-3.10 Employ design strategies and building materials that evoke a sense of quality and permanence. Policy CD-3.12 Utilize differing but complementary forms of architectural styles and designs that incorporate representative characteristics of a given area. Policy CD-3.14 Provide variations in color, texture, materials, articulation, and architectural treatments. Avoid long expanses of blank, monotonous walls or fences. Policy CD-3.15 Require property owners to maintain structures and landscaping to high standards of design, health, and safety. Policy CD-3.17 Encourage the use of creative landscape design to create visual interest and reduce conflicts between different land uses. Policy CD-3.19 Design walls and fences that are well integrated in style with adjacent structures and terrain and utilize landscaping and vegetation materials to soften their appearance. Policy CD-3.20 Avoid the blocking of public views by solid walls. Goal CD-4 Recognize, preserve, and enhance the aesthetic value of the City's enhanced landscape corridors and scenic corridors. Policy CD-4.1 Create unifying streetscape elements for enhanced landscape streets, including coordinated streetlights, landscaping, public signage, street furniture, and hardscaping. Policy CD-4.2 Design new and, when necessary, retrofit existing streets to improve walkability, bicycling, and transit integration; strengthen connectivity; and enhance community identity through improvements to the public right-of-way such as sidewalks, street trees, parkways, curbs, street lighting, and street furniture. Policy CD-4.8 Preserve and enhance view corridors by undergrounding and/or screening new or relocated electric or communication distribution lines, which would be visible from the City's scenic highway corridors. Goal CD-5 Economic Development Corridors that are visually distinctive and vibrant and combine commercial, industrial, residential, civic, cultural, and recreational uses. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 24 Goal CD-6 Attractive landscaping, lighting, and signage that conveys a positive image of the community. Policy CD-6.3 Require property owners to maintain the existing landscape on developed nonresidential sites and replace unhealthy or dead landscaping. Policy CD-6.4 Require that lighting and fixtures be integrated with the design and layout of a project and that they provide a desirable level of security and illumination. Policy CD-6.5 Limit light leakage and spillage that may interfere with the operations of the Palomar Observatory. Policy CD-6.6 Encourage the incorporation of lighting into signage design when appropriate in order to minimize glare and light spillage while accentuating the design of the signage. Policy CD-6.7 Integrate project signage into the architectural design and character of new buildings Policy CD-6.8 Discourage the use of flashing, moving, or audible signs. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impact La): Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Menifee lies within the San Jacinto Basin and encompasses numerous brush -covered hills and low mountains surrounded by a series of interconnected, broad, nearly flat-bottomed valleys.e The project site is located in an area zoned as EDC-NG and is not located near any hillsides, creeks, greenways, or other significant topography identified by the City of Menifee General Plan. 9-10The project site is entirely undeveloped and surrounded by Mapes Road and Big League Dreams Perris sports complex to the north; Sherman Road and residential development to the east; a United Parcel Service (UPS) customer center and vacant land to the south; and Southern California Gas Company, a storage yard, and Trumble Road to the west. Scenic views in and around Menifee include the San Jacinto Mountains to the northeast and east; the San Bernardino Mountains to the north; the San Gabriel Mountains to the northwest; and the Santa Ana Mountains to the west and southwest." The San Jacinto Mountains are over 18 miles east of the project site, the San Bernardino are over 20 miles to the northeast of the project site, the San Gabriel Mountains are over 35 miles to the northwest of the project site, and the Santa Ana Mountains are over 14 miles to the west of the project site. The Menifee General Plan Draft EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan would not substantially degrade scenic vistas in Menifee. All three parcels within the project site are designated as EDC by the City of Menifee General Plan Land Use Map12 and zoned as EDC-NG according to the City of Menifee Zoning Map.13 While the proposed project would construct light industrial warehouse and office structures on a site that is currently undeveloped, the structures would not be dissimilar to the developments to the north, west, and south of the project site. As such, the proposed project would not introduce a new visual obstacle to an existing scenic vista and would therefore have a less than significant impact on a scenic vista. Impact Lb): Less Than Significant Impact. There are no California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Designated Scenic Highways within the City. 14 However, the project site is approximately 0.21 mile northeast of State Route (SR) 74, an Eligible State Scenic Highway, and 1.52 miles west of 1-215, an 0 City of Menifee. 2013. City of Menifee General Plan Draft EIR, 5.1 Aesthetics. 9 City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit LU-2 Land Use Map. 10 City of Menifee. 2013 City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit LU-1 Community Structure 11 City of Menifee. 2013 City of Menifee General Plan Draft EIR, 5 1 Aesthetics. 12 City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit LU-2 Land Use Map. 13 City of Menifee. 2022. Zoning Map. Website: https://cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenterNiew/11042/Zoning-Map—February-2022?bidld=. Accessed September 14, 2022. 14 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2022. California State Scenic Highway System Map. Website: https://caltrans.maps arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa. Accessed June 27, 2022 Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 25 Eligible County Scenic Highway. 15 According to the Menifee General Plan Draft EIR, new and/or intensified uses along these roadways would not fully obstruct visual resources such as the hillsides or distant mountains and would not require substantial changes in topography.16 Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on scenic resources within a State Scenic Highway. Impact I.c): Less Than Significant Impact. All three parcels within the project site are designated as EDC by the City of Menifee General Plan Land Use Map17 and zoned EDC-NG.18 The EDC land use designation identifies areas where a mixture of uses is planned, such as residential, commercial, industrial, office, civic, entertainment, educational, and recreational, with horizontal and vertical uses permitted.19 The project site is entirely undeveloped and surrounded by Mapes Road and Big League Dreams Perris sports complex to the north; Sherman Road and residential development to the east; a UPS customer center and vacant land to the south; and Southern California Gas Company, a storage yard, and Trumble Road to the west. The proposed project would be consistent with the site's land use designation and would comply with applicable zoning ordinances and General Plan policies listed above. The Menifee Municipal Code also contains provisions that aim to minimize the visual and light and glare impacts of new development, including Chapter 6.01 (Dark Sky; Light Pollution), Chapter 9.290 (Wireless Communication Facilities), and Chapter 11.20 (Administrative Nuisance Abatement). As the project site is mostly bounded by developed land and is located in close proximity to existing residential development, the project site is not considered to be located in a nonurbanized area. As such, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact with regard to conflicts with applicable zoning and regulations governing scenic quality. Impact I.d): Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would include new sources of daytime and nighttime lighting, such as streetlights and exterior and interior lighting as part of the warehouse and offices, as well as mobile sources of lighting from incoming and outgoing trucks and vehicles. Though the proposed project would potentially result in new sources of light, the project site is located in an area with existing light sources from industrial, commercial, and residential development. The proposed project would comply with the Menifee Municipal Code Chapter 6.01 (Dark Sky; Light Pollution), which regulates lighting sources, materials, and installation in the City. Additionally, the proposed project would comply with applicable General Plan Community Design policies pertaining to lighting, signage, and landscaping, as well as the 2019 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen). As such, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact with regard to light and glare and their impact on day or nighttime views. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required. 15 City of Menifee. 2013. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit C-8 Scenic Highways. 16 City of Menifee. 2013 City of Menifee General Plan Draft EIR, 5.1 Aesthetics 17 City of Menifee 2021. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit LU-2 Land Use Map. 16 City of Menifee. 2022. Zoning Map Website: https://cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenterNiew/11042/Zoning-Map—February-2022?bidld=. Accessed June 29, 2022 19 City of Menifee. 2012. City of Menifee General Plan, Land Use Designation and Definition. Website: https:// www.cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenterNiew/485/Land-Use-Designations-Matrix?bidld=. Accessed July 15, 2022. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 26 Less Than II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST Potentially significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant RESOURCES: Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the State's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the proposed project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared El ❑ ❑ pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural ❑ ❑ ❑ use, or a Williamson Act Contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code §12220(g)), timberland (as defined in Public Resources Code Section ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑x 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined in Government Code §51104(g))? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? 9) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, ❑ ❑ ❑ to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? Sources: Menifee General Plan, California Department of Conservation's California Important Farmland Finder. Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-6 High -value agricultural lands available for long-term agricultural production in limited areas of the City. Policy OSC-6.1 Protect both existing farms and sensitive uses around them as agricultural acres transition to more developed land uses. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impact Il.a): No Impact. According to the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), the project site does not contain Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 27 Farmland of Statewide Importance. The site is, however, listed as Farmland of Local Importance.20 The California Department of Conservation defines Farmland of Local Importance as land of importance to the local agricultural economy as determined by each county's board of supervisors and a local advisory committee.21 Riverside County defines Farmland of Local Importance as soils that would be classified as Prime and Statewide but lack available irrigation water; lands planted to dryland crops of barley, oats, and wheat; lands producing major crops for Riverside County but that are not listed as Unique crops; dairylands, including corrals, pasture, milking facilities, hay and manure storage areas if accompanied with permanent pasture or hayland of 10 acres or more, lands identified by city or county ordinance as Agricultural Zones or Contracts, which includes Riverside City "Proposition R" lands, and lands planted to jojoba which are under cultivation and are of producing age.22 As the project site is not considered Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, this precludes the potential for new impacts associated with the conversion of farmland to nonagricultural uses. Furthermore, while the project site is designated as Farmland of Local Importance by the FMMP, it is currently zoned EDC-NG and is therefore identified as appropriate for permitted uses, including those anticipated in the proposed project, under this land use designation by the City of Menifee. As such, the proposed project would have no impact regarding the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland). Impacts Il.b-c): No Impact. The project site is zoned as EDC-NG and is not currently zoned for agricultural uses. According to the General Plan EIR, all Williamson Act contracts in the City went into nonrenewal status in 2007 and have since expired as of January 1, 2017. Therefore, the project site is not subject to a Williamson Act Contract and does not contain forest land or timberland. These conditions preclude the potential for new impacts associated with rezoning of forest land or timberland or conflicts with existing Williamson Act contracts. Therefore, no impact would occur. Impact Il.d): No Impact. The project site does not contain forest land. This condition precludes the potential for new impacts associated with the conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact with respect to loss of forest last or conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Impact Il.e): No Impact. The project site is designated as Farmland of Local Importance by the FMMP and does not contain forest land. All parcels within the site are designated as EDC by the City of Menifee General Plan Land Use Map23 and are zoned as EDC-NG according to the City of Menifee Zoning Map.24 Land uses surrounding the project site include Business Park (City of Perris) to the north, EDC-NG to the west and south, and Rural Residential (RR1) to the east.25 These land use designations and zoning are nonagricultural and non -forest uses and are intended for urban and residential development. This condition precludes the potential for new impacts associated with the conversion of farmland to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Therefore, no impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required. 20 California Department of Conservation. 2016 California Important Farmland Finder Website: https://map.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/ Accessed June 27, 2022. 21 California Department of Conservation. 2019. Important Farmland Categories. Website: https://www.conservation.ca gov/dirp/fmmp/Pages/Important-Farmland-Categories.aspx. Accessed June 14, 2022. 22 California Department of Conservation. 2019. Farmland of Local Importance (2018). Website: https:// www.conservation.ca.gov/dirp/fmmp/Documents/Farmland of Local_Importance_2018.pdf. Accessed June 27, 2022 23 City of Menifee. 2022. Land Use Map. Website: https://cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenterNiew/14673/Exhibit_LU-2_Land-Use-Map_l01221 Accessed June 16, 2022. 24 City of Menifee. 2022 Zoning Map. Website: https://cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenterNiew/11042/Zoning-Map—February-2022?bidid= Accessed June 16, 2022. 25 City of Menifee. 2022. Land Use Map. Website: https://cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenterNiew/14673/Exhibit_LU-2_Land-Use-Map_l01221 Accessed September 14, 2022 Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 28 Less Than III. AIR QUALITY Potentially Significantwith Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact I No Impact Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? 3) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an ❑ ❑ ® ❑ applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard? ;) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial ❑ ❑ pollutant concentrations? i) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a ❑ ❑ ® ❑ substantial number of people? Sources: City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan; South Coast Air Quality Management District Air Quality Management Plan; Urban Crossroads. 2022. Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Air Quality Impact Analysis. (See Appendix A.) Setting: The proposed project site is located within the City of Menifee, in Riverside County, which is within the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB). The SoCAB includes all of Orange County, Los Angeles County (except for the Antelope Valley), the non -desert portion of western San Bernardino County, and the western and Coachella Valley portions of Riverside County. The San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains bound the SoCAB on the north and east while the Pacific Ocean lies to the west of the SoCAB. The southern limit of the SoCAB is the San Diego County line. The SoCAB is under the jurisdiction of South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).26 The air pollutants for which national and State standards have been promulgated and that are most relevant to air quality planning and regulation in the SoCAB include ozone (03), nitrogen oxide (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter, including dust, 10 micrometers or less in diameter (PM,o), and particulate matter, including dust, 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter (PM2 5). In addition, toxic air contaminants (TACs) are of concern in the SoCAB. Each of these pollutants is briefly described below. Other pollutants that are regulated but not considered an issue in the project area are sulfur dioxide, vinyl chloride, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, and lead; the proposed project would not emit substantial quantities of those pollutants, so they are not discussed further in this section. Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-9 Reduced impacts to air quality at the local level by minimizing pollution and particulate matter. 26 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2017 Air Quality Management Plan. Website: http://www.agmd.gov/home/air- quality/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt-plan/final-2016-aqmp. Accessed May 24, 2022. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 29 Policy OCS-9.1 Meet State and federal clean air standards by minimizing particulate matter emissions from construction activities. Policy OCS-9.2 Buffer sensitive land uses, such as residences, schools, care facilities, and recreation areas from major air pollutant emission sources, including freeways, manufacturing, hazardous materials storage, wastewater treatment, and similar uses. Policy OCS-9.3 Comply with regional, State, and federal standards and programs for control of all airborne pollutants and noxious odors, regardless of source. Policy OCS-9.4 Support the Riverside County Regional Air Quality Task Force, the Southern California Association of Government's Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District's Air Quality Management Plan to reduce air pollution at the regional level. Policy OCS-9.5 Comply with the mandatory requirements of Title 24 Part 1 of the California Building Standards Code (CALGreen) and Title 24 Part 6 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Impact Ill.a): Less Than Significant Impact. Air Quality In March 2017, the SCAQMD released the Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The 2016 AQMP continues to evaluate current integrated strategies and control measures to meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), as well as to explore new and innovative methods to reach its goals. Some of these approaches include utilizing incentive programs, recognizing existing co -benefit programs from other sectors, and developing a strategy with fair share reductions at the federal, State, and local levels.27 Similar to the 2012 AQMP, the 2016 AQMP incorporates scientific and technological information and planning assumptions, including the 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016-2040 RTP/SCS), a planning document that supports the integration of land use and transportation to help the region meet the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements.211 The proposed project's consistency with the AQMP will be determined using the 2016 AQMP, as discussed below. Criteria for determining consistency with the AQMP are defined in Chapter 12, Section 12.2, and Section 12.3 of the 1993 CEQA Handbook.29 These indicators are discussed below. Consistency Criterion No. 1 The proposed project will not result in an 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. 27 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2017 Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. 2e Southern California Association of Government (SCAG). 2016. 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy April. 29 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) 1993. CEQA Handbook. Available at SCAQMD, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 30 The violations that Consistency Criterion No. 1 refer to are the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and NAAQS. CAAQS and NAAQS violations would occur if regional or localized significance thresholds were exceeded. Construction Impacts —Consistency Criterion 1 Consistency Criterion No. 1 refers to violations of the CAAQS and NAAQS. CAAQS and NAAQS violations would occur if localized or regional significance thresholds were exceeded. As evaluated, the proposed project's regional and localized construction -source emissions would not exceed applicable regional significance threshold and localized significance threshold (LST). As such, a less than significant impact is expected. Operational Impacts —Consistency Criterion 1 As evaluated, the proposed project's localized and regional operation -source emissions would not exceed applicable regional significance threshold and LST. As such, a less than significant impact is expected. On the basis of the discussion of Impact Ill.b, and Impact Ill.c, the proposed project is determined to be consistent with the first criterion. Consistency Criterion No. 2 The 2016 AQMP demonstrates that the applicable ambient air quality standards can be achieved within the timeframes required under federal law. Growth projections from local general plans adopted by cities in the district are provided to the Southern California Association of Government (SCAG), which develops regional growth forecasts, which are then used to develop future air quality forecasts for the AQMP. Development consistent with the growth projections in the General Plan is considered to be consistent with the AQMP. Construction Impacts —Consistency Criterion 2 Peak day emissions generated by construction activities are independent of land use assignments but are a function of development scope and maximum area of disturbance. Irrespective of the site's land use designation, development of the site to its maximum potential would occur, with disturbance of the entire site occurring during construction activities. As such, when considering that no emissions thresholds will be exceeded, a less than significant impact would result. Operational Impacts —Consistency Criterion 2 The General Plan Land Use designation for the project site is EDC-NG. The intent of the EDC designation is to identify areas where a mixture of residential, commercial, office, industrial, entertainment, educational, and/or recreational uses or other uses is planned. Both horizontal and vertical mixed uses are permitted. In general, areas designated as EDC are envisioned to develop primarily as nonresidential uses with residential uses playing a supporting role. In addition to identifying a citywide preferred land use mix for all property designated as EDC, the General Plan will also identify a preferred mix of uses desired for each of the City's five EDC subareas (see above). Each subarea has a unique identity and plays a specific role in the City of Menifee. The General Plan will use these subareas to focus policy direction in the Land Use and Community Design elements. The proposed project is located within the Northern Gateway subarea. This area is envisioned as an employment center at Menifee's northern gateway that focuses on providing opportunity for business park development and more traditional industrial (less office) uses. As previously discussed, the proposed project consists of the development of 277,578 square feet of high -cube fulfillment center warehouse use within a single building, which is consistent with the proposed uses allowed under the land use designation, and therefore, the proposed project does not propose or require amendment of the site's underlying land use designation. On the basis of the preceding discussion, the proposed project is determined to be consistent with the second criterion. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 31 AQMP Consistency Conclusion The proposed project would not have the potential to result in or cause NAAQS or CAAQS violations. The proposed project's proposed uses are consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation. Additionally, the proposed project would not exceed the regional or localized construction and operational thresholds; thus, the proposed project's development intensity is consistent with the development intensities allowed within the General Plan as previously stated. As such, the proposed project is considered to be consistent with the AQMP. Impact Ill.b): Less Than Significant Impact. A project may have a significant impact if project -related emissions exceed federal, State, or regional standards or thresholds, or if project -related emissions substantially contribute to existing or projected air quality violations. The proposed project is located within the SoCAB, where efforts to attain State and federal air quality standards are governed by the SCAQMD. Both the State of California (State) and the federal government have established health -based ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for seven air pollutants (known as "criteria pollutants"): 03, CO, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (S02), PM10, PM2.5, and lead (Pb). The State has also established AAQS for additional pollutants. The AAQS are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace within a reasonable margin of safety. Where the State and federal standards differ, CAAQS are more stringent than NAAQS. Air pollution levels are measured at monitoring stations located throughout the SoCAB. Areas that are in nonattainment concerning federal or State AAQS are required to prepare plans and implement measures to bring the region into attainment. SCAQMD summarizes the project area's attainment status for the criteria pollutants.30 The proposed project's short-term construction and long-term operational emissions and their context for subsequently impacting the environment are discussed below. SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION Construction -Related Regional Impacts The construction -related regional air quality impacts have been analyzed for criteria pollutants. The methodology used to calculate regional construction air emissions is detailed in Appendix A and summarized below. The analysis of the project's short-term construction emissions for criteria pollutants is also presented below. Typical emission rates from construction activities were obtained from CalEEMod Version 2022.1. Using CalEEMod, the peak daily air pollutant emissions during each project phase were calculated and presented below. The CalEEMod construction emissions model outputs are provided in Appendix A. For purposes of analysis, construction of the proposed project is expected to commence in July 2023 and would last through September 2024. Should construction occur any time after the proposed dates, the construction emissions would decrease as emission regulations becoming more stringent.31 The duration of construction activity and associated equipment represents a reasonable approximation of the expected construction fleet as required per CEQA Guidelines. The proposed project would be required to comply with existing SCAQMD rules for reduction of fugitive dust emissions (Rule 403) and architectural coatings (Rule 1113). These SCAQMD rules are included as Best Available Control Measures (BACM). Compliance with Rule 403 is achieved through application of standard best management practices in construction and operation activities, such as application of water or chemical stabilizers to disturbed soils, covering haul vehicles, sweeping loose dirt from paved site 10 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) Attainment Status for South Coast Air Basin. Website: http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air- plans/ai r-q uality-management-plans/naaqs-caags-feb20l6. pdf 31 As shown in the CalEEMod User's Guide Version 2022.1, Section 4.3 "Off -Road Equipment" as the analysis year increases, emission factors for the same equipment pieces decrease due to the natural turnover of older equipment being replaced by newer less polluting equipment and new regulatory requirements. Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 32 access roadways, cessation of construction activity when winds exceed 25 miles per hour (mph), and establishing a permanent, stabilizing ground cover on finished sites. Rule 1113 requires architectural coating used to be no more than a low volatile organic compound (VOC) default level of 50 g/L. Table 1 presents the construction -related criteria pollutant emissions anticipated during the construction period and indicates that emissions resulting from the project construction will not exceed criteria pollutant thresholds established by the SCAQMD for emissions of any criteria pollutant. Therefore, project construction -related activities would result in a less than significant regional air quality impact during construction. Table 1: Maximum Daily Construction Emissions Summary Year Emissions (lbs/day) VOC NO. CO F SO. PM,, PM2.5 Summer 2023 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 2024 39.20 28.20 40.90 0.05 3.82 1.92 Winter 2023 4.99 47.20 39.30 0.08 8.46 5.08 2024 2.53 19.10 23.80 0.04 2.89 1.41 Maximum Daily Emissions 39.20 47.20 40.90 0.08 8.46 5.08 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO Construction -Related Local Impacts Construction -related air emissions could exceed State and federal air quality standards in the localized project vicinity, even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant enough to create a regional impact to the SoCAB. The potential local impacts of construction of the proposed project are evaluated in the following section. Local Air Quality Impacts from Construction The appropriate Source Receptor Area for the LST analysis for the proposed project is the Perris Valley (SRA 24). LSTs apply to CO, NO2, PM,o, and PM25. The SCAQMD produced lookup tables for projects less than or equal to 5 acres in size. In order to determine the appropriate methodology for determining localized impacts that could occur as a result of project -related construction, the following process is undertaken: • The CalEEMod model is utilized to determine the maximum daily on -site emissions that will occur during construction activity. • The SCAQMD's Fact Sheet for Applying CaIEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds and CaIEEMod User's Guide Appendix A: Calculation Details for CaIEEMod is used to determine the maximum site acreage that is actively disturbed based on the construction equipment fleet and equipment hours as estimated in CaIEEMod. • If the total acreage disturbed is less than or equal to 5 acres per day, as is the case for this proposed project, then the SCAQMD's screening look -up tables are utilized to determine whether a proposed project has the potential to result in a significant impact. The look -up tables establish a maximum Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 33 daily emissions threshold in Ibs/day that can be compared to CaIEEMod outputs. Three and a half acres of land will be disturbed per day. • If the total acreage disturbed is greater than 5 acres per day, then LST impacts may still be conservatively evaluated using the LST look -up tables for a 5-acre disturbance area. Use of the 5- acre disturbance area thresholds can be used to show that even if the daily emissions from all construction activity were emitted within a 5-acre area, and therefore concentrated over a smaller area which would result in greater site adjacent concentrations, the impacts would still be less than significant if the applicable 5-acre thresholds are utilized. • The LST Methodology presents mass emission rates for each Source Receptor Area, project sizes of 1, 2, and 5 acres, and nearest receptor distance of 25 meters. For project sizes between the values given, or with receptors at distances between the standardized receptors, the methodology uses linear interpolation to determine the thresholds. The CaIEEMod output sheets included in Appendix A indicate the equipment used for this analysis. The SCAQMD's screening look -up tables were utilized in determining impacts, however, since the look -up tables identifies thresholds at only 1 acre, 2 acres, and 5 acres, and at distances of 25, 50, 100, 200 and 500 meters, linear regression was utilized, consistent with SCAQMD guidance. The proposed project's construction activities could actively disturb approximately 3.5 acres per day during site preparation and 4 acres per day during grading activities. For the purposes of analysis and in order to use linear regression, this analysis conservatively assumes that 5 acres can be disturbed during grading activities. The nearest receptor used for evaluation of localized impacts of PM10 and PM25 is the existing residence at 25100 Sherman Road, approximately 126 feet (38 meters) east of the project site. For purposes of analysis, a 38-meter distance will be used for evaluation of localized of PM10 and PM25 impacts. The nearest receptor used for evaluation of localized impacts of NOx and CO is the Southern California Gas Company, approximately 44 feet (13 meters) southwest of the project site. As such a 25-meter receptor distance will be used fui evaluation of localized NOx and CO. According to Table 2, localized construction emissions would not exceed the applicable SCAQMD LSTs for emissions of any criterial pollutant. Outputs from the model runs for unmitigated construction LSTs are provided in Appendix A. Co Site Pre Prep ' Gra Table 2: Localized Construction -Source Emissions nstruction i Emissions (Ibs/day) NOx CO PM10 PM2.s kctivity Year Scenario n/a n/a n/a n/a Summer Winter 47.00 38.00 8.19 5.02 Maximum Daily 47.00 38.00 8.19 5.02 Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 34 Construction Activity Year ` Scenario Emissions (lbs/day) NOx CO PM10 PM2.e SCAQMD Localized Threshold 237 1,346 23 8 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO Long -Term Operations Long-term project operations would result in a long-term increase in air quality emissions. Increased emissions would be due to project -generated vehicle trips and on -going use of the proposed project. The following is an analysis of potential long-term operational air quality impacts. Operational Regional Impacts Operational activities associated with the proposed project would result in emissions of VOCs, NOx, SOx, CO, PM1o, and PM2 s. Operational emissions would be expected from the following primary sources: Area Sources. Area sources include emissions from consumer products, landscape maintenance equipment, and architectural coatings. Landscape maintenance includes fuel combustion emissions from equipment such as lawn mowers, rototillers, shredders/grinders, blowers, trimmers, chainsaws, and hedge trimmers. The emissions associated with landscape maintenance equipment were calculated based on assumptions provided in CaIEEMod. Energy Sources. Electricity and natural gas are used by almost every project. Criteria pollutant emissions are emitted through the generation of electricity and consumption of natural gas. However, because electrical generating facilities for the project area are located either outside the region (State) or offset through the use of pollution credits (RECLAIM) for generation within the SoCAB, criteria pollutant emissions from off -site generation of electricity are generally excluded from the evaluation of significance and only natural gas use is considered. Mobile Sources. Project -related operational emissions derive predominantly from mobile sources. Neither the project applicant nor the City has any regulatory control over these tail pipe emissions. Rather, vehicle tail pipe source emissions are regulated by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). As a result of ARB and EPA actions, basin -wide vehicular -source emissions have been reduced dramatically over the past years and are expected to further decline as clean vehicle and fuel technologies improve. The project -related operational emissions would derive primarily from vehicle trips generated by the proposed project. Per the Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Traffic Analysis (Appendix H), the proposed project is anticipated to generate a net total of 592 trips per day with 35 AM peak -hour trips and 46 PM peak -hour trips. Daily trips include 486 passenger vehicles trips and 106 truck trips. Please refer to Appendix A for fleet composition. Vehicles traveling on paved roads would be a source of fugitive emissions due to the generation of road dust inclusive of brake and tire wear particulates. The emissions estimates for travel on paved roads were calculated using CaIEEMod. On -Site Equipment Source. It is common for industrial buildings to operate exterior cargo handling equipment in the building's truck court areas. For the proposed project, on -site modeled operational Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 35 equipment includes up to three 175 horsepower (hp), natural gas -powered cargo handling equipment: port tractor operating 4 hours a day32 for 365 days of the year. Table 3 presents the proposed project's long-term operational worst -case summer/winter criteria pollutant emissions for all sources and indicates that none of the sources would exceed SCAQMD regional thresholds. Therefore, long-term project operations would result in a less than significant regional air quality impact. Table 3: Summary of Maximum Daily Operational Emissions Source Emissions (lbs/day) VOC NOx CO SOX PM10 PM2.e Summer Mobile Source 2.27 9.23 31.70 0.13 3.41 0.76 Area Source 8.68 0.10 12.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 On -Site Equipment Source 0.12 0.38 16.44 0.00 0.03 0.03 Project Maximum Daily Emissions 11.07 9.71 60.24 0.13 3.46 0.81 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO Winter Mobile Source 2.16 9.74 26.00 0.12 3.41 0.76 Area Source 6.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 On -Site Equipment Source 0.12 0.38 16.44 0.00 0.03 0.03 Project Maximum Daily Emissions 8.98 10.12 42.44 0.12 3.44 0.79 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO NO NO Source: CalEEMod operational -source emissions are presented in Appendix A. Operational Local Impacts As previously stated, the proposed project is located on an approximately 13.34-acre parcel. As noted previously, the LST Methodology provides lookup tables for sites with an area with daily disturbance of 5 acres or less. For projects that exceed 5 acres, the 5-acre LST lookup tables can be used as a screening tool to determine whether pollutants require additional detailed analysis. This approach is conservative as it assumes that all on -site emissions associated with the proposed project would occur within a concentrated 5-acre area. This screening method would therefore over -predict potential localized impacts, because by assuming that on -site operational activities are occurring over a smaller area, the resulting concentrations of air pollutants are more highly concentrated once they reach the smaller site boundary than they would be for activities if they were spread out over a larger surface area. On a larger site, the 92 Based on Table II-3, Port and Rail Cargo Handling Equipment Demographics by Type, from California Air Resources Board's (ARB's) Technology Assessment: Mobile Cargo Handling Equipment document, a single piece of equipment could operate up to 2 hours per day (Total Average Annual Activity divided by Total Number Pieces of Equipment). As such, the analysis conservatively assumes that the tractor/loader/backhoe would operate up to 4 hours per day. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 36 same amount of air pollutants generated would disperse over a larger surface area and would result in a lower concentration once emissions reach the project site boundary. As such, LSTs for a 5-acre site during operations are used as a screening tool to determine whether further detailed analysis is required. The LST analysis generally includes on -site sources. (Area, energy, mobile, on -site cargo handling equipment, and stationary equipment are previously discussed in this report). However, it should be noted that the CalEEMod outputs do not separate on -site and off -site emissions from mobile sources. As such, in an effort to establish a maximum potential impact scenario for analytic purposes, the emissions shown in Table 4 represent all on -site project -related stationary (area) sources and project -related mobile sources. It should be noted that the longest on -site distance is roughly 0.5 mile for both trucks and passenger cars. Modeling based on these assumptions demonstrates that even within broad encompassing parameters, operational -source emissions of the proposed project would not exceed applicable LSTs. Table 4: Maximum Daily Localized Operations Emissions Thresholds Scenario Emissions (lbslday) NOx CO PM10 PM2.5 Summer 2.18 33.18 0.14 0.07 Winter 2.17 21.47 0.13 0.05 Maximum Daily Emissions 2.18 33.18 0.14 0.07 SCAQMD Localized Threshold 270 1,577 7 3 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO NO NO Source: CaIEEMod localized operational -source emissions are presented in Appendix A. As shown in Table 4, operational emissions would not exceed the LST thresholds for the nearest sensitive receptor. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant localized impact during operational activity. Cumulative Impacts The CAAQS designate the area including the project site as being in nonattainment for 03, PM1o, and PM2 5 while the NAAQS designates the area including the project site as being in nonattainment for 03 and PM2 5. Per SCAQMD guidance on how to address cumulative impacts for air pollution, the analysis conducted assumed that individual projects that do not generate operational or construction emissions that exceed the SCAQMD's recommended daily thresholds for project -specific impacts would also not cause a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants for which the SoCAB is in nonattainment, and, therefore, would not be considered to have a significant, adverse air quality impact. Alternatively, individual project -related construction and operational emissions that exceed SCAQMD thresholds for project -specific impacts would be considered cumulatively considerable. Construction Impacts The project -specific evaluation of emissions presented in the preceding analysis demonstrates that project construction -source air pollutant emissions would not result in exceedances of regional thresholds. Therefore, project construction -source emissions would be considered less than significant on a project - specific and cumulative basis. Operational Impacts The project -specific evaluation of emissions presented in the preceding analysis demonstrates that project operational -source air pollutant emissions would not result in exceedances of regional thresholds. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 37 Therefore, project operational -source emissions would be considered less than significant on a project - specific and cumulative basis. Impact Ill.c): Less Than Significant Impact. The potential impact of project -generated air pollutant emissions at sensitive receptors has also been considered. Sensitive receptors can include uses such as long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, and retirement homes. Residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, and athletic facilities can also be considered as sensitive receptors. Results of the LST analysis indicate that the proposed project would not exceed the SCAQMD localized significance thresholds during construction. Therefore, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations during project construction. Additionally, the proposed project would not exceed the SCAQMD localized significance thresholds during operational activity. Further, project traffic would not create or result in a CO "hotspot" (see Section 3.9 of Appendix A for analysis). Therefore, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations as the result of project operations. Furthermore, construction Health Risk Assessment (HRA) and operational HRA for the proposed project show that the proposed project would not exceed any of the cancer risk nor non -cancer risk thresholds in SCAQMD. For modeling approach, data, and results, please refer to the HRA in Appendix A. Therefore, the proposed project would have less than significant impacts in terms of substantial pollutant concentrations to nearby sensitive receptors. Impact Ill.d): Less Than Significant Impact. The potential for the proposed project to generate objectionable odors has also been considered. Land uses associated with odor complaints include: • Agricultural uses (livestock and farming) • Wastewater treatment plants • Fond pmrpssing plants • Chemical plants • Composting operations • Refineries • Landfills • Dairies • Fiberglass molding facilities The proposed project does not contain land uses typically associated with emitting objectionable odors. Potential odor sources associated with the proposed project may result from construction equipment exhaust and the application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities and the temporary storage of typical solid waste (refuse) associated with the proposed project's (long-term operational) 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 would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with current solid waste regulations. The proposed project would also be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent occurrences of public nuisances. Therefore, odors and other emissions (such as those leading to odors) associated with construction and operations activities of the proposed project would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 38 Less Than IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special -status species in local or ❑ ® ❑ ❑ regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, ❑ ❑ ❑ policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or ❑ ❑ ❑ migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree ❑ ❑ ❑ preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other ❑ ® ❑ ❑ approved local, regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan? Sources: City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan; City of Menifee. 2013. City of Menifee General Plan EIR; Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency. 2003. Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP); ELMT Consulting, Inc. 2022. Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Consistency Analysis. (Included in Appendix B.) Setting: The project site consists of vacant, undeveloped land that has been subject to a variety of anthropogenic disturbances associated with historic agricultural activities, surrounding development, and routine weed abatement/disking activities. These disturbances have eliminated the natural plant communities that historically occurred within the immediate vicinity of the project site. Because of existing and historic land Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 39 uses, no native plant communities or natural communities of special concern were observed on or adjacent to the project site. The project site ranges in elevation from approximately 1,423 to 1,434 feet above mean sea level. On -site topography is generally flat with no areas of significant topographic relief and gently slopes from southeast to northwest. Vegetation Sensitive Vegetation Communities The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) lists two special -status habitats as being identified within the Perris and Romoland quadrangles: Southern Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest and Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest, which do not occur on the project site. No California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) special -status plant communities occur within the boundaries of the project site. Vegetation Communities on the Project Site The project site contains one land cover type that is classified as disturbed. These areas are impacted by routine weed abatement and primarily support weedy and early successional species such as short -pod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), horseweed (Erigeron sp.), prickly Russian thistle (Kali tragus), and telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora). Wildlife Wildlife activity during the field survey was low and consisted primarily of common avian species tolerant of human disturbances and activities. No active nests or birds displaying nesting behavior were observed during the field survey, which was conducted during the breeding season. The only reptilian species observed during the field investigation was the Great Basin fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis longipes). Other common reptilian species expected to occur on -site include the common side -blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana elegans) and southern alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata). Mammalian species observed during the field investigation were valley gopher (Thomomys bottae) and desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii). Other common mammalian species expected to occur on -site include coyote (Canis latrans), opossum (Didelphis virginiana), and raccoon (Procyon lotor). The project site has not been identified as occurring in a wildlife corridor or linkage. Sensitive Wildlife No -special -status wildlife species were observed on the project site during the field investigation. Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-8 Protected biological resources, especially sensitive and special -status wildlife species and their natural habitats. Policy OSC-8.1 Work to implement the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan in coordination with the Regional Conservation Authority. Policy OSC-8.2 Support local and regional efforts to evaluate, acquire, and protect natural habitats for sensitive, threatened, and endangered species occurring in and around the City. Policy OSC-8.4 Identify and inventory existing natural resources in the City of Menifee. Policy 0SC-8.5 Recognize the impacts new development will have on the City's natural resources and identify ways to reduce these impacts. Policy OSC-8.8 Implement and follow MSHCP goals and policies when making discretionary actions pursuant to Section 13 of the Implementing Agreement. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 40 Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impact IV.a): Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Sensitive Species According to the CNDDB and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS), 24 special -status plant species have been recorded in the Perris and Romoland quadrangles (refer to Appendix B). Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of on -site habitats, it was determined that the project site does not have potential to support any of the special -status plant species known to occur in the vicinity and all are presumed absent due to the lack of native habitats and presence of historical and repeated on -site disturbances. According to the CNDDB, 76 special -status wildlife species have been reported in the Perris and Romoland quadrangles (refer to Appendix B). The project site and adjacent lands contain suitable non-native grassland habitat with low -growing vegetation, providing conditions that have a moderate potential to provide foraging habitat for Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperi►), sharp -shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus), and California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia), and a low potential to provide marginal foraging habitat for transient or migrating burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) and northern harrier (Circus hudsonius). Portions of the project site are vegetated with low -growing plant species that allow for some line of sight observation favored by burrowing owls. However, no suitable mammal burrows (>4 inches in diameter) that could provide burrowing and nesting opportunities for burrowing owl were observed on -site. Additionally, the site supports and is surrounded by tall trees and power poles that provide perching opportunities for large raptors (i.e., red-tailed hawk) that can prey on burrowing owls. To ensure that project -related impacts to the aforementioned species do not occur during implementation of the proposed project, a pre -construction nesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance, as described under MM BIO-1. With implementation of the pre -construction nesting bird clearance survey, impacts to the aforementioned species would be less than significant and no mitigation would be required. In addition, a 30-day pre -construction survey for burrowing owls shall be conducted prior to initial ground -disturbing activities (e.g., vegetation clearing, clearing and grubbing, tree removal, site watering) as described under MM BIO-2, to ensure that no burrowing owls have colonized the site in the days or weeks preceding the ground -disturbing activities. Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan The Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) covers 146 species, 38 of which require additional surveys if the proposed project occurs in the specific survey area for a species. The Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) MSHCP Information Map outlines, on a parcel by parcel basis, those properties which require habitat assessments and focused surveys. Based on the RCA MSHCP Information Map query and review of the MSHCP, it was determined that the project site is not located within the designated survey area for Narrow Endemic Plant Species as depicted in Figure 6-1 within Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP. Further, based on the results of the field investigation, the project site does not provide suitable habitat for MSHCP listed Narrow Endemic Plant Species. Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP, Additional Survey Needs and Procedures, states that additional surveys may be needed for certain species in order to achieve coverage for these species. Based on the RCA MSHCP Information Map query and review of the MSHCP, it was determined that the project site is located within a designated survey area only for burrowing owl, as depicted in Figure 6-4 within Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP. Critical Habitat The project site is not located with United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)-designated Critical Habitat for any listed species. Therefore, loss or adverse modification of Critical Habitat would not occur with implementation of the proposed project, and consultation with the USFWS would not be required for impacts to Critical Habitat. Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 41 With the implementation of MM BIO 1, MM BIO-2, and Standard Conditions of Approval (COA) BIO-1 through COA BIO-3, impacts would be less than significant. Impact 2.4.1b): No impact. The project site does not contain riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. No jurisdictional drainages, riparian/riverine and/or wetland features were observed within the project site during the field investigation. No Riparian/Riverine habitat, as defined under the MSHCP, or other sensitive natural communities were recorded on or adjacent to the project site; therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on any riparian habitat, Riparian/Riverine, or other sensitive natural community. No impact would occur. Impact IV.c): No Impact. No State or federally protected wetlands were observed on the project site or nearby adjacent areas. A review of recent and historic aerial photographs (1985-2021) of the project site did not provide visual evidence of an astatic or vernal pool conditions within the project site. No ponding was observed during the field investigation, further supporting the fact that the drainage patterns currently occurring on the project site do not follow hydrologic regime needed for vernal pools. There are no classes of soils on -site that would provide an impermeable restrictive layer and provide conditions for the development of vernal pools. From this review of historic aerial photographs and observations during the field investigations, it can be concluded that there is no indication of vernal pools or suitable fairy shrimp habitat occurring within the proposed project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.). As such, no impact would occur. Impact IV.d): No Impact. The project site has not been identified as occurring in a wildlife corridor or linkage. The proposed project will be confined to existing areas that have been heavily disturbed and are isolated from regional wildlife corridors and linkages as there are no riparian corridors, creeks, or useful patches of steppingstone habitat (natural areas) within or connecting the site to a recognized wildlife corridor or linkage. As such, implementation of the proposed project is not expected to impact wildlife movement opportunities and no impacts to wildlife corridors or linkages are expected to occur and use of wildlife nursery sites will not be impeded. As such, no impact would occur. Impact IV.e): No Impact. Vegetation on -site is limited to grassland species and ruderal or weedy species. There are no trees on -site that are considered Heritage Trees as defined in the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance (MMC § 9.86.110). Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance, and no project - related impact would occur in this regard. As such, no impact would occur. Impact IV.f): Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. No wildlife species that are Covered Species and Adequately Conserved by the MSHCP were detected within the project site during the habitat assessment and focused surveys. The proposed project would not directly affect any relevant MSHCP-covered plant and animal species for which surveys can sometimes be required or special mitigation arranged. Payment of MSHCP and Stephens' kangaroo rat fees is intended to offset habitat losses for animals such as Stephens' kangaroo rat, coyote, and foraging bird species that might utilize the project site. The impacts that might occur on -site are what the MSHCP anticipated in areas not situated in Criteria Area Cells (i.e., potential future MSHCP Reserve lands). Impacts would be primarily offset through MSHCP fee payment and Stephens' kangaroo rat fee payment. The proposed project would not conflict with the relevant provisions of the MSHCP and a less than significant impact would occur in this regard with implementation of MM BIO-1 and BIO-2 and Standard Conditions of Approval COA BIO-1 through COA BIO-3. As such, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Mitigation Measures: MM 13I0-1 If construction occurs between February 1 and August 31, the project applicant shall retain a qualified Biologist to conduct a pre -construction clearance surrey for nesting birds that shall be conducted within 3 days of the start of any vegetation removal or ground - Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 42 disturbing activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed during construction. The Biologist conducting the clearance survey shall document a negative survey with a brief letter report indicating that no impacts to active avian nests will occur. If an active avian nest is discovered during the pre -construction clearance survey, construction activities shall occur only outside of a no -disturbance buffer. The size of the no - disturbance buffer shall be determined by the wildlife Biologist and will depend on the level of noise and/or surrounding anthropogenic disturbances, line of sight between the nest and the construction activity, type and duration of construction activity, ambient noise, species habituation, and topographical barriers. These factors will be evaluated on a case -by -case basis when developing buffer distances. Limits of construction to avoid an active nest will be established in the field with flagging, fencing, or other appropriate barriers; and construction personnel shall be instructed on the sensitivity of nest areas. A biological monitor shall be present to delineate the boundaries of the buffer area and to monitor the active nest to ensure that nesting behavior is not adversely affected by the construction activity. Once the Biologist determines that young birds have fledged and left the nest, or the nest otherwise becomes inactive under natural conditions, the Biologist shall remove the buffer and construction activities within the buffer area can occur. MM B1O-2 The project applicant shall retain a qualified Biologist to conduct a 30-day pre -construction survey for burrowing owl. The results of the single one -day survey would be submitted to the City prior to obtaining a grading permit. If burrowing owls are not detected during the pre -construction survey, no further mitigation is required. If burrowing owls are detected during the pre -construction survey, the project applicant and a qualified consulting Biologist will be required to prepare and submit to CDFW for approval a burrowing owl relocation program. Standard Conditions of Approval: COA BI0-1 In accordance with City of Menifee requirements, the project applicant shall make the appropriate mitigation fee payment into the Stephens' kangaroo rat fee payment program for conservation of Stephens' kangaroo rat -occupied habitats in order to offset the loss of potentially suitable Stephens' kangaroo rat habitat on -site through project implementation. COA BIO-2 In accordance with City of Menifee requirements, the project applicant shall make the appropriate MSHCP mitigation fee payment that will contribute to conservation and management of conservation land for all MSHCP-covered organisms. COA BIO-3 The proposed project shall implement applicable Standard Best Management Practices (BMPs) listed in Volume 1, Appendix C of the MSHCP to ensure project activities do not adversely affect any adjacent undeveloped areas. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 43 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5? Less Than Potentially Significant with Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporated b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource ❑ pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Disturb any human remains, including those ❑ interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Sources: City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan; City of Menifee. 2013. City of Menifee General Plan Draft EIR; Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 2022. Cultural Resources Assessment for the Mapes Road Project, City of Menifee, Riverside County, California; Pedestrian Survey conducted by Brian F. Smith on January 5, 2022 (Provided in Appendix C.) Setting: This section describes the existing cultural resources setting and potential effects from project implementation on the project site and its surrounding area. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on information provided by the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), the Eastern Information Center (EIC), National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), historic United States Geological Survey (USGS) data and historic aerial photographs Non-ronfidential records search results and other correspondence are included in Appendix C. Eastern Information Center On December 27, 2021, Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. (BFSA) conducted a records search and literature review at the EIC located at University of California, Riverside for the project site and a 1-mile search radius surrounding it. The purpose of this review was to access existing cultural resource survey reports, archaeological site records, historic aerial photographs, and historic maps and evaluate whether any previously documented prehistoric or historic archaeological sites, architectural resources, cultural landscapes, or other resources exist within or near the project site. The results from the records search indicate that there are four prehistoric, one multicomponent (both prehistoric and historic), and 18 historic resources recorded within the 1-mile search radius, none of which are located within the project boundaries. In addition, 30 area -specific survey reports are on file with the EIC, none of which are located within the project boundaries, suggesting that the project site has not been previously surveyed for cultural resources. A records search map identifying the project boundaries and a 1-mile search radius along with relevant non -confidential records search results can be found in Appendix C. Native American Heritage Commission BFSA contacted the NAHC to determine whether any sacred sites were located within the project site of its vicinity. The NAHC indicated that the Sacred Lands Files (SLF) search was positive for Native American cultural resources within the project boundaries and recommended contacting the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians. As the lead agency, the City of Menifee is responsible for Native American consultation per the requirements of Assembly Bill (AB) 52 (Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014). AB 52 Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 44 established a formal consultation process for California tribes as part of the CEQA process. Tribal consultation is best served by a government -to -government model, as a result, no additional outreach was conducted by BFSA for the current project nor is it required. However, the NAHC included the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians on an email regarding the positive results of the SLF search. All correspondence is provided in Appendix C. Pedestrian Survey On January 5, 2022, BFSA Principal Investigator Brian F. Smith conducted a pedestrian survey for unrecorded cultural resources within the project boundaries. The survey of the property was an intensive reconnaissance consisting of a series of parallel survey transects spaced at approximately 10-meter intervals, oriented east to west, which covered all areas of the project site. The entire property was accessible, and it is currently a plowed field. The soil within the project site primarily consists of sandy loam devoid of any notably sized cobbles or rocks. Vegetation within the subject property was minimal and ground visibility was good to excellent. The survey did not result in the identification of any cultural resources. No historic or prehistoric resources were observed during the survey. Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-5 Archaeological, historical, and cultural resources that are protected and integrated into the City's built environment. Policy OSC-5.1 Preserve and protect archaeological and historic resources and cultural sites, places, districts, structures, landforms, objects and native burial sites, traditional cultural landscaped and other features, consistent with State law and any laws, regulations or policies which may be adopted by the City to implement this goal and associated policies. Policy OSC-5.4 Establish clear and responsible policies and best practices to identify, evaluate, and protect previously unknown archaeological, historic, and cultural resources, following applicable CEQA and NEPA procedures and in consultation with the appropriate Native American tribes who have ancestral lands within the City. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impact V.a) No Impact. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 defines "historical resources" as resources listed in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), a local register, determined significant by the lead agency, or determined to be eligible by the California Historical Resources Commission for listing in the CRHR. The criteria for eligibility are generally set by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, which established the NRHP and which recognizes properties that are significant at the federal, State, and local levels. To be eligible for listing in the NRHP and CRHR, a district, site, building, structure, or object must possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association relative to American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture. In addition, unless the property possesses exceptional significance, it must be at least 50 years old to be eligible. The results from the EIC indicate that there are 19 historic resources located within the 1-mile search radius, none of which are located within the project boundaries. The pedestrian survey determined that no historic resources were identified. While unlikely, subsurface construction activities always have the potential to destroy or damage previously undiscovered historical resources. Historic resources can include wood, stone, foundations, and other structural remains; debris -filled wells or privies; and deposits of wood, glass, ceramics, and other refuse. Impacts to historical resources would not occur. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 45 Table 5: Cultural Resources Within the 1-mile Radius of the Project Site Resource No. Resource Description P-33-012619 AP02: Lithic Scatter P-33-012620 AP02: Lithic Scatter P-33-012728 AP02: Lithic Scatter P-33-012822 AP04: Bedrock milling feature P-33-014324 AP04: Bedrock milling feature; AH04: Privies/dumps/trash scatters RIV-4180H AH04: Privies/dumps/trash scatters P-33-014323 AH04: Privies/dumps/trash scatters P-33-012621 AH04: Privies/dumps/trash scatters P-33-007701 HP02: Single-family property P-33-007702 HP02: Single-family property P-33-015381 HP02: Single-family property P-33-015382 HP02: Single-family property P-33-015383 HP02: Single-family property P-33-015389 HP02: Single-family property AH07: Roads/trails/railroad grades AH07: Roads/trails/railroad grades RIV-8196H RIV-10,349 RIV-10,350 AH07: Roads/trails/railroad grades RIV-10,351 AI-107: Roads/trails/railroad grades RIV-10,403 AH07: Roads/trails/railroad grades RIVA0,404 AH07: Roads/trails/railroad grades RIV-10,543 AH07: Roads/trails/railroad grades RIV-11,281 AH07: Roads/trails/railroad grades P-33-028203 HP30: Trees/vegetation Source: Eastern Information Center (EIC) Records Search. December 27, 2021 Impact V.b): Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines defines significant archaeological resources as resources that meet the criteria for historical resources, as discussed above, or resources that constitute unique archaeological resources. A project - related significant adverse effect could occur if a project were to affect archaeological resources that fall under either of these categories. The records search conducted at the EIC for the project site and its 1-mile radius identified 23 archaeological resources (5 prehistoric and 18 historic), none of which are located within the project boundaries. In addition, the results of the pedestrian survey did not locate or identify any prehistoric resources. Nevertheless, it is possible that earthmoving activities associated with project construction could encounter previously undiscovered archaeological resources. Archaeological resources can include, but are not limited to, stone, bone, wood or shell artifacts or features, including hearths and structural elements. Damage or destruction of these resources would be a potentially significant impact. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 46 Implementation of MM CUL-3 would ensure that this potential impact is reduced to a less than significant level. Impact V.c): Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. No human remains or cemeteries are known to exist within or near the project site. Although human remains within the project site are unlikely, there is always the possibility that earthmoving activities associated with project construction could potentially damage or destroy previously undiscovered human remains. This would be a potentially significant impact. In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 must be followed. MM CUL-1, MM CUL-2 and COA TCR-1 further specify the procedures the project must follow in the event human remains are uncovered. Along with compliance with these guidelines and statutes, implementation of MM CUL-1, MM CUL-2 and COA TCR-1 would reduce potential impacts related to human remains to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures: MM CULA 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 Resource Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final 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 (NAHC) shall be contacted within the period specified by law (24 hours). Subsequently, the NAHC shall identify the "most likely descendant." The most likely descendant shall then make recommendations and engage in consultation concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. MM CUL-2 Non -Disclosure of Location Reburials It is understood by all parties that unless otherwise required by law, the site of any reburial of Native American human remains or associated grave goods shall not be disclosed and shall not be governed by public disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act. The Coroner, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California Government Code Section 7927.000, parties and lead agencies will be asked to withhold public disclosure information related to such reburial, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California Government Code Section 7927.000. MM CUL-3 Inadvertent Archaeological 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 only, 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 as determined in consultation with the Native American tribe(s). a) 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 tribal representative(s), and the Community Development Director to discuss the significance of the find. Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 47 b) At the meeting, the significance of the discoveries shall be discussed and after consultation with the tribal representative(s) and the Archaeologist, a decision shall be made, with the concurrence of the Community Development Director, as to the appropriate mitigation (documentation, recovery, avoidance, etc.) for the cultural resources. c) Grading or 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. Work shall be allowed to continue outside of the buffer area and will be monitored by an additional Tribal monitor, if needed. d) Treatment and avoidance of the newly discovered resources shall be consistent with the Cultural Resources Management Plan and Monitoring Agreement entered into with the appropriate tribe. This may include avoidance of the cultural resources through project design, in -place preservation of cultural resources located in native soils and/or reburial -burial on the Project property so they are not subject to further disturbance in perpetuity as identified in Non -Disclosure of Reburial Condition... e) If the find is determined to be significant and avoidance of the site has not been achieved, a Phase III data recovery plan shall be prepared by the project Archaeologist, in consultation with the Tribe, and shall be submitted to the City for their review and approval prior to implementation of the said plan... f) Pursuant to California Public Resources. Code Section 21083.2(b), avoidance is the preferred method of preservation for archaeological resources and cultural resources. If the landowner and the Tribe(s) cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for the archaeological or cultural resources, these issues will be presented to the City Community Development Director for a decision. The City Community Development Director shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act CEQA with respect to archaeological resources and, recommendations of the project Archaeologist and shall take into account the cultural and religious principles and practices of the Tribe. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the City Community Development Director shall be appealable to the City Planning Commission and/or City Council. Standard Conditions of Approval: COA TCR-1 Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Conditions of Approval Should human remains be discovered during construction of the proposed project, the project contractor would be subject to either State law regarding the discovery and disturbance of human remains or the Tribal burial protocol. In either circumstance all destructive activity in the immediate vicinity shall halt and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. If the remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be contacted. The NAHC will make a determination of the Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The City and Developer will work with the designated MILD to determine the final disposition of the remains. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 48 Less Than VI. ENERGY Potentially Significant Less Than Significant with Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Would the project: a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary n ® ❑ consumption of energy resources, during construction or operation? ❑ ® b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for ❑ ❑ renewable energy or energy efficiency? Sources: City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan. Urban Crossroads. 2022. Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Air Quality Impact Analysis. (See Appendix A.) Mobile Source Health Risk Assessment. 2022. Urban Crossroads. 2022. Mapes and Sherman Greenhouse Gas Analysis. Urban Crossroads. 2022. Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Energy Analysis. (See Appendix A.) Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-4 Efficient and environmentally appropriate use and management of energy and mineral resources to ensure their availability for future generations. Policy OCS-4.1 Apply energy efficiency and conservation practices in land use, transportation demand management, and subdivision and building design. Policy OCS-4.2 Evaluate public and private efforts to develop and operate alternative systems of energy production, including solar, wind, and fuel cell. Policy OCS-4.3 Advocate for cost-effective and reliable production and delivery of electrical power to residents and businesses throughout the community. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impact VI.a): Less Than Significant Impact. The construction energy demand of the project includes 105,486 kWh electricity use, 36,791 gallons of diesel for construction equipment use, and 30,218 gallons of fuel for workers, vendors, and hauling trips. The operation of the proposed project would result in 1,354,592 kWh of electricity use, 2,860,138 annual Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), and an estimated annual fuel consumption of 177,455 gallons of fuel. Additionally, project's on -site cargo handling equipment would consume an estimated 4,642 gallons of natural gas annually. For details of the energy demand calculation, please refer to the Energy Section of Appendix A. California Code Title 24, Part 6 (also referred to as the California Energy Code), was promulgated by the California Energy Commission in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to create uniform building codes to reduce California's energy consumption. To these ends, the California Energy Code provides energy efficiency standards for residential and nonresidential buildings. California's building efficiency standards are updated on an approximately three-year cycle. The 2022 version of Title 24 was adopted by the CEC and will become effective on January 1, 2023. As the project construction is anticipated in 2023- 2024, the proposed project would be required to comply with the Title 24 standards in place at that time. For example, the Title 24 standards will require electrical vehicle charging infrastructure for nonresidential buildings such as the proposed project. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 49 For new development such as that proposed by the project, compliance with California Building Standards Code Title 24 energy efficiency requirements (CALGreen) are considered demonstrable evidence of efficient use of energy. Development on the project site would be required to promote and provide for energy efficiencies beyond those required under other applicable federal or State of California standards and regulations, and in so doing would meet all California Building Standards Code 24 standards. Moreover, energy consumed by the project is expected to be comparable to, or less than, energy consumed by other commercial/retail/office uses of similar scale and intensity that are constructed and operating in California due to compliance with Title 24 requirements. On this basis, the proposed project would not result in the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy. Furthermore, the proposed project would not cause or result in the need for additional energy facilities or energy delivery systems. Less than significant impacts would occur. Impact VI.b): Less Than Significant Impact. The project's consistency with the applicable state and local plans is discussed below. Consistency with Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) Transportation and access to the project site is provided by the local and regional roadway systems. The proposed project would not interfere with, nor otherwise obstruct intermodal transportation plans or projects that may be realized pursuant to the ISTEA because SCAG is not planning for intermodal facilities on or through the project site. Consistency with Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) The project site is located along major transportation corridors with proximate access to the Interstate freeway system. The site selected for the project facilitates access, acts to reduce vehicle miles traveled, takes advantage of existing infrastructure systems, and promotes land use compatibilities through collocation of similar uses. The project supports the strong planning processes emphasized under TEA- 21. The project is therefore consistent with, and would not otherwise interfere with, nor obstruct implementation of TEA-21. Consistency with Integrated Energy Policy Report (IEPR) Electricity would be provided to the project by SCE. SCE's Clean Power and Electrification Pathway (CPEP) white paper builds on existing state programs and policies. As such, the project is consistent with, and would not otherwise interfere with, nor obstruct implementation of the goals presented in the 2021 IEPR. Additionally, the project will comply with the applicable Title 24 standards which would ensure that the project energy demands would not be inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary. As such, development of the proposed project would support the goals presented in the 2020 IEPR. Consistency with State of California Energy Plan The project site is located along major transportation corridors with proximate access to the Interstate freeway system. The site selected for the project facilitates access and takes advantage of existing infrastructure systems. The project therefore supports urban design and planning processes identified under the State of California Energy Plan, is consistent with, and would not otherwise interfere with or obstruct, implementation of the State of California Energy Plan. Consistency with California Code Title 24, Part 6, Energy Efficiency Standards The 2022 version of Title 24 was adopted by the California Energy Commission (CEC) and became effective on January 1, 2023.33 As the project building construction is anticipated in 2024, it is presumed that the proposed project would be required to comply with the Title 24 standards in place at that time. 33 California Energy Commission (CEC) 2022. CEC Approves 2022 CALGreen Building Standards Code Website: http://calenergycommission.blogspot.com/2021/10/cec-approves-2022-calgreen-building html. Accessed September 23, 2022 Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 50 Therefore, the project would not result in a significant impact on energy resources. The proposed project would be subject to Title 24 standards. Consistency with California Code Title 24, Part 11, CALGreen As previously stated, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11: CALGreen is a comprehensive and uniform regulatory code for all residential, commercial, and school buildings that went in effect on January 1, 2009, and is administered by the California Building Standards Commission. CALGreen is updated on a regular basis, with the most recent approved update consisting of the 2022 California Green Building Code Standards that became effective on January 1, 2023. The proposed project would be required to comply with the applicable standards in place at the time plan check submittals are made. Consistency with AB 1493 AB 1493 is not applicable to the project as it is a statewide measure establishing vehicle emissions standards. No feature of the proposed project would interfere with implementation of the requirements under AB 1493. Consistency with RPS California's RPS is not applicable to the project as it is a statewide measure that establishes a renewable energy mix. No feature of the proposed project would interfere with implementation of the requirements under RPS. Consistency with SB 350 The proposed project would use energy from SCE, which have committed to diversify their portfolio of energy sources by increasing energy from wind and solar sources. No feature of the proposed project would interfere with implementation of SB 350. Additionally, the proposed project would be designed and constructed to implement the energy efficiency measures for new industrial developments and would include several measures designed to reduce energy consumption. As shown above, the proposed project would not conflict with any of the State or local plans. As such, a less than significant impact is expected. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 51 Less Than VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Would the project: a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strona seismic around shaking? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including ❑ ❑ ® ❑ liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of ❑ ❑ ® topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- ❑ ❑ ® ❑ or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code ❑ ❑ ® ❑ (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste ❑ ❑ ❑ water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? ❑ f) Be impacted by or result in an increase in wind ❑ ❑ Z erosion and blowsand, either on or off -site? g) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ geological feature? j Sources: City of Menifee. 2014. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit S-1 Fault Map and Exhibit S-3 Liquification and Landslides; Riverside County. 2016. Riverside County General Plan, Chapter 6: Safety Element, Figure S-8 Wind Erosion Susceptibility Map; City of Menifee. 2022. Menifee Municipal Code; State of California Department of Conservation Website-EQ Zapp: California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application — Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation; Southern California Geotechnical. 2021. Geotechnical Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 52 Investigation, Proposed Warehouse, SWC Mapes Road and Sherman Road, Menifee, California for Stream Realty Acquisition, LLC; Southern California Geotechnical. 2021. Results of Infiltration Testing, Proposed Warehouse, SWC of Mapes Road and Sherman Road Menifee, California. (See Appendix D); Brian F. Smith and Associates. 2022. Paleontological Assessment for the Mapes and Road Project. (See Appendix D) Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal S-1 A community that is minimally impacted by seismic shaking and earthquake -induced or other geologic hazards. Policy S-1.1 Require all new habitable buildings and structures to be designed and built to be seismically resistant in accordance with the most recent California Building Standards Code adopted by the City. Goal S-2 A community that has used engineering solutions to reduce or eliminate the potential for injury, loss of life, property damage, and economic and social disruption caused by geologic hazards such as slope instability; compressible, collapsible, expansive, or corrosive soils; and subsidence due to groundwater withdrawal. Policy S-2.1 Require all new developments to mitigate the geologic hazards that have the potential to impact habitable structures and other improvements. Policy S-2.2 Monitor the losses caused by geologic hazards to existing development and require studies to specifically address these issues, including the implementation of measures designed to mitigate these hazards, in all future developments in these areas. Policy S-2.3 Minimize grading and modifications to the natural topography to prevent the potential for man -induced slope failures. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impact Vll.a.i): Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located in an area which is subject to strong ground motions due to earthquakes. There are a number of faults located near the project site that are capable of producing significant ground motions. However, no known active faults intersect the site, and the site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone.34.35,36 According to the General Plan, the nearest known fault is 3.38 miles to the southwest and has not moved in the Holocene or late Pleistocene. The nearest active fault zoned under the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Act is over 11 miles to the southwest of the project site.37 As such, the possibility of rupture of a fault on the site would be considered low and the impact of the proposed project would be less than significant. Impact Vll.a.ii-iv, Vll.c-d): Less Than Significant. As discussed above in Impact 2.7.a.i, while there are no known active faults on the site, the project site is located in a seismically active region and therefore may be subject to strong seismic ground shaking. The City of Menifee has adopted the 2019 California Building Standards Code (CBC).311 and compliance with these measures would ensure that the development of the proposed project would be seismically suitable to mitigate the effects of potential seismic and other geological hazards. Furthermore, the project site is not located in an area identified by the Menifee General Plan to be a liquefaction or landslide zone and the geotechnical report determined 34 Southern California Geotechnical. 2021. Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Warehouse, SWC Mapes Road and Sherman Road, Menifee, California for Stream Realty Acquisition, LLC. 35 City of Menifee. 2014. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit S-1 Fault Map. 36 California Department of Conservation. California Earthquake Hazard Zone Application — Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation Website: https://maps conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/. Accessed June 22, 2022 37 City of Menifee. 2014. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit S-1 Fault Map. 30 City of Menifee. 2022. City of Menifee Municipal Code 8.04 010 Adoption by Reference. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 53 that subsurface conditions at the project site are not considered to be conducive to liquefaction.39 Laboratory testing as part of the geotechnical investigation determined that near surface soils sampled from the project site have a very low expansion potential. Based on infiltration testing performed at the project site, infiltration is not considered feasible for the site. However, the proposed project includes a proposed stormwater infiltration system consisting of two below - grade chamber systems located in the western and northeastern areas of the site. The Infiltration Report states the use of on -site stormwater infiltration systems carries a risk of creating adverse geotechnical conditions that could impact overlying structures and pavement and recommends that proposed infiltration systems be located at least 25 feet away from structures. Even located 25 feet away, the proposed infiltration systems may impact structures. Further recommendations include that special consideration to the effect that the proposed infiltration systems may have on nearby subterranean structures, open excavations, or descending slopes should be given by the infiltration system designer, as outlined under Standard Condition of Approval COA-GEO-1 below.40 Standard Condition of Approval COA-GEO-2 requires that the applicant comply with the recommendations of the geotechnical report and any revisions deemed necessary by the City's Building Official and/or Engineering/Public Works Director. The Menifee Building and Safety Department and Engineering/Public Works Department would review construction plans for compliance with the Municipal Code and CBC and any recommendations made in the geotechnical report. Finally, the geotechnical report concluded that the potential for other geologic hazards such as seismically induced settlement, lateral spreading, tsunamis, inundation, seiches, flooding, and subsidence affecting the project site is considered low. The proposed project would comply with standard engineering practices, the geotechnical report's recommendations (COA-GEO-1), and the established regulatory framework (i.e., Municipal Code and CBC). As such, the proposed project's potential impacts concerning potential substantial adverse effects involving geologic and seismic hazards and unstable or expansive soil conditions would be less than significant. Impact VII.b, f): Less Than Significant Impact. Grading and site preparation, such as the removal of Surface vegetation and excavation, during ronsfrurfion would potentially result in short-term exposure of soil to erosive factors like wind and water. According to the geotechnical report, due to their silt content some of the near surface, soils may become unstable if exposed to significant moisture infiltration or disturbance by construction traffic, and some of the on -site soils will be susceptible to erosion. The report recommends that the project site be graded to prevent water from running into excavations as well as the pooling of surface water. The project site is located in an area that is moderately susceptible to wind erosion, however, this exposure may be minimized as the site is surrounded by roads as well as commercial and residential development.41 Additionally, implementation of the proposed project would cover currently exposed areas with a warehouse facility and paved parking, which would further reduce potential soil erosion from wind. Finally, construction of the proposed project construction would comply with all applicable erosion and sediment control policies and regulations, such as the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities which requires the maintenance of effective erosion and sediment controls,42 among other measures, and Menifee Municipal Code 15.01.015, Reduction of Pollutants in Storm Water. Given compliance with the appropriate regulations and policies, the proposed project's potential impacts on soil erosion and loss of topsoil would be less than significant. Impact Vll.e): No Impact. The proposed project would utilize existing wastewater utility connections from the EMWD; thus, no septic tank or alternative wastewater disposal systems will service the proposed 39 City of Menifee. 2014. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit S-3 Liquefaction and Landslides. 40 Southern California Geotechnical. 2021. Results of Infiltration Testing, Proposed Warehouse, SWC of Mapes Road and Sherman Road Menifee, California. 41 Riverside County 2016. Riverside County General Plan, Chapter 6: Safety Element, Figure S-8 Wind Erosion Susceptibility Map. https://planning.rctima.org/Portals/O/genplan/content/gp/chapterO6.html#List_1_8 Accessed June 22, 2022. 42 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2022. Storm Water Discharges from Construction Activities. Website: https://www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater-discharges-construction-activities. Accessed June 23, 2022. Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 54 project. As such, no impact resulting from the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would occur. Impact Vll.g): Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Paleontological resources are the fossilized remains of organisms from prehistoric environments found in geologic strata. These resources are valued for the information they yield about the history of the earth and its past ecological settings. The potential for fossil occurrence depends on the rock type exposed at the surface in a given area. A significant adverse effect could occur if grading or excavation activities associated with a project would disturb paleontological resources or geologic features that presently exist within the project site. According to the paleontological records search, the proposed project lies within the central part of the Perris Block, a structural block bounded on the west by the Elsinore fault zone and on the east by the San Jacinto fault zone and situated entirely on old alluvial fan deposits (Qof) dating from late to middle Pleistocene. The records search found that the nearest known fossil locality is located "approximately 8 to 9 miles southeast of the proposed project at Diamond Valley lake," consisting of hundreds of specimens of Ice Age mammal bones. Further research has confirmed the existence of potentially fossiliferous deposits within the project boundaries. Therefore, implementation of the measures listed in the Paleontological Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as outlined under MM GEO-1, would reduce the impacts to paleontological resources to less than significant during construction should any be discovered. Mitiqation Measures: MM GEO-1 Implement All Paleontological Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Measures 1. Monitoring of mass grading and excavation activities in areas identified as likely to contain paleontological resources shall be performed by a City -qualified Paleontologist or Paleontological Monitor supervised by a City -qualified Paleontologist. Starting at 5 feet below the surface, monitoring will be conducted full- time in areas of grading or excavation in undisturbed Pleistocene old alluvial fan deposits. 2. Paleontological monitors will be equipped to salvage fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays. The monitor must be empowered to temporarily halt or divert equipment to allow removal of abundant or large specimens in a timely manner. Monitoring may be reduced if the potentially fossiliferous units are not present in the subsurface, or, if present, are determined upon exposure and examination by qualified paleontological personnel to have low potential to contain fossil resources. The monitor shall notify the project paleontologist, who will then notify the concerned parties of the discovery. 3. Paleontological salvage during trenching and boring activities is typically from the generated spoils and does not delay the trenching or drilling activities. Fossils are collected and placed in cardboard flats or plastic buckets and identified by field number, collector, and date collected. Notes are taken on the map location and stratigraphy of the site, which is photographed before it is vacated, and the fossils are removed to a safe place. On mass grading projects, discovered fossil sites are protected by flagging to prevent them from being overrun by earthmovers (scrapers) before salvage begins. Fossils are collected in a similar manner, with notes and photographs being taken before removing the fossils. Precise location of the site is determined with the use of handheld GPS units. If the site involves remains from a large terrestrial vertebrate, such as large bone(s) or a mammoth tusk, that is/are too large to be easily removed by a single monitor, a fossil recovery crew shall excavate around the find, encase the find within a plaster and burlap jacket, and remove it after Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 55 the plaster is set. For large fossils, use of the contractor's construction equipment may be solicited to help remove the jacket to a safe location. 4. Isolated fossils are collected by hand, wrapped in paper, and placed in temporary collecting flats or five -gallon buckets. Notes are taken on the map location and stratigraphy of the site, which is photographed before it is vacated, and the fossils are removed to a safe place. 5. Particularly small invertebrate fossils typically represent multiple specimens of a limited number of organisms, and a scientifically suitable sample can be obtained from one to several five -gallon buckets of fossiliferous sediment. If it is possible to dry screen the sediment in the field, a concentrated sample may consist of one or two buckets of material. For vertebrate fossils, the test is usually the observed presence of small pieces of bones within the sediments. If present, as multiple five -gallon buckets of sediment can be collected and returned to a separate facility to wet -screen the sediment. 6. In accordance with the "Microfossil Salvage" section of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology guidelines (2010:7), bulk sampling and screening of fine-grained sedimentary deposits (including carbonate -rich paleosols) must be performed if the deposits are identified to possess indications of producing fossil "microvertebrates" to test the feasibility of the deposit to yield fossil bones and teeth. 7. In the laboratory, individual fossils are cleaned of extraneous matrix, any breaks are repaired, and the specimen, if needed, is stabilized by soaking in an archivally approved acrylic hardener (e.g., a solution of acetone and Paraloid B-72). 8. Recovered specimens are prepared to a point of identification and permanent preservation (not display), including screen -washing sediments to recover small invertebrates and vertebrates. Preparation of individual vertebrate fossils is often more time-consuming than for accumulations of invertebrate fossils. 9. Identification and curation of specimens into a professional, accredited public museum repository with a commitment to archival conservation and permanent retrievable storage (e.g., the Western Science Center [WSC]) shall be conducted. The paleontological program should include a written repository agreement prior to the initiation of mitigation activities. Prior to curation, the lead agency (the City of Menifee) will be consulted on the repository/museum to receive the fossil material. 10. A final report of findings and significance will be prepared, including lists of all fossils recovered and necessary maps and graphics to accurately record their original location(s). The report, when submitted to, and accepted by, the appropriate lead agency, will signify satisfactory completion of the project program to mitigate impacts to any potential nonrenewable paleontological resources (i.e., fossils) that might have been lost or otherwise adversely affected without such a program in place. Standard Conditions of Approval: COA-GEO-1 Implementation of Infiltration Report Recommendations Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City of Menifee Building and Safety Department Official and/or City of Menifee Engineering/Public Works Director, that the recommendations for design and construction identified in the Infiltration Report, Proposed Warehouse, SWC Mapes Road and Sherman Road, Menifee, California (Southern California Geotechnical, Inc., November 1, 2021), have been incorporated into the project design, and grading and building plans. The project geotechnical engineer shall review the on -site stormwater infiltration system design and make recommendations to ensure structural stability. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 56 COA-GEO-2 Implementation of Geotechnical Recommendations Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City of Menifee Building and Safety Department Official and/or City of Menifee Engineering/Public Works Director, that the recommendations for design and construction identified in the Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Warehouse, SWC Mapes Road and Sherman Road, Menifee, California (Southern California Geotechnical, Inc., October 22, 2021), have been incorporated into the project design and grading and building plans. The proposed project's final grading plans, foundation plans, building loads, and specifications shall be reviewed by a State of California Registered Professional Geologist/Registered Professional Engineer to verify that the Geotechnical Interpretive Report recommendations have been incorporated/updated, as needed. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 57 Less Than Vill. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Potentially Significant Less Than Significant with Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a ❑ ❑ [ ] ❑ significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Sources: City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan; Urban Crossroads. 2022. Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Greenhouse Gas Analysis. (See Appendix A). Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-4 Efficient and environmentally appropriate use and management of energy and mineral resources to ensure their availability for future generations. Policy OSC-4.1 Apply energy efficiency and conservation practices in land use, transportation demand management, and subdivision and building design. Goal OSC-10 An environmentally aware community that is responsive to changing climate conditions and actively spPks to reduce local greenhouse gas emissions. Policy OSC-10.1 Align the City's local GHG reduction targets to be consistent with the statewide GHG reduction target of AB 32. Policy OSC-10.2 Align the City's long-term GHG reduction goal consistent with the statewide GHG reduction goal of Executive Order S-03-05. Policy OSC-10.3 Participate in regional greenhouse gas emission reduction initiatives. Policy OSC-10.4 Consider impacts to climate change as a factor in evaluation of policies, strategies, and projects. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impacts Vlll.a): Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would develop an approximately 277,578-square-foot light industrial warehouse space. The General Plan Land Use designation for the project site is EDC-NG. The proposed project's land uses are consistent with the zoning designation. It should be noted that the City of Menifee does not yet have an adopted greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory or an adopted GHG reduction plan (such as a Climate Action Plan). The City of Menifee has not formally adopted its own numeric threshold of significance for determining impacts with respect to GHG emissions. A screening threshold of 3,000 Metric Ton (MT) CO2e per year to determine whether additional analysis is required is an acceptable approach for small projects. This approach is a widely accepted screening threshold used by the City of Menifee and numerous cities in the SoCAB and is based on the SCAQMD staffs proposed GHG screening threshold based on the relative GHG emissions contribution between Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 58 residential/commercial sectors and stationary source (industrial) sectors, as described in the SCAQMD's Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans ("SCAQMD Interim GHG Threshold.") As shown in Table 6, the proposed project would result in a total of approximately 2,421 MT CO2e/year, which would not exceed the SCAQMD's screening threshold of 3,000 MT CO2e/year. As such, the proposed project would not have the potential to result in a cumulatively considerable impact with respect to GHG emissions. Table 6: Project GHG Emissions Emission Source Emissions (MT/year) CO2 CH4 N20 Refrigerants Total CO2e Annual construction -related emissions amortized over 30 years 21.37 1.00E-03 1.00E-03 0.01 21.70 Mobile Source 1,558.00 0.04 0.15 2.25 1,606.00 Area Source 5.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.79 Energy Source 214.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 215.00 Water Usage Waste 90.40 2.09 0.05 0.00 158.00 23.30 2.33 0.00 0.00 81.50 Refrigerants 0.00 0.00 0.00 46.80 46.80 On -Site Equipment 286.15 Total CO2e (All Sources) 2,421 Impacts Vill. b): Less Than Significant Impact. SB 3212017 Scoping Plan Consistency The 2017 Scoping Plan Update reflects the 2030 target of a 40 percent reduction below 1990 levels, set by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by SB 32.43 Table 3-7 of Appendix A summarizes the proposed project's consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan. As summarized, the proposed project would not conflict with any of the provisions of the Scoping Plan. A less than significant impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required. 43 California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. 2017. California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. November Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 59 Less Than IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS Potentially Significant Less Than MATERIALS Significant with Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, ❑ ❑ ® ❑ use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, ❑ ❑ ® ❑ substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ emergency evacuation plan? g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ death involving wildland fires? Sources: Menifee General Plan, Menifee General Plan Exhibit S-7, Critical Facilities; California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2022. California Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSV) Viewer; California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2022. State Responsibility Area (SRA) Viewer; Riverside County Fire Department. 2021. HEI Corporation. 2021. Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, Three Undeveloped Parcels of Land Southwest Corner of Sherman Road and Mapes Road Menifee, California. (See Appendix E) Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal S-4 A community that has effective fire mitigation and response measures in place, and as a result is minimally impacted by wildland and structure fires. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 60 Policy S-4.1 Require fire-resistant building construction materials, the use of vegetation control methods, and other construction and fire prevention features to reduce the hazard of wildland fire. Ensure all new development and/or redevelopment in the LRA and VHFHSZ will comply with the California Fire Code (CFC) and California Building Standards Code (CBC). All new development within the LRA Very High Fire zone will comply with Chapter 49 of the California Fire Code and Chapter 7A of the California Building Standards Code. Policy S4.4 Review development proposals for impacts to fire facilities and compatibility with fire areas or mitigate. Policy S-4.18 The City shall evaluate all redevelopment as well as new development after a large fire event to ensure development will comply with the most current version of the California Building Standards Codes and California Fire Code. The City and Fire Department will continue to coordinate with State, regional, and local agencies on emergency management and on fire risk reduction planning. Goal S-5 A community that has reduced the potential for hazardous materials contamination. Policy S-5.1 Locate facilities involved in the production, use, storage, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials away from land uses that may be adversely impacted by such activities and areas susceptible to impacts or damage from a natural disaster. Policy S-5.2 Ensure that the fire department can continue to respond safely and effectively to a hazardous materials incident in the City, whether it is a spill at a permitted facility, or the result of an accident along a section of the freeway or railroads that extend across the City. Policy S-5.4 Ensure that all facilities that handle hazardous materials comply with federal and State laws pertaining to the management of hazardous wastes and materials. Policy S-5.5 Require facilities that handle hazardous materials to implement mitigation measures that reduce the risks associated with hazardous material production, storage, and disposal. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impacts IX.a): Less Than Significant Impact. The project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of EDC and is zoned EDC-NG, which allows for a mix of development types including residential, commercial, and industrial, among others.44,45 The proposed project would consist of a 267,578-square- foot warehouse and a 10,000-square-foot office with associated vehicle and truck parking. It can be reasonably anticipated that construction of the proposed project would require a minor level of transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials typical of construction projects. However, any use, handling, transportation, and disposal of hazardous materials would comply with all applicable federal, State, and local laws and policies, including California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA). Any use, handling, or transportation of hazardous materials during construction would comply will applicable federal, State, and local laws and policies including Cal/OSHA requirements. The proposed project does not include any activities involving significant use, routine transport, or disposal of hazardous substances. As such, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact with regard to hazards to public health as a result of the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Impact IX.b): Less Than Significant Impact. As described above in Impact 2.9.a of this section, the proposed project would involve the minor use of hazardous materials typically required during construction and operations. However, the proposed project would comply with applicable federal, State, and local laws 44 City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit LU-2 Land Use Map. 45 City of Menifee. 2014. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit LU-3 Land Use Designations Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 61 pertaining to the safe handling and transport of hazardous materials, which would minimize potential spill occurrences. According to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I ESA) conducted for the proposed project, the project site is vacant and does not contain any existing buildings or structures.46 As a result, the proposed project would not release asbestos -containing materials or lead -based paint typically found in buildings built prior to 1960. Additionally, the Phase I ESA did not identify any Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) within the site. Therefore, the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Impact IX.c): Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is not located within 0.25 mile of any school. The nearest school is Calvary Chapel Christian Academy, a private kindergarten through junior high school approximately 0.58 mile to the southeast at 27912 Adams Avenue.47 The proposed project is also approximately 0.78-mile northwest of Romoland Elementary School. The proposed project consists of light industrial and office uses, which may involve minimal routine transport, use, or handling of minimal quantities of hazardous substances. However, the proposed project would comply with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations to reduce potential impacts on hazardous emissions for nearby schools. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Impact IX.d): Less Than Significant Impact. The Phase I ESA conducted for the proposed project determined that the project site is not posted to any federal, State, or local databases. A nearby property at 25146 Sherman Road is posted to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Non - Generators list, however, there is no indication of spills or leaks and it is unlikely that activities on this property would have impacted the environmental conditions of the project site. The property to the south of the project site, located at 25283 Sherman Road and occupied by UPS Hemet, is posted onto the Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System (SWEEPS) Underground Storage Tank (UST), Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) and RCRA Small Quantity Generator (SQG) lists. The RCRA- SQG indicates that the site's occupant was a generator of small quantities of hazardous materials. The SWEEP UST posting states that a 10,000-gallon gasoline UST and a 250-gallon waste oil UST were located on the site, and the LUST posting states that the soil was affected by an unauthorized release of gasoline. However, the LUST case has been closed as of August 29, 1991, and it is unlikely that unauthorized release of gasoline on this property would have affected the environmental conditions on the project site.48 The proposed project is not located on a site included on a list of hazardous materials sites pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and impacts would be less than significant. Impact IX.e): Less Than Significant Impact. The following airports/airstrips are located nearest the project site: • Perris Valley Airport at 2091 Goetz Road, Perris, approximately 2.06 miles to the west. • Skylark Field Airport at 20701 Cereal Street, Lake Elsinore, approximately 10.69 miles to the southwest. • French Valley Airport: at 37600 Sky Canyon Drive, Murrieta, approximately 12.20 miles to the southeast. • Hemet Ryan Airport: at 4710 W. Stetson Avenue, Hemet, approximately 8.63 miles to the east. • March Air Reserve Base: at 2685 Graeber Street, March Air Reserve Base, approximately 7.86 miles to the northwest. 46 HEI Corporation. 2021. Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, Three Undeveloped Parcels of Land Southwest Corner of Sherman Road and Mapes Road Menifee, California. 47 Calvary Chapel Christian Academy. 2022 Home. Website: calvarychapelca.com. Accessed September 15, 2022. 4e HEI Corporation. 2021. Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, Three Undeveloped Parcels of Land Southwest Corner of Sherman Road and Mapes Road Menifee, California. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 62 The project site is not within the Airport Influence Area Boundary for Perris Valley Airport.49 However, it does lie within the Airport Influence Boundary for the March Air Reserve Base.50 According to the March Air Reserve Base/Inland Port Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, the project site is within Zone D: Flight Corridor Buffer. The noise impact within Zone D is categorized as moderate to low, and there are no limits or restrictions placed on density/intensity standards for residential or other developments. The project site is not located within 2 miles of any other public airport or airstrip. As such, impacts related to noise or safety hazards associated with proximity to an airport or airstrip would be less than significant. Impact IX.f): Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not interfere with existing emergency evacuation plans or the adopted 2021 City of Menifee Emergency Operations Plan. The proposed project does not include any characteristics that would physically impair or otherwise interfere with an emergency response or evacuation plan in the project vicinity. A 26-foot-wide fire lane is proposed to fully surround the warehouse to the north, west, south, and east and would provide emergency and fire truck access to the entire perimeter of the facility at all times. Furthermore, the proposed project would widen both Mapes Road and Sherman Road, thus improving circulation and access in and around the project site. As such, implementation of the proposed project would improve circulation and access and would not interfere with existing emergency evacuation plans or emergency response plans in the area. As a result, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Impact IX.g): Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is not located within a State Responsibility Area (SRA) or a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ).51,52 However, the proposed project would comply with the City's General Plan policies, the City Municipal Code, the California Fire Code, and the 2019 CBC. Additionally, the nearest fire station is Riverside County Fire Station No. 7, located approximately 3.03 miles northwest of the project site.53 With compliance to applicable policies and regulations that would mitigate impacts from wildland fires as well as services available from the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD), implementation of the proposed project would not directly or indirectly expose people or structures to significant risk from wildland fires. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required 49 Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission. 2010 Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, Chapter W8 Background Data: Perris Valley Airport and Environs. 50 Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission. 2014. March Air Reserve Base/Inland Port Authority Land Use Compatibility Plan. 51 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2022. State Responsibility Area (SRA) Viewer. Website: https://calfire- forestry.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=468717e399fa4238ad86861638765ce1. Accessed June 23, 2022. 52 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2022. FHSZ Viewer. Website: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/. Accessed June 23, 2022. 53 Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD). 2021 Fire Stations Map Website: https://rvcfire org/resources/fire-stations-map. Accessed June 27, 2022. Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 63 Less Than X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Potentially Significant significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise ❑ ® ❑ substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede ❑ ❑ ® ❑ sustainable groundwater management of the basin? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river ❑ ❑ ® ❑ or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- ❑ ❑ ® ❑ or off -site; ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in ❑ ❑ ® ❑ flooding on- or off -site; iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of cxisting or planned stormwater drainage systems or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or iv) impede or redirect flood flows? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk ❑ ❑ ® ❑ release of pollutants due to inundation? e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable ❑ ❑ ® ❑ groundwater management plan? Sources: City of Menifee. 2014. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit S-5 Flood Hazards; California Department of Conservation. California Tsunami Inundation Maps and Data; Thienes Engineering, Inc. 2022. Project Specific Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan; Southern California Geotechnical. 2021. Results of Infiltration Testing, Proposed Warehouse, SWC of Mapes Road and Sherman Road Menifee, California. (See Appendix F) Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal S-3 A community that is minimally disrupted by flooding and inundation hazards. Goal OSC-7 A reliable and safe water supply that effectively meets current and future user demands. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 64 Policy OSC-7.8 Protect groundwater quality by decommissioning existing septic systems and establishing connections to sanitary sewer infrastructure. Policy OSC-7.9 Ensure that high -quality potable water resources continue to be available by managing stormwater runoff, wellhead protection, and other sources of pollutants. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impacts Ka, X.c (I)—X.c (!Ili), X.e): Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would develop an approximately 277,578-square-foot light industrial warehouse space with paved parking areas and landscaping. As a result, the proposed project has the potential to release water pollutants during both construction and operation that could violate water quality standards and degrade surface or groundwater quality. Construction -related erosion effects would be addressed through compliance with the NPDES program's Construction General Permit. Construction activity subject to this General Permit includes activity that results in a land disturbance equal to or greater than 1 acre. Given that the proposed project would disturb an area greater than 1 acre, it would be subject to this General Permit. As a part of the NPDES General Construction Permit, the proposed project would be required to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction in accordance with federal and State requirements. The SWPPP would identify structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs) intended to prevent erosion during construction. Although construction activities have the potential to generate increased water pollution and sedimentation, compliance with applicable policies and regulations would minimize the potential to degrade water quality in downstream water bodies to the maximum extent possible. Further, Menifee Municipal Code Chapter 15.01, Storm Water/Urban Runoff, addresses stormwater and runoff pollution control and is intended to reduce the quantity of pollutants being discharged to waters of the United States. Menifee Municipal Code Section 15.01.015(B)(1) specifies that any person performing construction work in the City shall comply with the provisions of Menifee Municipal Code Chapter 15.01 and control stormwater runoff to prevent any likelihood of adversely affecting human health or the environment. Therefore, impacts related to surface and groundwater water quality would be reduced to a less than significant level. Finally, the Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (P-WQMP) concluded that impervious surfaces on the project site have been minimized to City standards and landscaping has been provided to the maximum extent possible. Stormwater runoff on the project site would be collected in catch basins and directed to the underground detention system and proprietary biotreatment unit for treatment prior to release onto Mapes Road via a parkway drain. Prior to discharging, detention will be utilized on -site to ensure that the proposed condition peak flow rate does not exceed the existing condition peak flow rate. Therefore, drainage patterns of the proposed project would mimic pre -development conditions and there would be no negative impacts on existing downstream drainage facilities. Following compliance with the existing water quality regulatory framework (i.e., NPDES and Menifee Municipal Code), including implementation of BMPs specified in the project P-WQMP, described above, project operations would not violate water quality or waste discharge requirements. A less than significant impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. Impact X.b): Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not include groundwater wells and would connect to existing EMWD potable water lines. The proposed project would include an underground detention system, proprietary biotreatment unit and landscaping which would act as a filtration system. According to the results of infiltration testing performed on the project site by Southern California Geotechnical, the static groundwater table is considered to exist at a depth in excess of 25 feet at the time of testing. Further, three infiltration tests were performed at the project site and the observed infiltration rate was 0 inches per hour due to the presence of dense to very dense soils and the high clay and silt content. Based on these results, it is unlikely that the project site serves as an area of groundwater recharge. Given the incremental amount of urban runoff that may be generated from the proposed Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 65 industrial use and the incorporation of an underground retention and biotreatment system to capture runoff from the project site, development of the project site would not notably contribute to groundwater contamination. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact. Impact X.c (iv): Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is not located in an area prone to flooding or within a designated flood hazard zone. According to the General Plan Flood Hazards Map, the proposed project is located within Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Zone X.54 Flood Zone X corresponds to areas outside of the 500-year flood or areas protected by levees from the 100-year flood. Therefore, the proposed project would not impact flood flows and impacts would be less than significant. Impact X.d): Less Than Significant Impact. As previously described in Impact 2.10.c (iv) of this section, the project site is located in FEMA Flood Zone X, an area defined as minimal flooding hazard. Therefore, the proposed project would not be prone to flooding or within a designated flood hazard zone. Additionally, the project site is located 31 miles away from the Pacific Ocean, thus the risk of inundation as the result of a tsunami is low. Additionally, the project site is not located in a low-lying area or a recognized tsunami hazard zone susceptible to inundation.55 As such impacts related to the release of pollutants as a result of project inundation in a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required. 54 City of Menifee. 2014. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit S-5 Flood Hazards. 55 California Department of Conservation. California Tsunami Inundation Maps and Data. Website: https://maps conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/ts_evacuation/ Accessed June 28, 2022 Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 66 Less Than XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING Potentially Significant Less Than Significant with Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Sources: City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit LU-2 Land Use Map; City of Menifee. 2022. Zoning Map. Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal LU-1 Land uses and building types that result in a community where residents at all stages of life, employers, workers, and visitors have a diversity of options of where they can live, work, shop, and recreate within Menifee. Policy LU-1.1 Concentrate growth in strategic locations to help preserve rural areas, create place and identity, provide infrastructure efficiently, and foster the use of transit options. Policy LU-1.5 Support development and land use patterns, where appropriate, that reduce reliance on the automobile and capitalize on multimodal transportation opportunities. Policy LU-1.6 Coordinate land use, infrastructure, and transportation planning and analysis with regional, county, and other local agencies to further regional and subregional goals for jobs -housing balance. Policy LU-1.8 Ensure new development is carefully designed to avoid or incorporate natural features, including washes, creeks, and hillsides. Goal LU-2 Thriving Economic Development Corridors that accommodate a mix of nonresidential and residential uses that generate activity and economic vitality in the City. Policy LU-2.1 Promote infill development that complements existing neighborhoods and surrounding areas. Infill development and future growth in Menifee is strongly encouraged to locate within EDC areas to preserve the rural character of rural, estate, and small estate residential uses. Policy LU-2.2 Encourage vertical and horizontal integration of uses where feasible on properties in EDCs. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impact XI.a): Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is entirely undeveloped and does not contain existing public or residential roadways or structures. The area surrounding the project site consists of commercial, industrial, and residential uses. The project site is bounded by Mapes Road and Big League Dreams Perris sports complex to the north; Sherman Road and a residential development to the east; a UPS customer center and vacant land to the south; Southern California Gas Company and a storage yard and Trumble Road to the west. The project site is not located in a residential area and would not alter or Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 67 remove roadways, nor would it introduce barriers that would divide an established community. The proposed project is consistent with development envisioned by the General Plan for this area, which is zoned as EDC-NG. Additionally, the proposed project is consistent with the City's intent in designating the project site as an EDC to promote infill development that complements existing neighborhoods and surrounding areas. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact. Impact XI.b): Less Than Significant Impact. All three parcels within the project site are designated as EDC by the City of Menifee General Plan Land Use Map (Exhibit 3)56 and zoned as EDC-NG according to the City of Menifee Zoning Map.57 The proposed project consists of the construction of a warehouse facility and would be consistent with these designations. The project site would not require a General Plan Amendment or rezone. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect and would have a less than significant impact. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required. 56 City of Menifee. 2014. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit LU-2 Land Use Map 57 City of Menifee. 2019. Zoning Map. Website: https://www.cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenterNiew/l 1042/Zoning-Map --- February- 2022?bidld=. Accessed September 27, 2022. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 68 Less Than XII. MINERAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant Less Than Significant with Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the ❑ ❑ ❑ region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally - important mineral resource recovery site ❑ ❑ ❑ EXII delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Sources: City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit OSC-3 Mineral Resource Zones. Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-4 Efficient and environmentally appropriate use and management of energy and mineral resources to ensure their availability for future generations. Policy OSC-4.1 Apply energy efficiency and conservation practices in land use, transportation demand management, and subdivision and building design. Policy OSC-4.3 Advocate for cost-effective and reliable production and delivery of electrical power to residents and businesses throughout the community. Policy OSC-4.4 Require that any future mining activities be in compliance with the State Mining Reclamation Act, federal and State environmental regulations, and local ordinances. Policy OSC-4.5 Limit the impacts of mining operations on the City's natural open space, biological and scenic resources, and any adjacent land uses. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impact Xll.a-b): No Impact. The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA) requires classification of land into Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs) according to the known or inferred mineral potential of the area. Under SMARA, areas are categorized into MRZ-1, MRZ-2, MRZ-3, and MRZ-4. The General Plan identifies MRZ-1, MRZ-3, and Urban Areas in the City of Menifee. There are no mineral extraction facilities on or near the project site and there are no known mineral resources in the site, which is designated as Urban Area.58 An area identified as MRZ-1, meaning available geologic information indicates that little likelihood exists for the presence of significant mineral resources, is located approximately 1.92 miles to the southwest of the project site.59 Implementation of the proposed project would not involve any mining activities and would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of local, regional, or State importance. Therefore, no impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required. 58 City of Menifee. 2014. City of Menifee General Plan, Exhibit OSC-3 Mineral Resource Zones. 59 Ibid. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 69 Less Than XIII. NOISE Potentially Significant Less Than Significant with Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Would the project result in: a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards ❑ ❑ ® ❑ established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? ❑ ❑ El b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Sources: City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan, Noise Element; City of Menifee. 2022. City of Menifee Development Code.; Urban Crossroads. 2022. Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Noise and Vibration Analysis. (See Appendix G.) Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal N-1 Noise -sensitive land uses are protected from excessive noise and vibration exposure. Policy N-1.1 Assess the compatibility of proposed land uses with the noise environment when preparing, revising, or reviewing development project applications. Policy N-1.2 Require new projects to comply with the noise standards of local, regional, and State building code regulations, including but not limited to the City's Municipal Code, Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, the California Green Building Code, and subdivision and development codes. Policy N-1.3 Require noise abatement measures to enforce compliance with any applicable regulatory mechanisms, including building codes and subdivision and zoning regulations, and ensure that the recommended mitigation measures are implemented. Policy N-1.7 Mitigate exterior and interior noises to the levels listed in the table below to the extent feasible, for stationary sources adjacent to sensitive receptors: Stationary Source Noise Standards i Land Use Interior Standards Exterior Standards Residential 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 40 Leq (10 minute) 165 45 Leq (10 minute) 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 55 Leq (10 minute) Leq (10 minute) Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 70 Policy N-1.8 Locate new development in areas where noise levels are appropriate for the proposed uses. Consider federal, State, and City noise standards and guidelines as a part of new development review. Policy N-1.9 Limit the development of new noise -producing uses adjacent to noise -sensitive receptors and require that new noise -producing land be are designed with adequate noise abatement measures. Policy N-1.10 Guide noise -tolerant land uses into areas irrevocably committed to land uses that are noise -producing, such as transportation corridors adjacent to the 1-215 or within the projected noise contours of any adjacent airports. Policy N-1.11 Discourage the siting of noise -sensitive uses in areas in excess of 65 dBA CNEL without appropriate mitigation. Policy N-1.12 Minimize potential noise impacts associated with the development of mixed -use projects (vertical or horizontal mixed -use) where residential units are located above or adjacent to noise -generating uses. Policy N-1.13 Require new development to minimize vibration impacts to adjacent uses during demolition and construction. Goal N-2 Minimal Noise Spillover. Minimal noise spillover from noise -generating uses, such as agriculture, commercial, and industrial uses into adjoining noise -sensitive uses. City of Menifee Development Code Section 9.215.060 of the City of Menifee Development Code establishes exterior noise level criteria for noise -sensitive residential properties affected by stationary noise sources. For residential properties, the exterior noise level shall not exceed 65 A -weighted decibel (dBA) Leq during daytime hours between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 45 dBA Leq for nighttime hours between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Section 9.215.060(C) establishes that private construction projects within 0.25 mile of occupied residences are exempt from the Development Code's noise standards if construction occurs within the permitted hours of 6:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday (except national holidays). Analysis of Project and Determination of Significance: Noise impacts shall be considered significant if any of the following would occur as a direct result of the proposed development. Table 7 shows the significance criteria summary matrix that includes the allowable criteria used to identify potentially significant incremental noise level increases. Table 7: Significance Criteria Summary Receiving Significance Criteria Analysis Land Use Condition(s) Daytime Nighttime If ambient is < 60 dBA Leq' >_ 5 dBA Leq project increase Noise- Sensitive If ambient is 60-65 dBA Leq1 3 dBA Leq project increase If ambient is > 65 dBA Leq' z 1.5 dBA Leq project increase Off -Site Non-Noise- Sensitive2 If ambient is > 70 dBA CNEL >_ 3 dBA CNEL project increase Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 71 Analysis I Receiving Land Use Condition(s) Exterior Noise Level Limit3 Significance Criteria Daytime 65 dBA Leq Nighttime 45 dBA Leq Operational Noise- Sensitive' If ambient is < 60 dBA Leq' >_ 5 dBA Leq project increase If ambient is 60-65 dBA Leq > _ 3 dBA Leq project increase If ambient is > 65 dBA Leq' >_ 1.5 dBA Leq project increase Construction Noise- Sensitive' Permitted hours of 6:30 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.4 Noise Level Threshold 5 80 dBA Leq n/a Vibration Level Thresholds 0.3 PPV (in/sec) Notes: Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON). 1992. Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues. 2 City of Menifee General Plan Noise Element, Table N-b3. 3 City of Menifee Development Code, Section 9.215.060 4 City of Menifee Municipal Code, Section 9.215.060(C) 5 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. 6 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Manual. Table 19. "Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a m. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impacts Xlll.a-b): Less Than Significant. Construction Noise Impacts This section analyzes the potential impacts of the proposed project's short-term construction activities at nearby sensitive receptors. The locations of sensitive receptors (i.e., receivers or "sensitive receivers") are shown in Exhibit 10-A of the Noise and Vibration Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads, which can be found in Appendix G. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual recognizes that construction projects are accomplished in several different stages and outlines the procedures for assessing noise impacts during construction. Each stage has a specific equipment mix, depending on the work to be completed during that stage. As a result of the equipment mix, each stage has its own noise characteristics; some stages have higher continuous noise levels than others, and some have higher impact noise levels than others. The proposed project's construction activities are expected to occur in the following stages: • Site Preparation • Grading • Building Construction • Paving • Architectural Coating Using reference construction equipment noise levels sourced from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the CadnaA noise prediction model, calculations of the proposed project's construction noise level impacts at nearby sensitive receiver locations were completed in a manner that is consistent with FTA guidance for general construction noise assessment. Table 9 shows the results of this analysis. As shown, construction noise levels are expected to range from 54.4 to 65.6 dBA Leq at nearby sensitive receiver locations. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 72 Table 8: Construction Equipment Noise Level Summary Construction Noise Levels (dBA Leq) Receiver Site Building Architectural Highest Location' Preparation Grading Construction Paving Coating Levelsz R1 61.4 64.4 62.4 64.4 58.4 64.4 R2 59.3 62.3 60.3 62.3 56.3 62.3 R3 62.6 65.6 63.6 65.6 59.6 65.6 R4 57.4 60.4 58.4 60.4 54.4 60.4 Notes: ' Noise receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 10-A. 2 Construction noise level calculations based on distance from the construction activity, which is measured from the project site boundary to the nearest receiver locations. CadnaA construction noise model inputs are included in Appendix G. To evaluate whether the proposed project would generate potentially significant short-term noise levels at nearest sensitive receiver locations, a construction -related noise level threshold of 80 dBA Leq is used. As shown in Table 9 below, noise impacts due to construction of the proposed project would be less than 80 dBA Leq at sensitive receivers and therefore less than significant. Table 9: Construction Noise Level Compliance Construction Noise Levels (dBA Leq) Receiver Highest Construction Threshold Location' Noise Levelsz Threshold Exceeded? R1 64.4 80 No R2 62.3 80 No R3 65.6 80 No R4 60.4 80 No Notes: ' Noise receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 10-A in Appendix G. 2 Highest construction noise level calculations based on distance from the construction noise source activity to the nearest receiver locations as shown in previous table. 3 Construction noise level thresholds as shown in the setting Nighttime concrete pouring may occur as a part of the proposed project's building construction activities. Nighttime concrete pouring activities are often used to support reduced concrete mixer truck transit times and lower air temperatures than during the daytime hours and are generally limited to the actual building pad area. Since nighttime concrete pours would take place outside the allowable construction hours established by the City of Menifee Development Code, Section 9.215.060(C), the project applicant would be required to obtain authorization for nighttime concrete pouring work. Any nighttime construction noise activities shall satisfy the noise limits outlined in Table 10. As evaluated in Appendix G, nearby sensitive receivers would experience less than significant impacts from nighttime concrete pouring activities, should they occur. Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 73 Operational Noise Impacts Less Than Significant Impact. This operational noise analysis evaluates noise level impacts associated with the expected typical daytime and nighttime activities at the project site. Consistent with similar warehouse uses, the proposed project's operations would primarily be conducted within the enclosed building, except for traffic movement, parking, as well as loading and unloading of trucks at designated loading bays. The reference noise levels shown below in Table 10 were utilized to represent operational noise sources such as loading dock activity, roof -top air conditioning units, trash enclosure activity, parking lot vehicle movements, and truck movements. Table 10: Reference Noise Level Measurements Min.IHourz Reference Noise Level Noise Source (dBA Leq) at Sound Power Noise Source' Height Day Night 50 feet Level (dBA)3 Loading Dock Activity 8 feet 60 60 65.7 111.5 Roof -Top Air Conditioning Units 5 feet 39 28 57.2 88.9 Trash Enclosure Activity 5 feet 10 10 57.3 89.0 Parking Lot Vehicle Movements 5 feet 60 60 52.6 81.1 Truck Movements 8 feet 60 60 59.8 93.2 Notes: ' As measured by Urban Crossroads, Inc. 2 Anticipated duration (minutes within the hour) of noise activity during typical hourly conditions expected at the project site "Daytime" = 7:00 a m —10:00 p.m ; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m.-7:00 a.m. 3 Sound power level represents the total amount of acoustical energy (noise level) produced by a sound Mime independent of distance or surroundings. Sound power levels calculated using the CadnaA noise model at the reference distance to the noise source. Numbers may vary due to size differences between point and area noise sources. Based on the above reference noise levels, the effect of the proposed project's operations on surrounding sensitive receivers was estimated using the CadnaA noise model. As shown in Table 11 below, operational noise levels associated with the proposed project would satisfy the daytime and nighttime exterior noise level standards and thresholds of significance. Therefore, the proposed project's operational noise impacts are considered less than significant. Table 11: Operational Noise Level Compliance Receiver Project Operational Noise Levels (dBA Leq)Z Noise Level Standards (dBA Leq)3 Noise Level Standards Exceeded?4 Location' Daytime Nighttime Daytime Nighttime Daytime Nighttime R1 54.2 54.2 65.0 -5 No -5 R2 41.1 40.8 65.0 45.0 No No R3 43.1 42.9 65.0 45.0 No No R4 43.5 43.4 65.0 45.0 No No Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 74 Receiver Location' Project Operational I Noise Level Standards Noise Level Standards Noise Levels (dBA Leq)z (dBA L.q)3 I Exceeded?4 Daytime I Nighttime I Daytime I Nighttime I Daytime I Nighttime Notes: ' See Exhibit 8-A of Appendix G for the receiver locations. 2 Proposed project operational noise level calculations are included in Appendix 9-1 of Appendix G. 3 City of Menifee Development Code, Chapter 9 215 Noise Control Regulations, Table 9.215.060-1 4 Do the estimated project operational noise source activities exceed the noise level standards? 5 Receiver location R1 represents the Big League Dreams and does not include any noise -sensitive nighttime receivers. "Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Based on the operational noise levels shown in Table 12, project -related increases to surrounding daytime and nighttime ambient noise conditions would be below the significance criteria presented in Table 8 and therefore less than significant. The proposed project's effect on daytime and nighttime ambient noise conditions at nearby sensitive receivers are shown in Table 12 and Table 13, respectively. Table 12: Daytime Project Operational Noise Level Increases Reference Total Project Ambient Combined Increase Receiver Operational Measurement Noise Project and Project Increase Crlteria Location' Noise Leve12 Location3 Levels4 Ambients Increases Criteriar Exceeded? R1 54.2 L1 52.9 56.6 3.7 5.0 No R2 41.1 L2 61.5 61.5 0.0 5.0 No R3 43.1 L3 53.7 54.1 0.4 5.0 No R4 43.5 L4 56.0 56.2 0.2 5.0 No Notes: ' See Exhibit 8-A for the receiver locations of Appendix G. 2 Total Project daytime operational noise levels. 3 Reference noise level measurement locations as shown on Exhibit 5-A of Appendix G. 4 Observed daytime ambient noise levels. 5 Represents the combined ambient conditions plus project activities 6 The noise level increase expected with the addition of the proposed project activities 7 Significance increase criteria. Table 13: Nighttime Operational Noise Level Increases Receiver Location' Total Project Operational Noise Leve12 Measurement Location3 Reference Ambient Noise Levels4 Combined Project and Ambiente Project Increases Increase Criteria? Increase Criteria Exceeded? R1 54.2 L1 53.0 56.6 3.6 5.0 No R2 40.8 L2 58.3 58.4 0.1 5.0 No R3 42.9 L3 50.6 51.3 0.7 5.0 No R4 43.4 L4 54.1 54.5 0.4 5.0 No Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 75 Reference Total Project Ambient Combined Increase Receiver Operational Measurement Noise Project and Project Increase Criteria Location' Noise Leve12 Location' Levels4 AmbienP Increase6 Criteriar Exceeded? Notes: ' See Exhibit 8-A of Appendix G for the receiver locations. 2 Total project nighttime operational noise levels. 3 Reference noise level measurement locations as shown on Exhibit 5-A of Appendix G 4 Observed nighttime ambient noise levels. 5 Represents the combined ambient conditions plus project activities 6 The noise level increase expected with the addition of the proposed project activities. Significance increase criteria. Impact Xlll.b): Less Than Significant Impact. Table 14 shows the proposed project's construction - related vibration levels that may occur at nearby receiver locations. At distances ranging from 125 to 284 feet from the proposed project's construction activities, construction vibration velocity levels are estimated to range from 0.005 to 0.019 in/sec peak particle velocity (PPV). These construction -related vibration levels would be well below the 0.3 PPV (in/sec) vibration threshold adopted by this analysis. Therefore, the effect of the proposed project's construction -related vibrations would be less than significant. Additionally, it is worth noting that the vibration levels estimated at receiver locations would not be sustained during the entire construction period. Instead, they would occur during the times that heavy construction equipment is operating adjacent to the proposed project's site perimeter. Table 14: Project Construction Vibration Levels Typical Construction Vibration Levels PPV (in/sec)3 Highest Distance Threshold to Const. Small Jack Loaded Large Vibratory Vibration PPV Thresholds Location' Activityz bulldozer hammer Trucks bulldozer Roller Level (in/sec)4 Exceeded?5 R1 125 feet 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.008 0.019 0.019 0.3 No R2 162 feet 1 0.000 0.002 0.005 1 0.005 0.013 0.013 0.3 No R3 126 feet 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.008 0.019 0.019 0.3 No R4 284 feet 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.005 0.005 0.3 No Notes: PPV = peak particle velocity ' Receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 10-A of Appendix G. 2 Distance from receiver building facade to project construction boundary (project site boundary) 3 Based on the Vibration Source Levels of Construction Equipment. 4 Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020, Table 19, p. 38. 5 Does the peak vibration exceed the acceptable vibration thresholds? Implementation of the proposed project would not include any new permanent sources that would expose persons in the project vicinity to groundborne vibration levels that could be perceptible without instruments beyond the boundary line of the project property. Therefore, there would be no impact related to operational groundborne vibration from the proposed project. Impact Xlll.c): Less Than Significant Impact. A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels for a project located in the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport. Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 76 The nearest public airport to the project site is the Perris Valley Airport, located approximately 2 miles west of the project site. According to the airport's noise exposure map, the project site is located outside of the 55 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) airport noise contours.60 While aircraft noise is occasionally audible on the project site from aircraft flyovers, aircraft noise associated with nearby airport activity would not expose people residing or working near the project site to excessive noise levels. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not expose persons residing or working in the project vicinity to noise levels from airport activity that would be in excess of normally acceptable standards for the proposed land use development, and no impact would occur. Mitiqation Measures: No mitigation is required. 60 Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission. 2010. Perris Valley Airport. Website: https://www rcaluc org/Plans/New-Compatibility-Plan. Accessed September 27, 2022 Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 77 Less Than XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING Potentially Significant significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Would the project: a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑ construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Sources: City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan; City of Menifee. 2013. City of Menifee General Plan Draft EIR; California Employment Development Department (EDD); United States Census Bureau. 2022. QuickFacts, Menifee City, California. Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal LU-2 Thriving Economic Development Corridors that accommodate a mix of nonresidential and residential uses that generate activity and economic vitality in the City. Policy LU-2.1 Promote infill development that complements existing neighborhoods and surrounding areas. Infill development and future growth in Menifee is strongly encouraged to locate within EDC areas to preserve the rural character of rural, estate, and small estate residential uses. Policy LU-2.2 Encourage vertical and horizontal integration of uses where feasible on properties in EDCs. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impact XIV.a): Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project does not include the construction of any housing. Therefore, no direct population growth would occur as a result of the proposed project. Unplanned indirect population growth could occur if the proposed project created employment opportunities not previously considered in the General Plan. The proposed project would employ approximately 603 employees. According to the General Plan EIR, the City's population at General Plan buildout is estimated as 158,942, an increase of 81,423 over the 2010 Census count and 39,160 over the SCAG 2035 forecast of the City's population. As of the 2020 census, the City had a population of 102,527 persons, with 3.16 persons per household.61 Further, according to the California Employment Development Division, there are approximately 1,700 unemployed individuals in the City as of August 2022.62 Therefore, the majority of new employees would be expected to be existing residents consistent with the population 61 United States Census Bureau. 2022 QuickFacts, Menifee City, California. Website: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/menifeecitycalifornia/POP010220. Accessed September 15, 2022. 62 California Employment Development Department (EDD). Monthly Labor Force Data for Cities and Census Designated Places (CDP), August 2022, Riverside County Website: https://www.labormarketinfo.edd ca.gov/data/labor-force-and-unemployment-for-cities-and-census- areas.html Accessed September 15, 2022. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 78 growth planned for and analyzed under the General Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact. Impact XIV.b): No Impact. The project site is vacant and undeveloped and does not contain any dwelling units. The proposed project consists of the development of light industrial warehouse space, which would include office and warehouse space. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. As such, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 79 Less Than XV. PUBLIC SERVICES Potentially Significant Less Than Significant with Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Police protection? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ c) Schools? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ d) Parks? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ e) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Sources: Riverside County Fire Department. 2021. City of Menifee. 2022. Menifee Municipal Code; Menifee Police Department. 2022; City of Menifee. 2022. Office of the Fire Marshal; Romoland School District. 2022; Perris Union High School District. 2022; Calvary Chapel Christian Academy. 2022. Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal S-4 A community that has effective fire mitigation and response measures in place, and as a result is minimally impacted by wildland and structure fires. Policy S-4.1 Require fire-resistant building construction materials, the use of vegetation control methods, and other construction and fire prevention features to reduce the hazard of wildland fire. Policy S-4.2 Ensure, to the maximum extent possible, that fire services, such as firefighting equipment and personnel, infrastructure, and response times, are adequate for all sections of the City. Policy S-4.4 Review development proposals for impacts to fire facilities and compatibility with fire areas or mitigate. Goal OSC-1 A comprehensive system of high -quality parks and recreation programs that meets the diverse needs of the community. Policy OSC-1.7 Ensure that parks and recreational facilities are well -maintained by the responsible agency. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impacts XV.a): Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Menifee contracts with CAL FIRE and RCFD for a full range of fire protection services. The RCFD operates 96 fire stations and provides fire and emergency services to 19 partner cities as well as residents in unincorporated areas of Riverside County.63 ea The proposed project would be served by the two nearest RCFD fire stations, Station 54 and Station 7. 63 Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD) 2021. Riverside County Fire Departments. Website: https://rvcfire.org/resources/fire-stations. Accessed June 15, 2022. 64 Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD). 2021 Riverside County Fire Department Service Area. Website: https:Hrvcfire.org/about- us/service-area. Accessed June 15, 2022. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 80 Station 54 located at 25730 Sultanas Road in the City of Homeland, 3.07 miles southeast of the project site, and Station 7 is located at 28349 Bradley Road, approximately 3.13 miles to the south of the project site. The proposed project consists of the development of an approximately 267,578-square-foot light industrial warehouse and a 10,000-square-foot office, consistent with the General Plan's vision for EDC-NG designated areas. Although the proposed project would increase demand for fire protection services compared to existing conditions, that demand was analyzed in the General Plan EIR and the impact was determined to be less than significant given compliance with applicable design requirements, applicable fire code and RCFD requirements, and payment of appropriate impact fees. Chapter 8.02 of the Menifee Municipal Code provides for the imposition of developer impact fees (DIF) for new development to mitigate the impact on the City's public services and facilities.65 Additionally, RCFD enforces the 2019 California Fire, Building, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing and Residential codes as amended by the Menifee Municipal Code and Riverside County Municipal Code, in addition to the National Fire Protection Association standards; Title 19, of the California Public Safety Code; and the California Health and Safety Code. The RCFD would review the proposed project development plans for compliance with applicable City, County, and State requirements for fire protection and prevention. As such, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on the provision of fire services. Impacts XV.b): Less Than Significant Impact. The project site would be served by the Menifee Police Department (the Department). The Department is headquartered at 29714 Huan Road, approximately 4.39 miles to the south of the project site.66 The proposed project lies within the ME100 beat area, 1 of 4 geographic patrol beat areas in the City.67 The proposed project would not include the development of any residential units but would employ approximately 603 employees, with employment expected to be primarily sourced from the existing workforce within the City. As the proposed project is not residential, it is unlikely that the development and operation of the proposed project would result in a significant need for police protection services. Additionally, Chapter 8.02 of the Menifee Municipal Code provides for the imposition of DIF for new development to mitigate the impact on the City's public services and facilities.66 As such, impacts associated with the development of the proposed project would be less than significant. Impacts XV.c): Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is within the boundary of the Romoland School District and the Perris Union High School District.69,70 The proposed project is approximately 0.78-mile northwest of Romoland Elementary School and 0.58-mile northwest of Cavalry Chapel Christian Academy, a private kindergarten through junior high school.71 The proposed project does not include the development of any residential units and would not result in an increase in population that could directly or indirectly generate the demand for school services. As discussed in impact 2.14 Population and Housing, employment for the proposed project is anticipated to be sourced from the existing available workforce in the City. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to increase the number of residents in the area or indirectly generate school -aged students. However, the proposed project would be required to contribute DIF to the Romoland School District and the Perris Union High School District. As such, the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physical altered school facilities and compliance with applicable local and State 66 City of Menifee Menifee, CA — Code of Ordinances Title 8, Chapter 8.02: Development Impact Fees. Website: https:Hcodelibrary amlegal.com/codes/menifee/latesUmenifee_ca/0-0-0-23873 Accessed June 16, 2022. 66 Menifee Police Department. 2022. Website: https.//menifeepolice.org. Accessed June 16, 2022 67 City of Menifee Police Department. 2020. City of Menifee Police Beat #ME100. Website: https://menifeepolice.org/wp- content/uploads/2020/08/Police_Beats_ME1002 pdf Accessed June 16, 2022. 66 City of Menifee. Menifee, CA — Code of Ordinances. Title 8, Chapter 8 02: Development Impact Fees. Website: https://codelibrary.amlegal com/codes/menifee/latest/menifee_ca/0-0-0-23873 Accessed June 16, 2022. 69 Romoland School District 2022. Romoland School District 2016-2017 Elementary School Boundaries Website: https://www.romoland.net/cros/lib/CA01902709/Centricity/domain/19/documents/BoundaryMap_4-11-2017.pdf. Accessed September 15, 2022. 70 Perris Union High School District 2022 Find Your School. Website: https://www.puhsd.org/Content2/find-your-school. Accessed September 15, 2022 71 Calvary Chapel Christian Academy 2022 Home. Website: https://www calvarychapelca.com. Accessed September 15, 2022. Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 81 regulations would ensure that the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on school services. Impact XV.d): Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is approximately 0.90 miles northwest of Eller Park and 1.65 miles northeast of Nova Park. The proposed project does not include the development of any residential units and would not result in an increase in population that could directly or indirectly generate demand for park services. Although the proposed project is anticipated to employ approximately 603 people, as previously discussed, the employees are likely to come from the City's existing available workforce. Further, the employees are unlikely to use recreational facilities during work hours. Furthermore, employment growth as a result of the proposed project would be consistent with the planned growth as estimated in the General Plan. Therefore, the implementation of the proposed project is not expected to result in an increase in the use of existing park and recreation facilities in the surrounding area or in the City of Menifee. Impact We): Less Than Significant Impact. Public recreation facilities provided by the City include the AMR Skate Park, the Kay Ceniceros Senior Center, and the Lazy Creek Recreation Center.72 Each of these facilities is located more than 4 miles from the project site. The Romoland Library is approximately 2.45 miles southeast of the project site. The proposed project does not include the development of any residential units and would not result in an increase in population that could directly or indirectly generate demand for library services. Additionally, as previously discussed, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in an indirect increase in population as employees for the proposed project are expected to come from the City`s existing workforce. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact to other public facilities. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required. 72 City of Menifee. 2022 Facilities. Website: https://www.cityofinenifee.us/460/City-Facilities. Accessed September 15, 2022. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 82 XVI. RECREATION Potentially Significant Impact Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities ❑ such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Sources: City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan; City of Menifee. 2013. City of Menifee General Plan Draft EIR; United States Census Bureau. 2022. QuickFacts, Menifee City, California. Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-1 A comprehensive system of high -quality parks and recreation programs that meets the diverse needs of the community. Policy OSC-1.1 Provide parks and recreational programs to meet the varied needs of community residents, including children, youth, adults, seniors, and persons with disabilities, and make these facilities and services easily accessible and affordable to all users. Policy OSC-1.2 Require a minimum of five acres of public open space to be provided for every 1,000 City residents. Policy OCS-1.7 Ensure that parks and recreational facilities are well -maintained by the responsible agency. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impact XVI.a): Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project does not include residential units or residential uses and therefore would result in a direct population increase or an increase in the use of existing recreational facilities associated with an increase in population. According to the General Plan EIR, the City's population at General Plan buildout is estimated as 158,942, an increase of 81,423 over the 2010 Census count and 39,160 over the SCAG 2035 forecast of the City's population. As of the 2020 census, the City had a population of 102,527 persons, with 3.16 persons per household.73 Although the proposed project is anticipated to employ 603 employees, it is expected that these employees would come from the existing workforce in the City, as discussed in Impact 2.14 Population and Housing. Additionally, the proposed project's employees are not expected to use recreational facilities during work hours. Therefore, the implementation of the proposed project is not expected to result in an increase in use of existing park and recreation facilities in the surrounding area or in the City of Menifee. According to Chapter 7.75 (Parkland Dedication and Fees) of the Menifee Municipal Code, since the proposed project does not include the subdivision of land for residential use, it is not required to dedicate land of pay in -lieu fees. 73 United States Census Bureau. 2022. QuickFacts, Menifee City, California. Website: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/menifeecitycalifornia/POP010220 Accessed September 15, 2022 Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 83 Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact to existing neighborhood and regional parks. Impact XVI.b): Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed above, because the proposed project would not directly result in unplanned population growth in the City, the proposed project would not increase the use of existing recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. As discussed previously, the proposed project would consist of light industrial warehouse space, including warehouse and office space, as well as associated vehicle, trailer, and bicycle parking spaces. The proposed project does not include recreational facilities. No park lands, recreational facilities, or community parks would be impacted by the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact as it pertains to the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Mitiqation Measures: No mitigation is required. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 84 Less Than XVII. TRANSPORTATION Potentially Significant Less Than Significant with Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Would the project. - a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, ❑ ❑ ® ❑ including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, ❑ ❑ ® ❑ subdivision (b)? c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Sources: Menifee General Plan; Menifee Development Code; City of Menifee Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled; Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Traffic Analysis (Urban Crossroads 2023); Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Evaluation (Urban Crossroads, 2022) (see Appendix H). Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal C-1 A roadway network that meets the visitors to the City of Menifee. circulation needs of all residents, employees, and Policy C-1.1 Require roadways to: • Comply with federal, State, and local design and safety standards. • Meet the needs of multiple transportation modes and users. • Be compatible with the streetscape and surrounding land uses. • Be maintained in accordance with best practices. Policy C-1.2 Require development to mitigate its traffic impacts and achieve a peak -hour Level of Service (LOS) D or better at intersections, except at constrained intersections at close proximity to the 1-215 where LOS E may be permitted. Policy C-1.5 Minimize idling times and Vehicle Miles Traveled to conserve resources, protect air quality, and limit greenhouse gas emissions. Goal C-2 A bikeway and community pedestrian network that facilitates and encourages nonmotorized travel throughout the City of Menifee. Policy C-2.1 Require on- and off-street pathways to: • Comply with federal, State and local design and safety standards. • Meet the needs of multiple types of users (families, commuters, recreational beginners, exercise experts) and meet ADA standards and guidelines. • Be compatible with the streetscape and surrounding land uses. • Be maintained in accordance with best practices. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 85 Policy C-2.3 Require walkways that promote safe and convenient travel between residential areas, businesses, schools, parks, recreation areas, transit facilities, and other key destination points. Policy C-2.4 Explore opportunities to expand the pedestrian and bicycle networks; this includes consideration of utility easements, drainage corridors, road rights -of -way and other potential options. Policy C-3.2 Require new development to provide transit facilities, such as bus shelters, transit bays, and turnouts, as necessary. Policy C-3.3 Provide additional development -related incentives to projects that promote transit use. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impact XVll.a): Less Than Significant Impact. A Traffic Analysis (TA) was prepared for the proposed project by Urban Crossroads on April 24, 2023, and is included in Appendix H. The TA evaluated the potential circulation system deficiencies that may result from the development of the proposed project, and, where necessary, recommended improvements to achieve acceptable operations consistent with General Plan LOS goals and policies. The TA was prepared in accordance with the City's Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled (updated January 2022), the City's Level of Service (LOS) Traffic Study Guidelines (revised October 2020), and in consultation with City staff. The intersection LOS analysis is based on the traffic volumes observed during the peak -hour conditions using traffic count data collected in October 2021. The TA analyzed the weekday AM Peak -hour (between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m.) and weekday PM Peak - hour (between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.) Table 15 below presents the daily and peak -hour trip generation for the project. As indicated in Table 15, the project is anticipated to generate approximately 758 Average Daily Traffic (ADT), including an estimated 42 AM peak -hour trips and 54 PM peak -hour trips. Table 16: Project Trip Generation Summary Land Use Quantity Units AM Peak -hour PM Peak -hour Daily In I Out Total In Out Total Actual Vehicles: High -Cube Fulfillment Passenger Cars 277.578 TSF 22 7 29 11 29 40 486 2-4 axle Trucks: 2 1 3 1 2 3 46 5+-axle Trucks 2 1 3 1 2 3 60 Total Truck Trips (Actual Vehicles): 4 2 6 2 4 6 106 Total Trips (Actual Vehicles)' 26 9 35 13 33 46 592 Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE): High -Cube Fulfillment Passenger Cars 277.578 TSF 22 7 29 11 29 40 486 2-4 axle Trucks 3 1 4 2 4 6 90 Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 86 AM Peak -hour PM Peak -hour Quantity Land Use Units In Out Total In Out Total Daily 3+-axle Trucks 7 2 9 2 6 8 182 Total Truck Trips (PCE) 10 3 13 4 10 14 272 Total Trips (PCE)Z 32 10 42 15 39 54 758 Notes: TSF = thousand square feet 1 Total Trips = Passenger Cars + Truck Trips Source: Urban Crossroads 2023. Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Traffic Analysis. Table 4-2. Intersection Analysis Traffic operations of roadway facilities are described using LOS, which is a qualitative description of traffic flow based on several factors such as speed, travel time, delay, and freedom to maneuver. Six levels are typically defined, ranging from LOS A, representing completely free -flow conditions, to LOS F, representing breakdown in flow resulting in stop -and -go conditions. LOS E represents operations at or near capacity, an unstable level where vehicles are operating with the minimum spacing for maintaining uniform flow. Policy C-1.2 of the City of Menifee General Plan, listed above, requires development to mitigate its traffic impacts and achieve a peak -hour LOS D or better at intersections, except at constrained intersections at close proximity to the 1-215, where LOS E may be permitted. Therefore, any intersection operating at LOS E or F would be considered deficient. The 10 study area intersections listed below were selected for evaluation in the traffic study based on consultation with City of Menifee staff: • 1-215 South Bound Ramps/SR-74 and Bonnie Drive • 1-215 North Bound Ramps and SR-74 • Trumble Road and Mapes Road • Trumble Road and SR-74 • Driveway 1 and Mapes Road • Driveway 2 and Mapes Road • Sherman Road and Mapes Road • Sherman Road and Driveway 3 • Sherman Road and Driveway 4 • Sherman Road and SR-74 Existing and Existing Plus Project Conditions The intersection analysis results are summarized below in Table 16 for Existing Plus Project (E+P) conditions, which indicate that consistent with existing traffic conditions, the study area intersections are anticipated to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS under E+P traffic conditions. As such, no improvements were identified. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 87 Table 16: Intersection Analysis for Existing and E+P Conditions Existing (2022) E+P Delay2 Level of Delay2 Level of (secs.) Service (secs.) Service Traffic AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Intersection Control' 1-215 South Bound Ramps/ TS 10.2 12.3 B B 10.3 12.4 B B SR-74 and Bonnie Drive 21-215 North Bound Ramps and TS 8.0 8.3 A A 8.2 8.4 A A SR-74 Trumble Road and Mapes Road AWS 10.9 11.0 B B 11.2 11.4 B B Trumble Road and SR-74 TS 17.7 12.0 B B 18.8 12.8 B B Driveway 1 and Mapes Road CSS Future Intersection 10.4 11.0 B B Driveway 2 and Mapes Road CSS Future Intersection 0.0 0.0 B B Sherman Road and Mapes Road CSS 10.7 1 11.0 1 B I B 10.7 11.1 B B Sherman Road and Driveway 3 CSS Future Intersection 8.6 8.5 A A Sherman Road and Driveway 4 CSS Future Intersection 8.7 8.7 A A Sherman Road and SR-74 CSS 11.6 1 10.9 1 B I B 11.7 11.0 B B Notes: ' TF = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross -Street Stop; CSS = Improvement 2 Per the Highway Capacity Manual (6th Edition), overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all -way stop control. For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) arc shown. Source: Urban Crossroads. 2023. Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Traffic Analysis Table 5-1. Opening Year Cumulative (2024) Conditions Opening Year Cumulative (2024) peak -hour traffic operations have been evaluated for the study area intersections. The intersection analysis results are summarized in Table 9 below, which indicate that the following study area intersections are anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS during the peak - hours under Opening Year Cumulative (2024) Without Project and Opening Year Cumulative (2024) With Project traffic conditions: • 1-215 Southbound Ramps/SR-74 and Bonnie Drive-LOS E PM peak -hour only • Trumble Road and Mapes Road-LOS F PM peak -hour only • Sherman Road and SR-74-LOS F AM and PM peak -hour As shown in Table 16, there are no additional study area intersections anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS with the addition of project traffic. It should be noted, with the implementation of improvements to address deficiencies, the intersection of 1-215 Southbound Ramps/SR-74 and Bonnie Drive is anticipated to operate at an acceptable LOS during the AM and PM peak -hours. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 88 Table 17: Intersection Analysis for Opening Year Cumulative (2024) Conditions 2024 Without Project 2024 With Project Level of Delay2 Level of Delay2 (secs.) Service (secs.) Service Traffic AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Intersection Control' 1-215 South Bound Ramps/ TS 34.0 123.2 C F 35.9 124.9 D F SR-74 and Bonnie Drive 21-215 North Bound Ramps and TS 16.3 25.1 B C 16.8 25.9 B C S R-74 Trumble Road and Mapes Road AWS 21.2 89.3 C F 23.0 97.7 C F Trumble Road and SR-74 TS 123.5 105.2 F F 128.9 112.0 F F Driveway 1 and Mapes Road CSS Future Intersection 12.2 15.0 B C Driveway 2 and Mapes Road CSS Future Intersection 0.0 0.0 A A Sherman Road and Mapes Road CSS 15.4 1 22.7 1 C I C 15.5 23.3 C C Sherman Road and Driveway 3 CSS Future Intersection 8.7 8.6 A A Sherman Road and Driveway 4 CSS Future Intersection 8.7 8.8 A A Sherman Road and SR-74 CSS 14.5 1 13.1 1 B I B 14.6 13.4 B B Notes: BOLD = LOS does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i e , unacceptable LOS). TF = Traffic Signal; CSS = Cross -Street Stop; CSS = Improvement 2 Per the Highway Capacity Manual (6th Edition), overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all -way stop control. For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown. Source: Urban Crossroads. 2023. Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Traffic Analysis Table 6-1. The results of these analyses determined that under existing conditions, and E+P conditions, none of the intersections evaluated is operating at unacceptable LOS during peak -hours. As such, no improvements have been recommended. Evaluation of the Opening Year Cumulative (2024) scenarios, both with and without project traffic conditions, concluded that one intersection is anticipated to operate at a deficient LOS during the peak -hours. The proposed project would be required to contribute its fair share towards future traffic signals planned at the intersections of Trumble Road at Mapes Road and Sherman Road at Mapes Road, consistent with PDF TRANS-8. However, the City's LOS Traffic Study Guidelines indicate that the LOS E will trigger a fair share contribution if the proposed project adds 50 or more peak -hour trips to the intersection. The TA indicates that the proposed project will contribute 23 peak -hour trips at this intersection. Because the trips are less than the threshold in the City's guidelines, the fair share contribution would not apply, and the proposed project would not be required to pay its fair share toward the intersections of 1-215 Southbound Ramps/SR-74 at Bonnie Drive and Trumble Road at SR-74. Additionally, under every scenario evaluation, the TA concluded that there are no movements that are anticipated to experience queueing issues during the weekday AM or weekday PM peak 95th percentile traffic flows. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 89 Site Adjacent and Site Access Recommendations The TA provides recommendations based on the minimum improvements needed to accommodate site access and maintain acceptable peak -hour operations for the proposed project, which are included as project design features PDF TRAN -1 through PDF TRAN-7. Signal Warrant Analysis Traffic signal warrant analyses were performed for all of the full access unsignalized study area intersections listed below: • Trumble Road and Mapes Road • Driveway 1 and Mapes Road • Driveway 2 and Mapes Road • Sherman Road and Mapes Road • Sherman Road and Driveway 3 • Sherman Road and Driveway 4 Traffic signal warrant analyses were conducted for Existing (2022), E+P, and Opening Year Cumulative (2024) conditions. The results of these analyses for each condition are detailed below. Existing (2022) Conditions Traffic signal warrants for Existing traffic conditions are based on existing peak -hour intersection turning volumes. There are no unsignalized study area intersections that currently meet a peak -hour volume - based traffic signal warrant for Existing (2022) traffic conditions. E+P Conditions Traffic signal warrants were performed for E+P traffic conditions based on peak -hour intersection turning movements volumes. There are no study area intersections anticipated to meet peak -hour volume -based traffic signal warrant under E+P traffic conditions. Opening Year Cumulative (2024) Conditions Traffic signal warrants were performed for Opening Year Cumulative (2024) traffic conditions based on peak -hour intersection turning movement volumes. The intersection of Trumble Road at Mapes Road is anticipated to meet a peak hour volume -based traffic signal warrant under Opening Year Cumulative (2024) Without Project traffic conditions. There is no additional unsignalized study area intersections anticipated to meet traffic signal warrants under Opening Year Cumulative (2024) With Project traffic conditions in addition to the location previously warranted under Opening Year Cumulative (2024) With Project traffic conditions. A signal warrant defines the minimum condition under which the installation of a traffic signal might be warranted. Meeting this condition does not require that a traffic control signal be installed at a particular location but rather that other traffic factors and conditions be evaluated in order to determine whether the signal is truly justified. It should also be noted that signal warrants do not necessarily correlate with LOS. An intersection may satisfy a signal warrant condition and operate at or above acceptable LOS or operate below acceptable LOS and not meet a signal warrant. Transit Service The project site is currently served by the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA). According to the TA, RTA Route 28 is the closest existing route that currently runs along SR-74 and 1-215. Transit service is reviewed and updated by RTA periodically to address ridership, budget, and community demand needs. Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Field observations performed as part of the TA indicate that there is nominal pedestrian and bicycle activity within the project area. There are Class II bike lanes proposed on Mapes Road and Trumble Road, and Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 90 Sherman Road is classified as a Class III bike route. The proposed project would implement Class II bike lanes along the frontage of Mapes Road, consistent with City standards. The proposed project would be required to implement project design features PDF TRAN -1 through PDF TRAN-8, which would ensure that the proposed project would have adequate site access and would maintain acceptable peak -hour operations. With the implementation of PDF TRAN-1 through PDF TRAN- 8, the proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system. Impacts would be less than significant. Impacts XVII.b): Less Than Significant Impact. The City's Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled (updated January 2022) documents the City's VMT analysis methodology and approved impact thresholds. The VMT analysis presented below has been developed based on the newly adopted City Guidelines. The analysis utilized the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) VMT Screening Tool, which allows users to input an APN to determine whether a project's physical location meets one or more of the screening thresholds for land use projects identified in the City Guidelines. Screening criteria is broken into three steps: Step 1: Transit Priority Area (TPA) Screening Step 2: Low VMT Area Screening Step 3: Project Type Screening A land use project need only to meet one of the above screening criteria to result in a less than significant impact. TPA Screening Projects located within a TPA (i.e., within 0.5 mile of an existing "major transit stop"74 or an existing stop along a "high -quality transit corridor"75) may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. However, the presumption may NOT be appropriate if a project: • Has a floor area ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75; • Includes more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than required by the jurisdiction (if the jurisdiction requires the project to supply parking); • Is inconsistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy (as determined by the lead agency, with input from the Metropolitan Planning Organization); or • Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or high -income residential units. Based on the VMT Screening tool, the project site is not located within 0.5 mile of an existing major transit stop or along a high -quality transit corridor. As such, the TPA screening threshold is not met. Low VMT Area Screening The City Guidelines also states that, "residential and office projects located within a low VMT-generating area are presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. In addition, other employment -related and mixed -use land use projects may qualify for the use of screening if there is a reasonable expectation that the proposed project would generate VMT per service population 74 Public Resources Code, Section 21064.3 ("'Major transit stop' means a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.") 75 Public Resources Code, Section 21155 ("For purposes of this section, a high -quality transit corridor means a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.") Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 91 that is similar to the existing land uses in the Low VMT area."76 The proposed project resides within Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) 1098 and was shown to generate 32.1 VMT per service population, whereas the City's impact threshold is 33.6 VMT per service population. Based on the Screening Tool results (Appendix H), the project is located within a low VMT-generating zone. Therefore, the Low VMT Area screening threshold is met. Project Type Screening Threshold The City Guidelines notes projects that consist of local serving retail less than 50,000 square feet may be presumed to cause a less than significant impact. The proposed project does not intend to develop any local serving retail uses. Additionally, the City Guidelines also indicate that projects generating fewer than 110 daily vehicle trips may be presumed to have a less than significant impact. Trips generated by the proposed project have been estimated based on trip generation rates collected by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021. The proposed project is anticipated to generate 592 daily vehicle trips, which is above the 110 daily vehicle trip threshold (Appendix H). Therefore, the Project Type screening threshold is not met. Based on review of applicable VMT screening thresholds, the proposed project meets the Low VMT Area screening and would therefore be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact. The proposed project does not meet the TPA or Project Type screening, however, meeting the Low VMT Area screening is sufficient to determine a less than significant impact. Impact XVII.c): Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project does not include the use of any incompatible vehicles or equipment on -site, such as farm equipment. The design features of the proposed project would create two new driveways along Mapes Road and two along Sherman Road. The anticipated on -site roadway improvements would be compatible with the surrounding industrial, commercial, and residential land uses. Additionally, sight distance at project access points would comply with applicable City of Menifee sight distance standards." Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Impact XVII.d): Less Than Significant Impact. Regional access to the project site is provided via SR-74 as well as 1-215 by way of Exit 15 (SR-74 toward Hemet). Vehicular access to the site will be provided via one 40-foot and one 26-foot driveway along Mapes Road, as well as a 30-foot primary car entry driveway and a 39-foot secondary truck entry driveway along Sherman Road. As previously discussed, project truck traffic would be prohibited along Sherman Road, which is designated as a collector roadway by the General Plan. Therefore, truck traffic to and from the project site would be routed via Mapes Road to Trumble Road, both of which are designated as major roadways. Trumble Road connects to SR-74, which subsequently provides access to 1-215. Pedestrian access is proposed via perimeter and internal sidewalks and walkways. As previously concluded in Section 2.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Impact 2.9.f, construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in any permanent lane closures or obstructions that could impede emergency response to or from the project site from the surrounding streets. In addition, a 26-foot-wide fire lane is proposed to fully surround the warehouse to the north, west, south, and east and would provide emergency and fire truck access. Finally, the proposed project would comply with applicable RCFD access requirements, ensuring the provision of adequate emergency access to the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would have less than significant impacts on the emergency access. 76 City of Menifee 2020 City of Menifee Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled. Website: https://www.cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenterNiew/10699/Final-Adopted-TIA-Guidelines-for-VMT_6-3-20. Accessed September 26, 2022 77 City of Menifee. 2022. City of Menifee Development Code, 9.160.060 Intersection Sight Distance Website: https://online.encodeplus com/regs/menifee-ca/ereader/index.html. Accessed July 13, 2022. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 92 Project Design Features: PDF TRAN-1 Driveway 1 and Mapes Road The proposed project shall implement the following improvements to accommodate site access: The proposed project shall install a stop control on the northbound approach. This improvement shall accommodate a minimum 100-foot westbound left turn lane. The proposed project shall install truck turn restriction signage to restrict trucks from making right turns out of Driveway 1. PDF TRAN-2 Driveway 2 and Mapes Road The proposed project shall implement the following improvements to accommodate site access: The proposed project shall install a stop control on the northbound approach. This driveway shall be restricted to right-in/right-out access only via the raised median or an alternate design as approved by the City Engineer. Half -section roadway improvement shall accommodate a second eastbound shared through -right turn lane. PDF TRAN-3 Sherman Road and Mapes Road The proposed project shall implement the following improvements to accommodate 95tn percentile queues and site adjacent roadway improvements: The proposed project shall improve the intersection to accommodate a 100-foot eastbound left turn pocket and the half -section roadway improvement on Mapes Road shall accommodate a dedicated eastbound right turn pocket (trap lane with no pocket length). PDF TRAN-4 Sherman Road and Driveway 3 The proposed project shall implement the following improvements to accommodate site access: The proposed project shall install a stop control on the eastbound approach. This improvement shall accommodate a minimum 50-foot northbound left turn lane. PDF TRAN-5 Sherman Road and Driveway 4 The proposed project shall implement the following improvements to accommodate site access: The proposed project shall install a stop control on the eastbound approach. This improvement shall accommodate a minimum 50-foot northbound left turn lane. The proposed project shall install truck turn restriction signage to restrict trucks from making right turns out of Driveway 4. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 93 PDF TRAN-6 Mapes Road The proposed project shall construct Mapes Road at its ultimate half -section -width as a Major Highway (118-foot right-of-way) from the project's western boundary to Sherman Road consistent with the City's standards. The roadway improvements shall include the construction of a raised median consistent with City Standard No. 110 (although a break in the median shall allow for full access at Driveway 1 only) or an alternate design as approved by the City Engineer. Through lanes along the project's frontage shall be striped in the interim to transition down to the existing lanes west of the project, until such time in the future when Mapes Road is widened to its ultimate cross section to the west. PDF TRAN-7 Sherman Road The proposed project shall construct Sherman Road at its ultimate half -section width as an Industrial Collector (78-foot right-of-way, 56-foot curb -to -curb) from Mapes Road to the project's southern boundary consistent with the City's standard's. The roadway shall be striped along the project's frontage to provide the appropriate lanes and transitions between the existing lanes to the south of the proposed project. On -site traffic signing and striping shall be implemented agreeable with the provisions of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) and in conjunction with detailed construction plans for the project site. Sight distance at each project access point shall be reviewed with respect to standard Caltrans and City of Menifee sight distance standards at the time of preparation of final grading, landscape, and street improvement plans. PDF TRAN-8 Trumble Road at Mapes Road/Sherman Road at Mapes Road The proposed project shall be responsible for the project's contribution towards the deficient intersection of Trumble Road at Mapes Road and Sherman Road at Mapes Road through the payment of fair share that would be assigned to construction of future traffic signals planned at these intersections. Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 94 Less Than XVIII. TRIBAL AND CULTURAL Potentially Significant Less Than RESOURCES Significant with Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a Cultural Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or ❑"] ❑ El b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria ❑ ® ❑ ❑ set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Sources: City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan; City of Menifee. 2013. City of Menifee General Plan Draft EIR; Cultural Resources Study for the Mapes Road Project, City of Menifee, Riverside County, California, provided in Appendix C. Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal OSC-5 Archaeological, historical, and cultural resources that are protected and integrated into the City's built environment. Policy OSC-5.1 Preserve and protect archaeological and historic resources and cultural sites, places, districts, structures, landforms, objects and native burial sites, traditional cultural landscapes and other features, consistent with State law and any laws, regulations or policies which may be adopted by the City to implement this goal and associated policies. Policy OSC-5.4 Establish clear and responsible policies and best practices to identify, evaluate, and protect previously unknown archaeological, historic, and cultural resources, following applicable CEQA and NEPA procedures and in consultation with the appropriate Native American tribes who have ancestral lands within the City. Policy OSC-5.5 Develop clear policies regarding the preservation and avoidance of cultural resources located within the City, in consultation with the appropriate Native American tribes who have ancestral lands within the City. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impact XVlll.a): Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The records search conducted at the EIC, which included a search of the CRHR, did not identify any listed or eligible Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) that would be adversely affected by the proposed project. Additionally, the pedestrian survey conducted by BFSA on January 5, 2022, failed to identify any TCRs. However, the NAHC's SLF produced a positive result for TCRs in the project vicinity and recommended contacting the Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 95 Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians for additional information regarding the proposed project. Should any undiscovered TCRs be encountered during project construction, implementation of MM CUL- 1, MM CUL-2, MM CUL-3 and MM CUL-5, would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. Impact XVlll.b): Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. In compliance with AB 52, the City distributed letters to Native American tribes that have previously requested notification for AB 52 consultation, notifying each tribe of the opportunity to consult with the City regarding the proposed project. Consultation letters were mailed on February 9, 2022. Responses from Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians were received on March 3, 2022; Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians replied on March 7, 2022; and Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians replied on April 12, 2022. Conditions of Approval were received from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians on May 18, 2022. Consultation meetings with the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians and Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians occurred on October 27, 2022, separately. Impacts to TCR would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Mitigation Measures: Implement MM CUL-1 through MM CUL-3 and MM CUL-4 Cultural Resource Disposition In the event that Native American cultural resources are discovered during the course of grading (inadvertent discoveries), the following procedures shall be carried out for final disposition of the discoveries: a) One or more of the following treatments, in order of preference, shall be employed with the tribes. Evidence of such shall be provided to the City of Menifee Community Development Department: i. Preservation -In -Place of the cultural resources, if feasible. Preservation -in - place means avoiding the resources, leaving them in the place where they were found with no development affecting the integrity of the resources. ii. Reburial of the resources on the project property. The measures for reburial shall include, at least, the following: Measures and provisions to protect the future reburial area from any future impacts in perpetuity. Reburial shall not occur until all legally required cataloging and basic recordation have been completed, with an exception that sacred items, burial goods and Native American human remains are excluded. Any reburial process shall be culturally appropriate. Listing of contents and location of the reburial shall be included in the confidential Phase IV report. The Phase IV Report shall be filed with the City under a confidential cover and not subject to Public Records Request iii. If preservation -in -place or reburial is not feasible then the resources shall be curated in a culturally appropriate manner at a Riverside County curation facility that meets State Resources Department Office of Historic Preservation Guidelines for the Curation of Archaeological Resources ensuring access and use pursuant to the Guidelines. The collection and associated records shall be transferred, including title, and are to be accompanied by payment of the fees necessary for permanent curation. Evidence of curation in the form of a letter from the curation facility stating that subject archaeological materials have been received and that all fees have been paid, shall be provided by the landowner to the City. There shall be no destructive or invasive testing on sacred items, burial goods and Native American human remains. Results concerning finds of any inadvertent discoveries shall be included in the Phase IV monitoring report. Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 96 MM CUL-5 Prior to Grading Permit Issuance Archaeologist Retained. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the proposed project, applicant shall retain a Riverside County qualified Archaeologist to monitor all ground - disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. The project Archaeologist and the tribal monitor shall manage and oversee monitoring for all initial ground -disturbing activities and excavation of each portion of the project site including clearing, grubbing, tree removals, mass or rough grading, trenching, stockpiling of materials, rock crushing, structure demolition etc. The project Archaeologist and the tribal monitor shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect, or halt the ground disturbance activities to allow identification, evaluation, and potential recovery of cultural resources in coordination with any required special interest or tribal monitor. The developer/permit holder shall submit a fully executed copy of the contract to the Community Development Department to ensure compliance with this condition of approval. Upon verification, the Community Development Department shall clear this condition. In addition, the project Archaeologist, in consultation with the consulting tribe(s), the contractor, and the City, shall develop a Cultural Resources Management Plan (CRMP) in consultation pursuant to the definition in Assembly Bill (AB) 52 to address the details, timing, and responsibility of all archaeological and cultural activities that will occur on the project site. A consulting tribe is defined as a tribe that initiated the AB 52 tribal consultation process for the project, has not opted out of the AB 52 consultation process, and has completed AB 52 consultation with the City as provided for in Cal Pub Res Code § 21080.3.2(b)(1) of AB 52. Details in the CRMP shall include: a) Project grading and development scheduling b) The project Archaeologist and consulting tribe shall attend the pre -grading meeting with the City, the construction manager and any contractors, and will conduct a mandatory Cultural Resources Worker Sensitivity training to those in attendance. The training will include a brief review of the cultural sensitivity of the proposed project and the surrounding area; what resources could potentially be identified during earthmoving activities; the requirements of the monitoring program; the protocols that apply in the event inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources are identified, including who to contact and appropriate avoidance measures until the find(s) can be properly evaluated; and any other appropriate protocols. All new construction personnel that will conduct earthwork or grading activities that begin work on the proposed project following the initial training must take the Cultural Sensitivity Training prior to beginning work and the project Archaeologist and consulting tribe(s) shall make themselves available to provide the training on an as needed basis; c) The protocols and stipulations that the contractor, City, consulting tribe(s), and project Archaeologist shall follow in the event of inadvertent cultural resources discoveries, including any newly discovered cultural resource deposits that shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation. Standard Conditions of Approval: Implement COA TCR-1. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 97 Less Than XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Potentially Significant Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Would the project: a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable ❑ ❑ ❑ future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to ❑ ❑ ® ❑ serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Comply with federal, State, and local _ management and reduction statutes and ❑ ❑ ® ❑ regulations related to solid waste? Sources: City of Menifee. 2021. City of Menifee General Plan; City of Menifee. 2013. City of Menifee General Plan Draft EIR; City of Menifee. Menifee Municipal Code; Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD). 2020. Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP); California's Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal LU-3 A full range of public utilities and related services that provide for the immediate and long- term needs of the community. Policy LU-3.1 Work with utility providers in the planning, designing, and siting of distribution and support facilities to comply with the standards of the General Plan and Development Code. Policy LU-3.2 Work with utility providers to increase service capacity as demand increases. Policy LU-3.3 Coordinate public infrastructure improvements through the City's Capital Improvement Program. Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 98 Policy LU-3.4 Require that approval of new development be contingent upon the project's ability to secure appropriate infrastructure services. Policy LU-3.5 Facilitate the shared use of right-of-way, transmission corridors, and other appropriate measures to minimize the visual impact of utilities infrastructure throughout Menifee. Goal OSC-7 A reliable and safe water supply that effectively meets current and future user demands. Policy OSC-7.2 Encourage water conservation as a means of preserving water resources. Policy OSC-7.4 Encourage the use of reclaimed water for the irrigation of parks, golf courses, public landscaped areas, and other feasible applications as service becomes available from the Eastern Municipal Water District. Policy OSC-7.5 Utilize a wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal system that adequately serves the existing and long-term needs of the community. Policy OSC-7.7 Maintain and improve existing level of sewer service by improving infrastructure and repairing existing deficiencies. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impact XIX.a): Less Than Significant Impact. The EMWD provides potable water and wastewater services to the City of Menifee and would provide services to the proposed project. The proposed project could result in an increase in demand for water and an increase in wastewater generation. However, according to the General Plan EIR, the increase in water demand and wastewater generation as a result of the General Plan buildout are within EMWD forecasts.78 The proposed project would connect to an existing 12-inch water line and an existing 12-inch recycled water line in the adjacent right-of-way in Mapes Road. Wastewater and stormwater discharge is regulated by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (Santa Ana RWQCB), and the proposed project would comply with all provisions of the Santa Ana RWQCB NPDES permit system.79,80 The need for additional sewers will be determined through plans of service coordinated by EMWD's New Business Department as required by EMWD's Master Plan. Using sewage generation rates from the Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide, the proposed project would generate approximately 6,852 gallons per day (GPD) for warehouse and office use.S1 The wastewater produced by the proposed project is well below the total daily capacity of EMWD's 48 million GPD current treatment capacity.e2,83 Therefore, the increase in wastewater generated by the proposed project would not have a significant impact on EMWD's wastewater treatment facilities as it accounts for a small percentage of the daily treatment capacity. The proposed project would connect to a 15-inch sewer line located in the adjacent right-of-way in Mapes Road. The proposed project would install all dry utilities underground.B4 The undergrounding of these facilities would not significantly impact the environment. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact. Impact XIX.b): Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed above, EMWD provides potable water and wastewater services to the City and would provide services to the proposed project. EMWD provides a 71 City of Menifee. 2013. City of Menifee General Plan Draft EIR, Utilities and Service Systems. 79 Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (Santa Ana RWQCB). 2022. Wastewater Regulation and Permitting. Website: hops //www waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/water issue s/programs/Wastewater/. Accessed June 29, 2022. 80 Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (Santa Ana RWQCB). 2022 Storm Water Unit. Website: hltps llwww waterboards.ca.gov/sanlaanatwaler issues/programs/stormwater/. Accessed June 29, 2022. B1 Based on sewage generation factor of 20 GPD/1,000 Grsquare feet for warehouse use and 150 gpd/1,000 Gr. square feet for office use. Draft L.A. CEQA Thresholds Guide, Exhibit M.2-12: Sewage Generation Rates. Website: https:Hplanning.lacity.org/eir/CrossroadsHwd/deir/files/references/A07.pdf. Accessed October 3, 2022. e2 Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) 2022. Wastewater Service. Website: https://www emwd.org/wastewater-service. Accessed September 27, 2022. B3 22,678/48,000,000 = 0.00047246 e4 City of Menifee. 2022. City of Menifee Municipal Code, Chapter 9.230 Utilities, Section 9.230 040 Development Standards - Commercial and Industrial. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 99 balance of local and imported water, with approximately half of the water supplied in the EMWD service area imported from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.B5 The California Water Code (CWC) requires that every urban water supplier adopt and regularly update an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) which identifies past and projected water usage and current and future water supplies and establishes a plan to meet water demands during normal, dry, and multiple dry years.86 In compliance with the Water Conservation Act of 2009 and SB X7-7, EMWD was required to reduce their gallons per capita per day (GPCD) by December 31, 2020. EMWD set forth a target of 176 GPCD for 2020, which was achieved.07 Utlllzing this rate of '176 GPCD, the proposed project's 603 ernployees would result in an estimated water demand of approximately 106,128 GPCD. According to the Menifee General Plan EIR, the projected net increase in water demands by General Plan buildout—approximately 15 million GPD— is within EMWD forecasts of increases in its water supplies over the 2015-2035 period."" Furthermore, the most recent UWMP completed by EMWD in 2020 confirms that EMWD will have sufficient supplies to meet both retail and wholesale demands from 2020 to 2045 under average year, single -dry year, and multiple dry year conditions.B9 As the project does not represent unplanned growth and is accounted for in the UWMP, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on the adequacy of water supplies in the region. Impact XIX.c): Less Than Significant Impact. EMWD provides wastewater treatment to the City of Menifee, with wastewater being collected at the Sun City Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF), the Perris Valley RWRF (PVRWRF), and the Temecula Valley RWRF. The north end of the City, where the project site is located, is serviced by the PVRWRF in the City of Perris.90 The current capacity of the PVRWRF is 22 million gallons per day (mgd), however, the most recent expansion of the PVRWRF completed in 2014 would bring the ultimate capacity of the facility to 100 mgd. This expansion allows the facility to meet the current and future demands of the region as well as help to meet the increasing demand for recycled water throughout EMWD's service area.91 According to the Menifee General Plan EIR, full buildout of the General Plan would result in a net increase in wastewater generation of about 5.6 mgd, an increase that would be within EMWD ongoing and planned RWRF capacity expansions.92 As discussed above, based on the industrial wastewater generation rate of 1,700 GPD per acre the proposed project would produce approximately 22,678 GPD of wastewater, which represents 0.047 percent of the EMWD's total daily capacity and 0.10 percent of the current capacity of the PVRWRF. Therefore, the proposed project's impact on wastewater treatment providers ability to provide service is less than significant. Impact XIX.d-e): Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project's additional solid waste stream would have a less than significant impact on regional landfill capacity. The City's solid waste services are provided by Waste Management, Inc. (WMI) and waste is diverted to three landfills: Badlands Sanitary Landfill, El Sobrante Landfill, and Lamb Canyon Sanitary Landfill. The combined maximum daily capacity of these three landfills is 25,854 tons.93.14.95 According to CalRecycle's Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates, an industrial facility is estimated to produce 5 pounds of solid waste per 1,000 square feet per day.96 65 Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Website: https://www emwd.org/sites/main/files/file- attachments/urbanwatermanagementplan_0 pdf?1625160721. Accessed June 29, 2022 66 Ibid. B7 Ibid. 66 City of Menifee. 2013. City of Menifee General Plan Draft EIR, Utilities and Service Systems B9 Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD). 2021 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Website: https://www.emwd org/sites/main/files/file- attachments/urbanwatermanagementplan_O.pdf?1625160721. Accessed June 29, 2022. 90 Ibid 91 Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD). 2021. Perris Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility. Website: https://www.emwd org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/pvrwrffactsheet pdf Accessed June 28, 2020. 92 City of Menifee. 2013. City of Menifee General Plan Draft EIR, Utilities and Service Systems 93 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2019. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details Badlands Sanitary Landfill (33-AA-0006). Website: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2245?sitelD=2367. Accessed June 29, 2022. 94 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2019 SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details El Sobrante Landfill (33- AA-0217). Website: https://www2 calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2280?sitelD=2402. Accessed June 29, 2022 95 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2019 SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details Lamb Canyon Sanitary Landfill (33-AA-0007) Website: https://www2.calrecycle ca gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2246?sitelD=2368 Accessed June 29, 2022. 96 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2019. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates Industrial Sector Generation Rates. Website: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastecharacterization/general/rates. Accessed September 27, 2022 Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 100 Therefore the proposed project would produce approximately 1,388 pounds (0.69 tons) of solid waste per day, which is within the maximum daily capacity of the three landfills to which solid waste is diverted.97 Further, the General Plan EIR determined that there would be adequate landfill capacity in the region to accommodate solid waste that would be produced by full buildout of the General Plan. The proposed project would also comply with all applicable federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact with regard to capacity of local solid waste infrastructure and compliance with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Mitiqation Measures: No mitigation is required. 97 277,578/1,000 = 277.578 " 5 = 1,387 89 pounds of solid waste Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 101 Less Than XX. WILDFIRE Potentially Significant Less Than Significant with Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Would the project: a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency ❑ response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant ❑ concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power ❑ lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, ❑ post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes? ❑ 1 ® I ❑ Sources: Menifee General Plan, Menifee General Flan Exhibit 5-2, Slope Distribution; Menifee General Plan, Exhibit S-3 Liquefaction and Landslides; California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection's (CAL FIRE) FHSZ Viewer; and CAL FIRE State Responsibility Area (SRA) Viewer. Applicable General Plan Policies: Goal S-4 A community that has effective fire mitigation and response measures in place, and as a result is minimally impacted by wildland and structure fires. Policy S-4.1 Require fire-resistant building construction materials, the use of vegetation control methods, and other construction and fire prevention features to reduce the hazard of wildland fire. Ensure all new development and/or redevelopment in the LRA and VHFHSZ will comply with the California Fire Code (CFC) and California Building Standards Code (CBC). All new development within the LRA Very High Fire zone will comply with Chapter 49 of the California Fire Code and Chapter 7A of the California Building Standards Code. Policy S4.4 Review development proposals for impacts to fire facilities and compatibility with fire areas or mitigate. Policy S-4.10 Ensure all new residential development as well as all new development and redevelopment within the LRA and VHFHSZ will comply with the most current version of the California Building Standards Codes and California Fire Code. Policy S-4.14 All new parcel maps and tentative maps in the LRA, SRA, and VHFHSZ shall provide two points of access to the project in conformance with the California Building Standards Code and California Fire Code and California Government Code Section 65302 (g)(5). Approval Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 102 of parcel maps and tentative maps in LRA's, SRAs or VHFHSZs is conditional based on meeting the SRA Fire Safe Regulations and the Fire Hazard Reduction Around Buildings and Structures Regulations, particularly those regarding road standards for ingress, egress, and fire equipment access. (See Government Code § 66474.02.). Policy S-4.18 The City shall evaluate all redevelopment as well as new development after a large fire event to ensure development will comply with the most current version of the California Building Codes and California Fire Code. The City and Fire Department will continue to coordinate with State, regional, and local agencies on emergency management and on fire risk reduction planning. Policy S-6.1 Continuously review, update, and implement emergency preparedness, response, and recovery plans that make the best use of the City and county -specific emergency management resources available. Analysis of Project Effect and Determination of Significance: Impact XX.a): Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is not located within an SRA or a VHFHSZ. The nearest SRA is located approximately 1.03 miles to the east of the project site and the nearest VHFHSZ is approximately 1.27 miles to the northeast of the project site.98,99 The project site is located in an area with existing industrial/commercial uses and residential properties and would consist of light industrial warehouse space. The proposed plan would not include permanent road closures that would impact an emergency response plan or evacuation plan. The project site would have access to evacuation routes on SR-74 and 1-215. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Impact XX.b): Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed previously, the proposed project is not located within an SRA or VHFHSZ but is within 1.5 miles of an SRA and a VHFHSZ. The project site is located in an area of the City with slopes between 0 and 19 degrees, with no steep slopes near the project site. The proposed project would comply with all applicable City of Menifee General Plan policies listed above, including the CBC and CFC, mitigating any risks associated with the spread of wildfire. As such, any impact would be less than significant. Impact XX.c): Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project includes standard infrastructure, including roadways, utilities, and fire suppression systems. A 26-foot-wide fire lane is proposed to fully surround the warehouse to the north, west, south, and east and would provide emergency and fire truck access. The proposed project would fully comply with City of Menifee General Plan policies and the CFC. Thus, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk involving wildland fires and the impacts would be less than significant. Impact XX.d): Less Than Significant Impact. According to the General Plan Landslides Map, the proposed project is not located in a landslide prone zone and is located in an area with slopes of less than 19 degrees. As such, the risk of slope failure and landslides in the event of a fire is low. Therefore, risks associated with slope instability are considered low and impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required. a° California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2022. State Responsibility Area (SRA) Viewer. Website: https://calfire- forestry maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=468717e399fa4238ad86861638765cel. Accessed June 23, 2022 99 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2022. FHSZ Viewer. Website: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/ Accessed June 23, 2022. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 103 XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a tish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Potentially Significant Impact 1-1 Less Than Significant with Less Than Mitigation Significant Incorporated Impact E No Impact EN Findings of Fact: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project may result in impacts associated with biological resources that could be significant if left unmitigated. Implementation of mitigation measures and COAs as outlined in the respective sections of this Draft IS/MND would reduce all potential impacts on these resources to levels that are less than significant. As such, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation and standard conditions of approval incorporated. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a �-j ❑ Cl project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Findings of Fact: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. This analysis evaluates whether the impacts of the proposed project, together with the impacts of cumulative development, would result in cumulatively significant impact. This analysis then considers whether incremental contribution of impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed project would be significant. Both conditions must apply for a project's cumulative effects to rise to the level of significance. The geographic context for the analysis of the cumulative impacts includes the project site, as well as a 0.5-mile and 5-mile radius of the project site, in the City of Menifee in Riverside County. All cumulative projects would be subject to local, State, and federal regulations and would be required to comply with City/County ordinances and General Plan policies, as well as other regulations and requirements that address environmental resources, as outlined in MM 1310-1, MM BIO-2, MM CUL-1 through MM CUL-5, and MM GEO-1. These regulations would be implemented in conjunction with other State, County, and local requirements. Additionally, all future development would be required to pay fair share fees for infrastructure improvements to ensure infrastructure keeps pace with development. The analysis presented in this Draft IS/MND includes a review of the proposed project's potential impacts related to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and tribal cultural resources, among other environmental issue areas. As presented throughout this Draft IS/MND, the proposed project's cumulative impacts would either be less than significant with mitigation incorporated, less than significant, or there would be no cumulative impacts. Implementation of mitigation as outlined in this Draft IS/MND would reduce all potentially significant impacts to less than significant. Given that all impacts would be mitigated Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 104 to a less than significant level and given the proposed project's size, the incremental effects of this proposed project are not considerable relative to the effects of past, current, and probable future projects. For these reasons, cumulative impacts are less than significant. The proposed project's incremental contribution to less than significant cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation and standard conditions of approval incorporated. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects ❑ ® ❑ ❑ on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Findings of Fact: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As described throughout the preceding checklist portion of this Draft IS/MND, the proposed project would not have any substantial environmental effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. All impacts identified throughout this document either do not require mitigation or would be mitigated to levels that are less than significant. In addition, the proposed project would be required to comply with existing regulations as discussed throughout the Draft IS/MND. The proposed mitigation measures and COAs, once implemented, and compliance with existing regulations would ensure that no substantial adverse effects on human beings would result from the proposed project. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 105 XXI. REFERENCES California Department of Conservation. 2016. California Important Farmland Finder hftps://map.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/ClFF/. California Department of Conservation. 2016 Mines Online. hftps://maps.conservation.ca.gov/mol/index.html. California Department of Conservation. California Earthquake Hazard Zone Application. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/. California Department of Conservation. California Tsunami Inundation Maps and Data https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/ts_evacuation/. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). State Responsibility Area (SRA) Viewer https://calfire- forestry. maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=468717e399fa4238ad86861638765ce1. California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2019. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/General/Rates. California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2019. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details Badlands Sanitary Landfill (33-AA-0006). https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2245?siteI D=2367. California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2019. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details FI Sohrante Landfill (33-AA-0217). https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2280?siteI D=2402. California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2019. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details Lamb Canyon Sanitary Landfill (33-AA-0007). https://www2.caI recycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2246?siteI D=2368. California Department of Transportation. 2022. California State Scenic Highway System Map. https://caltrans. maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index. html?id=465dfd3d8O7c46cc8e8O57116fl aacaa. California Employment Development Department (EDD). 2022. Monthly Labor Force Data for Cities and Census Designated Places (CDP), July 2022, Riverside County. https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/data/labor-force-and-unemployment-for-cities-and-census- areas.html. Calvary Chapel Christian Academy. 2022. Calvarychapel.com. City of Menifee. 2013. Menifee General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report. https://www.cityofinenifee.us/262/Environmental-Impact-Report. City of Menifee. 2013. Menifee General Plan. https://www.cityofinenifee.us/221/General-Plan. City of Menifee. 2020. City of Menifee Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled. https://www.cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenterNiew/l 0699/Final-Adopted-TIA-Guidelines-for- VMT 6-3-20. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 106 City of Menifee. 2022. City of Menifee Development Code. https://online.encodeplus.com/regs/menifee- ca/index.aspx City of Menifee. 2022. Facilities. https://www.cityofinenifee.us/460/City-Facilities. City of Menifee. 2022. Menifee Municipal Code. https:Hcodelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/menifee/latest/overview. City of Menifee. 2022. Office of the Fire Marshal. https://www.cityofinenifee.us/566/Office-of-the-Fire- Marshal. City of Menifee. 2022. Zoning Map. https://www.cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenterNiew/l1042/Zoning- Map-February-2022?bidld=. Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD). 2020. Eastern Municipal Water District 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. https://www.emwd.org/sites/main/files/file- attachments/urbanwatermanagementplan_O.pdf?1625160721 ELMT Consulting, Inc. 2022. Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Consistency Analysis. HEI Corporation. 2021. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of Three Undeveloped Parcels of Land Southwest Comer of Sherman Road and Mapes Road, Menifee, California. Menifee Police Department. 2022. https://menifeepolice.org. Perris Union High School District. 2022. Find Your School. https://www.puhsd.org/Content2/find-your- school. Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD). 2021. Fire Stations Map. https://rvcfire.org/resources/fire- stations-map. Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD). 2021. Riverside County Fire Department. hftps://rvcfire.org/resources/fire-stations. Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD). 2021. Riverside County Fire Department Service Area. https:Hrvcfiire.org/about-us/service-area. Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency. 2003. Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). https://rctlma.org/epd/WR-MSHCP. Romoland School District. 2022. Romoland School District 2016-2017 Elementary School Boundaries. https://www.romoland.net/cros/lib/CA01902709/Centricity/domain/19/documents/BoundaryMap_4-11- 2017. pdf. Southern California Geotechnical. 2021. Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Warehouse, SWC Mapes Road and Sherman Road Menifee, California for Stream Realty Acquisition, LLC. Southern California Geotechnical. 2021. Results of Infiltration Testing, Proposed Warehouse, SWC of Mapes Road and Sherman Road Menifee, California. Thienes Engineering, Inc. 2022. Project Specific Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan. Urban Crossroads. 2022. Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Air Quality Impact Analysis. Planning Application No. DEV2022-003 Page 107 Urban Crossroads. 2022. Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Energy Analysis. Urban Crossroads. 2022. Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Greenhouse Gas Analysis. Urban Crossroads. 2022. Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Mobile Source Health Risk Assessment. Urban Crossroads. 2022. Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Noise and Vibration Analysis Urban Crossroads. 2023. Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Traffic Analysis. Urban Crossroads. 2022. Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Evaluation. United States Census Bureau. 2022. QuickFacts, Menifee City, California. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/menifeecitycalifornia/POP010220. Planning Application No DEV2022-003 Page 108 FIRSTCARBON SOLUTIONSTm Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Menifee, Riverside County, California Prepared for: City of Menifee Community Development Department 29844 Haun Road Menifee CA 92586 951.723.3741 Contact: Fernando Herrera, Associate Planner Prepared by: FirstCarbon Solutions 2999 Oak Road, Suite 250 Walnut Creek, CA 94597 925.357.2562 Contact: Mary Bean, Project Director Cecilia So, Project Manager Report Date: June 6, 2023 NORTH AMERICA I EUROPE I AFRICA I AUSTRALIA I ASIA WWW FIRSTCARBONSOLUTIONS.COM AN ADEC INNOVATION City of Menifee Mopes and Sherman Commerce Center Preface Section 21081.6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 require a Lead Agency to adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) whenever it adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) in conjunction with a project approval. The purpose of the MMRP is to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures occurs during project implementation. The Draft IS/MND prepared for the proposed Mapes and Sherman Commerce Center (proposed project) concluded that project implementation could result in potentially significant effects on the environment and mitigation measures were incorporated into the proposed project or are required as a condition of project approval that reduce these potential impacts to a less than significant level. This MMRP documents how and when the mitigation measures adopted by the Lead Agency will be implemented and confirms that potential environmental impacts are reduced to less than significant levels as identified in the Draft IS/MND. This document does not discuss those subjects that the environmental analysis demonstrates would result in less than significant impacts and for which no mitigation was proposed or necessary. FirstCarbon Solutions 1 U:\PLANNING APPLICATIONS\PP\2022\DEV2022-W3 - MAPES AND SHERMAN WAREHOUSE\07 CEQA\PuhIIC IS MND 5-2-2023\36090006 Mapes and Sherman MMRP.dna E 06 It M 0 m a E 0 0 c 0 r �o u y r_ m m a G ° c a, w 0 a) m y u C a c a1 c o a E a w > IS E o ` m aJ oaa)) aaii U u 0 c 2�. O f0 ` a• U y L l I ° L M y > LL 0 U C 0 b 7 N U a) Q C OD 3 O E a v c o ° Co Ovi ro W C p O o aTi c n > !t c•�O_�a c E o a > �+o L O C `0 L H C w c c 0 ° a+ O E O = C U c O a) a) 7 c `a, O It CL v> E c O ail— y O v a > v u u E C co a v Ln Ln C `'n 0O a)O O `1 . N L +'L+ u T a O OD C C c �n C a) a! ±2 � U OD C y� m a) F o a O O c a) aJ y t u 3 y t Z C 7 U O U O ++ O— fa r U YO U v L> OD .. p m a +' OD a) vOf N C fO c> O° *c' aj �>, C F- v 0 t > ar ° o v aJ c° v U a U U O C= a, U--ffi u ° _ a C ° Q? aL•+ M C c U: i C .° c `� C U a j a) m C C � NO fa 'L `n C f0 a) +in 7 a O (n i L OD t Q a) t O a) > � a) 3 'i= o a) m> °>° N c a co fO °° O i m 0 .c v vi *' �, > U v m -0 f0 N a) a a) i O fO U ` i ° a t +� of Y OA O_ M Cu U M (o t C �' a) 3 C M a 7 0 >• N fO Ia N t C Y �n u0 U O C O N +' (9 t a) O t O N O c a) >o . a c _ U m ra ° `�° u c a) U m° v 01 0 C oo fO c 3 � 3 C U ++ 3 j C U O +'n t c +L N +0. m (D cu.) aJ O u O -° C 0 pu 0 0 a L Q ° a) O O� +' O N c a i+ V O Q U U � U •� aN) fa .N a 0 C N 0 , 4- U m Y N m 0 _ ° —_ c t n v U+ -° L° L m o '" v 3 c m o ar a O � u ,n s c +� c Z t N 3 4 n v°, w 3 c U [0 .O U OD L C O° n OD t t a) F- t L C U •O O u C ++ > +• ++ u a+ o N .3 •> C C r_ O c O E a N ,N a) at,,, O '' i0 C a) > •�, d0 y >, a a v O u c 3 C O J a a) O= C O O '> 0 +� a i s }' 1O +� Co +, N •O O T> c vi h aJ N ~_ = O. aJ C i U a.+ N � c v c M tLn a C �n o O c t c m (U ° c y v v v m o m . i U c v a° ° ++ `) U OO m +° a Ln of y O.. C N Q M 7 m C ++ a1 C : a t> +' U m - am+ C OO Z u > +`+ i N O —O O m N aj � a) ° O .Q �O +' OD O 'O i u v m m —°° a a a N a —°o o Iz •m c aui = j= 'm � Q Zoe > � c . 0 u v -0 can- � 3 m .E ,n m !_^ c u col a E a 0 o, a 2 o �o e Z ;« E C a o E m 1 o u e c o c 5 0 u$ u y C e 0 Y 2 L J N LL o N O d m Y O V C aJ c C .� 7 2 .aj z C �• al C C Y aJ C a p w co U v � p o s v z> > E> a 'COL-0v° a E > a E> a Y O v v m v c Ciu o o u o m >_ w o Y o u u v v no +, O v v u u o 0 o 0 0 u u w y aJ � H > Y o C O C +' O ~ O a1 O v U to U U o ` to c - c m C - N C O 7 � i o O C i i= a.Ln a a °-0 c T c v c O c o c c O ° u O +' O G m VI � 'Y !� m u u u u � C •W W 7 [La O C 1n d C i O_ a 12 y °° a" m m 3 ro 3 �^ O c > c O c a O Q O c c 0 c. va m aE o.�a o cu c °+' E o �Y 3 3 °Y' 0`n 0`n W L C7 -p 0 Y aU+ C U Ln aO� C A vl OU N v Q m O m Z > 6 vn L L a Z O_ cif a D_ o a) a� T 'n 'c a v_ v Y u a -0 C 70 '= o N N a = Y 41 u° N E c p o 0 3 3 +� 7 0 wLn u - a1 a z -V c v 7 m m Z2 a .� 2 O u 6 m y aJ v � L +� Ln N 'n m U O' L U O T> a Ln OD .a) c '3 N U L c O_ }' al a1 c ° E - 7 m an a) u - > 3 oc° 0 .c a W cco v O w° ° m c W U° m E a 7 3 �n U 3 _ O T O` -0 a +Y., L m — W t Z C aJ � t m •� p y �i 0- v1 m y m 3 0 a on a 7 *' 3 L }, Y �o Mn C 7- o L E L Y +' w E a > c .- ` C p w m `n N L Y O C C L a) •OD m w a = L in w `� 4- O L L U O d o Y x N al Y u OA w 7 0 C +' p m aJ - i- 7 c U a) a) U C a of U cu Y c m O_ Y N MnE E U C a) '� 00 a 7 0> r++a +' y m a m e o00 a) .� 7 .c c Ln a i m 3 f0 C o •i .t- C m Q Vf O L aJ +' C jr C w L Ln cr i 2 y L O L 7 7 0 00 d �n u V7 a Q C m w a 0 ° ++ i C L w C E C a m C aJ a/ aJ O L U O aJ U a m 7> +, U ++ O w 7 O_ p Y a N y +' 0 LL L C Y J L Z C C L o C C L Q 7 Y T L w ai U cu O G m u p O y C C c ?� C 0 +L'' 7 •00 7 t V L T m Ln a w O 0 p p a v «° O. v +� O aJ Ou OU a! m OU a1 U .O O In Z C aJ +' Y t)D co c m vui O y m O a m a 7 T U U C +' lf1 U O c a) O E E L— E¢-E �, of N C •m 7 �n m i O Q O U w om co a) U O_ `~ O al OC W •v� C m o� vYi v �. O a c L u Cu aui N Ln in m +� v o' > 3 m E m m tw }, `O U U L w L 7 E L E m m 0 a) h U 3 a y Y a C E C T T> 7 +3 u a 7 Y m Y �p a~ O cn t d0 L m m E 111 C O a: to w VI C cn a a m Ql al a Z U 7 L C Q U 00 1 L c m c m O_ Q N C L C Y Y C m 7 tw o 3 3 .` o 7 m I, al -� w a a a U Q H c v= Y cn O o 4- to Z Q VI G E H a 3 a a = E c L c E `� U c ° m p a °U «. Obi ice` N 00 Y OD O a o U rl iJ � p C o f fCa C C O `n N i. n �O a O N ,c E •c c a a° c v c `m u v v U m y `^ a E v m u v z >O e a p m 00 0 0 v u U u U E i 7 ,� C L a) E E o u j +L+ ZA U i N c a ° N> v- a 3 v a �' ° 7 c7i L o a m 7 v 7 Un E s o v Q m+ v v ,n m 3 OD aj 7 a- �< O C3 v 3 m L L L v, a m O_ > u `� U O v m c c W m v o Y u¢ v� L a v i Y cn *-J O L O_ I g •�, uz ii-5 Ln o �o a � E O U w O C O m m u m d C � C n � Ol O Y m a u C v C:Z H o `- 01 cc E u a a)G� a > o 0 E L > E > a w (J u O °u Q O C _O m Y U U L L W > Y � C O U 00 00 C C E 0 O U C m O C O C L O O m c a o a OL m rl u_ aui :C O' +' C U L > �F 3 m Y m ° v oo 4. U °' a — U o L _ C E m m p GJ UJ .m m m O d_ m C E v i O v _ o °c° cu E o o C U ^ to o E C:Lv E L C 7 a m E m U= 0) v O OJ v Y Y c+ m_ m O m 0 +� > C v m '^ 0 m L v> 2-0 u Z H O E Y m y L O N> v L-0 0 Z. +, C 0 v L N C UJ ; C O1 m C N $ p t L N C 7 O U N +�+ N — — C 7 N VI m L :� a E ° v v E a .cL„ o: 7 t o a� 3 _. cLo t o v v� a� c m o o v, c m" ^ ° C E 4, _ Y ° 'LA Y Qj O � �"� O O -O (7 N � m ° Ln c u u U c Y C a) � v O m p c L N m •u Y E L Y E Y= O v •f0 '-' E a u w° m m .3 y c E aj "- cLi > p °1 c a� v a o io y m u 0 Q v o v m c O Q v vui m m u t M av511 N v o c Ln in v o a 3 .� E c v° t v t ,� E a v '^ C a �, o pC-lQUJ —u � Ol O O U C cu 3x v O 0 O m v O a c Ou m c t pc o Y �a m o •3v°' i O > E NGU uo YVm Ca, C L wm N > U > m > m CU o mu L- -O p Ln ` C� C fY0 U pCp +L+ fC � m c m N c 0 a m e v `° v 'v v 0 a m O L u a t °-n° $ o 0 o v a-0-0 �i ami E O C •O 6 O-D E U C L Ul O+ C C CD v v ry C C m N N m G/ L m U y L a = m 0 t 0 O vYi > L O_ u— °' o °a m y +� 3 aL Y O m " v c YO t°-0 v^ N o 0 v -O L E° Q +'° C `n c-0 °1 o O c t'' O s N O a GJ X y "O �n N L C 4- 7 L Y t U c Q o ?~ o `� .� Q o o C m c I Gi c 3 a a O r m fO o �^ U ni o`po O O p -O Z aci a�i L O>> L O E N N W O E _� - N s O O Q +� O 0 Ln v J 00 a v -O c u p y c l� m v v L o c u U s ° v ai y°° c c 3 v e a Q O U N N (� •i O m O O u U Y VI Ou .2 v Y ,n Q m v O tLo Y a� O v •p vn^i� v �� o ua �, o `�°, Qv.� oQ� E0� �'� 3�3 m c � Q) � a° u - v `m u y m�� it 5 c 0 a a E 0 u O C O 'H V r- al z m c a) m a c 0 m m V 0 bA C E F- L N 7 N N c 0 2 iuLn cvf0 L cY° mL+(3m.) O 0 O O 0 to cO �,iVo um Y C Q LjE a)Q O 46 ° O YZ O + Q)ru C v'=' G 'W'•c >_ aJ N° u c v o p U O c c L❑ c aj N 3 a) m m C W Ql \ Y -° Y ,n E d Q) o-0 U -C C 'VI Q) a) ° o C Y ° ° u O C °L -0 C 0) 00 -a E � N u a0i u m L u tI0 L) Q) 7 � 'N .LATi C °u m N o-u v N-6-E U`°L E E CO vv EuL°°-o°v° pQ-m 0 aj ) 0o E •c N�° Q) -0 O L iQ O N O in O Y E O Q) >> U N L i N U m c y Y 7 C Y o> °D m¢ ^ m o v Y c '3 0 0 '> Q v° U y❑ tip m N �n > O L O cc C:O N u u c v v v m U o �_ m m o LU -0 m °_ .LQ .E m O N E T CL c Q) Q-0 > O Q .0 aD i W N❑❑ a) U C cn -0 i O_ L v m Y a a" c o v es m -0 Y O +_ • �' Y Y y V m c Q) E L o`D E � a u r c a -" Q°i 3 E Qci aci o Q � Co o f m Y Q N 'o m a c C m m v m o v v E E Y u} v o v 3� a o u v `-�° '� aci 3 c E c *' Y o o as 'o 00 a C T L O Y .` L N a) u 7 ` Q) O 0 m m �Q N N, N U m Y Y > C:-0 0 a) oD m o c -0 a) -0 v •� 0 v ` O QJ a) v m Cf v ° c pD Q) Y �..� a) ° QJ CJ >> V L ° .L C U O -0 .n C O` 7 O_ � C 3 U N O aLC 7 Q❑ C m m N CL t m O Y U N Y O '-' " v Y N (u.'^ rNo v c0 v m O O 4-- u Ln +T+ 41 m y •o O am., `m Cu L L a �+ d C c E Y N Q) '~ C Q •� o in m E a ° °Y' *� o m m- E m- E E E o v u v +' O a 'u L m Q CL y 7 M O ;' L 7� a) L Z) O O Q) C U •� C O Q) a1 O N d m L U❑ Y N U U Y O_ N D_ L Y U U U W m 0. m Z -° U a) L- v E 0 a c a` o �o a � 0 o aai o; u e o o c e O m C u y c = o c 0 Y ° 01 � c al O N y u c C to c C O N O E v ccT O E> C_ m a) U u o U a c c ° mO u u E N o � C U O ` ba C W " 0.7 E u v c v O +� m u C r= u O u a O O C 'L c — a) O 0 U w ° c a) a C -a.c O O L C v°i O -O of Y a) [2 C c a) ;C m bD O +_ fa OD = �_ U a+ '> c) O m O m OD U p O > 7 7 acoa°)vm� M O 'Ma°ia T3 oo ami c>o n o E c 'J m O v (UL u E — O c m c c +� > v a o C O o`om aJ.�v.m f0 O OD u �' C Ln +(U d a a U v m a+ v c°° v tw T m o L u y O N ++ c OD Y >' O C c _ L CO t, Ou E d O �, ,,, -0m y c E O. m m v +' v E E EL o C bD 3 c 0 E o c E c m m v 0 0 to c O N C7 i° c O C C Y m O '` n N N c0 u p l7 � O N M m a a E v o m o v n �4 Ln 0 "O a) VI L _ _ Y Lna) a a) o °J > 'u 7 v c 0 y v O O L c m L 'O a) a) 0 c O c O a) Y Q) ~ i CL L ° c E c OD -0 Ou U L -0 OD ObD .� v 0 T O L X a) c C aJ a C C m of E L m m w . N m � Y C aj L Y 'C c m m O OD m T O cc Oc) ° txo O C O -v a) � u` O m a o -0'n u + In °� t v (a Y a) in -0 OD L vl LL 7 m u c a `U o rca �' a, ° oo 3 aD v u C> E +� v c vi In n E c T- E c ,�+ a) u m +� in L c }' O a T o t N c amp m c v '� O O C aJ m O ° m ai N L u a E °J in u i U +� u c al v -D O o � Cc-0C_ ° °- ' tID m O C� a vmi L m o p "O .cin a) - C p y c a) m Y o— L +1 a) 0 Y 3 O m Y a) _ _m m v m p 'I t Ln O 3 O 4-7 c a ,� -° E '� '� v E L • OD o °- Q ,., ° E O ,n c m 0 O v L O_ m in C L. - v gooa oE a' o '^ Cc W E o Y c m L o +> -0 in N m c of O cCL N C L O> >> E m o c ou-o 0) > m •a v o Ew tioO a) E >. T aJ C O_ O �n ,., L Y L C> O T `O E E •+m—, N 3 O c a`ni t _N m L m ' 3 O o O t C ,O- ++ N N N O j T a +, 3 a) c aa) 1 �n ° Q O j C m s t M U a) C W O ,0 O v v a m E a) ._ o m L vi Y o m m z' n a s o E N M E 0 c 0 a a E 0 u 0 c 0 m V 01 > m c m m C c 0 u u w 0 O on c E 1- r N L 7 N m N C O to .rn 2 v -o ai m N U t 7 LD U C m O Y m 7 L N O U N +t•+ v N `� ice+ @ G1 +' Q 2 u O. -0 CL m C of E C O +� C Y m v" c c fO o c v m- > o_ N O O-0 +_-+ CO � O b0 OD O E N +� 0 G1 N c U y v c u *' a omo m `o v v N 3 c m t °' m— v� ai > a y u $ c '^ v o O aj o O Ln }' o_ > n o t y O ">-0> a° °� Y v In Op m y �O U' .m Y ,� +' U 3 `� C N T N O C C o� N s O ai C E o v m _o v v '� v t o *' U N+ w wU U 0 m 0 m O E N Y U d O m +' +' o -O t 0 wO Q N Ql U `� C w pUp aL-+ E C C �+ -o _0 O_ 0 ra N O N U In a O m fo u 0 �O O v v+ O +' u °J E t N v— E a�i t E v v ar - a m +, m fp Y +. E a; ,� m u E E m v cuo o O u=- o> O v 3 v m m o v v N t O m o m N m GJ N` o O> c w O N E v u N u t O +� c m 0 >• m O O t o m E — m m 'A o. v a E: � N > N a v i m > °+�' -0 v E c '� E !_^ v, cui °0 v o m aci on cu w c E m c ro c +� c v u v N > +� Q. v u E v �°Ln `o E uo v 0 3 u a Z m v L > ai - `� Ei- m v N - ++ c v, u v v E E 3 aj N >O cNo t a'Ji Q r�mo O m o '� o O 'u a� O O m a� a� O L� Q) o a N N m O. Z Zn ay.. 4_ E N N O- u E O N N N v vi Y N GJ � L 0 C C -0 O v O C) Y o Y 0 u m W in N N E Loi +O+ (CO N E O N `v "' Q -0 v m .� v oN 1 O > O v -0 _0v v > _ � Q t N '0 N OA 0 0 L O` '�'T m v c o o 41 0 ru N CL m , o c v a Y m Non N 0-0 0 � a v 3 N ) +� C C O p m> m._v � 0 T CCD Y CO u a O 0 U m u E a w m c O m O c G1 vi N v o ._ .:] e m c 0 Y d a E 0 u O C O m w > L O �o Y N m 0 — C y O Y_ .Nm C� c = c as 0 v> o E T E Ll O u u c 0 m IJ r- tio L C > p a u O po C tw C +L+ E :3 C F p o a c 0 C O O 4-+ ++ to to co u L i co w O C O_ v a ° v > u � O_ O LO m C a n a o t u u a a1 aJ ° n c a C Ln " o v c c aai " o C aci m u C O aai n n c m O O CL Wt ovQo°J ox - mm C v v v Q a �_n E> r o f v, u v L Y o }'' u T v�i in o f> a o v n E a, -o 3 E v m o o �: c o a, a _ c +, o a, m o - E -0(n -0 Z m Etj aj u m c >° O > m ° � u c a 0 0 C Q ° c °u c c L 01 Ln v C u o 3 c .� *' m n v > L �+ C al U }' 41 w io u a ° U m w w C O c L U C +� u E ma v E c0 u a,n0 v cA c v E aa) L L C m C LLn v O O 0 on oo m ainoQa o .c u co Lc° m •m c„o ° a v v ° o v Q Li E 4 O a v a •_� u wtxo a N p �mu 00 ° v°° v M on c 0 o E a u oLmo ° o v �o f 0 _ 3 o o o c oOC ` v 0) •m L >. m m a) i +' C O n Y 'L 00 'IA Y u O L E E L v� " n t $ v cLo w L m� v c �^ m E c E c° L o¢ ° a o a on C v v°>>° c n c c o aJ cLo o L d v o c w °: m o$> c u E o v� m u° E c- v o 0 0 > .N E a a a u m E .0 E° u- m m C o m L u m t 2' m- L c c C o c > v to m +� y •� v -° L n c a ` m +� O v v m m N m n C m L �+ O v L-0 n O O O t m O_ v w m 0 oD o-0-P v n c v^ O c c� a�i O m° __ o __ s m +' c- c L >, In a in O U C 0 0 °- C ++ m L ° io U 3 aJ aUi m U j t C ° C ,vf L a +' M +W 6' a N O 3r CO �• 3 t n- t i '0 3> 7 m U ++ 7 IO Xai ' a u N !a ° aJ N aJ n d n C L j -O t +L+ a >, O C aU.+ 7 C t O> C 'a) .c � aJ tio OL t L t aJ aJ m a� L u m > L u v u u °° m n +� v u a a n +� c on u v> c E c m n omc v .c > cuo c m m °� H m¢ .c m H m o c E 3 u - - - - I� o6 01 O- C -0 E 0 c 0 v a E 0 u 0 c 0 m IJ W > w m 'c aJ m 0 O v O +, a 'm c } N u a) c C a) O .` a > O v w > a al a1 on c O m u r= 0 O 00 C E F c 03 p �O C C_ (O t C O= Y N fY0 w° T m L O C (a C O aJ a) L al a) U aJ -° ° 'm0 E `� U i O aJ J 'O O_ t �_ U t y _ C w T w r- aJ al L 7 c L a) L C a) c O Y O_ O_ w •_ m c> i -O uA O JO d y X U t *' L D_ T .0 c T 'LL>, O m m L u U a) `1 O J dD a) •— Ln c C Y O m a Y L CO (LO � U O VI O L L O L +' Y c C y in m al 3 Y a1 a YO u J Y c J N a) c a/ y J W L °' a N� `n u m U vn tw C7 w 0 U c ;� O� t N� YE u a1 J O E u a' C y N O �' `� _ ° aJ •m Y CU aJ N Ln E ° u a-0 aui a-° a fa u_ _� o m o `�' u c o o 0 m v o :t ° 0 v oo w J o C v °' Z o .c m e - u u ¢ m v u y JO _d 3 U umi t c_ +' c a J a c v m u� N c +T+ O 0` u m m N 0 c u 'L 00 v a) s m 3 .° o o m E n T Y-o o L J v c J E v° +• > 'c O +�+ a3 v u O_ >, C J 7 0_ aj > ° CU ° E •YO— N N YO Q m t bo O Ou G Q O O E m dp ` '^ C Fa c 00 . N c CC �°, u fLD aJ fL0 7 fY0 L G L }_ °° '-^ — E E u a J is v dp m v O j '� m 00 0 c v o v v m ra v u°> J ro ° c a ` v C o -o Z L u o f aj aJ v m a a a? v ° �a o� J a— vm, c Y C v t mLn c m o v — Y t > a C C c N W d —> u o m m a1 Ln '- —> Ln }, 0 m m VI p O +' m O aJ i •— — Y L T ++ t W a u t-- 7 c m u L N a) � a1 J aj t c y u w o o v aci - 4 m m� C E v m m w o v m u Y o u m aui c coo O L � 'y +� L E ° EO U a1 >, 7 H cc >tL0 G1 C O pcp vci C +L.' Y O a: m m Y a Li J i.+ i_+ •� E c m hD O .L J J U _O _O C fL0 � t'� L- 0 L , 0' •(v .r- U 'O d O OD O. LO v v>> v N N YO °U U E a—J' a1 a CU Ou a ON m ,Jn U d .L C c 0 a' v u> a` o` v v E 2 o °c w° v u �' o°Jc �' E vi C7 aci u JuL An C: �O a��._ - Ln v m e 0 a a 0 o m e v o E on, 0 C V G O O C t 0 'Y u C 0 is cu Oi C L � O N O 72 O 'L C O. E ai O c a ar ° 0 v a> O E v m :- m 0 E > a co U c 0 0 0 0 Q Q Ou c 0 C 0 m y y U L CU ~ Ln Q O C c C c tw c 0 d t C O Y m u O >> c — u fO m N o u a ° O C L C w C U 00 O O u w w a1 — v v v m -aE E CL 0 L L a1 w t: w +-' O OD 7 > Q Q u v-a U 4! L a aJ m C j-0 u N i fD O O C Od O i^ E v= 0 0 t a) c oD 'u 0 t c° 0 +� D L c 3 v ° M-0 Ln m -o v •L — c •° L ,� > �a C •L u m a rya C Ln O O m �n V7 y > L U O L vi O m X w? aJ E O N Vi > N L +7+ d of u 'W cL0 N > 'U m t' (�D N U N Vl _ +' C 'm > t' bD � 'O m aJ N U ° 0 a=+ a/ W T C O OL 3 >� v - o o o a m m v a s E o o E > n v Q v �+ +� a Co c Q a y E n u .� c c 3 O m a� +� o- m E 0_ o u `! C (� (O OD 3 U , u 0 m L j p— 7 C m +� Y O C "O L +� a1 7 O Q E O aJ ++ V m N t C E +Q) L m � O CD �fa aO+ +> C �+ cr > C E ° C > c O tw j C •° co E >' z ° co fa � E > L '++ C O C .Ln i y a� O_ •w ++ 0 C> L CL O C L L C E y 0 ++ >, Y •C t m v O �' +O+ m = c O c �n & c a u .5 o_ m o— nD �, t m m v m v o a�i > c°= E aj m e °_' °D c-C t v o 3 m0 E Lnn > U* v *' — v.>_ E m v0, v o a o-0 CL +� °° E .Q ~ +� c c o E Y ° tozn c L o fo v ° n o t °cD o D uu v> o o° U Y u y E +� m> aai (� C > s In d f�f V aj a.+ •- L '++ L �••� pD m L U a) t C C t 4. m .m ° O W > O O O E += a! O C 0+ eto c °� ° o u a m C U° aXi L E t o+ a>i o f ai •— aJ v v 7 al U m -° ` CL � t .� y i Q m U E L m O C O O t O O U m � a C L t ++ C O Y 0� L t aJ >° '� j O ar v U �+ 0 o Q � ,� N 0) m C u Y C O} N C O_ o E c u ° ° C mo w ++ u Ln0 7 J O_ -D N a) L Vf CO w O m O aJ tn a F a-0 o0D o .c u m �-" o O_ ° v c E o"i E 0 v v u � *' `L° 'c° N O d t Q > G U al m 4+ o w-0 �+ 7 'p U (a L C 70 m 0 m L t a7 �.+ 7 w L VI 'L O of Q Q m H m m U Q1 Ln : C OD N� v o +� of Y ++ — O w> U U O. 4 E 0 c 0 r d a E 0 v 0 c O m u > gl c 0 m u 1.,1 W d > 0 ° C E ►, 7 N g c O m g 0 Wn O Y o C Ln o ° y v c fOo v v 3 L o °,,' vi > a vi n N U -O �, ° N N t N y O L y, O U Q N m U t0 o ° N c fo Y C Y a v N m U '� N .}, EL °— •OD ¢ t y >� L L � O1 Q 0 �"� �.., -0 n— In ++ � •- '+-,i Q a L a o VI O Y W u = U L t6 t v° v N Cc0 -D oo v � w v `Y° ° a v o o° u m E v ,CL `�°, " v o v L y °� ° U Occ_ ._ +� v c c u 0 M y Iao n p v a y — c c to a�i v o f0 .O C L O •� C -0 C 4� OU •m � iii +' f0 'O C L U O1 ° M U O i a +� u " out +� T = �, fO ° °; o '�' v v }' Y o3n c M 0 o ° t Y O L L vUi n U -0-0 OU .> 0 7 U 41 CO CO � C In C U N aO+ Q1 C fl_ C _° C OU fC0 C o u U OL O C COD Y Q ILO ILO tw m Y 0 Is + o m *' o In .3 a o > L .� o� m 41 c c o ° o > u O_ o m u m p O U 00 Y CO O1 > O a+ +� O 'C L > Y fo O_ +� O� m vI n O N •CD C +L+ C S +_.. N t I°j t C N 'Ip O �n OJ 7 C of o v o CL +>' N -° o +. c> c t ^ 3 o c m a o CL rco C o v m v °' v, Co O° 3 v o °c° v� o m on v > >" aui rz � 'N *�'' ¢ N to U fa E C u O1 .> v tw Q Cto w 7 m N C •C c O ICO N N v E m `^ 3 r' a¢ o w c CL In °c° v o> E `° o �°, '0�0 0$ o c m U +' •> a_+ O C OJ CLO C vOi =p •*' ISO u • V fuo oD C oD — �n u CD In U O N N O O COO C O N m i 'C > N-0 C Z O S L m `° c o Iri w a a m c 3 0 +� E C 3 t m a �'+ °>' y -0 DOJ U CO O L 7' 7 7 U L>>> O ° OJ L> s O L V t �,m¢ nooa� EU fo u V1C Y aJ� fo v u OnIn< mH u O1 ! C -0 O C O� +L+ U °U y +L+ U N f0 U STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF MENIFEE ) I, Rachel Valencia, Acting Deputy City Clerk of the City of Menifee, do hereby certify that the foregoing Planning Commission Resolution No. PC23-594 was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Menifee at a meeting thereof held on the 14' day of June, 2023 by the following vote: Ayes: Diederich, Long, Madrid, Thomas, LaDue Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: None ache) Valencia Acting Deputy City Clerk