Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
24-1406
RESOLUTION NO. 24-1406 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENIFEE, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 2014051029) FOR CIMARRON RIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT (PLN23-0060), MAJOR MODIFICATION TO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36658 (PLN22-0246) AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT (PLN 23-0241) WHEREAS, on October 12, 2022, the applicant, Pulte Home Company LLC, filed a formal application with the City of Menifee for the approval of the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) No. PLN23-0060, Major Modification (MJMOD) to Tentative Tract Map (TTM) No. 36658 (PLN22-0246) and Development Agreement (DA) Amendment No. PLN23-0241; and WHEREAS, the City is the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code §§ 21000 et seq.; and WHEREAS, collectively, all the applications are referred to as the "Project"; and WHEREAS, the approval of the Project constitutes a discretionary approval, which is part of a "project" as that term is defined in CEQA Guidelines § 15378 and which itself requires review under CEQA; and WHEREAS, on October 21, 2015, the City certified a Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), Technical Studies, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) (State Clearinghouse No. 2014051029) for the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan to analyze and mitigate the project's potentially significant environmental impacts; and WHEREAS, in connection with the proposed Project, an Addendum to the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan FEIR (herein referred to as the "Addendum"), a copy of which is on file with the Community Development Department and attached as Exhibit "A", has been prepared pursuant to the provisions of Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines in order to determine whether any significant environmental impacts which were not identified in the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan FEIR would result from the proposed Project or whether previously identified significant impacts would be substantially more severe in connection with the proposed Project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on February 28, 2024 and recommended the adoption of the Addendum, where the public was allowed to comment on the proposed Project including the Addendum to the FEIR; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on March 20, 2024, where the public was allowed to comment on the proposed Project including the Addendum to the FEIR; and WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully considered all of the comments received from the public as well as the information provided by City staff regarding environmental review. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Menifee resolves as follows: Cimarron Ridge — Addendum to FEIR (SPA, MJMOD & DA Amendment) March 20, 2024 Section 1. That the Addendum was prepared for the proposed Project in compliance with the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. Section 2. That, based upon the evidence submitted and as demonstrated by the analysis included in the Addendum, none of the conditions described in Sections 15162 or 15163 of the CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or negative declaration have occurred; specifically: 1. There have not been any substantial changes in the Project that require major revisions of the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan FEIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. 2. There have not been any substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the proposed Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan FEIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. 3. There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan FEIR was certified as complete and adopted, that shows any of the following: (a) The proposed Project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan FEIR; (b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan FEIR; (c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would, in fact, be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the proposed Project, but the project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; (d) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan FEIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives. Therefore, the previous MMRP remains valid, and it is included as Appendix A to the proposed Addendum to the FEIR for Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan. Section 3. In connection with the proposed Project and this City Council's review of the Addendum to the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan FEIR, the City Council has independently reviewed the Addendum and has exercised its independent judgment in making the findings and determinations set forth herein. Cimarron Ridge — Addendum to FEIR (SPA, MJMOD & DA Amendment) March 20, 2024 Section 4. Pursuant to the above findings, this City Council determines that the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan FEIR, together with the Addendum, satisfy all the requirements of CEQA and are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the proposed Project and, therefore, adopts the Addendum to the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan FEIR for the proposed Project. Section 5: Location and Custodian of Record of Proceedings. The Community Development Department of the City of Menifee, located at 29844 Haun Road, Menifee, CA 92586, is hereby designated as the custodian of the documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council's resolution is based, which documents and materials shall be available for public inspection and copying in accordance with the provisions of the California Public Records Act (Government Code §§ 6250 et seq.) during normal business hours. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of March 2024. v=' Bill Zi m m n, Mayor ATTEST: US e ' nie Roseen, Acting City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the Major Modification and Revision to Tentative Tract Map 36658 (PLN22-0246), Amendment to the Development Agreement No. 2014-002, and the Amendment to Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) of the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan (SCH No. 2014051029) Prepared for: City of Menifee 29844 Haun Road Menifee, California 92586 Contact: Desiree McGriff (951) 723-3770 Prepared By: Kimley-Horn and Associates 3801 University Avenue, Suite 300 Riverside, California 92501 February 2024 Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTIVI 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Noise ❑ Agricultural and Forestry Resources ❑ Population/Housing ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Public Services ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Recreation ❑ Energy ❑ Transportation ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Tribal Cultural Resources ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Wildfire ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance ❑ Land Use/Planning DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation (check one): ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. ® I find that the amended project has previously been analyzed as part of an earlier CEQA document. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous documentation adequate to cover the project which are documented in this ADDENDUM to the earlier CEQA document (CEQA Section 15164). CERTIFICATION: Signature February2024 Date 2.7.24 Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PURPOSE OF THE ADDENDUM.................................................................................. 1-1 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT....................................................................... 2-2 2.1 Project Setting and Location............................................................................................2-2 2.2 Project Description..........................................................................................................2-2 2.2.1 Access.............................................................................................................. 2-5 2.2.2 Circulation........................................................................................................2-5 2.2.3 Landscaping.....................................................................................................2-6 2.2.4 Site Excavation and Grading Activities............................................................2-6 2.2.5 Site Drainage....................................................................................................2-6 2.2.6 Off -Site Improvements....................................................................................2-7 2.3 Construction Schedule.....................................................................................................2-7 2.4 Project Approvals.............................................................................................................2-7 3.0 CIMARRON RIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS SUMMARY. 3-1 3.1 TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Environmental Impact Analysis and Project Approvals........................................................................................3-2 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS..................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Aesthetics ............ ............................................................................................................. 4-1 4.1.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis................................................4-1 4.1.2 Analysis of Proposed Project...........................................................................4-1 4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources.................................................................................4-5 4.2.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis................................................4-5 4.2.2 Analysis of Proposed Project...........................................................................4-5 4.3 Air Quality........................................................................................................................4-8 4.3.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis................................................4-8 4.3.2 Analysis of Proposed Project...........................................................................4-8 4.4 Biological Resources......................................................................................................4-14 4.4.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis..............................................4-14 4.4.2 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-14 4.5 Cultural Resources.........................................................................................................4-22 4.5.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis..............................................4-22 4.5.2 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-22 4.6 Geology and Soils...........................................................................................................4-27 4.6.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis ...................................4-27 4.6.2 Analysis of Proposed Project........................................................................ 4-27 February 2024 1 Table of Contents Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Climate Change) ................. ..4-34 ............................................ 4.7.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis ............. :................................ 4-34 4.7.2 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-34 4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials.................................................................................4-37 4.8.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis..............................................4-37 4.8.2 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-37 4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality........................................................................................4-44 4.9.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis..............................................4-44 4.9.2 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-44 4.10 Land Use and Planning...................................................................................................4-49 4.10.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis..............................................4-49 4.10.2 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-49 4.11 Mineral Resources.........................................................................................................4-51 4.11.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis ..............................................4-51 4.11.2 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-51 4.12 Noise..............................................................................................................................4-53 4.12.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis ..............................................4-53 4.12.2 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-53 4.13 Population and Housing.................................................................................................4-58 4.13.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis ..............................................4-58 4.13.2 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-58 4.14 Public Services ........................... ...... .............................. .......... ........................ .............. 4-60 4.14.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis ..............................................4-60 4.14.2 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-60 4.15 Recreation......................................................................................................................4-62 4.15.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis..............................................4-62 4.15.2 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-62 4.16 Transportation ...............................................................................................................4-64 4.16.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis..............................................4-64 4.16.2 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-64 4.17 Utilities and Service Systems.........................................................................................4-77 4.17.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis..............................................4-77 4.17.2 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-77 4.18 Wildfire ..........................................................................................................................4-81 4.18.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis..............................................4-81 4.18.2 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-81 4.19 Energy...............................................................................................................4-84 4.19.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis..............................................4-84 4.19.2 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-84 4.20 Tribal Cultural Resources...............................................................................................4-88 February 2024 ii Table of Contents Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.20.1 Analysis of Proposed Project.........................................................................4-88 5.0 DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE CEQA DOCUMENTATION ................................... 5-1 6.0 CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................6-1 Appendices Appendix A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Appendix B: Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Consistency Analysis Appendix C; Updated Cultural Resources Assessment Appendix D. ALUC Development Review — Director's Determination Appendix E: Traffic Consistency Memorandum List of Tables Table 1: Proposed Project Summary..........................................................................................................1-2 Table 2: Summary of Intersection Operations Existing Plus Project........................................................4-66 List of Exhibits Exhibit 1: Regional Location Map...............................................................................................................1-5 Exhibit2: Land Use Plan.............................................................................................................................1-6 Exhibit3: Project Location Map.................................................................................................................2-4 Exhibit 4: Proposed Circulation Plan..........................................................................................................2-8 Exhibit 5: Non -Vehicular Circulation Plan..................................................................................................2-9 Exhibit 6: Landscape Theme Plan — Community Wide............................................................................2-10 Exhibit7: Proposed Grading Plan.............................................................................................................2-11 Exhibit 8: Proposed Drainage Plan...........................................................................................................2-12 Exhibit 9: Fire Hazard Severity Zone — General Plan................................................................................4-41 Exhibit 10: Fire Hazard Severity Zone — CAL FIRE....................................................................................4-42 February 2024 lit Table of Contents Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 1.0 Purpose Of The Addendum February 2024 Introduction Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 1.0 PURPOSE OF THE ADDENDUM This Addendum has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21000 et seq.); the CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations [CCR] Section 15000 et seq.); and the rules, regulations, and procedures for implementing CEQA as set forth by the City of Menifee (City). The City is the lead agency under the CEQA. Section 15164(a) of the CEQA Guidelines states that "the lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary, but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred." Pursuant to Section 15162(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, a subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative Declaration is only required when: 1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or 3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. The Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan No. 2013-247 (Specific Plan) was approved by the City in July 2015 and was intended to develop a master -planned community that will contain a variety of innovative housing types and functional open spaces in the northwestern part of the City; refer to Exhibit 1: Regional Location February 2024 1-1 Introduction Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Map. On November 4, 2015, the City adopted Ordinance No. 2015-176, approving Specific Plan No. 2013- 247, which established a land use plan, circulation plan, design standards and guidelines for 756 single- family residential dwelling units within a 240.3-acre area. Ordinance No. 2015-178 was also adopted approving Change of Zone No. 2014-017, to change the zoning classification of a 240.3-acre area from One -Family Dwellings (R-1), One -Family Dwellings 10,000 square foot Minimum (R-1-10,000), and open area combining Zone (R-5) to Specific Plan (SP). Also adopted was the Final Program EIR (FEIR) for the Specific Plan (Approved Project), State Clearinghouse (SCH) No. 2014051029, in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. The developer also proposed Development Agreement No. 2014-002 to lock in certain fees and regulations for development of the project. General Plan Amendment No. 2014-06 was also proposed to change the then current general plan land use designation from 2.1-5 du/ac Residential to Specific Plan. The Specific Plan is a comprehensive policy and regulatory guidance document for the private use and development of all properties within the Specific Plan area. By providing the necessary regulatory and design guidance, the Specific Plan ensures that future development implements the goals and policies of the City of Menifee General Plan (Menifee GP). According to Table 3.0-A, Land Use Summary, of the Specific Plan, the Specific Plan area, is comprised of 240.3 acres in the northwestern portion of the City within Riverside County (County) and is comprised of three land use designations: Medium Density Residential (MDR), Open Space Conservation (OS-C), and Open Space Recreation (OS-R); refer to Exhibit 2: Land Use Plan. The City has received a Planning Application for Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) No. PLN23-0060 "Cimarron Ridge", Development Agreement Amendment No. PLN23-0241, and Major Modification No. PLN22-0246 (Tentative Tract Map Revision for TR36658) (Project). The SPA is for the amendment of the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan and proposes changes to the previously established Planning Area No. 4 (PA- 4), Planning Area No. 5 (PA-5), and Planning Area No. 6 (PA-6). As shown in Table 1: Proposed Project Summary, the Project proposes transferring 49 residential lots from PA-4 to PA-5 and transferring the 10.19-acre park from PA-5 to PA-4 but does not propose any alterations to density or an increase in the number of lots as a result of these revisions. PA-4 would consist of 81 residential lots and include a 10.9- acre park consisting of active uses, including lighted ball fields, and passive uses and amenities, including a dog park for the community and on -site parking. PA-5 would consist of 151 residential lots and a 1.5- acre recreation area. A 1.2-acre pickle ball facility is proposed in conjunction with PA-5. Gated access would be provided between PA-5 and PA-6 as they are both proposed to be age restricted gated communities. Table 1: Proposed Project Summary February 2024 1-2 Introduction Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project City of Memfee. 2015. Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan. Page 3.0-7. Table 3.0-13, Detailed Land Use Summary. Adkan Engineers. ND. Tentative Tract No. 36658 #1 Amendment #1. Note: The proposed modifications to the tentative tract map will not add or reduce the approved number of residential lots. The following modifications are proposed for Cimarron Ridge TR36658: • All streets servicing TR36658-5, and TR36658-6, will be converted from public streets to private streets. The design of the intersection of Smokey Quartz Street and Goetz Road would be revised to accommodate the proposed gated entry turnaround prior to the gate addition. Gates would also be added to the east entry of phase TR36658-5 on Byers Road and the north entry on McLaughlin Road. • Phase TR36658-4 proposes to relocate 49 residential lots to phase TR36658-5. The Project proposes to slightly enlarge the 10.19-acre park to 10.9 acres and relocate the park acreage from phase TR36658-5 to the northern portion of phase TR36658-4. A 1.5-acre recreation center and 1.2-acre pickleball facility (proposed to be private) are proposed in phase TR36658-5. The purpose of this Addendum is to analyze any potential differences between the impacts identified for the Project site in the FEIR for the Approved Project and those that would be associated with development of the Project as proposed herein. As identified above, pursuant to provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City is the "Lead Agency' charged with the responsibility of deciding whether to approve development on the Project site. As part of its decision -making process, the City is required to review and consider whether the Project would create new significant impacts or more severe significant impacts than those previously disclosed, analyzed and mitigated for in the FEIR. Additional CEQA review beyond this Addendum would only be triggered if the Project created new significant impacts or more severe significant impacts than those disclosed, analyzed, and mitigated for in the FEIR. New threshold guidelines did not constitute "new information" requiring additional environmental review. CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(a) states that an Addendum is the appropriate CEQA document for the Project, if the City finds that major revisions to the FEI R are not necessary and that none of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of subsequent or supplemental EIR (SEIR) are triggered. As detailed herein, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts and/or more severe impact that were not disclosed, analyzed, and mitigated for in the FEIR. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, this Addendum to the previously certified FEIR is the appropriate environmental documentation for the Project. In taking action on any of the approvals, the decision -making body must consider the whole of the data presented in the FEIR and the previously adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), as augmented by this Addendum. February 2024 1-3 Introduction Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project February 2024 1-4 Introduction LEGEND Project Boundary L_1 Cities Counties Source: Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan (202A Figure 2 0-1 Exhibit 1: Regional Location Map Kimley)>)Horn City of Menifee TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project PA6 MDR 29A A. 96 DU. PA 711 PA 7,4 it, MDR NDR PAID. J L PA 2 I PA IA MDR MDR 3&11M 4LS A. 134DM ,111111. L _J IEG— spmft Plm B.. —.9.q rIIM1 11"Mh rA. Ila ,.-,1 '3117. rA 1,141 ULI W%' iso'kb rA 1. 4&D[ft Ill I.W lull E�.J- �". w.g wafymd i, PA.4-d5 Source: Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan (2023). Figure 3.1-2 Exhibit 2: Land Use Map Kimley)))Horn City of Menifee TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 2.0 Description of Proposed Project February 2024 Project Description Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT 2.1 PROJECT SETTING AND LOCATION The Project site is in the northwestern portion of the City of Menifee (City) in the southwestern portion of Riverside County, California; refer to Exhibit 1: Regional Location Map. The Project site is comprised of Specific Plan Planning Areas (PA) 4, 5, and 6, totaling approximately 76 acres across Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 330-220-016, 330-220-017, 330-230-042, 330-230-043, located south of McLaughlin Road, east of Goetz Road, and west of Valley Boulevard and Byers Road; refer to Exhibit 3: Project Location Map. The Project is currently vacant and there are no existing defined drainage courses, streams, or rivers. Note that PAS 1 through 3 and all backbone infrastructure and utilities are currently under construction. The site has been highly disturbed as it was previously mass graded for home pads, roads, detention basins, infrastructure, etc. The following uses surround the Project site: • North: vacant land and rural residential • South: vacant land • East: single family and rural residential West: City of Perris, land uses consist of vacant land followed by rural residential homes and ranch style properties along Sotelo Road The Project site's Menifee GP land use designation and zoning is Cimarron Ridge SP.1,2 Sections 4.0 and 5.0 of the Specific Plan provide the Development Standards and Design Guidelines for the Specific Plan area, respectively. 2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City has received a Planning Application for Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) No. PLN23-0060 "Cimarron Ridge", Development Agreement Amendment No. PLN23-0241 and Major Modification No. PLN22-0246 (Tentative Tract Map Revision for TR36658) (Project). The SPA is for the amendment of the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan and proposes changes to the previously established Planning Area No. 4 (PA- 4), Planning Area No. 5 (PA-5), and Planning Area No. 6 (PA-6). As shown in Table 1: Proposed Project Summary above, the Project proposes transferring 49 residential lots from PA-4 to PA-5 and transferring the 10.19-acre park from PA-5 to PA-4 but does not propose any alterations to density or an increase in the number of lots as a result of these revisions. PA-4 would consist of 81 residential lots and include a 10.9-acre park consisting of active uses, including lighted ball fields, and passive uses and amenities, including a dog park for the community and on -site parking. PA-5 would consist of 151 residential lots and a 1.5-acre recreation area. A 1.2-acre pickle ball facility is proposed in conjunction with PA-5. Gated access City of Menifee. 2023. General Plan —Land Use Map. https://www.cityofineni(ee.us/DocumentCenter/View/11043/General-Plan--Land-Use• Map--March-2023 (accessed September 2023). ' City of Menifee. 2023. Zoning Map. littps:i/J+ww.utvofinenifee.us/DocumentCenter/View/11042/`Zoning-Map---March-2023 (accessed September 223). February 2024 2-2 Project Description Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project would be provided between PA-5 and PA-6 as they are both proposed to be age restricted gated communities. February 2024 2-3 Project Description LEGEND ,I Specific Plan Boundary Project Boundary Source: Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan (2023). Frguro 2.0-2 Exhibit 3: Project Location Map Kimley>>> Horn City of Menifee TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project The following modifications are proposed for Cimarron Ridge TR36658: All streets servicing TR36658-5, and TR36658-6, will be converted from public streets to private streets. The design of the intersection of Smokey Quartz Street and Goetz Road would be revised to accommodate the proposed gated entry turnaround prior to the gate addition. Gates would also be added to the east entry of phase TR36658-5 on Byers Road and the north entry on McLaughlin Road. Phase TR36658-4 proposes to relocate 49 residential lots to phase TR36658-. The Project proposes to slightly enlarge the 10.19-acre park to 10.9 acres and relocate the park acreage from phase TR36658-5 to the northern portion of phase TR36658-4. A 1.5-acre recreation center and 1.2-acre pickleball facility (proposed to be private) are proposed in phase TR36658-5. 2.2.1 Access Regional The Project site is located in the northwest portion of the City of Menifee approximately two miles west of Interstate 215 (1-215), which provides regional access to the Project area as identified in Exhibit 1: Regional Location Map. Local Existing roads located near the site include Ethanac Road to the north, which ultimately connects to 1-215. Other existing roads currently serving the site include Goetz Road which traverses the eastern portion of the site. Valley Boulevard is located to the southeast of the site and extends to the northwest to Goetz Road. Chambers Avenue and Thornton Avenue are located to east of the site and terminate at Valley Boulevard. Rouse Road is also located to the east of the site and terminates near Byers Road. Troy Lane and Byers Road, which are currently unpaved dirt roads, are located to the east of the site. McLaughlin Road is located to the north and is also an unpaved dirt road. The Project site and the relationship to the surrounding roads are shown in Exhibit 3: Project Location Map. Project Primary access to the Project site will be from Valley Boulevard and Goetz Road. Secondary access to the site will be provided by McLaughlin Road to the north and Thornton Avenue to the south. A number of interior circulation roads will facilitate access to the interior of the Project site. 2.2.2 Circulation Vehicular and non -vehicular circulation improvements would be proposed in accordance with the Circulation Plan found in Section 3.2 of the Specific Plan. The Circulation Plan for Cimarron Ridge reinforces the concept of traditional neighborhood design. The Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan proposes a circulation system comprised of roads, pedestrian pathways, and trails to provide for efficient and effective access to and through the site. The circulation plan is designed to provide optimal circulation efficiency as well as safety for guests and residents. Refer to Exhibit 4: Proposed Circulation Plan and Exhibit 5: Non - Vehicular Circulation Plan. February 2024 2-5 Project Description Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 2.2.3 Landscaping Project landscaping would be consistent with that Landscape Design Guidelines found in Chapter 5.1 of the Specific Plan. These Landscape Design Guidelines are composed of seven major thematic landscape elements. Thematic elements are generally considered major improvements that occur at the community or neighborhood level, and which assist in establishing the overall design theme for Cimarron Ridge. The thematic elements include: • Community Theme Concept; • Plant Palette; • Streetscapes; • Entry Monuments; • Open Space and Recreation; • Walls & Fences; and • Lighting. These thematic landscape elements occur throughout the community and unite Cimarron Ridge under a common design theme. Refer to Exhibit 6: Landscape Theme Plan — Community Wide. 2.2.4 Site Excavation and Grading Activities The Conceptual Grading Plan for the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan was prepared in conjunction with the land use and circulation plans in the Specific Plan to provide building pads that are safe from flooding or inundation. The grading concept is responsive to the physical character, location, and type of land use, and well as the visual and environmental qualities of the site. The conceptual Grading Plan is shown in Exhibit 7: Proposed Grading Plan. All cut and fill will be balanced on site and will not require import or export of materials. Approximately 999,775 cubic yards of material will be moved overall (total estimated cut and fill) to achieve the cut and fill balance for the entirety of the Specific Plan area. This quantity may vary as final grading plans are developed. Balance of cut and fill in each phase and within each Planning Area is the goal; however, in some cases a limited amount of off - phase grading may occur for borrow and stock piling sites. See Section 3.4 of the Specific Plan for the Grading Plan. 2.2.5 Site Drainage The existing Specific Plan site is vacant and was previously rough graded per the prior TTM's that were approved. Therefore, in its current state, the site generates limited volumes of runoff. However, in its developed state, the Approved Project will include extensive areas of impermeable surfaces from which rain will run off; this "additional" runoff (difference between existing and future) is the responsibility of the Approved Project to detain on -site. To capture, convey and detain this on -site runoff, a system of on - site detention facilities has been designed, located, and sized to accommodate the projected storm water volumes. The Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan proposes a series of water quality basins and detention basins that have been integrated into the Land Use Plan and are planned to be situated at the low portion of February 2024 2-6 Project Description Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project each sub -area. The conceptual Drainage Plan as illustrated on Exhibit 8: Proposed Drainage Plan shows the planned storm drains, water quality basins, and detention basins. 2.2.6 Off -Site Improvements Off -site improvements proposed as part of this Project include a traffic signal at the intersection of Thornton Avenue and Murrieta Road. 2.3 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE The proposed Project construction schedule is as follows: PA6 PAS PA4 • Model Start 3/25 • Phase 1 Start 4/8 • Phase 1 Start 7/29 Phase 1 Start 7/29 2.4 PROJECT APPROVALS The following approvals are required for the Project: • Planning Application for Specific Plan Amendment No. PLN23-0060 "Cimarron Ridge" • Development Agreement Amendment No. PLN23-0241. • Major Modification No. PLN22-0246 (Tentative Tract Map Revision for TR36658) See Section 2.2 for further details. February 2024 2-7 Project Description `c M o MCt At M.l it w an T4: ..v LEGEND aP.,undn c Plan ® Project Site [in Arterial Roadway Major Roadway Secondary Roadway Collector Roadway Promenade Street Typical Local Streets Proposed Landuse @fit(•. RM rtiE RD MDR OS-C 1 \ ... a114"4 .., 1WQ Basins s, r PA'3 ROW way o" III PA3 rPA IA.r PA 118 y, - Ibph wou: I ll CHAMOr.R5 AVE' I0 5W 1000. � I Feet � Source: Cimarron Ridce Soeci6c Plan (2023). Figure 3.2-2 Exhibit 4: Proposed Circulation Plan ® Kimlep Horn City of Menifee Not to scale TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project LEGEND s 3 - r` :I r----jsaFci�lcwwaa,m.,ry ®n:wEc,eareoary _ p S r -.��■>=.'. • - 7 Qom' inJ44AnIY INM ��'0� ' � _-______—__ ._Q IFNPoIIAINlL11l � EL..SSIIPIEIiMF ti �'•oA. nAn>HAAIIn aNwrsE � • �� ,,,\ • '� � 'RAIL T' LAE�YNAS • VA �; \ ,.\ i MIA.LOTAEao6TAIR ! �NAI��A v .ou . . YRMIA••.. wr• — AARMC - 'V PA IL UI Olk PAi "Olt PA3: IMM Mnl Mh W nlh PAlsl PAR YS Mk Mm1Y Mh TnMLMM6 7Y Wstt 1h is _ • K sEs W. '! Q �T ' Source: Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan. (2023). Fiquro 3.2-4 Exhibit 5: Non -Vehicular Circulation Plan Kimley>Morn City of Menifee TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project t tIF-00' ♦ . Ornamental Grasses in Mass Groupings Unique Accent PlenUng I ' f, Natives & Drought Tolerant Plants oject Site Source: Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan. (2023). Flgum 3.4-2 Exhibit 7: Proposed Grading Plan Kimley>>)Horn City of Menifee TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project ®Project Site Source: Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan (2023) Figure 3.3-2 Exhibit 8: Proposed Drainage Plan Kimley»)Horn City of Menifee TTM 35658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 3.0 Environmental Analysis February 2024 Environmental Impact Analysis Summary Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 3.0 CIMARRON RIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS SUMMARY The environmental impact findings of the FEIR are summarized below. No Impact: The FEIR determined that no impact would occur with respect to the following environmental topic areas below. These impacts were included in the FEIR's "Effects Found Not To Be Significant (EFNTBS)" section (Section 4.0). • Agriculture and Forest Resources (EFNTBS Impacts 4.1.2.1 through 4.1.2.5); • Geology and Soils (EFNTBS Impact 4.1.3.8); • Hazards and Hazardous Materials (EFNTBS Impact 4.1.4.3); • Hydrology and Water Quality (EFNTBS Impacts 4.1.5.7, 4.1.5.8, and 4.1.5.10); • Mineral Resources (EFNTBS Impacts 4.1.6.1 and 4.1.6.2); • Noise (Initial Study/Notice of Preparation Impacts Xll.e and Xll.f) • Population and Housing (EFNTBS Impacts 4.1.7.2 and 4.1.7.3); • Public Services (EFNTBS Impact 4.1.8.4); • Transportation/Traffic (Initial Study/Notice of Preparation Impacts XVI.c and XVI.d); and • Utilities and System Services (EFNTBS Impact 4.1.10.1) Less Than Significant Impact: The FEIR identified less than significant impacts in the following environmental topic areas below. These impacts were included in the FEIR's EFNTBS section (Section 4.0),the previous Initial Study/Notice of Preparation, and MMRP. • Aesthetics (EFNTBS Impacts 4.1.1.1 through 4.1.1.4); • Air Quality (Initial Study/Notice of Preparation Impact Ill.e); • Biological Resources (Initial Study/Notice of Preparation Impacts IV.b through IV.e.); • Cultural and Paleontological Resources (Initial Study/Notice of Preparation Impacts V.a and V.d); • Geology and Soils (EFNTBS Impacts 4.1.3.1 through 4.1.3.7); • Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Impact 5.4.5.2); • Hazards and Hazardous Materials (EFNTBS Impacts 4.1.4.1, 4.1.4.2, and 4.1.4.4 through 4.1.4.8); • Hydrology and Water Quality (EFNTBS Impacts 4.1.5.1 through 4.1.5.6 and 4.1.5.9); • Land Use and Planning (Initial Study/Notice of Preparation Impact X.a); Impact 5.10.6.1, 5.10.6.2) • Noise (Impact 5.6.5.2) Population and Housing (EFNTBS Impact4.1.7.1); • Public Services (EFNTBS Impacts 4.1.8.1 through 4.1.8.3, and 4.1.8.5); and Recreation (EFNTBS Impacts 4.1.9.1 and 4.1.9.2); February 2024 3-1 Environmental Impact Analysis Summary Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Transportation/Traffic (Initial Study/Notice of Preparation Impacts XVI.e and XVI.f); and • Utilities and System Services (EFNTBS Impacts 4.1.10.2 through 4.1.10.5, and 4.1.10.7) Less Than Significant Impact with Incorporation of Mitigation: The FOR and MMRP identified impacts that could be mitigated to less than significant levels with incorporation of mitigation measures in the following environmental topic areas: • Biological Resources (Impacts 5.2.6.1 and 5.2.6.6); • Cultural and Paleontological Resources (Impacts 5.3.6.2 and 5.3.6.3); • Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Impact 5.4.5.1); • Noise (Impacts 5.6.5.1, 5.6.5.3, and 5.6.5.4); • Transportation/Traffic (Impact 5.7.10.6) Utilities and System Services (EFNTBS Impact 4.1.10.6)3 Significant and Unavoidable Impact: The FOR identified significant and unavoidable impacts in the following environmental topic areas: Air Quality (Impacts 5.1.5.1 through 5.1.5.4) . Transportation/Traffic (Impacts 5.7.10.1 and 5.7.10.2) 3.1 TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Environmental Impact Analysis and Project Approvals The scope of the City's review of the Project is set forth in CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. This review is limited to evaluating the environmental effects associated with the Project when compared to the Approved Project as set forth in the FEIR. This Addendum also reviews new information, if any, of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable due diligence at the time the FEIR was certified. This evaluation includes a determination as to whether the changes proposed for the Project would result in any new significant impacts or more severe significant impact. Although CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 does not stipulate the format or content of an Addendum, the topical areas identified in the CEQA Guidelines 2023 Environmental Information Form were used as guidance for this Addendum. In addition, Section 15164(e) of the CEQA Guidelines states that "A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's findings on the Project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence." This comparative analysis provides the City with the factual basis for determining whether any changes in the Project, any changes in circumstances, or any new information since the FOR was certified would require additional environmental review or preparation of an SEIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, the City has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that implementation of the Project does not propose substantial changes to the Approved Project, no substantial changes in circumstances would occur which would require major ' Mitigation Measures were added as part of the Final EIR process to address Riverside County Waste Management Department's concerns. February 2024 3-2 Environmental Impact Analysis Summary Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project revisions to the FEIR, and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of FOR that would result in either new significant effects or an increase in the severity of previously analyzed significant effects. A MMRP was adopted as a part of the FEIR that minimized impacts associated with implementation of the Approved Project. The previously adopted mitigation measures applicable to the Approved Project will be imposed as conditions of the Project, and the MMRP, as applicable to the Approved Project, is contained in Appendix A to this Addendum EIR. February 2024 3-3 Environmental Impact Analysis Summary Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.0 Environmental Analysis February 2024 3-1 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 4.1 AESTHETICS 4.1.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Initial Study prepared for the FEIR concluded that all issues related to Aesthetics were determined to be less than significant during preparation of the Approved Project's NOP and were briefly discussed in FEIR Section 4 Environmental EFNTBS — Section 4.1.1 Aesthetics. 4.1.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No New or More Severe Impact: The dominant scenic views from the Project site and the surrounding area include the San Jacinto Mountains to the northeast and east; the Menifee Mountains to the southeast; 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 Project would potentially affect views of the identified scenic vistas to the single family and rural residential homes to the east; rural residential to the north; and rural residential homes to the west. The proposed SPA includes residential development standards that require the Project's proposed medium density residential development in PA-4 and PA-5 to adhere to the required setbacks, and maximum structural heights of 40 feet. This would ensure that visual impacts to the residential homes located to the east, north, and west and motorists driving on the roadways are minimized. Since the Project's development would adhere to the proposed SPA's residential setback and height standards and include undeveloped natural habitat that would improve views of the Menifee Mountains to the east, the Project's encroachment into the viewshed would not be significant. Additionally, similar scale residential uses are established and planned with the immediate vicinity of the Project site. Therefore, the change in views of the Project site from the surrounding area would not cause a significant impact on a scenic vista. Impacts are less than significant without mitigation. Accordingly, no new impacts relative to adverse effects on a scenic vista or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the FEIR would occur. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact on a scenic vista(s). As such, it is determined that construction and operation activities associated with the Project would have a less than significant February 2024 4-1 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project impact on scenic vistas. No Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Threshold (b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? No New or More Severe Impact: The FEIR determined that the Approved Project would not result in any adverse scenic resource impacts. Therefore, no adverse impacts on scenic resources, including resources within a State scenic highway, would result from the Project's implementation. Consistent with the FEIR findings, there are no rock outcroppings or historic building within a State- or County -designated scenic highway in the vicinity of the Project site. Additionally, there are no trees on - site since the Project site is highly disturbed from mass grading for home pads, roads, detention basins, infrastructure. Impacts in this regard are considered less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact on a scenic resource(s). The Project would be consistent with the proposed SPA standards and Menifee GP guidelines. Therefore, no Project -specific mitigation measures are needed. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Threshold (c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? No New or More Severe Impact: The Project would improve the existing vacant and highly disturbed land to 81 MDR units and 10.9 gross acres of OS-R on PA-4 and 151 MDR units and 2.7 gross acres of OS-R on PA-5, including circulation improvements, landscaping, and infrastructure improvements. The surrounding area includes land designated for residential uses to the east, south, and west; open space to the west, and public utility corridors and economic development corridor (Northern Gateway) to the north which allows industrial/business park uses. The Project's proposed components would be guided in accordance with the proposed SPA's development standards and design guidelines. This would ensure that the Project improve the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. Consistent with the FEIR, the Project would be consistent with the surrounding area's land uses and would improve the existing visual character of the site. Therefore, no new impacts relative to adverse aesthetic impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the FEIR would occur. February 2024 4-2 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact pertaining to the substantial degradation of the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. The Project would be designed in compliance with the proposed SPA's development standards and design guidelines. Therefore, no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Threshold (d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? No New or More Severe Impact: According to the land use and development regulations provided in the Approved Specific Plan, all future development would be required to comply with the Specific Plan design guidelines and City of Menifee Municipal Code (Menifee MC) Chapter 6.01, Dark Sky Light Pollution general requirements. Consistent with the Menifee MC and proposed SPA development regulations', and as applicable, all lighting elements in the Project site would be designed to minimize glare spillover, and light pollution. Outdoor lighting would be directed downward. Additionally, the Project would implement approved materials and methods of installation, requirements for lamp source and shielding to ensure outdoor lighting meets Mount Palomar Lighting requirements. As such, consistency with the Menifee MC and lighting requirements of the proposed SPA would ensure that potential impacts associated with light and glare would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impacts from light or glare. No significant impacts associated with light and glare are identified in the FEIR. The Project would be designed consistent with the applicable guidelines and standards within the Menifee MC and proposed SPA. No Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Lighting standards were not updated as part of the proposed SPA February 2024 4-3 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Overall Aesthetics Impacts Conclusion With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts with respect to aesthetics. The Project site would be developed with medium density residential homes and open space recreation which would be consistent with the Cimmaron Ridge land use designation and zoning upon approved of the proposed SPA and TTM modifications. The Project would be developed in accordance with the proposed SPA development standards and design standards, and Menifee MC lighting standards, as applicable. Therefore, the preparation of a SEIR is not warranted. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. February 2024 4-4 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES 4.2.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The FOR identified that implementation of the Approved Project would not impact or conflict with Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, a Williamson Act contract, or with the conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use. As such, the FOR found that no impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures were required. 4.2.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No New or More Severe Impact: According to the FEIR, there is no Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the Specific Plan boundaries. However, according to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, the Project is designated as Farmland of Local Importance.5 The Project site is not zoned for agricultural use and is not designated under a Williamson Act contract. The Project site is heavily disturbed due to past grading activity associated with the Approved Project. Under the Approved Project, construction within the Specific Plan continues. Therefore, the loss of Farmland of Local Importance within the Project site was accounted for in the FEIR. No impacts are anticipated. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact concerning the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. No impact would occur, and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Threshold (b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No New or More Severe Impact: There are no lands within the Specific Plan area that are zoned for an agricultural use or designated under a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, no impacts to existing agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contract would occur. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. 5 California Department of Conservation. (2020). California Important Farmland: 1984-2020. Available at: https://maps.conservation.ca.pov/dlrp/ciftimeseries/ (accessed September 2023). February 2024 4-5 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact concerning the confliction with existing zoning for agricultural uses or with a Williamson Act contract. No impact would occur, and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Threshold (c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? No New or More Severe Impact: Due to the lack of natural resources, including farmland and forest, the Project would not convert farmland or forest land for non-agricultural land. Furthermore, the Project site is not zoned for forestry use on either City Zoning Map or the Riverside County Zoning Map. As such, no impacts related to the loss of farmland and forestland would occur. Consistent with the FEIR's findings, no significant impacts to agricultural resources would occur from Project implementation. No mitigation measures are necessary. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FOR None Identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impacts related to the conflict with existing zoning, or rezoning of forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. No impact would occur, and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Threshold (d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? No New or More Severe Impact: As noted in Threshold 4.2(c) above, there is no forest land on the Project site. Therefore, buildout of the Project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use. No impact would occur. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FOR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would not result new or more severe impact related to the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use. No impact would occur, and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not February 2024 4-6 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Threshold (e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? No New or More Severe Impact: Due to the lack of natural resources, including farmland and forest, the Project would not result in the conversion of farmland or forest land to non-agricultural use or non -forest use, respectively. No impact would occur. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would not result in new or more severe impacts related to the changes in the existing environment that would result conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use. No impact would occur, and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Overall Aericulture and Forestry Resources Impacts Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact to agriculture or forestry resources. No significant impacts to agricultural resources are identified in the FEIR and no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to agriculture and forestry resources. With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts with respect to agricultural and forestry resources. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of a SEIR is not warranted. February 2024 4-7 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.3 AIR QUALITY 4.3.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The FEIR concluded that although buildout of the Specific Plan would implement FOR MMs Air 1 through Air 6, impacts related to air quality concerning long-term regional air quality, consistency with the AIR Quality Management Plan (AQMP), and cumulative air quality pertaining to long-term operation emissions, would remain significant and unavoidable. As described in Section 3.0, the Project proposes transferring 49 residential lots from PA-4 to PA-5 and transferring the 10.19-acre park from PA-5 to PA-4 but does not propose any alterations to density or an increase in the number of lots as a result of these revisions. PA-4 would consist of 81 residential lots and include a 10.9-acre park consisting of active uses, include lighted ball fields, and passive uses and amenities, including a dog park for the community and on -site parking. PA-5 would consist of 151 residential lots and a 1.5-acre recreation area. A 1.2-acre pickle ball facility is proposed in conjunction with PA-5. Gated access would be provided between PA-5 and PA-6 as they are both proposed to be age - restricted gated communities. Therefore, the Air Quality Technical Report was relied upon for the following analysis since the Project would only provide a locational change and does not propose any additional uses not analyzed in the FEIR (see FEIR Appendix A for more information). 4.3.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No New or More Severe Impact: As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires each state with nonattainment areas to prepare and submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that demonstrates the means to attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The SIP must integrate federal, State, and local plan components and regulations to identify specific measures to reduce pollution in nonattainment areas, using a combination of performance standards and market -based programs. Similarly, under State law, the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) requires an air quality attainment plan to be prepared for areas designated as nonattainment regarding the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and NAAQS. Air quality attainment plans outline emissions limits and control measures to achieve and maintain these standards by the earliest practical date. The Project is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAQMD is required, pursuant to the Federal Clean AirAct (FCAA), to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants for which the SCAB is in nonattainment. To reduce such emissions, the SCAQMD drafted the AQMP which establishes program of rules and regulations directed at reducing air pollutant emissions and achieving CAAQS and NAAQS. Pursuant to the FEIR, criteria for determining consistency with the AQMP are defined by the following indicators: • Consistency Criterion No. 1: The 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. • Consistency Criterion No. 2: The Project will not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP, or increments based on the years of the Project build -out phase. February 2024 4-8 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Criterion 1: Based on the FEIR air quality modeling analysis, the FEIR found that with implementation of mitigation measures, long-term operations of the Specific Plan would exceed the air quality pollutant concentration standards, and therefore, the buildout of the Specific Plan, including the Project, would be inconsistent with the first criterion. Criterion 2: The Project's locational change of the medium density residential units and open space — recreation uses would be consistent with the Cimarron Ridge SP Land use and Zoning upon approved of the Specific Plan Amendment and TTM 36658 modification. Therefore, the Project would not result in an inconsistency with the current land use designation in the City's General Plan; is not anticipated to exceed the AQMO assumptions for the Project site, and found to be consistent with the AQMP for the second criterion. Based on the failure of Criterion 1 above, the Project would remain inconsistent with the SCAQMD AQMP. Consistent with the FEIR, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measures from the FEIR Refer to FEIR MMs Air 1 through Air 6 in Threshold (b) below. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact pertaining to conflict with or obstructing implementation of the AQMP. As discussed in Threshold (b) below, Implementation of FEIR MM Air 1 was determined to reduce construction emissions to a less than significant level. However, despite implementation of FEIR MMs Air 1 through Air 6, long term emissions concerning VOC and NOx would continue to exceed SCAQMD daily thresholds. Therefore, the significant and unavoidable impact would remain. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Threshold (b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Construction Emissions No New or More Severe Impact: FOR Table 5.1-D, Phase I Estimated Daily Construction Emissions and Table 5.1-E, Phase 2 Estimated Daily Construction Emissions showed the Approved Project's maximum daily construction emissions for each phase of construction, based on the assumptions outlined above and activity as estimated by CalEEMod (see FEIR page 5.1-14). Without mitigation measures, criteria pollutant emissions from construction of the Specific Plan, including the Project, do not exceed any of the SCAQMD thresholds, except for NOx. Therefore, FEIR MM Air 1 was implemented which would restrict the daily grading area to no more than five acres. With implementation of FEIR MM Air 1, no significant short- term toxic air contaminant impacts would occur during construction of the Project. Impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level. February 2024 4-9 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Operational Emissions No New or More Severe Impact: FEIR Table 5.1-F, provides the worst -case summer or winter criteria pollutant emissions created from the Approved Project's long-term operations. VOC, NOx, and CO emissions would exceed SCAQMD regional thresholds for Phase 1; Phase 2, for VOC only. When both phases are complete and fully operational, the Project would exceed SCAQMD regional thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, and PM-2.5. Therefore, the FEIR proposed the implementation of FEIR MMs Air 2 through Air 6 to reduce impacts. FEIR MM Air 2 requires that all future Project Applicants provide sidewalks. FEIR MM Air 3 requires that all applicable plans be submitted to the City to include the installation of high - efficiency lighting that is at least five percent more efficient than standard lighting in order to reduce energy consumption, FEIR MM Air 4 requires that all building structures meet or exceed 2013 Title 24, Part 6 Standards and meet Green Building Code Standards. FEIR MM Air 5 would provide a recycling program and recycling bins to all residents. FEIR MM Air 6 would require the application of VOC and solvents with VOC content lower than SCAQMD Rule 1113 to residential dwelling units. Additionally, homebuilders are encouraged to consider the use of pre -coated construction materials and materials that do not require painting. Although implementation of mitigation measures MMs Air 2 through Air 6 will reduce Approved Project -generated CO and PM-2.5 emissions below thresholds, NOx and VOC emission levels still exceed SCAQMD regional thresholds. Therefore, consistent with the FEIR determination, Project impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Program The FOR included MM Air 1 for construction emissions, and MMs Air 2 through Air 6 for operations. Mitigation Measures from the FEIR MM Air 1 The Project applicant shall ensure that the contract specifications list all applicable SCAQMD Rules and Regulations (such as Rule 403 for fugitive dust) and the construction contractors construction specification package shall use construction equipment that have Tier 4 final engines, level 3 diesel particulate filters (DPF), with oxidation catalyst that have a 20% reduction in emissions. Prior to issuance of grading permits, proof of compliance shall be provided to the City in Project construction specifications, which shall include, but is not limited to, a copy of each unit's certified tier specification, T-BACT documentation, and California Air Resources Board (CARB) and/or SCAQMD operating permit(s). Alternatively, during the City's review process for applications under the Specific Plan, the applicant shall have conducted modeling of the criteria pollutant emissions of NOx, PM-10, and PM-2.5 (regional NOxfrom all construction activities and localized PM-10 and PM-2.5 during grading only) with the proposed fleet of equipment. If the modeling shows that NOx, PM-10, and PM-2.5 emissions would exceed the SCAQMD's significance thresholds for those emissions, the maximum daily equipment of the proposed development shall be limited to the extent that could occur without resulting in NOx, PM-10, and PM-2.5 emissions in excess of SCAQMD's significance thresholds for those emissions. For implementing projects within the Specific Plan, the applicant shall be responsible for submitting a project -level air quality assessment that includes the modeling of emissions associated with the daily activities anticipated for the proposed development. February 2024 4-10 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project MM Air 2 As included in the design of any future maps submitted to the City and where existing ROW is available, the Project applicant shall provide sidewalks. The City building and safety department shall review all submittals prior to approval to ensure sidewalks are incorporated throughout the Project. MM Air 3 In order to reduce energy consumption from proposed Project development, applicable plans (e.g., electrical plans) submitted to the City shall include the installation of high - efficiency lighting that is at least 5% more efficient than standard lighting. These plans shall be reviewed and approved by the applicable Department (e.g., Department of Building and Safety). MM Air 4 In order to reduce energy consumption from the proposed Project development, the Project applicant shall require that all building structures meet or exceed 2013 Title 24, Part 6 Standards and meet Green Building Code Standards. In addition, major appliances such as dishwashers, washing machines, and refrigerators installed in homes, shall be Energy Star -rated models. Proof of compliance will be required by the Department of Building and Safety in order to obtain a Final Inspection. MM Air 5 Currently Waste Management — City of Menifee provides a recycling program and recycle bins to all residents. The developer shall coordinate with Waste Management to ensure residents are provided information on obtaining recycling bins and are educated regarding the benefits, through handouts and signage throughout the community. MM Air 6 In order to improve air quality by reducing VOC emissions associated with the application of architectural coating, homebuilders shall apply VOC coatings and solvents with VOC content lower than SCAQMD Rule 1113 to residential dwelling units. In addition, homebuilders are encouraged to consider the use of pre -coated construction materials and materials that do not require painting. Construction specifications shall be included in the building specifications that assure these requirements are implemented. The specifications shall be reviewed by the City of Menifee's Building and Safety Department for compliance with this mitigation measure prior to issuance of a building permit. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impacts or conflict with longterm air quality. The FEIR concluded that the overall development of the Specific Plan area would cause a significant and unavoidable impact relative to the long-term air quality despite implementation of MMs Air 2 through Air 6. Therefore, a determination of Significant and Unavoidable impact is made for the proposed Project in this regard. Threshold (c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. No New or More Severe Impact: The Project consists of residential and open space recreational uses. The majority of operational emissions would be from mobile sources (i.e., traffic). Sensitive receptors, existing residences in this case, and the analysis of Project -related impacts upon those in the Project vicinity were evaluated in the threshold above, "Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation." February 2024 4-11 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project As concluded in the FEIR, air quality impacts air quality impacts from construction would exceed SCAQMD local air quality significance thresholds for NOx and VOC with mitigation. However, there would be no long-term exceedances from Project operations because the Project does not contain sources that require localized analysis nor would the Project result in CO hot spots. Therefore, impacts are considered to be less than significant without mitigation incorporated. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion No new or more severe impact would occur concerning the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. No Project -specific mitigation is required. Threshold (d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. No New or More Severe Impact: Construction Odors that could be generated by construction activities are required to follow SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent odor nuisances on sensitive land uses. SCAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, states: A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. Construction equipment emissions, such as diesel exhaust, and volatile organic compounds from architectural coatings and paving activities, may generate odors. However, these odors would be temporary, would not affect a substantial number of people and would disperse rapidly. Therefore, Project construction activities would not result in objectionable odors that would adversely affect a substantial number of people and impacts would be less than significant. Operations The SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook identifies certain land uses as sources of odors. These land uses include agriculture (farming and livestock), wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting facilities, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The Project would not include any of the land uses that have been identified by the SCAQMD as odor sources. Therefore, Project operations would not result in odors that would adversely affect people. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. February 2024 4-12 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Conclusion There are no new or more severe impacts regarding the creation of objectionable odors. Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Accordingly, no Project -specific mitigation is needed. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Overall Air Quality Impact Conclusion With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase the severity of the previously identified impacts, with respect to air quality. With implementation of FOR MMs Air 1 through Air 6, the Project's impacts would be similar to the FEIR's air quality impact determinations. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of a SEIR is not warranted. February 2024 4-13 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 4.4.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The FEIR concluded that future development facilitated by the Specific Plan would not adversely affect, either directly or through habitat modification, any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species, any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community upon the implementation of FEIR MMs Bio 1 through Bio 3. Furthermore, there would not be conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state conservation plan with the implementation of FEIR MMs Bio 1 through Bio 3. An Updated Habitat Assessment (HA) and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Consistency Analysis was prepared by ELMT Consulting, Inc. in September 2023. The findings are summarized herein, and the technical study is provided as Appendix B of this Addendum EIR. 4.4.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No New or More Severe Impact: Special -Status Plants The updated HA and Western Riverside County MSHCP Consistency Analysis determined no special -status plant species were observed on the Project site. It was further determined that the site does not have potential to support any of the other special -status plant species known to occur in the vicinity of the site and all are presumed to be absent. Special -Status Wildlife No special -status wildlife species were observed during the field investigation. Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of on -site habitats, it was determined that the Project site has a low potential to support Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperii), sharp -shinned hawk (Accipiterstriatus), Costa's hummingbird (Calypte costae), and California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia). None of the aforementioned species are federally or state listed as threatened or endangered. Cooper's hawk, sharp -shinned hawk, and California horned lark are covered species under the MSHCP. None of these avian species are expected to nest on -site due to lack of suitable nesting opportunities, occurrence of the site outside of geographic breeding ranges, or severity of routine disturbances. It was further determined that the Project site does not have the potential to support any of the other special - status wildlife species known to occur in the vicinity of the site and all are presumed to be absent. February 2024 4-14 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Burrowing Owl Despite a systematic search of the Project site, no burrowing owls or sign (i.e., pellets, feathers, castings, or whitewash) were observed during the focused survey. Portions of the Project site are barren or vegetated with a variety of low -growing plant species that allow for minimal line -of -sight observation favored by burrowing owls. However, no suitable burrows or man-made roosting opportunities for burrowing owl were observed within or near the Project site during the field investigation. Recent site preparation activities have removed any suitable burrows that may have occurred, and continued disturbance associated with site preparation precludes fossorial mammals from establishing. Further, in association with ongoing site preparation activities, no man-made roosting opportunities are maintained within or near the site. As such, it was determined that the Project site does not have potential to support burrowing owl and this species is presumed to be absent. However, consistent with the FEIR, the Project would implement FEIR MM Bio 1 because the Project is located in MSHCP burrowing owl survey area. Consistent with MSHCP Species Specific Conservation Objectives for burrowing owl, FEIR MM Bio 1 would require that a pre -construction presence/absence survey burrowing owls be conducted by a qualified biologist within 30 days prior to commencement of grading and construction activities on -site. If ground disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre -construction survey, the site would be resurveyed for owls. Take of active nests will be avoided. Passive relocation (use of one way doors and collapse of burrows) will occur when owls are present outside the nesting season. With implementation of FEIR MM Bio 1, impacts to burrowing owls would be reduced to a less than significant level. Nesting Birds No active nests were directly observed on -site during the field survey, which was conducted outside of the breeding season. Although heavily disturbed, the site has the potential to provide nesting habitat for year-round and seasonal avian residents, as well as migrating songbirds that could occur in the area that area adapted to a high degree of disturbance and active construction. Nesting birds are protected pursuant to the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (META) and California Fish and Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513 prohibit the take, possession, or destruction of birds, their nests or eggs). Due to the presence of habitat for nesting birds, the Project would implement FOR MM Bio 2 which would require a pre -activity field survey be conducted by a qualified biologist three days prior to initiation of construction activities to determine if active nests of species protected by the MBTA or California Fish and Game Code, are present in the construction zone. If active nests are observed and located appropriate buffers (e.g., 500 feet of an active listed species or raptor nest, 300 feet of other sensitive or protected bird nests (non -listed), within 100 feet of sensitive or protected songbird nests) shall be established and maintained. Special -Status Plant Communities The CNDDB lists two (2) special -status habitats as being identified within the Romoland quadrangle: 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. February 2024 4-15 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Overall, implementation of FEIR MMs Bio 1 and Bio 2 would ensure that the Project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Wildlife Service. Therefore, potential impacts to endangered or threatened species are less than significant. Mitigation Program The FEIR included MMs Bio 1 and Bio 2 to reduce potential impacts to any candidate, sensitive, or special status species associated the implementation of the Approved Project. Mitigation Measures from the FOR MM Bio 1 Consistent with MSHCP Species Specific Conservation Objectives for burrowing owl, Objective 6 (page E-12), a pre -construction presence/absence survey burrowing owls shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 30 days prior to commencement of grading and construction activities on -site as well as for off -site improvements. If ground disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre - construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. Take of active nests will be avoided. Passive relocation (use of one way doors and collapse of burrows) will occur when owls are present outside the nesting season. MM Bio 2 In order to avoid violation of the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code site - preparation activities (removal of trees and vegetation) shall be avoided, to the greatest extent possible, during the nesting season (generally January 1 to September 15) of potentially occurring native and migratory bird species. If site preparation activities are proposed during the nesting/breeding season (generally considered January 1 to September 15), a pre -activity field survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist three (3) days prior to initiation of construction activities, to determine if active nests of species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (META) or the California Fish and Game Code, are present in the construction zone. If project activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days from the date of the pre - activity survey, surveys shall be repeated. If active nests are observed and located appropriate buffers (e.g., 500 feet of an active listed species or raptor nest, 300 feet of other sensitive or protected bird nests (non -listed), within 100 feet of sensitive or protected songbird nests) shall be established and maintained during clearing and grubbing activities within the nesting season. No grading or heavy equipment activity shall take place within the established buffer until the nest is no longer active as determined by a qualified biologist. rnnrhicinn The Project would result in no new or more severe impact on a status or listed species with implementation of FEIR MMs Bio 1 and Bio 2. Similar to the FEIR findings, the Project is anticipated to result in a less than significant impact to species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species by the CDFW. February 2024 4-16 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Threshold (b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No New or More Severe Impact: As concluded in the Updated HA and Western Riverside County MSHCP Consistency Analysis, no jurisdictional drainages, riparian/riverine and/or wetland features were observed within the Project site during the field investigation. Development of the Project would not result in impacts to riparian/riverine habitats and a Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) would not be required for the loss of riparian/riverine habitat from development of the Project. Therefore, the Project would not have an impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the CDFW or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project's would not result in a new or more severe impact on riparian habitats or other sensitive natural community than determined in the FOR. No Project -specific mitigation is needed. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Threshold (c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? No New or More Severe Impact: The Updated HA and Western Riverside County MSHCP Consistency Analysis concluded that the Project site does not contain any discernible drainage courses, inundated areas, or wetland features/obligate plant species that would be considered jurisdictional by the United States Army Corp of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), or CDFW. FEIR MM Bio 3, which required the Applicant to enter into a Notification of Streambed or Lake Alteration Agreement with the CDFW, does not apply. Thus, no impacts associated with state or federally protected wetlands would occur. Mitigation Program MM Bio 3 ..R*f*r=a .+ level NOTE: FEIR MM Bio 3 does not apply to the Project because according to the Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Consistency Analysis conducted for the Project, there are no February 2024 4-17 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project discernible drainage courses, inundated areas, or wetland features/obligate plant species on the Project site. Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would have no impact on jurisdictional wetlands. No Project -specific mitigation is required. Threshold (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? No New or More Severe Impact: The Project site has been highly disturbed due to mass grading. According to the Updated HA and Western Riverside County MSHCP Consistency Analysis, the Project site has not been identified as occurring in a wildlife corridor or linkage. The nearest linkage to the Project, as identified by the MSHCP, occurs approximately 0.9 mile to the northwest in association with the San Jacinto River. The Project would 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 any recognized wildlife corridor or linkage. As such, implementation of the Project would not impact wildlife movement opportunities and no impacts to wildlife corridors or linkages would occur. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would not 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. No Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Threshold (e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances related to protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No New or More Severe Impact: The FEIR stated that the City adopted Riverside County Ordinance No. 559 Regulating the Removal of Trees upon its incorporation and enforces the provisions contained with the ordinance. However, the Project site is highly disturbed due to mass grading, so no trees exist on the Project site. Consistent with the FEIR, the Project would not conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. Therefore, no impact would occur. February 2024 4-18 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact as it pertains to conflict with any local policies or ordinances related to protecting biological resources. No Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Threshold (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? No New or More Severe Impact: The Project site is located in the Sun City/Menifee Valley Area Plan of the MSHCP but is not located within any Criteria Cells or designated conservation areas. Additionally, the Project site is only located within the MSHCP designated survey area for burrowing owl. While the Project is not specifically identified as a "Covered Activity' under Section 7.1, Covered Activities Outside Criteria Area and PQP Lands, of the MSHCP, public and private development that are outside of Criteria Areas and Public/Quasi-Public (PQP)' lands (permitted under the MSHCP) are subject to consistency with MSHCP policies that apply to area outside of Criteria Areas. As such, to achieve coverage, the Project must be consistent with the following policies of the MSHCP: • The policies for the protection of species associated with Riparian/Riverine areas and vernal pools as set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP; • The policies for the protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species as set forth in Section 6.1.3; • The Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.4; and • The requirements for conducting additional surveys as set forth in Section 6.3.2 The Project's consistency with the Western Riverside County MSHCP was analyzed in Appendix B and the results are as follows. MSHCP Section 6.1.2 Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools As noted in Threshold (b) above, no jurisdictional drainages, riparian/riverine and/or wetland features were observed within the Project site during the field investigation. Development of the Project would not result in impacts to riparian/riverine habitats and a DBESP would not be required for the loss of PQP Lands are a subset of MSHCP Conservation Area lands totaling approximately 347,000 acres of lands known to be in public/private ownership and expected to be managed for open space value and/or in a manner that contributes to the Conservation of Covered Species (including lands contained in existing reserves). The acreage of PQP Lands has been accounted for in the MSHCP tracking process for assembling the Conservation Area. February 2024 4-19 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36659, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project riparian/riverine habitat from development of the Project. Therefore, the Project is consistent with Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. MSHCP Section 6.1.3 Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species Based on the RCA MSHCP Information Map query and review of the MSHCP, it was determined that the Project site is located within the designated survey area for Narrow Endemic Plant Species Munz's onion (Allium munzii), San Diego ambrosia (Ambrosia pumila), Many -stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis), Spreading navarretia (Navorretio fossallis), California Orcutt grass (Orcuttia colifornica), and Wright's trichoronis (Trichocoronis wrightii var. wrightii). Based on the results of the field investigation, the Project site does not provide suitable habitat for these MSHCP listed Narrow Endemic Plant Species. MSHCP Section 6.1.4 Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface The Urban/Wildlife Interface Guidelines are intended to ensure that indirect project -related impacts to the MSHCP Conservation Area, including drainage, toxics, lighting, noise, invasive plant species, barriers, and grading/land development, are avoided or minimized. The Project site is not located within or in close proximity of any Criteria Cells or designated conservation areas. Therefore, the Project would not need to comply with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines. MSHCP Section 6.3.2 Additional Survey Needs and Procedures The query of the RCA MSHCP Information Map and review of the MSHCP determined that the Project site is located within the designated survey area for burrowing owl. No other special -status wildlife species surveys were identified. As discussed in Threshold (a) above, the Project would implement FEIR MM Bio 1 to ensure that impacts to the burrowing owl are minimized. Therefore, the Project is consistent with MSHCP Section 6.3.2. Consistent with the FEIR, with implementation of FEIR MM Bio 1, potential impacts from conflicts with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state conservation plan are less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR Refer to FEIR MM Bio 1 in Threshold (a) above. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact as it pertains to conflict with plans, policies, and ordinances with implementation of FEIR MM Bio 1. There are no potentially significant impacts associated with the Project and therefore, no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Overall Biological Resources Impacts Conclusion With regard to CEQA Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new impacts or circumstances, or increase the severity of the previously identified impacts, with respect to biological resources. The Project would implement FEIR MMs Bio 1 and February 2024 4-20 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Bio 2 to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of a SEIR is not warranted. February 2024 4-21 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES 4.5.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The FEIR determined that development within the Specific Plan area would result in a less than significant impact to unknown historical resources. However, the FEIR determined that development within the Specific Plan area would potentially cause adverse impacts to unknown archaeological resources and human remains. In order to maintain any potential unforeseeable impacts to a less than significant level, the following FEIR MMs Cult 1 through Cult 4) were recommended. Additionally, the FEIR determined that implementation of FEIR Paleo 1 would ensure that impacts concerning paleontological resources would be minimized (refer to Section 4.6: Geology and Soils for discussion regarding paleontological resources). An Updated Cultural Resources Assessment (CRA) was prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates in September 2023. The findings are summarized herein, and the assessment is provided as Appendix C of this Addendum EIR. 4.5.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant Section 15064.5? No New or More Severe Impact: As concluded in the Updated CRA and FEIR, no historical resources as defined by CEQA, exist within or adjacent to the Project area. Furthermore, site does not contain any standing buildings or structures that are older than 45 years, or any younger buildings that hold more recent historical value, that meet the definition of a cultural resource that require consideration. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no impact on a historical resource. No Project -specific mitigation is needed. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact. Threshold (b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5? No New or More Severe Impact: The FEIR's CRA determined that the Specific Plan's surface sensitivity for intact archaeological remains were very low and the potential for significant cultural resources to be found in subsurface deposits were also low. Per the updated CRA for this Project, the Project area has been subjected to multiple prior cultural resources assessments, during which time three prehistoric archaeological sites were recorded within the Project area: CA-RIV-4486, CA-RIV-7028, and 33-001078. However, the 2014 CRA conducted for the Approved Specific Plan noted that the entirety of the Specific Plan area had been subject to extensive grading and excavation and that all previously recorded sites were destroyed. This observation is corroborated by historical aerials, which show that the Project site was February 2024 4-22 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project subject to extensive grading sometime between 2002 and 2005. Due to the presence of extensive grading and excavation, the likelihood of archaeological resources being present within the Project area is low. However, the FEIR concluded that implementation of FEIR MMs Cult 1 through Cult 4 would ensure that impacts to buried archaeological resources, if discovered during earth -moving activities, would be reduced. In compliance with the FEIR, the Project would implement FEIR MMs Cult 1 through Cult 3 to reduce impacts to any unknown archaeological resources. MMs Cult 1 through Cult 3 would require that if any buried cultural materials are encountered during any earth moving operations associated with the off -site improvements, all work in that area must be halted or diverted until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the nature and significance of the find. Furthermore, the Project would implement FEIR MM Cult 4 per the Soboba Tribes request, which would require that a Native American monitor be present during earth - moving activities. Therefore, no new or more severe impact relative to archaeological resources from previously identified significant impacts evaluated in the FEIR would occur with implementation of FEIR MMs Cult 1 through Cult 4. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact with mitigation under this threshold. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR The following FEIR MMs apply to the Project: MM Cult 1 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) and/or its representatives. 1) All ground disturbance activities within 100 feet of the discovered cultural resources shall be halted until a meeting is convened between the developer, the archaeologist, the Pechanga tribal representative(s) and the Community Development Director to discuss the significance of the find. 2) At 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. 3) Grading of further ground disturbance shall not resume within the area of the discovery until an agreement has been reached by all parties as to the appropriate mitigation. 4) Treatment and avoidance of the newly discovered resources shall be consistent with the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreements entered into with the February 2024 4-23 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Native American Tribes. MM Cult 2 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 shall be contacted within the period specified by law (24 hours). Subsequently, the Native American Heritage Commission 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. Human remains from other ethnic/cultural groups with recognized historical associations to the project area shall also be subject to consultation between appropriate representatives from that group and the Community Development Director, if applicable. 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 cultural artifacts shall not be disclosed and shall not be governed by public disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act. The Coroner, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California Government Code 6254 I., parties, and Lead Agencies, will be asked to withhold public disclosure information related to such reburial, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California Government Code 6254(r). MM Cult 3 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Community Development Department shall review the proposed grading plans to determine the depth of grading, including but not limited to foundation excavations, trenching and utility installations. Should grading activities include excavation into native soils (i.e., below two feet in fill areas or areas where no prior grading activities occurred or fill materials have been added), then the project applicant shall retain a Riverside County qualified archaeologist to monitor all ground disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. 1) The Project Archaeologist and the monitor(s) from the appropriate Native American Tribe (s) shall be included in the pre -grade meetings to provide cultural/historical sensitivity training including the establishment of set guidelines for ground disturbance in sensitive areas with the grading contractors. The Project Archaeologist and the Tribal monitor(s) 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 and etc. The Project Archaeologist and the Tribal monitor(s), shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt the ground disturbance activities to allow identification, evaluation, and potential recovery of cultural resources. 2) The developer/permit holder shall submit a fully executed copy of the archaeological contract to the Community Development Department to ensure compliance with this February 2024 4-24 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project condition of approval. Upon verification, the Community Development Department shall clear this condition. 3) Any newly discovered cultural resources shall be subject to an evaluation, in consultation with the Native American Tribe(s) and which will require the development of a treatment plan and monitoring agreement for the newly discovered resources. 4) The project archaeologist shall submit a complete final monitoring report no later than 60 days following completion of the monitoring activities to the City of Menifee, the property owner, the Eastern Information Center and the appropriate Tribes. The report shall document the monitoring activities, any resources that were identified, theirfinal disposition, complete DPR site record forms and inventory records, and any other pertinent information associated with the Project. MM Cult 4 Tribal monitor(s) shall be required on -site during all ground disturbing activities, including grading, stockpiling of materials, engineered fill, rock crushing, etc. The land divider/permit holder shall retain a qualified tribal monitor(s) from the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians and the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit a copy of two signed contracts between each of the above mentioned Tribes and the land divider/permit holder for the monitoring of the project to the Community Development Department and to the Engineering Department. The Native American Monitor(s) shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt the ground disturbance activities to allow recovery of cultural resources, in coordination with the Project Archaeologist. Should an agreement between the Tribes and the Applicant/Permittee not be established within forty-five (45) days of the date the Applicant/Permittee initiates such an agreement with the Tribes, Native American monitoring shall not be required. The Developer shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including all archaeological artifacts that are Native American origin, found in the Project area for proper treatment and disposition to a Riverside County curational facility that meets or exceeds Federal Curation Standards outlined in 36 CFR 79. The Applicant/Permittee shall be responsible for all curation costs. Conclusion The Project would result in a less than significant impact on an archaeological resource with implementation of FEIR MMs Cult 1 through Cult 4. No Project -specific mitigation is needed. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact with mitigation under this threshold. Threshold(c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outsides of formal cemeteries? No New or More Severe Impact: The Project does not contain or is located adjacent to a formal cemetery. The nearest formal cemetery is the Miller — Jones Mortuary and Cemetery located approximately 0.75 mile east of the Project site and is not a part of the Approved Project. Applicable laws and regulations provide guidance in the event that human remains are found at any time in the Project site. February 2024 4-25 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Consistent with the FEIR and pursuant to FEIR MM Cult 2, if human remains are encountered during ground disturbance activities, all work would be required to be halted and the County Coroner would be notified as required by California State Law (Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code). The Riverside County Coroner would determine whether the remains are of forensic interest. If the Riverside County Coroner were to determine that the remains are prehistoric, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) would be contacted. The NAHC would be responsible for designatin" the "Most Likely Desc"ndant" (MLD) who would be responsible for the ultimate disposition of the remains, as required by Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code. The MLD would make his/her recommendations within 24 hours of the notification of the NAHC. This recommendation could include scientific removal and no destructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials (Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). Human remains from other ethnic/cultural groups with recognized historical associations to the Project site would also be subject to consultation between appropriate representatives from that group and the Community Development Director, if applicable. Therefore, with implementation of FEIR MM Cult 2 and compliance with applicable federal, State, and local laws and regulations concerning human remains, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FOR Refer to FEIR MM Cult 2 in Threshold 4.5(b) above. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact pertaining to human remains with the implementation of FEIR MM Cult 2 and adherence to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. No Project - specific mitigation measures are required. Overall Cultural Resources Impacts Conclusion With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts with respect to cultural resources. The Project's Updated CRA did not identify any existing cultural resources, nor the potential for unknown buried cultural resources. As such, no further consideration regarding the impacts to cultural resources as a result of the Project is recommended. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of an SEIR is not warranted. February 2024 4-26 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4.6.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The FEIR concluded that all geology and soil related impacts associated with buildout of the Specific Plan would be no impacts or less than significant. A Geotechnical Review/Update prepared by Leighton and Associates, Inc., dated January 15, 2014 (Leighton 2014) was provided after circulation of the DEIR which reconfirmed the "no impact" and "less than significant impact" determinations. In addition, the 2013 Infiltration Rate Study for Storm Water Disposal by John R. Byerly Inc. was used to inform the below analysis. 4.6.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk 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. No New or More Severe Impact: According to the FEIR, the Specific Plan area is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and no known earthquake faults traverse the site. According to the United States Geological Survey's (USGS) Interactive U.S. Fault Map, the closest fault is the Elsinore Fault located approximately 8.5 miles southwest of the Project site.' Since the Project site is not located within a State established Earthquake Fault Zone and there are no known active faults within the Project site, ground rupture hazard potential for the Project is consider low and remote. Consistent with the FEIR determination, impacts concerning rupture of a known earthquake fault is less than significant. Mitigation Proeram Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact concerning the risk, loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault. Accordingly, no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact. (ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? No New or More Severe Impact: Although there are no faults on or adjacent to the Project site, southern California, in general, is a seismically -active region, Thus, the Project would be subject to strong seismic ground shaking. ' USGS. (2022). Interactive U.S. Fault Map. Available at: https://www.usgs.gov/tools/interactive-us-fault•rra (accessed September 2023). February 2024 4-27 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project The Project would be designed in accordance with the requirements of the current 2022 California Building Standards Code (CBC) Seismic Design Parameters. Structures for human occupancy must be designed to meet or exceed CBC standards for earthquake resistance. All grading and fill placement activities would be completed in accordance with the CBC requirements and the City's grading code. Furthermore, prior to grading, the Project would prepare a final Geotechnical Investigation which provides site -specific recommendations to address seismic design considerations, geotechnical design considerations, site grading recommendations, construction considerations, foundations design and construction, floor slab design and construction, retaining wall design and construction, and pave design parameters. Therefore, adherence to the 2022 CBC seismic design standards and recommendations of a final Geotechnical Investigation would ensure that impacts are less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FOR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact concerning the risk, loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking. Accordingly, no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact. (iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? No New or More Severe Impact: The FEIR determined that the Specific Plan area is located in an area identified as having very low potential for liquefaction. However, the Geotechnical Investigation prepared for the FEIR found that due to the presence of shallow granitic bedrock, the potential for liquefaction is unlikely. Additionally, the 2014 Geotechnical Review/Update determined that since loose, near -surface soils will be removed and recompacted in accordance with the recommendations of the final geotechnical investigation, the potential for liquefaction due to seismic activity would be very low. According to the City`s Liquefaction and Landslides map, the Project site and the immediate area are not within a zone of generalized landslide susceptibility.$ Therefore, Project development would not subject people or structures to liquefaction hazards, and impacts including risk of loss, injury, or death would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. Mitigation Proeram Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. s City of Menifee. (2014). Exhibit S-3, Liquefaction and Landslides Map. Retrieved from: https•//www.citvofinenifee.us/DocumentCenter/View/1030/S-3 LiouefactionandLandslides HD0913?bidld= (accessed September 2023). February 2024 4-28 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project rnnrlucinn The Project would result in no new or more severe impact concerning the risk, loss, injury, or death involving seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction. Accordingly, no Project -specific mitigation is required. (iv) Landslides? No New or More Severe Impact: The FEIR determined that landslides are not a potential hazard to the Specific Plan area. Topographically, the Project is characterized by relatively flat lands, with low gradient sloping towards the northern portion of the Project site. According to the City's Liquefaction and Landslides map, the Project site and the immediate area are not within a zone of generalized landslide susceptibility.' The Project site is also outside of the hazard zone for rockfaII/debris-flow. Consistent with the FEIR determination, there would not be an impact concerning the risk, loss, injury, or death from landslides. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe new impact concerning the risk, loss, injury, or death involving landslides. No impact would occur, and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Threshold (b) Result in substantial erosion or loss of topsoil? No New or More Severe Impact: The FEIR concluded that construction activities have the potential to result in soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Consistent with the FEIR, the Project would be required to implement the City's erosion control standards and earthwork recommendations from the 2014 Geotechnical Review/Update to minimize erosion or loss of topsoil during construction activity. Erosion would also occur during the operation phase of the Project due to landscaping and park maintenance. Consistent with the FEIR, the Project Applicant would file a Notice of Intent with the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) indicating that the proposed Project's construction activities would be in compliance with the "conditions" of the Construction Activities General Permit (State Water Resources Board Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System [NPDES] No. CAS000002). The primary condition of the Construction Activities General Permit would consist of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) which would include Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address soil erosion. Compliance with the Construction Activities General Permit would further reduce the potential for soil erosion and loss of topsoil. Impacts would be less than significant. 9 City of Menifee. (2014). Exhibit S-3, Liquefaction and Landslides Map. Retrieved from: https://www.citvofinenifee.us/DocumentCenter/View/1030/S-3 LiauefactionandLandslides HD0913?btd!d= (accessed September 2023). February 2024 4-29 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no, or no more severe, new impacts as it pertains to erosion or loss of topsoil. There are no new potentially significant impacts associated with the Project and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact. Threshold (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? No New or More Severe Impact: As discussed under Impact 4.6a(iii and iv), liquefaction and landslides were not considered to be a design concern for the Project, and potential for lateral spreading would be low. The major cause of ground subsidence is the excessive withdrawal of groundwater. The 2013 infiltration study explored the soils underlying the infiltration basin areas by means of eight test borings locations. Neither bedrock nor groundwater was encountered during the boring testing. Records from the State of California Department of Water Resources were reviewed which concluded that at the closest water well (Identified as State Well Number 05S/03W-17A001S) is located approximately 2,500 feet to the northeast of the Project site. Water level readings within this monitoring well indicated a groundwater level of 22 feet below the ground surface in February 1995. The infiltration report concluded that the bottom of the infiltration basins would be 80 feet to 120 feet above the water surface elevation. Therefore, based on the great depth to groundwater, groundwater would not affect excavations for the foundations and utilities. Additionally, the FEIR's Geotechnical Review/Update, groundwater was not encountered during boring exploration to a total depth of 25 feet below existing grades. Additionally, the Project would undergo moisture conditioning and recompacting at the near surface per the FEIR's Geotechnical Review/Update recommendations. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact related to on- or off -site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. on geologic and soil resources. There are no new potentially significant impacts associated with the Project and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact. February 2024 4-30 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Threshold (d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code, creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? No New or More Severe Impact: The FEIR concluded that laboratory testing conducted on the Specific Plan on -site soils generally possess a very low to medium expansion potential. However, Ault Clay is considered to be an expansive soil type and makes up approximately 63 acres of the Specific Plan area, including portions of the Project site. Consistent with the FEIR, the Project would implement Uniform Building Code design recommendations and recommendation from the final Geotechnical Investigation. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FOR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact related to expansive soils. There are no new potentially significant impacts associated with the Project; therefore, no new mitigation measures are required for issues related to expansive soils. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact. Threshold (e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewer are not available for the disposal of waste water? No New or More Severe Impact: Consistent with the FEIR, the Project would be served by the existing Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) sewer system and no septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal system would be required. Therefore, no impact would occur. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact as it pertains to soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. There are no new potentially significant impacts associated with the Project regarding septic tanks or wastewater disposal systems; therefore, no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact. February 2024 4-31 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Threshold (f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? No New or More Severe Impact: The FEIR conducted a Paleontological Resources Assessment Report which concluded that the Specific Plan's potential ranges from low to high. The Specific Plan area has been extensively graded and therefore minimized the sensitivity of surficial sediments throughout the Specific Plan area. Thus, no paleontological monitoring was recommended unless undisturbed Pleistocene -age sediments are encountered at depth. In the event that paleontological resources are discovered, the Project would implement FEIR MM Paleo 1, which would require continuous monitoring for paleontological resources and implementation of a mitigation program to address potential impacts to the discovered paleontological resource. Therefore, with implementation of FEIR MM Paleo 1, impacts concerning paleontological resources would be reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation Program The FEIR included MM Paleo 1 to reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources associated with the implementation of the Approved Project. Mitigation Measures from the FEIR MM Paleo 1 Should undisturbed Pleistocene -age sediments be encountered at depth as determined by the Project geologist, continuous monitoring for paleontological resources and a mitigation program to address potential impacts to any paleontological deposits that are unearthed shall be required. The mitigation program shall be developed in accordance with the provisions of CEQA as well as with the proposed guidelines of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, and shall include but not be limited to: 1) The excavation of areas identified as likely to contain paleontologic resources shall be monitored by a qualified paleontological monitor. Monitoring shall be restricted to the underlying, undisturbed older Pleistocene -age sediments conducive to the preservation of fossils. The monitor shall be prepared to quickly salvage fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays. The monitor will also remove samples of sediments that are likely to contain the remains of small fossil invertebrates and vertebrates. The monitor shall have the power to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow for removal of abundant or large specimens. 2) Collected samples of sediments shall be washed to recover small invertebrate and vertebrate fossils. Recovered specimens shall be prepared so that they can be identified and permanently preserved. 3) Specimens shall be identified, curated, and placed into a repository with permanent retrievable storage. 4) A report of findings, including an itemized inventory of recovered specimens, shall be prepared upon completion of the steps outlined above. The report shall include a discussion of the significance of all recovered specimens. The report and inventory, when submitted to the City of Menifee, will signify completion of the program to mitigate impacts to paleontologic resources. February 2024 4-32 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Conclusion The Project would result in a less than significant impact concerning paleontological resources with implementation of FOR MM Paleo 1. No Project -specific mitigation is required. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FOR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact. Overall Geology and Soils Impacts Conclusion With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts or circumstances from the previously identified impacts with respect to geology and soils. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of an SEIR is not warranted. February 2024 4-33 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS (CLIMATE CHANGE) 4.7.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The FEIR determined that implementation of MMs Air 2 through Air 6 would ensure that the Approved Project's GHG emissions will achieve a 21.7 percent reduction from the Project's Business -as -Usual (BAU) demonstration that the Project meets the Assembly Bill (AB) 32 reduction target of 15 percent. Furthermore, the FEIR concluded that the Approved Project is consistent with the with the policies and goals implemented to reduce GHG emissions. Therefore, GHG impacts are considered less than significant after implementation of mitigation. As described in Section 3.0, the Project proposes transferring 49 residential lots from PA-4 to PA-5 and transferring the 10.19-acre park from PA-5 to PA-4 but does not propose any alterations to density or an increase in the number of lots as a result of these revisions. PA-4 would consist of 81 residential lots and include a 10.9-acre park consisting of active uses, including lighted ball fields, and passive uses and amenities, including a dog park for the community and on -site parking. PA-5 would consist of 151 residential lots, a 1.5-acre recreation area, and a 1.2-acre pickleball facility. An access gate would connect PA-5 and PA-6 as they are both proposed to be age restricted gated communities. Therefore, the Cimarron Ridge Air Quality and Global Climate Change Impact Analysis was relied upon for the following analysis since the Project would only provide a locational change and does not propose any additional uses not analyzed in the FEIR (see FEIR Appendix B.1 for more information). 4.7.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. No New or More Severe Impact: FEIR Table 5.4-13: Unmitigated Project 2020 GHG Emissions showed that the Approved Project's GHG emissions in 2020 would be 15,088.24 MTCO2e. As the Approved Project's GHG emissions exceeded the screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year, the Approved Project's Year 2010 BAU emissions were compared to the Approved Project's year 2020 emissions (with mitigation and regulation). FEIR Table 5.4-C: Project BAU GHG Emissions shows that the Project's unmitigated, unregulated year 2010 BAU emissions would be 16,429.91 MTCO2e peryear. With implementation of FEIR MMs Air 2 through Air 6 and planting of 1,776 trees, the Approved Project's emissions would be reduced to 12.872.75 MTCO2e. This equates to a 21.7 percent reduction from BAU which meets the CARB reduction threshold of 15 percent reduction from BAU. Consistent with the FEIR, the Project would implement FEIR MMs Air 2 through 6 and include planting of trees which would ensure that the operation of the Project would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment, nor would it create a significant cumulative impact to global climate change. Impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR See MMs Air 2 through Air 6 in Section 4.3, Air Quality, Threshold (b) of this Addendum EIR. February 2024 4-34 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Conclusion The Project would result in a less than significant impact to climate change as a result of the generation of GHG emissions. GHG emissions are within the emissions disclosed in the FEIR. No new impact or increase in the severity of an identified impact would therefore occur with implementation of the Project with compliance with FEIR MMs Air 2 through Air 6. No Project -specific MMs are required. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact. Threshold (b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. No New or More Severe Impact: Consistent with the FEIR, the Project's residential uses would comply with all CALGreen Code mandatory green building measures, which would require that new buildings reduce water consumption, employ building commissioning to increase building system efficiencies, divert construction waste from landfills, and install low pollutant emitting finish materials. The implementation of these stricter building and appliance standards would result in water, energy, and construction waste reductions for the Project's residential uses. As previously discussed in Threshold (a) above, the buildout of the Specific Plan would result in a 21.7 percent BAU emissions reduction. Therefore, the buildout of the Specific Plan, including the Project, would not hinder the State's ability to achieve AB 32's goal of achieving 1990 levels of GHG emissions by 2020. Consequently, the buildout of the Project would not hinder the state's ability to achieve AB 32's goal. The Project's consistency with the CARB Climate Scoping Plan. Scoping Plan Pursuant to the requirements in AB 32, CARB adopted the Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) in 2008, which outlines actions recommended to obtain that goal. The Scoping Plan provides a range of GHG reduction actions that include direct regulations, alternative compliance mechanisms, monetary and nonmonetary incentives, voluntary actions, market -based mechanisms such as the cap -and -trade program, and an AB 32 implementation fee to fund the program. Although a number of these measures are currently established as policies and measures, some measures have not yet been formally proposed or adopted. It is expected that these actions to reduce GHG emissions will be adopted as required to achieve statewide GHG emissions targets. As discussed above, the Project is consistent with the reduction targets established by AB 32, using 15 percent as the reduction target. Mitigation measures incorporated into the Project contribute to greenhouse gas reductions. Per FEIR Table 5.4-E, the Project is consistent with the policies and goals implemented to reduce GHG emissions. Therefore, impacts would be mitigated to less than significant levels. Mitigation Proeram Mitigation Measures from the FEIR See MMs Air 2 through Air 6 in Section 4.3, Air Quality, Threshold (b) of this Addendum EIR February 2024 4-35 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project f nnrhicinn The Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases resulting in a less than significant impact. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur, and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact. Overall Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts Conclusion With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts or circumstances from the previously identified impacts with respect to greenhouse gas emissions. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of a SEIR is not warranted. February 2024 4-36 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 4.8.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The FOR concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would result in less than significant impacts and no impacts relative to hazards and hazardous materials. 4.8.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? No New or More Severe Impact: The Project would involve the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials during short-term construction activity. Use of hazardous materials include, but are not limited to the use of fuels, cleaning solvents, paints, and materials for servicing construction equipment on the site. These types of materials are not acutely hazardous. Additionally, the Project's storage, handling, use, and disposal of these materials would comply with applicable federal and State regulations. These regulations include the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act and Hazardous Materials Transportation Act; Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations (CalOSHA), and the State Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program. As a result, routine transport and use of hazardous materials during construction would be less than significant. During operations, use of hazardous materials would include, but not be limited to paints, landscape products, and cleaning solvents typical used for residential and recreational uses. These types of hazardous materials are not acutely hazardous. Similarly, the Project would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations to ensure that impacts concerning the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials are minimized. Compliance with all applicable federal and state laws related to the transportation, storage and response to upsets or accidents that may involve hazardous materials, would reduce the likelihood and severity of upsets and accidents during transit and storage, and potential impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion With compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations, the Project's impacts concerning significant hazards from routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant. There are no new potentially significant impacts associated with the Project and no Project - specific mitigation measures are required. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact. Threshold (b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? February 2024 4-37 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project No New or More Severe Impact: The foreseeable upset and accident release of hazardous materials are primarily subject to federal regulation by the Department of Transportation (DOT) Office of Hazardous Materials Safety in accordance with Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (Hazardous Materials Transportation Act). California regulations applicable to Hazardous material transport, storage and response to upsets or accidents are codified in Title 13, (motor vehicles) Title 8 (Cal/OSHA), Title 22 (Health and Safety Code), Title 26 (Toxics) of the California Code of Regulations, Chapter 6.95 of the Health and Safety Code (Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory) and the California Building Code. Therefore, compliance with all applicable federal and state laws related to the transportation, storage and response to upsets or accidents that may involve hazardous materials, would reduce the likelihood and severity of upsets and accidents during transit and storage, and potential impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in a less than significant impact as it pertains to upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials. No Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact. Threshold (c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No New or More Severe Impact: Consistent with the FEIR, the Project site is not located within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school site. The closest school is Ridgemoor Elementary located at 25455 Ridgemoor Road, Sun City, CA 92586 located approximately 1.5 miles south of the Project site. Therefore, no impact would occur. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact to as it pertains to emission or hazardous materials release near a school. There are no new potentially significant impacts associated with the Project and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact. February 2024 4-38 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Threshold (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 create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No New or More Severe Impact: According to the FOR, the Specific Plan area, including the Project site, was not included on any hazardous material sites list compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Additionally, the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) conducted for the FOR concluded that there are no significant hazards located within the Specific Plan area. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FOR None identified in the FOR. Conclusion The Project would result in a less than significant as it pertains to hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. No Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Furthermore, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of less than significant impact. Threshold (e) Would 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, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working the project area? No New or More Severe Impact: The Project site is partially located within Airport Compatibility Zone E of the Perris Valley Airport Influence Area (AIA), a privately owned airport that is open to public use, therefore the Project is subject to development review by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). This compatibility zone sets forth land use compatibility guidelines, maximum population density requirements, and height restrictions. Compatibility Zone E allows for residential development and has no restrictions on density. The Project site is located outside of the 55 dB(A) CNEL contour from Perris Valley Airport and outside the 60 dB(1) CNEL contour from March Air Reserve Base, therefore no special measures to mitigate aircraft noise are required at the Specific Plan area. An application was submitted during the FEIR to ALUC staff in 2014 to address concerns. The Approved Project, including the Project, was found conditionally consistent with the 2010/2011 Perris Valley Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). In addition, on November 29, 2023, the Riverside County ALUC found (confirmed) that the Project site is located within Airport Compatibility Zone E of the Perris Valley AIA (and partially outside the AIA, which does not restrict residential density or non-residential intensity. The Project does not involve changes in development standards or allowable land uses that would increase residential density or non-residential intensity. Therefore, the Project has no possibility of having an impact on the safety or air navigation within the Perris Valley Airport AIA. It was concluded that the Project is consistent with the 2011 Perris Valley ALUCP, provided the City follow the recommended conditions, as outlined in Appendix D. As such, the Project would not result in a safety hazard for people working or residing in the Project area. Therefore, impacts are less than significant. February 2024 4-39 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project's impacts to any applicable airport land use plans and emergency plan would be less than significant. There are no new potentially significant impacts associated with the Project, and no Project - specific mitigation measures are required. Threshold (f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No New or More Severe Impact: The City has adopted an Emergency Operations Plan to identify hazardous situations, phases of emergency management, and communication and warning systems available to effectively deal with emergency situations. No revisions to the adopted Emergency Operations Plan would be required as a result of construction on the Project site. The nearest fire stations are the Riverside County Fire Station 7 (located at 28349 Bradley Road, Sun City, CA 92586), located approximately 2.2 miles southeast of the Project site and Riverside County Fire Station 5 (located at 28971 Goetz Road, Menifee, CA 92587) located approximately 1.9 miles southwest from the Project site. Should a response from the station or another fire station near the site or other nearby uses be required, response times would not be impacted because primary access to all major roads would be maintained during construction. Pursuant to the Menifee GP Evacuation Routes Map, evacuation routes in the Project area include 1-215, Case Road, Ethanac Road, Murrieta Road, and Goetz Road.101-215 may be considered an emergency route as it traverses the City and provide access to many main thoroughfares. Any design of any needed roadway improvements and subsequent construction due to increased traffic volumes on local roadways would comply with the applicable federal, state, and local requirements including but limited too, the California Fire and Building Codes. The proposed design and construction plans for any future construction and roadway improvements, including potential mitigation (road widening or intersection improvements) to accommodate any future increase in traffic volume would be reviewed and approved by the City engineering department and fire marshal (if needed) during the plan review and prior to Project approval. Thus, The Project would comply with design standards for emergency services and would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Impacts would be less than significant in this regard and mitigation is not necessary. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR 1° City of Menifee. ND. Menifee General Plan, Exhibit 5-9 Evacuation Routes. https•//www.Litvofinenifee.us/DocumentCenter/View/14711/Evacaution-Routes (accessed October 2023). February 2024 4-40 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in a less than significant as it pertains to the impair, implement of, or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No Project -specific mitigation measures are required. 1-215 may be considered an emergency route as it traverses the City and provide access to many main thoroughfares. Threshold (g) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? No New or More Severe Impact: Although the FEIR concluded that portions of the Specific Plan area are located within a State Responsibility Area (SRA) and in a high and very high fire hazard severity zone (FHSZ), review of CAL FIRE's current Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsibility Area viewer identifies the Project site as being located outside of an SRA (see Exhibit 10: Fire Hazard Severity Zone — CAL FIRE).11 Furthermore, while the Menifee GP Exhibit S-8, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones and Public Facilities (see Exhibit 9: Fire Hazard Severity Zone — General Plan) shows that a very small portion of PAs 4 through 6 are an SRA very high FHSZ, this map is dated 2021.12 The CAL FIRE viewer is dated 2023, more accurately representing current Project site conditions. Therefore, the Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. No impact would occur (refer to Section 4.18, Wildfire of this Addendum EIR for more information). Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new impact from wildland fires. There are no new anticipated potentially significant impacts associated with the Project. Additionally, no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Overall Hazards -Related Impacts Conclusion With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts or circumstances from the previously identified impacts with respect to hazards and hazardous materials. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of an SEIR is not warranted. " CAL Fire. (2023). Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Available at: httos://caltire- forestry.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/Index.html?id=988d43la42b242b29d89S97ab693dO08 (accessed October 2023). 12 City of Menifee. (2021). General Plan—ExhibitS-8. Available at: https://www.Lityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenter/View/14710/2 Safety Exhibits 8-5 2021-8--Very-High-Fire- Hazard-Severity-Zoones-and- Public-Facilities (accessed October 2023). February 2024 4-41 Environmental Analysis Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) State Responsibility D® Local Responsibility - Project Site r I CO I J r - _ I IUSE RD O I M' Z 2 Q MBERS AVE —v Z Z UJ - - — 0 - in L BLVD rRRy HILLS BLVD . � 0 Source: City of Menifee (2021) General Plan - Exhibit S-8 Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones and Public Facilities Exhibit 9: Fire Hazard Severity Zone - General Plan Kimley>>)Horn City of Menifee TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Fire Hanrd S—fty Zon- in Stine Responvblldy Area - Septenber 29, 2023 •.�cce�ace M Nqn Owide Sane Responsibility Area Projecl Site Source: CAL FIRE. (2023). Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer Exhibit 10: Fire Hazard Severity Zone - CAL FIRE Kimley>>> Horn City of Menifee TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Nan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 4.9.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The FEIR concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not result in significant impacts relative to hydrology and water quality, and no mitigation is necessaryto reduce potential impacts. 4.9.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? No New or More Severe Impact: Construction activities could impact water quality through sheet erosion and sediment and pollutants entering drainages near the site. Grading activities could lead to uncontrolled sheet flow polluted with fuels, lubricants, and solid and liquid waste. These pollutants could potentially occur from improperly managed construction activities and vehicle maintenance which could lead to accelerated rates of erosion and potentially degrade surface or groundwater quality. Additionally, prior to the issuance of grading permits forthe Project, the Project Applicant will file a Notice of Intent with the Santa Ana RWQCB indicating that the proposed Project's construction activities would be in compliance with the "conditions" of the Construction Activities General Permit (State Water Resources Board Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002). The primary condition of the Construction Activities General Permit would consist of a SWPPP which would include BMPs to address soil erosion. BMPs are designed to control and prevent discharges of pollutants that can adversely impact the downstream surface water quality. Construction activities are also required to comply with the City's Stormwater/Urban Runoff Ordinance, the City's Grading Ordinance, and other required regulations. Therefore, compliance with standard regulatory requirements would ensure that the Project would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during construction. During operation, the Project would implement the Project BMPs contained in the FEIR's water quality management plan (WQMP) to treat all pollutants of concern (POC) and hydrologic conditions of concern, consistent with the approved WQMP developed in compliance with the City's MS4 permit (refer to FEIR pages 4-9 and 4-10). Compliance with the NPDES General Construction Permit and adherence to the FOR WQMP would ensure that the Project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would not result in new or more severe impacts related to the violation of any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality with compliance of State and local regulations. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would change the impact determination. Accordingly, the Project would not significantly impact surface or groundwater quality. Impacts would be less than significant. February 2024 4-44 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Threshold (b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? No New or More Severe Impact: Water services would be supplied to the Specific Plan area by EMWD. According to EMWD, approximately twenty percent of EMWD's potable water demand is supplied by EMWD groundwater wells and the remainder is supplied by imported water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) through its Colorado River Aqueduct and its connections to the State Water Project. The majority of the groundwater produced by EMWD comes from its wells in the Hemet and San Jacinto area. The development of the Specific Plan's land uses were considered in developing the EMWD's Urban Water Management Plan which is used to support water supply assessments. Consistent with the FEIR, the Project does not include groundwater extraction wells and domestic water to serve the Project site is expected to come from MWD and not from local groundwater sources. Therefore, the Project's water supply would not substantially deplete EMWD's groundwater supplies. In addition, the Project would incorporate site design BMPs pursuant to the FEIR WQMP to maximize pervious surfaces, thereby promoting infiltration and groundwater recharge. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would not result in new or more severe impacts related to a decrease or interference of groundwater supplies. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified. Threshold (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: result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site; No New or More Severe Impact: As stated in the FEIR, the Specific Plan area is currently vacant and there are no existing defined drainage courses, streams, or rivers. The Project site is highly disturbed as it was previously mass graded for home pads, roads, detention basins, infrastructure, etc. Runoff from the Project site would be discharged into a designated water quality basin which have been designed to mitigate increased runoff. Furthermore, the Specific Plan area has been designed to follow the existing flow patterns throughout the Specific Plan area, and would maintain the same area of flow during operations. Consistent with the FEIR, prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Project would prepare a SWPPP pursuant to the statement General Construction Permit NPDES No. CAS000002, Waste Discharge Requirements Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ that incorporates BMPs to minimize the potential for construction related runoff and erosion. Therefore, the Project would not substantially alter an existing drainage pattern, including alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner resulting in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site. Impacts would be less than significant. February 2024 4-45 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would not result in new or more severe impacts related to substantial erosion or siltation on - or off -site with the implementation. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified. ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site; iv) impede or redirect flood flows? No New or More Severe Impact: The FEIR determined that impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant. Development of the Project was concluded to maintain the existing drainage efficiency of the Project site via the placement of multiple detention basin and stormwater conveyance facilities in each Planning Area. Specifically, Planning Area 4 would drain to a detention basin centrally located in the Specific Plan area, and Planning Areas 5 and 6 would drain to a detention basin located at the southeast corner of Valley Boulevard and McLaughlin Road. Stormwater would then be conveyed outside of the Project area to existing facilities. The Project would involve the development of Planning Areas 4 and 5 in a similar intensity as analyzed in the FEIR. The Project would allow for the development of approximately 81 dwelling units in PA-4 and 151 dwelling units in PA-5. The impervious surface area introduced by the Project would therefore be similar to the Approved Project. Therefore, the Project would not increase surface runoff in a manner resulting in flooding on- or off -site. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would not result in new or more severe impacts related to an increased flood risk due to surface runoff. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified. iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provided substantial additional resources of polluted runoff; or No New or More Severe Impact: The Project would increase the impervious surfaces within Planning Areas 4 and 5 via the construction of residential units and additional facilities such as roadways and improved surfaces. This would reduce potential infiltration into exposed soil and induce stormwater runoff. This generated runoff would be conveyed to existing stormwater facilities. As summarized above, the Project runoff would not exceed the conveyance capability as compared to current conditions. Also, February 2024 4-46 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project the Project would comply with the City's NPDES and SWPPP requirements. As concluded in the FEIR, compliance with these standards will minimize the Project's increased runoff and additional sources of polluted runoff. Therefore, the Project would not exceed the capacity of existing or panned stormwater drainage systems or generate excessive polluted runoff. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FOR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would not result in new or more severe impacts related excessive runoff. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified. Threshold (d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? No New or More Severe Impact: As shown in the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood and Inundation Risk Map (FIRM) 06065C2055H eff. 8/19/2014, the Project is located outside of a flood hazard zone.13 Therefore, the Project is not anticipated to experience or exasperate flood conditions due to inundation. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would not result in new or more severe impacts related flooding. No Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified. Threshold (e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? No New or More Severe Impact: The Project is underlain by the San Jacinto Groundwater Basin. For groundwater management plan and reporting purposes, the San Jacinto Groundwater Basin is further separated into the Hemet/San Jacinto Management Plan Area, where the San Jacinto Fault Zone strongly influences the groundwater hydrology and is adjudicated under the Hemet -San Jacinto Watermaster, and the West San Jacinto Management Plan Area (submitted to the Department of Water Resources on January 31, 2022), for which EMWD is the designated Groundwater Sustainability Agency. Furthermore, the FEIR concluded that a project of this character would not deplete groundwater supplies to the point that they would conflict with a groundwater management plan. This is due largely to the source of Project 13 FEMA. (2014). FEMA Flood Map Service Center, Search by Address. Available at: httos://msc.fema.eov/oortal/search?AddressQuerv=menifee (accessed October 2023). February 2024 4-47 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project water being MWD's imported water, instead of local groundwater. Additionally, the Project would continue to require specific developers to create WQMPs on a project -specific basis in order to comply with the City's MS4 permit procedure. Therefore, the Project is not anticipated to conflict with established water quality control plans or groundwater management plans. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would not result in new or more severe impacts related conflicts with groundwater plans or water quality control plans. No Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEI R was certified. Overall Hydrology and Water Quality -Related Impacts Conclusion With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts or circumstances from the previously identified impacts with respect to hydrology and water quality. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Projectwould be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of an SEIR is not warranted. February 2024 4-48 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING 4.10.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis According to the FEIR, development of the Specific Plan area would not divide an established community. The Approved Project would be developed with medium density residential and open space conservation and recreational (park) uses, including circulation and associated infrastructure improvements. The FEIR concluded that impacts relative to land use and planning would be less than significant. 4.10.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (a) Physically divide an established community? No New or More Severe Impact: Consistent with the FEIR, the Project would not divide an established community. Consistent with the FEIR, the Project's proposed medium density residential and open space recreational uses would be permitted by right, following in the approval of the proposed Specific Plan Amendment. The Project site is currently vacant and therefore, the proposed vehicular and non -vehicular circulation improvements would not create additional physical barriers not covered in the proposed Specific Plan amendment. Furthermore, the Project would be consistent with the proposed Specific Plan Amendment's development regulations and would therefore, not impact connectivity or mobility of vehicles or pedestrian walkways. Therefore, no new or more severe impacts associated with the physical division of an established community would occur. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact as it pertains to physically dividing a community. No new or more severe impact from a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the FEIR would occur. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified is available that would change the impact determination. Threshold (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? No New or More Severe Impact: The Project site is located within PAs 4 and 5 of the Specific Plan area which was planned for both medium density residential and open space recreation. The Project would require a Specific Plan Amendment and Tentative Tract Map Revision for TR36658. The SPA is for the amendment of the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan and proposes changes to the previously established PA- 4 and PA-5. As shown in Table 1: Proposed Project Summary above, the Project proposes transferring 49 residential lots from PA-4 to PA-5 and transferring the 10.19-acre park from PA-5 to PA-4 but does not propose any alterations to density or increase in the number of lots as a result of these revisions. PA-4 would consist of 81 residential lots and include a 10.9-acre park consisting of active uses, including lighted ball fields, and passive uses and amenities, including a dog park for the community and on -site parking. PA-5 would consist of 151 residential lots and a 1.5-acre recreation area and a 1.2-acre pickleball facility February 2024 4-49 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project (proposed to be private). Gated access would be provided between PA-5 and PA-6, both of which are proposed to be age restricted gated communities. Consistent with the FEIR, the Specific Plan Amendment would adhere to the Menifee GP's Goals and policies. The Project would also adhere to Specific Plan Amendment's development regulations which take precedence over the City's zoning ordinance. Upon approval of the Specific Plan Amendment and Tentative Tract Map Revision, the Project would not 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. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact to as it pertains to conflict with land use plans, policies, and regulations. The Project would be consistent with the Specific Plan Amendment, the Menifee GP and MC, and applicable City design standards. Therefore, the Project would not 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. Overall Land Use Impacts Conclusion With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts from the previously identified impacts, with respect to land use and planning. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of an SEIR is not warranted. February 2024 4-50 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.11 MINERAL RESOURCES 4.11.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Specific Plan is in an area that has been classified as MRZ-3 which are areas where the significance of mineral deposits cannot be evaluated from available data. However, the FEIR concluded that the likelihood of extracting unknown significant mineral resources is very low. Additionally, no mining operations currently occur on or in close proximity of the Specific Plan area. Furthermore, the Specific Plan area is not delineated as a locally important mineral resource recovery site. Therefore, buildout of the Specific Plan area would not result in significant impacts relative to mineral resources, and no mitigation measures were implemented. 4.11.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (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. No New or More Severe Impact: The Project is not anticipated to result in the loss of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resources recovery site. As stated above, the MRZ mapped for the Specific Plan including the Project site, is MRZ-3. MRZ-3 classification is an area is an area where the available geologic information indicates that mineral deposits are likely to exist, however, the significance of the deposit is undetermined. As the Project site has no history of mineral resource recovery uses and does not contain any known mineral resource and is not located within an area that has been classified or designated as a mineral resource area by the State Board of Mining and Geology. Consistent with the FEIR determination, no impact to a known mineral resource of value would occur. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact related to the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. No Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified. Threshold (b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resources recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? No New or More Severe Impact. As previously discussed in Threshold (a) above, there are no mining operations that occur within the Specific Plan area or have been conducted on or in close proximity of the Specific Plan area, including the Project site. Furthermore, the Project site is not delineated as a locally important mineral resource recovery site by the Menifee GP or any other land use map. Therefore, no impact would occur. February 2024 4-51 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FOR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact related to the loss of a locally important mineral resources recovery site. No Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified. Overall Mineral Resources Impacts Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact to mineral resources. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to mineral resources. With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts or circumstances from previously identified impacts, with respect to mineral resources. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR,nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of an SEIR analysis is not warranted. February 2024 4-52 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.12 NOISE 4.12.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The FEIR determined that the development of the Specific Plan would have the potential of generating noise impacts through the construction of future residential units and other structures. FEIR MM's Noise 1 through Noise 6 were subsequently proposed in order to ensure compliance with County and City noise standards as well as conduct best practices including the use of sound walls. Furthermore, FEIR MMs Noise 7 through Noise 9 to reduce potential traffic noise associated with Specific Plan implementation. These mitigation measures were found to reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. 4.12.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (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? No New or More Significant Impact. Temporary Construction Noise Impact: Temporary noise impacts would occur during Project construction. Construction noise varies depending on the construction process, type of equipment involved, location of the construction site with respect to sensitive receptors, the schedule proposed to carry out each task, (e.g., hours and days of the week) and the duration of the construction work. FEIR Table 5.6-F (page 5.6-12) included typical noise sources and noise levels associated construction activities. The City has adopted Riverside County Ordinance No. 847. This ordinance prohibits the creation of any sound on any property designated by the General Plan as "residential" which causes the exterior sound level to exceed 55 dBA Lmax between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. or 45 dBA Lmax between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. However, construction is exempt from Ordinance No. 847 as long as it is limited to between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. during the months of June through September, and between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. during the months of October through May. Since the FEIR determined that construction could result reach between 77 dBA Leq and up to 79 dBA Lmax at 100 feet to the nearest receptor, the Project is required to comply with mitigation measure MM Noise 1, which limits construction activities to the stated timeframe in compliance with Ordinance No. 847. Moreover, the Project would implement FEIR MMs Noise 2 through Noise 5 to further lessen the Project's construction -related impacts as it requires the construction contractor to properly operate and maintain equipment, staging equipment away from noise -sensitive receptors, turning off equipment and vehicles not in use and prohibits idling in excess of five minutes, and provides a posted sign identifying the construction manager as the point of contact for local residents with noise complaints. Since the FEIR concluded construction impacts would still have the potential to temporarily increase the ambient measured noise levels at the nearest noise -sensitive receptor by as much as 16.1 dBA (under a worst -case scenario), FEIR MM Noise 6 would also be implemented which require the implementation of a temporary 12-foot-high noise barrier and preparation of construction noise reduction plan to reduce temporal noise impacts to a less than significant level. February 2024 4-53 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Permanent Operational Noise Impact Potential permanent or long-term noise impacts associated with the Project include off -site sources such as Project -specific traffic increases on area roadways. As concluded in the FEIR, the noise increase at six roadways was projected to exceed City standards at 50 feet from centerline. However, the Project -specific increase is not considered substantial (i.e., the increase is less than 5 dBA). The greatest increase in ambient noise levels due to Project -generated traffic is projected to be 1.2 dBA CNEL along Chambers Avenue between Valley Boulevard and Murrieta Road, and along Goetz Road between Monument Parkway and Goldenrod Avenue. Increases in ambient noise levels due to Project -generated traffic will not exceed 5 dBA would not be audible to the average human ear. Therefore, impacts from Project - generated traffic will be less than significant and no mitigation is required. However, implementation of build -out traffic noise levels will be between 65 and 70 dBA CNEL at proposed residential lots adjacent to Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard, and between 60 and 65 dBA CNEL at proposed residential lots adjacent to McLaughlin Road. As such, mitigation in the form of an 8-foot barrier (above the building pad) along Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard and a 6-foot barrier (above the building pad) along McLaughlin Road is necessary. Therefore, as applicable the Project would incorporate noise barriers pursuant to FEIR MM FEIR Noise 7. As concluded in the FEIR, the barriers required in FOR MM Noise 7 would not reduce noise levels at the second story of the proposed single-family detached residential dwelling units, and it is not feasible, nor aesthetically desirable, to construct a barrier high enough to do so. Therefore, enhanced building construction methods and materials must be utilized to achieve acceptable interior noise levels (45 dBA CNEL) for any single-family detached residential dwelling units adjacent to Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard with two stories. These methods include, but are not limited to, providing mechanical ventilation, using double paned glass, baffling exterior vents, and utilizing construction materials with a Sound Transmission Class (STC) of 25 for single-family detached residential dwelling units adjacent to Valley Boulevard and STC value of 30 for single-family detached residential dwelling units along Goetz Road. These methods of noise attenuation will be incorporated by the Project as required by FEIR MM Noise 8. Further, considering that typical modern construction achieves an exterior to interior noise reduction of 20 dBA, providing air conditioning/ventilation units (to allow a closed window condition) at all proposed residential dwelling units will suffice to meet the interior noise standard. The Project will also incorporate this feature as required by FEIR MM Noise 9. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR MM Noise 1 Onsite and Offsite Project construction activities, including deliveries, shall be limited to the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. during the months of June through September and between the hours of7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. duringthe months ofOctoberthrough May. MM Noise 2 During all excavation and grading both on -site and gffsite, construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturer standards. The contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest any project related activities. February 2024 4-54 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project MM Noise 3 The contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction -related noise/vibration sources and sensitive receptors nearest any Project related activities during all Project construction. MM Noise 4 During construction of both onsite and offsite activities, the developer shall require that all contractors turn off all construction equipment and delivery vehicles when not in use and prohibit idling in excess of five (5) minutes. MM Noise 5 For the duration of construction activities both onsite and offsite activities, the construction manager shall serve as the contact person should noise levels become disruptive to local residents. A sign shall be posted at the Project site with the contact phone number. MM Noise 6 To reduce impacts from construction noise to off -site sensitive receptors, prior to construction within 400-feet of a sensitive receptor, a temporary 12-foot-high noise barrier with a STC Rating of 15 dBA or greater shall be in place during construction. Plans showing the location of and STC Rating of the temporary noise barrier shall be submitted to the City Planning Director Community Development Director for review prior to the commencement of any Project -related construction within 400-feet of a sensitive receptor. The Planning Director Community Development Director shall review the location and STC rating of the noise barriers to confirm that the barriers will attenuate construction -related noise to the levels to 65 dBA or less. As an alternative to the herein described temporary noise barrier, the Project applicant may prepare and submit to the City Planning Director Community Development Director a Construction Noise Reduction Plan with supporting analysis that identifies alternative construction noise reduction strategies that achieve 65 dBA at the nearest sensitive receptor. If after review of the Noise Reduction Plan, the City Planning Director Community Development Director determines that the alternative noise reduction strategies proposed by said plan achieve the desired noise reduction, such strategies may be used in place of the temporary barrier described above. MM Noise 7 The Project proponent shall construct barriers 8-feet in height above the residential pads located adjacent to Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard, and barriers of 6-feet in height above the residential pads located along McLaughlin Road. These barriers may be constructed of any material weighing at least 4 pounds per square foot. They must also descend all the way to the ground and contain no holes or openings. Barriers shall wrap around to protect the side yards of lots adjacent to intersections. MM Noise 8 Enhanced building construction methods and materials shall be employed to achieve interior noise levels of 45 dBA CNEL or less at single-family detached residential dwelling units adjacent to Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard. Building materials shall achieve a composite Sound Transmission Class value of 25 for single-family detached residential dwelling units adjacent to Valley Boulevard and a Sound Transmission Class value of 30 for single-family detached residential dwelling units along Goetz Road. MM Noise 9 All proposed single-family detached residential dwelling units shall be provided with air conditioning/air ventilation units to allow for a closed window condition. February 2024 4-55 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact related to excessive noise. No Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FOR was certified. Threshold (b) Generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? No New or More Significant Impacts. Per the FEIR, the Project does not propose any uses that would generate substantial sustained vibration; thus, the Project -related vibration is expected only during construction. The most vibration -causing piece of equipment that will likely be used during Project construction is a vibratory roller. While this machine can cause vibration strong enough to annoy people over 100 feet away, persons or noise -sensitive receptors within 25 feet of the equipment would experience of a significant impact. Due to the proximity of adjacent single-family detached residential dwelling units, Project construction activities may result in ground -borne vibration that is annoying but would only occur during site grading and preparation activities. Construction vibration would not result in any structural damage. Based on the Caltrans data provided in the FEIR, haul trucks that may be associated with a project's construction, would not be anticipated to exceed 0.10 PPV at 10 feet. Predicted vibration levels at the nearest off -site structures, which are located in excess of 25 feet from the traveled roadway segments, are not anticipated to exceed the threshold of 0.2 inch/second PPV for non -engineered timber and masonry buildings. There are no buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage within 25 feet of the Project site or traveled roadway segments There are no existing residential dwelling units located within 25 feet of the haul route, and while the nearest off -site noise -sensitive receptor is within proximity to "feel" vibrations, which may cause some degree of annoyance, the distance is too great for the vibratory impacts to be substantial or significant. Therefore, ground -borne vibratory impacts will be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. rnnrincinn No new or more severe impact pertaining to the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels would occur. Impacts would be less than significant and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified. Threshold (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, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? February 2024 4-56 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project No New or More Significant Impacts. The Project site is located within the Perris Valley Airport Influence Area, a privately owned airport that is open to public use. However, as shown on Map PV-3 of the Perris Valley Airport Compatibility Plan Policy Document, the Project site is not located within a noise contour that could subject residents or people working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact related to the exposure of people to excessive airport noise. Additionally, no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified. Overall Noise Impacts Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact due to noise. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to noise. With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts or circumstances from previously identified impacts, with respect to noise. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of an SEIR analysis is not warranted. February 2024 4-57 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING 4.13.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis According to the FEIR, buildout of the Specific Plan would result in no impacts, and less than significant impacts to on -site residential uses. The FEIR projected to construct a total of 756 dwelling units, open space conservation, and recreation uses on a heavily disturbed and vacant site. Thus, the FEIR would not result in the displacement of residential uses. Furthermore, the FEIR's estimated residential uses were determined to be planned growth for the City, and impacts would be less than significant. 4.13.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly; and No New or More Severe Impact: As reported by the California Department of Finance (DOF), the City's 2023 population and housing is 110,034 and 39,966, respectively.14 As shown in the Table 1, 81 dwelling units are proposed for PA-4 and 151 dwelling units are proposed in PA-5, for a total of 232 dwelling units or 650 persons.15 The Project would construct the same 232 dwelling units as projected for PA-4 and PA-5 in the FEIR. The projected 650 persons would constitute approximately 0.4 percent of the total population growth projected under the Menifee GP buildout of 158,942 persons. Since the Project's population growth was accounted for in the FEIR, and within the Menifee GP buildout growth for the City, the Project's direct growth would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FOR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion There are no new or more severe potentially significant impacts regarding the induce of substantial unplanned population growth in the area. No Project -specific mitigation is required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified. Threshold (b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No New or More Severe Impact: The Project would enable the future development of PA-4 and PA-5 of the Specific Plan. These planning areas are currently vacant and undeveloped. No housing currently exists on the Project site, and the Project proposes no removal or development of existing housing in other areas. Allowed housing densities would be consistent with the development analyzed in the FEIR and 7d California Department of Finance. (2023). E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities. Counties, and the State, 2020-2023. Available at: httos://dof.ca.gov/forecastme/demoL,raohics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housing-estimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020.2023 (accessed September 2023). 15 Calculation based upon City of Menifee Draft Environmental Impact Report, Section 5.13 Population and Housing, Table 5.13-9 Future Buildout Projections: Residential Land Uses, to determine Project's population as follows: (232 dwelling units) x (2.8 persons per dwelling unit) = 650 persons generated. February 2024 4-58 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project would not exceed growth previously anticipated. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not necessitate the development or replacement of housing elsewhere. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. f nnrhicinn The Project would result in no new or more severe impact related to the development of additional housing units. No Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified. Overall Population and Housing Impacts Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact to population or housing resources. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to population and housing. With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts or circumstances from previously identified impacts, with respect to population and housing. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of an SEIR analysis is not warranted. February 2024 4-59 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES 4.14.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis Public services impacts were determined to be less than significant in the FEIR. Population changes associated with Project implementation was found to be within the capacity of existing and planned facilities within the City and the County. 4.14.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (a) 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: Fire protection, Police protection, Schools, Parks, and other Public Facilities? No New or More Severe Impact. The Project does not include or require construction of any new or physically altered fire protection, police protection, school, park, or other public facilities. Prior to commencement of future construction activities, the Project plans would be reviewed by applicable local agencies to ensure compliance with the Menifee Municipal Code Menifee MC Code) and City Development Code, as well as all applicable regulations to ensure adequate site signage, lighting, and other crime safety preventative measures. This includes fair use fees which are sourced from developers that are distributed to City and County services such as County Fire Protection (County Fire) and Menifee Police Department facilities (City Police). The nearest County Fire stations are Riverside County Fire Station 7 (located at 28349 Bradley Road, Sun City, CA 92586), located approximately 2.2 miles southeast of the Project site and Riverside County Fire Station 5 (located at 28971 Goetz Road, Menifee, CA 92587) located 1.9 miles southwest from the Project site. The nearest City Police Department is approximately 1.7 miles southeast of the Project site. Construction of the Project would not result in adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered public facilities, and would not adversely affect service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. Compliance with applicable local regulations would ensure that Project construction would result in a less than significant impact to public services. Since the Project site is already served by the existing fire and police station, and the Project would be constructed pursuant to existing California Fire Code regulations, the Project would not result in the need for new or physically altered police and/or fire department facilities that could cause significant environmental impacts. The Project would be developed within the Menifee Union School District and Romoland School District for elementary and middle school ages, and the Perris Unified School District (PUSD) for high school ages. Each district was determined to have existing capacity to accommodate population growth associated with Specific Plan implementation. The Project would be implemented at a similar density as analyzed in the FEIR and would therefore be within its estimates. Additional, payment of impact fees in compliance with Senate Bill (SB) SO would further reduce impacts. The Riverside County Library System (RCLS) provides library services to the City via the Sun City branch library located in the northwest corner of the February 2024 4-60 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Cherry Hills Boulevard and Bradley Road intersection. A new RCLS library was constructed for the City at 28798 La Piedra Rd.16 This is the City's second branch library. The Project would result in an increase in demand for library services in the City based on an increase in population. Future projects would be reviewed by the City on an individual basis and would be required to comply with requirements in effect at the time building permits are issued (i.e., payment of development impact fees). The Project would allow the development of 232 residential units. Due to the Project's consistency with assumed development of the Specific Plan, growth and service demands associated with development of the Project area would be consistent with what was analyzed in the FEIR. Therefore, impacts to fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, and other public facilities would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact related to public services and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified. Overall Public Services Impacts Conclusion The Project would result in no new or more severe impact to public services resources. Therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to public services. With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts or circumstances from previously identified impacts, with respect to public services. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of an SEIR analysis is not warranted. 16 City of Menifee. (2019). News Release: New Library Coming to Menifee Through the Riverside County Library System. Retrieved from: htips:/iwww.utvofinenifee.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/item/2684 (accessed May 3, 2021). February 2024 4-61 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.15 RECREATION 4.15.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The FEIR concluded that buildout of the Specific Plan area would increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks. While it is anticipated that an increase in the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks and trail facilities may occur, the new parks and their amenities that are provided as a part of the Project will lessen any substantial physical deterioration to existing recreation facilities in the area. Furthermore, the FEIR concluded that the Project's recreational facilities physical effect on the environment would be less than significant. 4.15.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (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? No New or More Severe Impact: The Project would construct a total of 232 medium density residential dwelling units or 650 people and thus, increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks. However, the Project also proposes approximately 13.6 acres of open space for recreational purposes. Consistent with the FEIR, the proposed park amenities would be considered neighborhood servicing, and thus, it is anticipated that residents of the Project would utilize the on -site recreational amenities to meet some of the demand for parks. While it is anticipated that an increase in the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks and trail facilities may occur, the new parks and their amenities that are provided as a part of the Project would lessen any substantial physical deterioration to existing recreation facilities in the area. Furthermore, Ordinance 460 (ORD 460) sets forth requirements for the dedication of land and/or payment of fees for park and recreational facilities as a condition of approval of a tentative tract or parcel map. Dedication and/or payment of fees devoted to neighborhood and community park and recreational facilities is required at a minimum ratio of five acres of land per 1,000 persons. At a rate of 5:1,000, the Project would be required to contribute 3.2 acres of parkland. Since the Project would build approximately 13.6 acres of open space for recreational uses, the Project would exceed the parkland requirement. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion As concluded above, the Project's proposed neighborhood parks would exceed the parkland requirement required by the Menifee GP. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and no Project -specific mitigation is required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified. Threshold (b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? February 2024 4-62 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project No New or More Severe Impact: The Project's proposed recreational facilities are analyzed in each individual environmental resource issue of this Addendum EIR. Refer to Sections 4.1 through 4.20 of this Addendum EIR for more information. Consistent with the FEIR determination, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion There are no new or more severe potentially significant impacts associated with the proposed Project. A less than significant impact would occur, and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIR was certified. Overall Recreation Impacts Conclusion With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts from the previously identified impacts, with respect to recreation. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of an SEIR is not warranted. February 2024 4-63 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.16 TRANSPORTATION 4.16.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The FEIR included a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) as well as an addendum focused on freeway analysis. Roadway impacts as a result of Specific Plan implementation would result in potentially significant impacts due to Level of Service (LOS) for associated intersections and roadways (2014 TIA). However, the implementation of MM Trans 1 through Trans 30 were found to reduce all impacts to less than significant levels. A Traffic Consistency Memorandum (Traffic Memo) was prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates (Appendix E) to evaluate the consistency of the Project with the original Specific Plan in the City of Menifee. 4.16.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (a) Conflict with program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? No New or More severe Impacts. The Project may have the potential to result in construction traffic related impacts due to on -site improvements. However, grading activities would not require the import or export of soil to or from the Project site. As a result, no grading -related haul trips would occur during construction. Other aspects of Project construction will generate worker -related vehicle trips to and from the Project site, and heavy - truck trips from the delivery of construction materials. Worker related trips will be temporary in nature and would consistent of the same 1,232 total trips anticipated in the FEIR over the duration of construction, and thus is less than significant. Additionally, the Specific Plan buildout would be constructed in phases. As such, construction phasing will allow for the staggered delivery of construction materials throughout Project construction, thereby reducing the number of heavy -truck trips occurring on local roadways at any one period of time. FEIR MMs Trans 1 through MM Trans 3 would ensure potential impacts related to circulation during the Project's construction are less than significant. Additionally, pursuant to the City Public Works Department's "Improvement Plan Check Policies and Guidelines," as amended by "II. Improvement Plan Standard Notes, Section [-Traffic Control Notes," adopted May 14, 2014, a construction traffic control plan would be required for street improvements and Project related construction, further reducing temporary traffic impacts resulting from construction. The control plans are specifically designed to address Project -specific traffic impacts and motorist delays during construction through the effective real-time application of measures and strategies including motorist information, traffic demand and incident management, and planned alternative routes (if necessary). In addition, implementation of FEIR MM Trans 3A requires a Construction Traffic Control Plan to identify and include measures such as, but not limited to, signage, flagmen, cones, advance community notice, or other acceptable measures to ensure traffic impacts from construction remain less than significant. The purpose of the measures shall be to safely guide motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians, minimize traffic impacts and ensure the safe and even flow of traffic consistent with City standards and requirements, in the event that Project construction requires any lane closures on the aforementioned February 2024 4-64 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project roadways. Implementation of a Construction Traffic Control Plan and FEIR MM Trans 3A, when combined with the Project's phased construction would ensure the proposed Project's impacts upon circulation during construction are reduced to less than significant levels. Furthermore, the Project applicant would coordinate with SCE to avoid encroaching upon any SCE facilities. Implementation of MM Trans 3B would further ensure coordination with SCE occurs to reduce any potential impacts to less than significant. Consistency Analysis The FEIR determined that the Specific Plan exceeds the City's proposed bikeway network by providing a Class II bike lane, in place of a Class III bike lane along Byers Road, and providing a Class II bike lane along U Street and Thornton Avenue, neither of which are classified in Exhibit C-4 of the Menifee GP. Along Valley Boulevard, Goetz Road, McLaughlin Road, U Street and Thornton Avenue, the Class II bike lanes are proposed as a 6-foot-wide striped lane for one way bike travel. The Class II bike lanes are designed for bike use only and would prohibit parking along the street. Along Byers Road the Class II bike lane is 5 feet wide and would accommodate parallel parking along the shoulder. Therefore, the proposed Class II bike lanes are consistent with the General Plan design criteria for Class II bike lanes described above. As SCE does identify McLaughlin Road as being located within a utility corridor with the potential for transmission lines adjacent to the bike lane, implementation of FEIR MM Trans 5A, requiring the installation of anti - climbing devices if deemed necessary by SCE, would ensure impacts to utility services remain less than significant. LOS Discussion The 2014 TIA estimated a trip generation of 7,491 average daily trips. An updated TIA was prepared in 2023 by Kimley-Horn and Associates. This updated TIA estimated that, due to Project changes, the Project would lead to a generation of 7,197 daily trips; a reduction of 294 daily trips. This would be within the conditions accounted or in the FEIR. The Project is located on vacant land within an urbanized area. Implementation of the Project would increase the intensity of the existing land use and would draw more visitors to the area, potentially creating more localized traffic. As such, the Project's impacts on the circulation system have been analyzed. An impact is considered significant for intersections when the Project causes the facility to change from an acceptable LOS to an unacceptable LOS. LOS analyses are no longer a requirement of CEQA as of 2019; however, in order to maintain consistency with the FEIR, this Addendum will include a discussion of Project LOS impacts. The Project conducted a focused intersection LOS analysis during the morning and evening peak hours under Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Plus Project. The Specific Plan bisects Valley Boulevard. The proposed Project modifications to the Specific Plan would relocate 49 single-family dwelling units originally located on the west side of Valley Boulevard to the eastside of Valley Boulevard. As such, a focused traffic analysis was conducted for the Valley Boulevard and Goetz Road intersection. The focused LOS analysis accounted for the morning and evening peak hours The results are shown on Table 2 Summary of Intersection Operations Existing Plus Project. February 2024 4-65 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Table 2: Summary of Intersection Operations Existing Plus Project Based on review of Table 2 and consistent with the LOS results for the intersection of Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard in the 2014 TIA, the intersection would continue to operate at an acceptable LOS. Therefore, the proposed lane configurations for the intersection of Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard can adequately accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed modifications. The FOR identified the intersection of Goetz Road at Valley Boulevard as an intersection that met LOS standards and as such did not require mitigation. The FEIR included FEIR MMs Trans 6 through 30 to reduce LOS at other intersections analyzed in the 2014 TIA. However, as stated above LOS is not significant under CEQA and therefore do not apply. Mitigation Program The FEIR included FEIR MMs Trans 1 through Trans 30 to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. However, FEIR MMs Trans 6 through Trans 30 are related to LOS, which is no longer significant under CEQA and therefore, do not apply. FEIR MMs Trans 4 or 5 do not apply because the Project does not include PA 1 or 3. Mitigation Measures from the FEIR MM Trans 1 Prior to construction, sight distance at the project entrance roadway shall be reviewed with respect to standard City of Menifee sight distance standards at the time of entitlement and confirmed during the preparation of final grading, landscape and street improvement plans. MM Trans 2 Participate in the phased construction of off -site traffic signals through payment of Project's fair share of traffic signal mitigation fees as shown in Table 5.7-P and 5.7-Q. MM Trans 3A A Construction Traffic Control Plan shall be prepared by the implementing developer and submitted to the City of Menifee Public Works Department for approval prior to the issuance of building permits for the Project. The Construction Traffic Control Plan shall include the estimated day(s), time(s) and duration of any lane closures that are anticipated to be required by Project construction. The Construction Traffic Control Plan shall include measures such as, but not limited to, signage, flagmen, cones, advance community notice, or other acceptable measures to the satisfaction of the City of Menifee Public Works Department to minimize traffic impacts from construction. The purpose of the measures shall be to safely guide motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians, minimize traffic impacts and ensure the safe and even flow of traffic consistent with City level of service standards and safety requirements. The implementing developer or its general contractor shall be required to notify the City of Menifee Public Works Department at least five (5) business days in advance of any planned lane closure that will be caused by Project construction. The City shall evaluate February 2024 4-66 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project any other known lane closures, construction activities or special events which may conflict with the Project's scheduled lane closure or create additional impacts to traffic flow; and, if deemed necessary by the City of Menifee Public Works Department, the Project's lane closure may be postponed or rescheduled. MM Trans 3B Prior to grading, the implementing developer shall coordinate with Southern California Edison (SCE) to identify and obtain necessary encroachment permits as approved and deemed necessary by SCE. MM Trans 4 PFi F t isquaneeElf fmFSt FAft PIaRAiAg AFeB , t f ll a w NOTE: MM Trans 4 does not apply because the Project does not include PAs 1 or 3 MM Trans 5 . NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 5 does not apply because the Project does not include PA 3 MM Trans 5A Prior to construction, the implementing developer shall coordinate with Southern California Edison (SCE) for identification and installation of Anti -Climbing devices on transmission lines adjacent to project bike paths as approved and deemed necessary by SCE. MM Trans 6 °-'^- W thP- Gf the fiFSt •t f oi, AFea -3 r-on4r,irt I)Flyeway)(EW) with the geeF:RetFiES: NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 6 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 7A PHOF tS the of the fFFSt 4 f ojaARiAg AFea t t the February 2024 4-67 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 7A does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 7B n the f the Gist mit f9F oiaRR Rg Area- 2the NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 7B does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 8 ° * t 61 . r r it re oi, V AΠ -RR.4Fturct the iRteFseetieR MM Trans 9 NOTE: FOR MM Trans 8 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 9 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable roadways would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. February 2024 4-68 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project MM Trans 10 NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 10 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable roadways would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 11 NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 11 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined thatthe Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 12 NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 12 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable roadways would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 13 NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 13 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 14 February 2024 4-69 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 14 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 15 r * v0ith i * f nnnn :rrawls 31 r-r..-- thy, iptp-..-eeti. of 9yeFs NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 15 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 16 .Prrn a f the fiFSt BEEWPaRG�' peFFAi: fAr PaaflniRg Urea 5 GGRStFuEt the MM Trans 17 NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 16 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. Q-A-e left tuFn lane. @Re thFeugk laRe. A-F;e shared thFOUgh aAd Fight tWFA IRRP February 2024 4-70 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 17 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined thatthe Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 18 Prier Fe issaaf}Ee ^f the f;.st eeGupanGy peFRqit f, WaRRiRg AFea ccepr-trur-t the NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 18 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined thatthe Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 19 PFieF t8 issuaRee 9f 61 .....;t f9F PI.,...,;,,, AFea 2 r-....t a NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 19 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 20 Pre; to theissuaAc-ef the f;FSt fGF P'aRR;R AFea , the o., ;t b Fight . FactbG-WAGI- QA@ W-ft ti-IFA IaAA- QRe ;h-A.P,d thFG gh a d Fight ' R I@ We5tlaednd: Qr}e Ie# EiirFl Ialled h a Fight t A I ..,,.. PAP IIC ?}fal eQ C }thrpp" . NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 20 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the February 2024 4-71 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 21 « the f the f « 9eEHPaAEY peFfflit f oi- V_A. 1 the oH « )R MM Trans 22 NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 21 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 22 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable roadway would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 23 Prier « f peFmit fGF PlaRRiRg Area �� ,�«. « 32' 9f . . , MM Trans 24 NOTE: FOR MM Trans 23 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable roadway would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 24 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at February 2024 4-72 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project applicable roadways would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 25 P «^ 'he of «I`^ f' f, DI n 35 r o ..lieaRt shall -«^II tr-,ff„- al at the iRteFS@6ti9R of nn 98ad (nlc) .-..J MM Trans 26 MM Trans 27 NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 7B does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 26 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 27 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 28 °''^' t8- the --f the fiFSt aeeupascy peFFRR f8F the o the r I 1 24 r NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 28 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS February 2024 4-73 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 29 A" Hew eR t and/eF u t . 4* g ..'AF-1 t.,u e Signal FRO d4i-at,OAS that aFe NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 29 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. MM Trans 30 NOTE: FEIR MM Trans 30 does not apply because the Project's Traffic Memo determined that the Project would generate fewer trips in both AM and PM Peak hours than what the Approved Project previously estimated for the Project site. This indicates that the LOS at applicable intersections would be improved with Project implementation when compared to the Approved Project. Conclusion There are no new or more severe potentially significant traffic impacts associated with the proposed Project. A less than significant impact would occur, and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Threshold (b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? No New or More Severe Impacts. Impacts concerning VMT were not analyzed as part of the FEIR. Based on the focused LOS analysis, the proposed lane configurations for the intersection of Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard can adequately accommodate the traffic generated by the Project. In addition, since the Project would generate less trips than what was previously analyzed, the Project would create a less -than - significant VMT impact, and no further VMT analysis is required for the modified CRSP. Mitigation Proeram Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None required. February 2024 4-74 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Conclusion There are no new or more severe potentially significant VMT impacts associated with the proposed Project. A less than significant impact would occur, and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Threshold (c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? No New or More Severe Impacts. The Project would enable the development of a portion of the City which is currently vacant and undeveloped. Construction within the Project's associated planning areas would require the development of additional roadways. However, dirt paths, unpaved, are currently available and provide access throughout the Project site. Consistent with the FEIR, no sharp curves or other hazardous traffic conditions currently exist within the Project vicinity. Surrounding uses are compatible with the proposed Project in terms of circulation and traffic patterns. In addition, the Project would be developed consistently with the Specific Plan's design features and design guidelines that include policies for providing pedestrian walkways, lighting, and bike lanes so as not to conflict with vehicular circulation. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated to occur. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None required. Conclusion There are no new or more severe potentially significant hazards due a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses associated with the Project. A less than significant impact would occur, and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Threshold (d) Result in inadequate emergency access? No New or More Severe Impacts. The Project would enable the development of a portion of the City which is currently vacant and undeveloped. Construction within the Project's associated planning areas would require the development of additional roadways. However, dirt paths, unpaved, are currently available and provide access throughout the Project site. Temporary construction routes would also be developed for construction phase activities onsite. A review of emergency access is included as part of the City's Design Review process. County Fire would also review development applications to ensure that adequate emergency accessibility is provided based on local and state guidance. Therefore, emergency access would be maintained to the Project. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None required. February 2024 4-75 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Conclusion There are no new or more severe potentially significant emergency access impacts associated with the proposed Project. A less than significant impact would occur, and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Overall Transportation/Traffic Impacts Conclusion With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe transportation impacts from the previously identified impacts. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of an SEIR is not warranted. February 2024 4-76 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS 4.17.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis Utility impacts associated with implementation of the Specific Plan were determined to be less than significant. Specifically, water and wastewater infrastructure were found to be suitable to accommodate the overall Specific Plan. Similarly, waste collection and storage facilities were found to be able to accommodate waste generated by the Specific Plan during development and operations. 4.17.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (a) Require or result in the construction of new water, wastewater treatment facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No New or More Severe Impacts. The Project would include the placement of new water, wastewater, stormwater, energy, and telecommunications facilities within the Project site and form connections to existing facilities within the public right-of-way (ROW). These improvements would include conveyance facilities for water, wastewater, and stormwater, as well as wiring and line connections for electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications. The majority of these improvements would occur within the Project site. ROW improvements would amount to service connections and would have minimal effect on exterior infrastructure. Effects stemming from utility improvements have been accounted for in impact discussion throughout Sections 4.1 through 4.20 of this Addendum EIR. Additionally, future developments would be required to undergo design review by the City, including utility plan review. The Project does not propose or require the expansion of utility infrastructure beyond the Project site. Therefore, no new or more severe impact would occur. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion There are no new or more severe potentially significant utility infrastructure improvement impacts associated with the proposed Project. A less than significant impact would occur, and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Threshold (b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project? No New or More Severe Impacts. The FEIR included the creation of a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) which concluded that EMWD would have adequate supply to accommodate the Specific Plan. This determination was made based on water supply estimates provided in EMWD's 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). However, multiple factors have altered water supplies since the approved 2010 UWMP. Per EMWD's 2020 UWMP, average water use per person has dropped significantly since 2010. Additionally, MWD is shown as capable to continue meeting water demands through 2045, even during an extended drought. 17 Due to these factors, as well as the Project's consistent scale with what 17 Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD). 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Page E-2. Retrieved from: httos://www.emwd.org./sites/main/files/rile-attachments/urbanwatermanagementplan O.odf?162S160721 (accessed October 8, 2023). February 2024 4-77 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project was analyzed in the FEIR, EMWD would have adequate water supplies to accommodate the Project. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FOR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion There are no new or more severe potentially significant water supply impacts associated with the proposed Project. A less than significant impact would occur, and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Threshold (c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? No New or More Severe Impact. The FEIR concluded that the City would have sufficient wastewater treatment infrastructure and capacity with implementation of the Specific Plan. The Project would not modify wastewater infrastructure previously designed for the Specific Plan, nor would the Project introduce a substantial amount of additional uses which would affect the amount of wastewater anticipated in the FEIR. However, note that, as previously stated, average water use per person has dropped significantly since 2010.18 This would in turn lead to a reduction of wastewater flows and generation for each person. Therefore, the Project would not generate wastewater at a rate that would exceed what was analyzed in the FEIR. Impacts would remain less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR None identified in the FEIR. Conclusion There are no new or more severe potentially significant wastewater treatment impacts associated with the proposed Project. A less than significant impact would occur, and no Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Threshold (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? Threshold (e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No New or More Severe Impact. The FEIR concluded that the Badlands Landfill and El Sobrante Landfill would be capable of accommodating the solid waste generated by the Project. Per the Specific Plan, All " Ibid. February 2024 4-78 Environmenta Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project cut and fill will be balanced on -site and will not require import or export of materials. Approximately 999,775 cubic yards of material will be moved overall (total estimated cut and fill) to achieve the cut and fill balance. Therefore, solid waste generated by the Project would remain consistent with what was analyzed in the FEIR. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. Additionally, the Project, as with all other development in the City, would be required to adhere to City ordinances with respect to waste reduction and recycling. As a result, no impacts related to State and local statutes governing solid waste are anticipated. However consistent with the FEIR, the Project would implement FEIR MMs UTIL 1 and UTIL 2 to address Riverside County Waste Management Department's concerns raised in FEIR. FEIR MM UTIL 1 would require that a Waste Recycling Plan (WRP) be submitted to Riverside County Waste Management Department for approval. At a minimum, the WRP must identify the materials (i.e., concrete, asphalt, wood, etc.) that will be generated by construction and development, the projected amounts, the measures/methods that will be taken to recycle, reuse, and/or reduce the amount of materials, the facilities and/or haulers that will be utilized, and the targeted recycling or reduction rate. FEIR MM UTIL 2 would require that the Project demonstrate compliance with the approved WRP at the time prior to issuance of occupancy permits. Therefore, implementation of FEIR MMs UTIL 1 and UTIL 2 would ensure that impacts are less than significant. Mitigation Program The FEIR identified FEIR MMs UTIL 1 and UTIL 2 to reduce impacts concerning the compliance with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Mitigation Measures from the FEIR MM UTIL 1 Prior to issuance of a building permit for each phase, a Waste Recycling Plan (WRP) shall be submitted to Riverside County Waste Management Department for approval. At a minimum, the WRP must identify the materials (i.e., concrete, asphalt, wood, etc.) that will be generated by construction and development, the projected amounts, the measures/methods that will be taken to recycle, reuse, and/or reduce the amount of materials, the facilities and/or haulers that will be utilized, and the targeted recycling or reduction rate. During Project construction, the Project site shall have, at a minimum, two (2) bins, one for waste disposal and the other for the recycling of Construction and Demolition (C&D) materials. Additional bins are encouraged to be used for further source separation of C&D recyclable materials. Accurate record keeping (receipts) for recycling of C&D recyclable materials and solid waste disposal must be kept. Arrangements can be made through the franchise hauler. MM UTIL 2 Prior to issuance of occupancy permits for each phase, evidence (i.e., receipts or other type of verification) to demonstrate Project compliance with the approved WRP shall be presented by the Project proponent to the Planning Division of the Riverside County Waste Management Department. February 2024 4-79 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project rnnrincinn There are no new or more severe potentially significant solid waste impacts associated with the proposed Project with implementation of FOR MMs UTIL 1 and UTIL 2. No Project -specific mitigation measures are required. Overall Utilities and Service Systems Impacts Conclusion With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe utility or service system impacts from the previously identified impacts. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of an SEIR is not warranted. February 2024 4-80 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.18 WILDFIRE 4.18.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis 4.18.2 Analysis of Proposed Project The updated CEQA Guidelines included a new separate discussion for Wildfire hazards. Although not addressed as a separate threshold, Section 4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials discussed impacts related to wildfire and emergency response. The FEIR determined that portions of the Specific Plan area are located within an SRA in a high and a very high FHSZ. Accordingly, the County Fire Department requires that any proposed developed located within or adjacent to or identified fire hazard area must prepare and implement a comprehensive fuel modification program in accordance with the County Fire Department regulations to ensure that emergency services are adequate. The FEIR also concluded that adherence with the California Fire and Building Codes would ensure that emergency access is adequate, per County Fire Department standards. As discussed above, because Wildfire impacts were not required to be analyzed at the time of FEIR certification, the Addendum does not need to analyze these impacts. Thus, this analysis is provided for informational purposes only. Threshold (a) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Although the FEIR concluded that portions of the Specific Plan area is located within a SRA and in a high and very high FHSZ, review of CAL FIRE's current Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsibility Area viewer identifies the Project site as being located outside of an SRA (see Exhibit 10: Fire Hazard Severity Zone — CAL FIRE). Furthermore, while the Menifee GP Exhibit S-8, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones and Public Facilities (see Exhibit 9: Fire Hazard Severity Zone — General Plan) shows that a very small portion of PAs 4 through 6 are an SRA very high FHSZ, this map is dated 2021. The CAL FIRE viewer is dated 2023, more accurately representing current Project site conditions. Thus, the Project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan due to a wildfire. No impact would occur. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR Not evaluated in the FEIR; therefore, no mitigation measures are available from the FEIR. Conclusion Since the Project site is not identified in an SRA or located within a very high fire hazard severity zone, the Project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan due to a wildfire event. No impact would occur. February 2024 4-81 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Threshold (b) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: 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? As noted in Threshold 4.18(a) above, the Project site is not within an SRA or within a high or very high FHSZ. Thus, the Project's occupants would not be exposed to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors that could exacerbate wildfire. No Impact would occur. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR Not evaluated in the FEIR; therefore, no mitigation measures are available from the FEIR. Conclusion Since the Project site is not identified in an SRA or located within a very high FHSZ, the Project's occupants would not be exposed to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors that could exacerbate wildfire. No impact would occur. Threshold (c) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? As noted in Threshold 4.18(a) above, the Project site is not within an SRA or within a high or very high FHSZ. Although the Project would require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure, the proposed infrastructure improvements would not exacerbate wildfire or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. No impact would occur. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR Not evaluated in the FEIR; therefore, no mitigation measures are available from the FEIR. Conclusion As concluded above, the Project's proposed infrastructure improvements would not exacerbate wildfire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. Therefore, no impact would occur with implementation of the Project. February 2024 4-82 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Threshold (d) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes? As noted in Threshold 4.18(a) above, the Project site is not within an SRA or within a high or very high FHSZ. The Project site is highly disturbed and would be balanced after grading activity ends. Furthermore, as discussed in Threshold 4.9(d), the Project site is located in Zone X, which is defined as areas determined to be outside the 0.2 percent annual chance floodplain. Thus, no structures would be subjected to 100- year flood hazard area. Lastly, as noted in Threshold 4.6a(iv), the Project site and the immediate area are not within a zone of generalized landslide susceptibility. Thus, no impacts would occur. Mitigation Proeram Mitigation Measures from the FEIR Not evaluated in the FEIR; therefore, no mitigation measures are available from the FEIR. Conclusion As concluded above, the Project site would expose people or structures significant risks due to wildfire - related impacts. No impact would occur. Overall Wildfire Impacts Conclusion With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts with respect to Wildfire since the Project is not located in an SRA or lands classified as very high FHSZ. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of an SEIR is not warranted. February 2024 4-83 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.19 ENERGY 4.19.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The FEIR did not include a specific analysis of the Specific Plan's energy impacts. As part of the CEQA Guidelines updated in 2020, energy impacts are discussed as an environmental topic area. This Addendum EIR includes the following energy discussion. 4.19.2 Analysis of Proposed Project Threshold (a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation, and Less than Significant. Construction Project construction would create temporary increased demands for electricity and vehicle fuels compared to existing conditions and would result in short-term transportation -related energy use. Electricity Future construction activities associated with the land uses accommodated under the Project would require electricity use to power the construction equipment. The electricity use during construction would vary during different phases of construction, where the majority of construction equipment during demolition and grading would be gasoline -powered or diesel -powered, and the later construction phases would be electricity -powered, such as interior construction and architectural coatings. Overall, the use of electricity would be temporary in nature and would fluctuate according to the phase of construction. Additionally, it is anticipated that the majority of electric -powered construction equipment would be hand tools (e.g., power drills, table saws, compressors) and lighting, which would result in minimal electricity usage during construction activities. Therefore, Project -related construction activities would not result in wasteful or unnecessary electricity demands and impacts would be less than significant. Natural Gas Energy It is not anticipated that construction equipment used for the Project would be powered by natural gas, and no natural gas demand is anticipated during construction. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with respect to natural gas usage. Transportation Energy Transportation energy use depends on the type and number of trips, VMT, fuel efficiency of vehicles, and travel mode. Transportation energy used during construction would come from the transport and use of construction equipment, delivery vehicles and haul trucks, and construction employee vehicles that would use diesel fuel and/or gasoline. It is anticipated that the majority of off -road construction equipment, such as those used during demolition and grading activities, would be gasoline -powered or diesel -powered. The use of energy resources by vehicles and equipment would fluctuate according to the phase of construction. To limit wasteful and unnecessary energy consumption, the construction contractors are anticipated to minimize non -essential idling of construction equipment during construction in accordance February 2024 4-84 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project with Section 2449 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9. In addition, electrical energy would be available for use during construction from existing power lines and connection, which could minimize or avoid the use of generators that are less efficient than tying into existing Southern California Edison (SCE) infrastructure. Furthermore, construction trips would not result in unnecessary use of energy since the Project site is centrally located and is served by numerous local roadways and a major freeway (e.g., 1-215) that provides the most direct and shortest routes from various areas of the region. Moreover, all construction -equipment operation would cease upon completion of Project construction. Thus, impacts related to transportation energy use during construction would be temporary and would not require expanded energy supplies or the construction of new infrastructure. Additionally, over time as fuel efficiencies and fuel technologies improve, it is likely that transportation energy consumption will decrease. Overall, construction fuel associated with land use developments accommodated under the Project would not be any more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than similar development projects. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with respect to transportation energy. Operations Project operations would create additional demands for electricity and natural gas compared to existing conditions and would result in increased transportation energy use. Operational use of energy would include heating, cooling, and ventilation of buildings; water heating; operation of electrical systems; use of on -site equipment and appliances; and indoor, outdoor, perimeter, and parking lot lighting. Electrical Energy Electrical service to the Project would be provided by SCE through connections to existing offsite electrical lines and new on -site infrastructure. While the Project would increase energy demand at the Project site compared to existing conditions, it would be required to comply with the applicable Building Energy Efficiency Standards and the CALGreen Code. Because the Project would be consistent with the requirements of these energy -related regulations, it would not result in wasteful or unnecessary electricity demands. Therefore, the Project would not result in a significant impact related to electricity. Natural Gas Energy The potential natural gas consumption for the Project was estimated in the FEIR to be approximately 11,558,402 thousand British Thermal Units per year (kBTU/yr) or 11.6 million therms.19 The County had an annual gas usage of approximately 431 million therms.20 This would constitute approximately 2.7 percent of the County's natural gas usage. Since the Project's density would not increase from the Approved Project, the Project's natural gas usage would be consistent with the natural gas usage determined in the FEIR. Therefore, operation of the Project would result in less than significant impacts with respect to natural gas usage. Mitigation Proeram Mitigation Measures from the FEIR Not evaluated in the FEIR; therefore, no mitigation measures are available from the FOR " California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). 2023. Cimarron Specific Plan. 20 California Energy Commission. 2022. Natural Gas Consumption by County. Riverside County. Retrieved from: httos://ecdms.enerev.ca.aov/easbvcountv.aspx (accessed October 9, 2023). February 2024 4-85 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Conclusion There are no new or more severe potentially significant impacts regarding energy usage. No Project - specific mitigation is required. Threshold (b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less than Significant Impact. The State's electricity grid is transitioning to renewable energy under California's Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program. Renewable sources of electricity include wind, small hydropower, solar, geothermal, biomass, and biogas. The statewide RPS requirements do not directly apply to individual development projects, but to utilities and energy providers such as SCE, whose compliance with RPS requirements would contribute to the State of California objective of transitioning to renewable energy. SCE's Pathway 2045 concludes that reaching California's 2045 greenhouse gas goals requires the decarbonization of electricity, electrification of transportation, electrification of buildings, and utilization of low carbon fuels.21 Achieving 100 percent renewable energy would be feasible with continued technical advances including the following:21 • Better weather forecasting technology is making it much easier for grid operators to precisely how much wind or solar generation we can depend on at any given time. • The cost of zero -carbon generation sources like wind and solar have dramatically decreased in the past decade and continue to decline. • The cost of energy storage technologies, which will help us be able to use renewables when the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining, also continues to decline. New advancements in the ability of large and small electricity users to shift usage towards times when electricity is cheaper and when the supply of renewables is most abundant are helping to make the grid more flexible and able to accommodate very high levels of renewable energy. • Grid operators around the western United States are coordinating to gain access to larger markets for renewables and other carbon -free flexible grid resources. Targeting energy efficiency during times of the day when renewables are less abundant (after the sun sets) will also help the grid operate more efficiently. As discussed herein, the Project would comply with the Building Energy Efficiency Standards, the CALGreen Code, and energy efficiency measures implemented by the General Plan. Consistent with the General Plan, the buildings developed under the Project would have rooftops that can support solar panels (i.e., solar -ready) which will comply with solar ready requirements of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards, which would enable future tenants to install a PV system. Therefore, implementation of the Project would support the statewide goal of decarbonization by 2045. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR 21 Southern California Edison. 2023. Carbon Neutrality by 2045. Retrieved from: https://www.edison.com/our-perspective/pathway-2045 (accessed August 2023). " SB 100. 2023. 100% Clean Energy FAQs. Retrieved from: httos://focus.senate.ca.gov/sb100/fag5 (accessed August 2023). February 2024 4-86 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Not evaluated in the FEIR; therefore, no mitigation measures are available from the FEIR. Conclusion There are no new or more severe potentially significant impacts regarding conflicts with energy regulations. No Project -specific mitigation is required. Overall Energy Impacts Conclusion With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts with respect to energy. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of an SEIR is not warranted. February 2024 4-87 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 4.20 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES 4.20.1 Analysis of Proposed Project The updated CEQA Guidelines include anew separate discussion for Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs). This section briefly examines potential impacts related to TCRs that could result from implementation of the Project. As discussed above, because TCRs were not required to be analyzed at the time of FEIR certification, the Addendum does not need to analyze these impacts. The following information is provided for informational purposes only. Pursuant to the provisions of SB 18, the City of Menifee Planning Department initiated consultation with twenty Native American Tribes and interested parties provided by NAHC on April 1, 2014. Results of the consultation are discussed below. Threshold (a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code § 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)? The City received two letters in response to the City's initiating consultation in compliance with SB 18; Soboba and Pechanga. Soboba requested consultation and this meeting occurred with the City during May/June of 2014. The Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians has been in communication with the City on the Approved Project since 2012 and provided a written response to the City on July 11, 2014 in response to the SB 18 notification letter. This letter identified that previous comment letters had been submitted to the City pertaining the Approved Project and acknowledged the first SB 18 consultation meeting with the City occurred on June 24, 2014. The City has received one letter dated March 24, 2014 from Pechanga prior to the SB 18 notification. In this letter, the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians requested to continue consultation with the City for the life of the Approved Project. The Tribe also requested additional cultural studies and plans be forwarded as they become available. A letter dated March 24, 2014 was also provided to the City which stated the Pechanga tribe intends to assert its right pursuant to California law with regard to any remains or items discovered in the course of this Project, pursuant to California Public Resources Code, Section 5097.98 which states that if human remains are discovered, the NAHC must name a "most likely descendant. As concluded in the FEIR, no "historical resources," as defined by CEQA, exist within or adjacent to the Project area and thus, the project as currently proposed will not cause a substantial adverse change to any known historical resources. No further cultural resources investigation is necessary. However, due to the sensitivity of TCRs within the Specific Plan area as indicated by SB 18 consultation, the Project would implement FEIR MMs Cult 1 through Cult 4 to ensure that impacts to unknown tribal cultural resources are minimized to less than significant impact. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FOR February 2024 4-88 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project FOR MMs Cult 1 through Cult 4 noted in Section 4.5: Cultural Resources apply Conclusion The Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource 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) with implementation FEIR MMs Cult 1 through Cult 4. No new impact related to TCRs would occur. Threshold (b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code § 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe? As noted above, the 5B 18 consultation with the Pechanga and Soboba concluded that the Specific Plan area is culturally sensitive for TCRs. Pursuant to FEIR MMs Cult 1, Cult 3, and Cult 4 if any cultural resources are discovered, ground disturbance activities within 100 feet of the discovered resource would halt and the developer, archaeologist, and tribal representative/Tribal monitor(s) would make a decision to apply appropriate mitigation (documentation, recovery, avoidance) for the found cultural resource(s) and apply treatment and/or avoidance in compliance with the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreements entered into with the appropriate Native American Tribe. If human remains are encountered, The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the most likely descendent. The most likely descendant shall then then make recommendations and engage in consultation concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The site of any reburial of Native American human remains or associated grave goods cultural artifacts would not be disclosed and would not be governed by public disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act. This would ensure that impacts to any unknown TCRs are reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the FEIR FEIR MMs Cult 1 through Cult 4 noted in Section 4.5: Cultural Resources apply. Conclusion The Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a TCRs 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. No new impact related to TCRs would occur. February 2024 4-89 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Overall Tribal Cultural Resources Impacts Conclusion With regard to CEQA Statute Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts with respect to TCRs. As demonstrated in this Addendum, the potential impacts associated with the Project would either be the same or less than those described in the FEIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the FEIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, preparation of an SEIR is not warranted. February 2024 4-90 Environmental Analysis Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658, DA No. 2014-002 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 5.0 Determination February 2024 Determination Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 5.0 DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE CEQA DOCUMENTATION The following discussion lists the appropriate subsections of Sections 15162 and 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines and provides justification for the City to determine that the Addendum is the appropriate CEQA document for the Project, based on the environmental analysis provided above. This section also includes a discussion of the revisions to the State CEQA Guidelines that have occurred since certification of the EIR, including the most recently adopted 2018 revisions. In 2018, the OPR transmitted its proposal for the comprehensive updates to the CEQA Guidelines to the California Natural Resources Agency. Included were proposed updates related to analyzing transportation impacts pursuant to 56 743, proposed updates to the analysis of GHG emissions, and revised Section 15126.2(a) in response to the California Supreme Court's decision in California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369. The updated Guidelines became effective on December 28, 2018. CEQA Guidelines Section 1S162 — Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations (a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that Project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, one or more of the following: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the Project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. The City proposes to implement the Project within the context of the FEIR, as described in this Addendum. As discussed in the Environmental Impact Analysis section of this Addendum, no new or more severe significant environmental effects beyond what was evaluated in the FEIR would occur. (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. As documented herein, no circumstances associated with the location, type, setting, or operations of the Project have substantively changed beyond what was evaluated in the FEIR; and none of the Project elements would result in new or more severe significant environmental effects than previously identified. No major revisions to the FEIR are required. (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant environmental effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; February 2024 5-1 Determination Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project No new significant environmental effects beyond those addressed in the FEIR were identified. (8) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; Significant Project -related effects previously examined would not be more severe than were disclosed in the FEIR as a result of the Project. Impacts associated with all environmental resource areas would be the same as or less than disclosed in the adopted FEIR. Implementation of the Project within the context of the FEIR would not substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts. (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or No mitigation measures or alternatives were found infeasible in the certified FEIR. (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. No other mitigation measures or feasible alternatives have been identified that would substantially reduce significant impacts. (b) If changes to a projector its circumstances occur or new information becomes available after adoption of a negative declaration, the lead agency shall prepare a subsequent EIR if required under subsection (a). Otherwise, the lead agency shall determine whether to prepare a subsequent negative declaration, an addendum, or no further documentation. Subsequent to certification of the FEIR in 2015, additional technical analyses were performed for the Project and are the subject of this Addendum. Based on the analyses in this document, the Project would not result in any new significant environmental effects, nor would it increase the severity of significant effects previously identified in the FEIR. None of the conditions listed under subsection (a) would occur that would require preparation of a subsequent EIR. (c) Once a project has been approved, the lead agency's role in project approval is completed, unless further discretionary approval on that project is required. Information appearing after an approval does not require reopening of that approval. If after the project is approved, any of the conditions described in subsection (a) occurs, a subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall only be prepared by the public agency which grants the next discretionary approval for the project, if any. In this situation, no other Responsible Agency shall grant an approval for the project until the subsequent EIR has been certified or subsequent negative declaration adopted. None of the conditions listed in subsection (a) would occur as a result of the Project. No SEIR is required. February 2024 5-2 Determination Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 — Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration (a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary, but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. As described above, none of the conditions described in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a SEIR have occurred. (b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. None of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR would occur as a result of the Project. Therefore, an addendum to the certified FEIR is the appropriate CEQA document for the Project. (c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the FEIR or adopted negative declaration. This Addendum will be attached to the FEIR and maintained in the administrative record files at the City (d) The decision -making body shall consider the addendum with the FEIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project. The City will consider this Addendum with the FEIR prior to making a decision on the Project. (e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's required findings on the Project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence. This document provides substantial evidence for City records to support the preparation of this Addendum for the Project. February 2024 5-3 Determination City of Menifee Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 6.0 Conclusion February 2024 Conclusion City of Menifee 6.0 CONCLUSION Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project The analysis presented in this document substantiates that the FOR for the Specific Plan is sufficient to satisfy CEQA requirements for the approval of the proposed Project That is, implementation and operation of the proposed Project described herein would not result in any new or substantially more severe environmental impacts than were previously considered and addressed in the FEIR. Further, the Project would implement all applicable mitigation measures presented in the FEIR. As such, potential environmental impacts of the Project are considered to be adequately and appropriately addressed by analysis presented in the FEIR. The Project does not require any major revision of the Certified EIR, nor would the Project result in conditions that would require preparation of a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR as described in Sections 15162 and 15163 of the CEQA Guidelines. February 2024 Conclusion City of Menifee Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project 7.0 References February 2024 References Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the City of Menifee TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project Albert A. Webb Associates. (2015). Final EIR & Technical Appendices —SCH No. 2014051029. CAL Fire. (2023). Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Available at: https://calfire- forestry.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=988d43la42b242b29d89597ab69 3d008 (accessed October 2023). California Department of Conservation. (2020). California Important Farmland: 1984-2020. Available at: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciftimeseries/ (accessed September 2023). California Department of Finance. (2023). E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2020-2023. Available at: https://dof.ca.pov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5- population-and-housing-estimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020-2023/ (accessed September 2023). City of Menifee. (2014). Exhibit S-3, Liquefaction and Landslides Map. Retrieved from- https://www.cityofinenifee. us/DocumentCenter/View/1030/S- 3 LiguefactionandLandslides HD0913?bidld= (accessed September 2023). City of Menifee. (2021). General Plan — Exhibit S-8. Available at: https://www.cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenter/View/14710/2 Safety Exhibits 8-5 2021-8--- Very-High-Fire-Hazard-Severity-Zoones-and-Public-Facilities (accessed October 2023). City of Menifee. ND. Menifee General Plan, Exhibit S-9 Evacuation Routes. https://www.cityofinenifee.us/DocumentCenter/View/14711/Evacaution-Routes (accessed October 2023). City of Menifee. 2023. General Plan — Land Use Map. https://www.citvofinen ifee.us/DocumentCenter/View/11043/General-Plan--Land-Use-Map--- March-2023 (accessed September 2023). City of Menifee. (2019). News Release: New Library Coming to Menifee Through the Riverside County Library System. Retrieved from: https://www.cityofinenifee.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/2684 (Accessed May 3, 2021) City of Menifee. 2023. Zoning Map. https://www.cityofinen ifee. us/DocumentCenter/View/11042/Zoning-M ap--March-2023 (accessed September 2023). Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD). 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Page E-2. Retrieved from: https://www.emwd.org/sites/main/files/file- attach ments/urbanwatermanagementplan O.pdf?1625160721 (Accessed October 8, 2023) ELMT Consulting. (2023). Updated Habitat Assessment (HA) and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Consistency Analysis. February 2024 6-1 References City of Menifee Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project FEMA. (2014). FEMA Flood Map Service Center; Search by Address. Available at: https://msc.fema.pov/portal/search?AddressQuerv=menifee (accessed October 2023). John R. Byerly Incorporated. (2013). Infiltration Rate Study for Storm Water Disposal. Kimley-Horn and Associates. (2023). Traffic Consistency Memorandum. Kimley-Horn and Associates. (2023). Updated Cultural Resources Assessment for the TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project. Riverside County ALUC. (2023). ALUC Development Review — Director's Determination. SB 100. 2023. 100% Clean Energy FAQs. Retrieved from: httt)s://focus.senate.ca.gov/sb100/facts. (Accessed August 2023). Southern California Edison. 2023. Carbon Neutrality by 2045. Retrieved from: https://www.edison.com/our-perspective/pathway-2045. (Accessed August 2023). USGS. (2022). Interactive U.S. Fault Map. Available at: https://www.usgs.gov/tools/interactive-us-fault- map (accessed September 2023). February 2024 6-2 References City of Menifee Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project APPENDIX A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM February 2024 Appendix A City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Section 3 — Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program CEQA requires the adoption of feasible mitigation measures to reduce the severity and magnitude of significant environmental impacts associated with project development. The Project's DEIR includes mitigation measures to reduce the potential environmental effects of the Project. CEQA also requires reporting on, and monitoring of, mitigation measures adopted as part of the environmental review process (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6). This mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) is designed to aid the City in its implementation and monitoring of measures adopted from the Project. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15097, a written monitoring and reporting program has been compiled to verify implementation of adopted mitigation measures. "Monitoring" refers to the ongoing or periodic process of Project oversight provided by the "Responsible Party" listed in the following table,. "Reporting" refers to written compliance review that will be presented to the decision -making body or authorized staff person identified in the table below. A report can be required at various stages throughout the Project implementation or upon completion of the mitigation measure. The following table provides the required information which includes identification of the potential impact, various mitigation measures, applicable implementation timing, agencies responsible for implementation, and the monitoring/reporting method for each mitigation measure identified. The following list clarifies the meaning of each column in the following table: Impact Category Identifies a potentially affected resource/environmental condition. Mitigation Measure Those measures that will be implemented to minimize potential significant environmental impacts. Implementation Timing The phase of the Project in which implementation and compliance will be monitored. Responsible Party Identifies the entity responsible for monitoring implementation of the mitigation measure. Method of Reporting/Monitoring Identifies mechanism by which implementation will be verified. Impact After Mitigation Identifies the level of impact after mitigation measure has been implemented. Albert A. `z ::i Associates 3-1 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table 3-A — Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Category Aesthetics Impact Mitigation not required Mitigation Measure I Mitigation not required Implementation Timing Not applicable Responsible Party Not applicable Impact After Mitigation Mitigation not required Agriculture and Mitigation not required Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not Forestry required Air Quality Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not applicable air quality plan required The proposed Project would violate air quality MM Air 1: The Project applicant shall ensure Prior to Developer / Significant and standards or contribute substantially to an that the contract specifications list all applicable Construction Contractor Unavoidable. A existing or projected air quality violation. SCAQMD Rules and Regulations (such as Rule Statement of 403 for fugitive dust) and the construction Overriding Considerations contractors construction specification package is required shall use construction equipment that have Tier prior to Project 4 final engines, level 3 diesel particulate filters approval (DPF), with oxidation catalyst that have a 20% reduction in emissions. Prior to issuance of grading permits, proof of compliance shall be provided to the City in Project construction specifications, which shall include, but is not limited to, a copy of each units certified tier specification, T-BACT documentation, and CARE and/or SCAQMD operating permit(s). Alternatively, during the City's review process for applications under the Specific Plan, the applicant shall have conducted modeling of the criteria pollutant emissions of NOw PM-10, and PM-2.5 (regional NO, from all construction activities and localized PM-10 and PM-2.5 during grading only) with the proposed fleet of equipment. If the modeling shows that NOw PM-10, and PM-2.5 emissions would exceed the SCAQMD's significance thresholds for those AlbertA. Associates 3-2 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge Impact FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program category Impact Mitigation Measure emissions, the maximum daily equipment of the Implementation Timing Responsible Party ImpactAfter Mitigation proposed development shall be limited to the extent that could occur without resulting in NOw PM-10, and PM-2.5 emissions in excess of SCAQMD's significance thresholds for those emissions. For implementing projects within the Specific Plan, the applicant shall be responsible for submitting a project -level air quality assessment that includes the modeling of emissions associated with the daily activities anticipated for the proposed development.. MM Air 2: As included in the design of any Prior to Developer / Significant and future maps submitted to the City and where Construction Contractor Unavoidable. A existing ROW is available, the Project applicant Statement of shall provide sidewalks. The City building and Overriding safety department shall review all submittals Considerationsis required prior to approval to ensure sidewalks are prior to Project incorporated throughout the Project., approval MM Air 3: In order to reduce energy During Developer / Significant and consumption from proposed Project Construction Contractor Unavoidable. A development, applicable plans (e.g., electrical Statement of plans) submitted to the City shall include the Overriding installation of high -efficiency lighting that is at Considerations least 5% more efficient than standard lighting. is required These plans shall be reviewed and approved by prior to Project the applicable Department (e.g., Department of approval Building and Safety). MM Air 4 In order to reduce energy During Developer / Significant and consumption from the proposed Project Construction Contractor Unavoidable. A development, the Project applicant shall require Statement of that all building structures meet or exceed 2013 Overriding Title 24, Part 6 Standards and meet Green Considerations Building Code Standards. In addition, major is required prior to Project Albert A. .Associates 3-3 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact After Impact Category Impact Mitigation Measure appliances such as dishwashers, washing Implementation I Timin Responsible Party Mitigation approval machines, and refrigerators installed in homes, shall be Energy Star -rated models. Proof of compliance will be required by the Department of Building and Safety in order to obtain a Final Inspection. MM Air 5: Currently Waste Management— City Post Construction Developer Significant and of Menifee provides a recycling program and Unavoidable. A recycle bins to all residents. The developer shall Statement of Overriding coordinate with Waste Management to ensure Considerations residents are provided information on obtaining is required recycling bins and are educated regarding the prior to Project benefits, through handouts and signage approval throughout the community. MM Air 6: In order to improve air quality by During Developer / Significant and reducing VOC emissions associated with the construction Contractor Unavoidable. A application of architectural coating, Statement of homebuilders shall apply VOC coatings and Overriding Considerations solvents with VOC content lower than SCAQMD is required Rule 1113 to residential dwelling units. In prior to Project addition, homebuilders are encouraged to approval consider the use of pre -coated construction materials and materials that do not require painting. Construction specifications shall be included in the building specifications that assure these requirements are implemented. The specifications shall be reviewed by the City of Menifee's Building and Safety Department for compliance with this mitigation measure prior to issuance of a building permit. Result in a cumulatively considerable net See MM Air 2 through MM Air 6, above. See above See above Significant and increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Unavoidable. A project region is non -attainment under an I Statement of applicable federal or state ambient air quality Overriding Albert A. Associates 3-4 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Category Impact standard (including releasing emissions which Mitigation Measure Implementation I Responsible Timin Party Impact After Mitigation Considerations exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone is required precursors) prior to Project approval The proposed Project would not expose Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not sensitive to substantial pollutant required rations. posed Project would not create r Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not nable odors that would affect a required tial number of people. Biological Have a substantial adverse effect, either MM Bio 1: Consistent with MSHCP Species Prior to Developer / Less than Resources directly or through habitat modifications, on Specific Conservation Objectives for burrowing construction Contractor significant any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, owl, Objective 6 (page E-12), a pre -construction or special status species in local or regional presence/absence survey burrowing owls shall plans, policies, or regulations, or by the be conducted by a qualified biologist within 30 California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. days prior to commencement of grading and Fish and Wildlife Service. construction activities on -site as well as for off - site improvements. If ground disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre -construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. Take of active nests will be avoided. Passive relocation (use of one way doors and collapse of burrows) will occur when owls are present outside the nesting season. The proposed Project would not have a Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not substantial adverse effect on any riparian required habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service. The proposed Project would not have a Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not substantial adverse effect on federally required protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal. filling. hydrological Albert A. Ill Associates 3-5 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Impact interruption, or other means. Mitigation Measure implementation Responsible Impact After The proposed Project would not interfere Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not substantially with the movement of any native required 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. The proposed Project would not conflict with Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not any local policies or ordinances protecting required biological resources, such as a tree reservation policy or ordinance. The proposed Project would not conflict with See MM Bio 1 above, and Prior to Developer / Less than the provisions of an adopted Habitat MM Bio 2: In order to avoid violation of the construction Contractor significant Conservation Plan, Natural Community MBTA and California Fish and Game Code site - Conservation Plan, or other approved local, preparation activities (removal of trees and regional, or state habitat conservation plan. vegetation) shall be avoided, to the greatest extent possible, during the nesting season (generally January 1 to September 15) of potentially occurring native and migratory bird species. If site preparation activities are proposed during the nesting/breeding season (generally considered January 1 to September 15), a pre - activity field survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist three (3) days prior to initiation of construction activities, to determine if active nests of species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (META) or the California Fish and Game Code, are present in the construction zone. If project activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days from the date of the pre -activity survey, surveys shall be repeated. If active nests are observed and located appropriate buffers (e.g., 500 feet of an active listed species or raptor nest, 300 feet of other sensitive or protected bird nests (non -listed), within 100 feet of sensitive or protected songbird nests) shall be established and maintained during clearing and grubbing AlbertA. Associates 3-6 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge Impact FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Category Impact Mitigation Measure activities within the nesting season. No grading Implementation Timing � Responsible Party Impact After Mitigation or heavy equipment activity shall take place within the established buffer until the nest is no longer active as determined by a qualified biologist. MM Bio 3: Prior to grading, project proponent Prior to grading Developer / Less than shall enter into a Notification of Streambed or Contractor significant Lake Alteration Agreement with California Department of Fish and Wildlife The Streambed or Lake Alteration Agreement shall require that existing good quality wetland, mulefat scrub habitat and unvegetated streambed are mitigated at a range of 1:1 to 3:1 replacement ratio based upon the existence of isolated drainage features and/or degraded vegetation, ensuring that Project impacts to jurisdictional waters would be reduced to a less than significant level. Cultural and The proposed Project would not create a Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not Paleontological substantial adverse change in the significance required Resources of an historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5. The Project would not cause a substantial MM Cult 1: If during ground disturbance During Developer / Less than adverse change in the significance of an activities, unique cultural resources are construction Contractor significant archaeological resource as defined in Section discovered that were not assessed by the 15064.5. 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 AlbertA Associates 3_7 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring Implementation and Reporting Responsible Program Impact After NM= Impact Mitigation Measure multiple artifacts in close association with each Timing Party Mitigation 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) and or its representatives. 1)AII 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 Pechanga tribal representative(s) and the Community Development Director to discuss the significance of the find. 2) At the meeting, the significance of the discoveries shall be discussed and after consultation with the 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. 3) Grading of further ground disturbance shall not resume within the area of the discovery until an agreement has been reached by all parties as to the appropriate mitigation. 4)Treatment and avoidance of the newly discovered resources shall be consistent with the Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreements entered into with the Native American Tribes. MM Cult 2: If human remains are encountered, During Developer / Less than State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 construction Contractor significant states that no further disturbance shall occur Albert A. �� Associates 3-8 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 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 shall be contacted within the period specified by law (24 hours). Subsequently, the Native American Heritage Commission 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. Human remains from other ethnic/cultural groups with recognized historical associations to the project area shall also be subject to consultation between appropriate representatives from that group and the Community Development Director, if applicable. 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 cultural artifacts shall not be disclosed and shall not be governed by public disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act. The Coroner, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California Government Code 6254 (r)., parties, and Lead Agencies, will be asked to withhold public disclosure information related to such reburial, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California Government Code 6254(r). MM Cult 3: Prior to issuance of a grading j Prior to j Developer/ Less than permit, the Community Development construction Contractor significant AlbertA. INF M. Associates 3_9 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Department shall review the proposed grading plans to determine the depth of grading, including but not limited to foundation excavations, trenching and utility installations. Should grading activities include excavation into native soils (i.e., below two feet in fill areas or areas where no prior grading activities occurred or fill materials have been added), then the project applicant shall retain a Riverside County qualified archaeologist to monitor all ground disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. 1)The Project Archaeologist and the monitor(s) from the appropriate Native American Tribe (s) shall be included in the pre -grade meetings to provide cultural/historical sensitivity training including the establishment of set guidelines for ground disturbance in sensitive areas with the grading contractors. The Project Archaeologist and the Tribal monitor(s) 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 and etc. The Project Archaeologist and the Tribal monitor(s), shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt the ground disturbance activities to allow identification, evaluation, and potential recovery of cultural resources. 2)The developer/permit holder shall submit a fully executed copy of the archaeological Albert A. Associates 3-10 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR contract to the Community Development Department to ensure compliance with this condition of approval. Upon verification, the Community Development Department shall clear this condition. 3)Any newly discovered cultural resources shall be subject to an evaluation, in consultation with the Native American Tribe(s) and which will require the development of a treatment plan and monitoring agreement for the newly discovered resources. 4) The project archaeologist shall submit a complete final monitoring report no later than 60 days following completion of the monitoring activities to the City of Menifee, the property owner, the Eastern Information Center and the appropriate Tribes. The report shall document the monitoring activities, any resources that were identified, their final disposition, complete DPR site record forms and inventory records, and any other pertinent information associated with the Project. MM Cult 4: Tribal monitor(s) shall be required on -site during all ground disturbing activities, including grading, stockpiling of materials, engineered fill, rock crushing, etc. The land divider/permit holder shall retain a qualified tribal monitor(s) from the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians and the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit a copy of a two signed contracts between each of the above mentioned Tribes and the land divider/permit holder for the monitoring of the project to the Community Development Department and to Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Prior and during I Developer / Less than construction Contractor significant Albert A. � Associates 3-11 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Implementation and Reporting Responsible Program Impact After Impact Category Impact Mitigation Measure the Engineering Department. The Native Timing Party Mitigation American Monitor(s) shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt the ground disturbance activities to allow recovery of cultural resources, in coordination with the Project Archaeologist. Should an agreement between the Tribes and the Applicant/Permittee not be established within forty-five (45) days of the date the Applicant/Permittee initiates such an agreement with the Tribes, Native American monitoring shall not be required. The Developer shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including all archaeological artifacts that are Native American origin, found in the Project area for proper treatment and disposition to a Riverside County curational facility that meets or exceeds Federal Curation Standards outlined in 36 CFR 79. The Applicant/Permittee shall be responsible for all curation costs. The project would not directly or indirectly MM Paleo 1: Should undisturbed Pleistocene- Prior, during and Developer / Less than destroy a unique paleontological resource or age sediments be encountered at depth as post construction Contractor significant site or unique geologic feature determined by the Project geologist, continuous monitoring for paleontological resources and a mitigation program to address potential impacts to any paleontological deposits that are unearthed shall be required. The mitigation program shall be developed in accordance with the provisions of CECA as well as with the proposed guidelines of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, and shall include but not be limited to: 1) The excavation of areas identified as likely to contain paleontologic resources shall be monitored by a qualified paleontological monitor. Monitoring shall be restricted to the underlying, Albert A Associates 3-12 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation I Timi undisturbed older Pleistocene -age Responsible Party Impact After Mitigation sediments conducive to the preservation of fossils. The monitor shall be prepared to quickly salvage fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays The monitor will also remove samples of sediments that are likely to contain the remains of small fossil invertebrates and vertebrates. The monitor shall have the power to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow for removal of abundant or large specimens. 2) Collected samples of sediments shall be washed to recover small invertebrate and vertebrate fossils. Recovered specimens shall be prepared so that they can be identified and permanently preserved 3) Specimens shall be identified, curated, and placed into a repository with permanent retrievable storage. 4) A report of findings, including an itemized inventory of recovered specimens, shall be prepared upon completion of the steps outlined above. The report shall include a discussion of the significance of all recovered specimens. The report and inventory, when submitted to the City of Menifee, will signify completion of the program to mitigate impacts to paleontologic resources. The Project would not disturb any human Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not remains, including those interred outside of required formal cemeteries. Geology and The proposed Project would not expose people Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not Soils or structures to potential substantial adverse required effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or Albert A. Associates 3-13 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Category Impact I death involving: i) rupture of a known Mitigation Measure I Implementation Timing Responsible Party Impact After Mitigation 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; ii) strong seismic ground shaking; iii) seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction; iv) landslides. The proposed Project would not result in Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not substantial soil erosion or the loss oftopsoil. required The proposed Project is not located on a Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that required would become unstable as a result of the Project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. _ The proposed Project is not located on Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-113 of the required Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property. The proposed Project will have a sewer system Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not installed. Therefore, the proposed Project will required not use septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water. Greenhouse Gas Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either See MM Air 2 through MM Air 6, above. See above See above Less than Emissions directly or indirectly, that may have a significant significant impact on the environment; Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Less than regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing significant the emissions of greenhouse gases. Hazards and The proposed Project would not create a Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not Hazardous significant hazard to the public or the required Materials environment through the routine transport, use. or disposal of hazardous materials. FT heproposed Project would not create a Mitigation not required Not applicable I Not applicable I Mitigation not significant hazard to the public or the I required Albert A. Associates 3-14 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Category Impact I environment through reasonably foreseeable Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing Responsible Party I Impact After Mitigation upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment The proposed Project will not emit hazardous Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not emissions or handle hazardous or acutely required hazardous materials, substances or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The proposed Project is not located on a site Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not which is included on a list of hazardous required materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, but is listed on a orphan site, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. The proposed Project is not located within an Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not airport land use plan or, where such a plan has required not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the projectarea. The proposed Project is not within the vicinity Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not of a private airstrip, result in a safety hazard required for people residing or working in the project area. The proposed Project will not impair Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not implementation of or physically interfere with required an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The proposed Project will expose people or Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or required death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands unless implementation of mitigation measures are incorporated. Hydrology and The Project would not violate any water quality Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not Albert A 10M. Associates 3-15 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Category Water Quality Impact standards or waste discharge requirements. Mitigation Measure Implementation Timin Responsible Party Impact After Mitigation required The Project would not substantially deplete Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not groundwater supplies or interfere substantially required with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted . The Project would not substantially alter the Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not existing drainage pattern of the site or area, required including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site; or substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site. The Project would not create or contribute Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not runoff water which would exceed the capacity required of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, The Project would not otherwise substantially Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not degrade water quality, required The Project would not place housing within a Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a required federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map; or place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would im ede or redirect flood flows. The Project would not expose people or Mitigation not required Not applicable No[ applicable Mitigation not structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or required Albert A. UUM, Associates 3-16 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Category Impact death involving flooding, including flooding as Mitigation Measure I Implementation Timing Responsible Party Impact After Mitigation a result of the failure of a levee or dam. The Project would not inundation by seiche, Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not tsunami, or mudflow. required Land Use and The proposed Project will not physically divide Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not Planning an established community. required The proposed Project will not conflict with any Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation required of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of voidin or miti atin an environmental effecthe proposed Project will not conflict with any Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not pplicable habitat conservation plan or natural rc' required ommunity conservation plan. Mineral The proposed Project will not result in the loss Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not Resources of availability of a known mineral resource that required would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. The proposed Project will not result in the loss Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not of availability of a locally -important mineral required resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. Noise The proposed Project would not expose MM Noise 1: Onsite and Offsite Project During Developer / Less than persons to generation of noise levels in excess construction activities, including deliveries, shall construction Contractor significant of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable be limited the hours of 6:00 a.m. standards of other agencies, m a tem er during the months of rune through. and between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 and 6: 0 p.m. during the months of October through May. MM Noise 2: During all Project site excavation During Developer/ Less than and grading both on -site and offsite, construction Contractor significant construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, Albert A.KWW," Associates 3-17 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge FOR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program consistent with manufacturer standards. The contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest any project related activities. MM Noise 3: The contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction -related noise/vibration sources and sensitive receptors nearest any Project related activities during all Project construction. MM Noise 4: During construction of both onsite and offsite activities, the developer shall require that all contractors turn off all construction equipment and delivery vehicles when not in use and prohibit idling in excess of five (5) minutes. MM Noise 5: For the duration of construction activities both onsite and offsite activities, the construction manager shall serve as the contact person should noise levels become disruptive to local residents. A sign shall be posted at the Project site with the contact phone number. MM Noise 6: To reduce impacts from construction noise to off -site sensitive receptors, prior to construction within 400-feet of a sensitive receptor, a temporary 12 foot high noise barrier with a STC Rating of 15 dBA or greater shall be in place during construction. Plans showing the location of and STC Rating of the temporary noise barrier shall be submitted to the Community Development Director for review prior to the commencement of any Project -related construction within 400-feet of a sensitive receptor. The Community Development Director shall review the location During construction Developer/ Contractor Lessthan significant During construction Developer/ Contractor Lessthan significant During construction Developer/ Contractor Lessthan significant Prior to construction Developer/ Contractor Lessthan significant Albert A.Associates 3-18 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and STC rating of the noise barriers to confirm that the barriers will attenuate construction - related noise to the levels to 65 dBA or less. As an alternative to the herein described temporary noise barrier, the Project applicant may prepare and submit to the Community Development Director a Construction Noise Reduction Plan with supporting analysis that identifies alternative construction noise reduction strategies that achieve 65 dBA at the nearest sensitive receptor. If after review of the Noise Reduction Plan, the Community Development Director determines that the alternative noise reduction strategies proposed by said plan achieve the desired noise reduction, such strategies may be used in place of the temporary barrier described above. MM Noise 7: The Project proponent shall Prior to Developer / Less than construct barriers 8-feet in height above the construction Contractor significant residential pads located adjacent to Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard, and barriers of 6-feet in height above the residential pads located along McLaughlin Road. These barriers may be constructed of any material weighing at least 4 pounds per square foot. They must also descend all the way to the ground and contain no holes or openings. Barriers shall wrap around to protect the side yards of lots adjacent to intersections. MM Noise 8: Enhanced building construction Prior to Developer / Less than methods and materials shall be employed to construction Contractor significant achieve interior noise levels of 45 dBA CNEL or less at single-family detached residential dwelling units adjacent to Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard. Building materials shall achieve a composite Sound Transmission Class value of 25 for single-family detached residential dwelling units adjacent to Valley I Albert A KW M. Associates 3-19 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Mitigation Measure Boulevard and a Sound Transmission Class value Implementation I Timi Responsibl e Party of 30 for single-family detached residential dwelling units along Goetz Road. MM Noise 9: All proposed single-family During Developer/ Less than detached residential dwelling units shall be construction Contractor significant provided with air conditioning/air ventilation units to allow for a closed window condition. The Project would not result in exposure of Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not persons to or generation of excessive required groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. The Project does not have the potential to See MM Noise 7, MM Noise 8 and MM Noise 9, See above See above Less than result in a substantial permanent increase in above. significant ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project; and The proposed Project does not have the potential to result in the exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies and result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the Project The Project does not have the potential to See MM Noise 1, MM Noise 2, MM Noise 5 See above See above Less than result in a substantial temporary or periodic through MM Noise 6, above significant increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project; The proposed Project is located outside the 55 Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not dB(A) CNEL contour from Perris Valley Airport required and outside the 60 dB(1) CNEL contour from March Air Reserve Base, and would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Albert A. MOM Associates 3-20 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Category Impact The proposed Project is not located within the Mitigation Measure Mitigation not required Implementation Responsible Timing I Party Not applicable Not applicable Impact After Mitigation Mitigation not vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project required expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Population and The proposed Project does not have the Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not Housing potential to induce substantial population required 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). The proposed Project does not have the Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not potential to displace substantial numbers of required existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The proposed Project does not have the Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not potential to displace substantial numbers of required people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Public Services The proposed Project does not have the Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not potential to result in substantial adverse required 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: fire protection, police protection, schools, or other public facilities: • Fire Protection • Police Protection • Schools, or Other Public Facilities - Library Albert A Associates 3-21 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Category Recreation Impact The Project would not increase the use of Mitigation Measure Mitigation not required implementation Timing Not applicable Responsible Party Not applicable Impact After Mitigation Mitigation not existing neighborhood and regional parks or required other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. The Project does not include recreational Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not facilities or requires the construction or required expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Transportation The Project would not conflict with an MM Trans 1: Prior to construction, sight Prior to Developer / Less than applicable plan, ordinance or policy distance at the project entrance roadway shall construction Contractor significant establishing measures of effectiveness for the be reviewed with respect to standard City of performance of the circulation system, taking Menifee sight distance standards at the time of into account all modes of transportation entitlement and confirmed during the including mass transit and non -motorized preparation of final grading, landscape and travel and relevant components of the street improvement plans. MM Trans 2: Participate in the phased Prior and during Developer / Significant until circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, construction of off -site traffic signals through construction Contractor such time as pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit; payment of Project's fair share of traffic signal the or conflict with an applicable congestion mitigation fees as shown in Table 5.7-P and 5.7- improvements management program, including, but not Q, are completed. limited to level of service standards and travel A Statement of demand measures, or other standards Overriding established by the county congestion Considerations management agency for designated roads or is required highways. prior to Project approval. MM Trans 3: Signing/striping shall be During Developer / Less than implemented in conjunction with detailed construction Contractor significant construction plans for the Project site. MM Trans 3A: A Construction Traffic Control During Developer / Less than Plan shall be prepared by the implementing construction Contractor significant developer and submitted to the City of Menifee Public Works Department for approval prior to the issuance of building permits for the Project. Albert A. VFM Associates 3-22 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsible Impact After Category Timing Party Mitigation The Construction Traffic Control Plan shall include the estimated day(s), time(s) and duration of any lane closures that are anticipated to be required by Project construction. The Construction Traffic Control Plan shall include measures such as, but not limited to, signage, flagmen, cones, advance community notice, or other acceptable measures to the satisfaction of the City of Menifee Public Works Department to minimize traffic impacts from construction. The purpose of the measures shall be to safely guide motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians, minimize traffic impacts and ensure the safe and even Flow of traffic consistent with City level of service standards and safety requirements. The implementing developer or its general contractor shall be required to notify the City of Menifee Public Works Department at least five (5) business days in advance of any planned lane closure that will be caused by Project construction. The City shall evaluate any other known lane closures, construction activities or special events which may conflict with the Project's scheduled lane closure or create additional impacts to traffic flow; and, if deemed necessary by the City of Menifee Public Works Department, the Project's lane closure may be postponed or rescheduled. MM Trans 313: Prior to grading, the During Developer / Less than implementing developer shall coordinate with construction Contractor significant Southern California Edison (SCE) to identify and obtain necessary encroachment permits as approved and deemed necessary by SCE. Albert A Associates 3-23 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact After Impact Category Impact Mitigation Measure MM Trans 4: Prior to issuance of first Implementation I Timing Prior to issuance Responsible Pa rty Developer / Mitigation Less than occupancy permit for Planning Area 1 construct of first occupancy Contractor significant full width improvements on Thornton Avenue, permit for and prior to issuance of the first occupancy Planning Area 1 permit for Planning Area 3 construct full width Thornton Avenue improvements on "U" Street between Goetz shall be Road and Thornton Avenue within the Project completed boundary. between Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard Prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit for Planning Area 3 "U" Street shall be completed between Goetz Road and Thornton Avenue MM Trans 5: Construct full width Prior to issuance Developer/ Less than improvements on all other internal roadways of the first Contractor significant within Phase I boundaries, prior to issuance of occupancy permit the first occupancy permit for Planning Area 3. for Planning Area 3 MM Trans 5A: Prior to construction, the Prior to Developer/ Less than implementing developer shall coordinate with construction Contractor significant Southern California Edison (SCE) for identification and installation of Anti -Climbing devices on transmission lines adjacent to project bike paths as approved and deemed necessary by SCE. MM Trans 6: Prior to issuance of the first Prior to issuance Developer / Less than occupancy permit for Planning Area 3 construct of first occupancy Contractor significant a temporary intersection of Goetz Road INS) permit for and U Street (South Goetz Project Planning Area 3 Driveway)(EW) with the following geometrics: Northbound: One shared, through and right Albert A. Associates 3-24 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Category Impact Mitigation Measure turn lane. Implementation I Timi � Responsible Party Impact After Mitigation Southbound: One shared leftturn and, through lane. Eastbound: N/A Westbound: One shared left turn and right turn lane. Stop controlled. MM Trans 7A: Prior to the issuance of the first Prior to issuance Developer / Less than occupancy permit for Planning Area 1 construct of first occupancy Contractor significant the intersection of Goetz Road INS) and Sotelo permit for Road -Thornton Avenue (EW) with the following Planning Area 1 geometries: Northbound: One shared left turn, through and right turn lane. Southbound: One shared left turn, through and right turn lane. Eastbound: One shared left turn, through and right turn lane. Stop controlled. Westbound: One shared left turn, through and right turn lane. Stop controlled. MM 78: Prior to the issuance of the 61st Prior to issuance Developer / Less than occuoancy permit for Planning Area 2 construct of 61'st Contractor significant the intersection of Goetz Road INS) and Sotelo occupancy permit Road -Thornton Avenue IEWI with the following for Planning Area geometries: 2 Northbound One left turn lane. One ;hared through and right turn lane Southbound- One teft turn lane. One shared through and right turn lane, Eastbound: One shared left turn, through and tight turn lane. Stop controlled Westbound: One shared left turn, through and Albert A. Associates 3-25 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation Responsible Impact After Category L Timi Party Mitigation right turn lane. Stoo controlled. MM Trans 8: Prior to issuance of 61" occupancy Prior to issuance Developer / Less than permit for Planning Area 2 construct the of 61" occupancy Contractor significant intersection of Valley Boulevard INS) and permit for Thornton Avenue (EW) with the following Planning Area 2 geometrics: Northbound: One left turn lane. One shared through and right turn lane. Southbound: One left turn lane. One shared through and right turn lane. Eastbound: One shared left turn, through and right turn lane. Stop controlled. Westbound: One shared left turn, through and right turn lane. Stop controlled. MM Trans 9: Prior to issuance of 61' Prior to issuance Developer / Less than occupancy permit for Planning Area 2 construct of 61" occupancy Contractor significant full width improvements on Goldenrod Avenue, permit for Valley Boulevard and Goetz Road within the Planning Area 2 Project boundary. MM Trans 10: Prior to issuance of the first Prior to issuance Developer / Less than occupancy permit for Planning Area 5 construct of the first Contractor significant partial width improvements on the southerly occupancy permit side of McLaughlin Road at its ultimate cross- for Planning Area section as a collector roadway adjacent to 5 Project boundary line. MM Trans 11: Prior to issuance of the first Prior to issuance Developer / Less than occupancy permit for Planning Area 5 construct of the first Contractor significant partial width improvements on the westerly occupancy permit side of Byers Road at its ultimate cross-section for Planning Area as a collector roadway adjacent to Project 5 boundary line. Albert A. Associates 3-26 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge Impact FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Category Impact Mitigation Measure MM Trans 12: Construct full width Implementation I Timi Prior to issuance � Responsible Party Developer / Impact After Mitigation Less than improvements on all other internal roadways of the first Contractor significant within each Planning Area as it is constructed occupancy permit (5, 6, or 7). For Planning Area 5.6or7 MM Trans 13: Concurrent with the Concurrent with Developer / Less than implementation of MM Trans 9 construct the the Contractor significant intersection of Goetz Road (NS) and Goldenrod implementation Avenue -McLaughlin Road (EW) with the of MM Trans 9 following geometrics: Northbound: One left turn lane. One shared through and right turn lane. Southbound: One left turn lane. One through lane. One right turn lane. Eastbound: One shared left turn, through and right turn lane. Stop controlled. Westbound: One shared left turn, through and right turn lane. Stop controlled. MM Trans 14: Concurrent with implementation Concurrent with Developer / Less than of MM Trans 10 construct the intersection of implementation Contractor significant Project Driveway (McLaughlin) (NS) and of MM Trans 10 McLaughlin Road (EW) with the following geometrics: Northbound: One shared left and right turn lane. Stop controlled. Southbound: Not Applicable. Eastbound: One shared through and right turn lane. Westbound: One shared left turn and through lane. Albert A. Wr . Associates 3_27 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Responsible Program ImpactAfter Impact Mitigation Measure I MM Trans 15: Concurrent with implementation Implementation Timing Concurrent with P arty Developer / Mitigation Less than of MM Trans 11 construct the intersection of implementation Contractor significant Byers Road (NS) and McLaughlin Road (EW) of MM Trans 11 with the following geometries: Northbound: One shared left and right turn lane Stop controlled. Southbound: Not Applicable Eastbound: One shared through and right turn lane. Westbound: One shared left turn and through lane. MM Trans 16: Prior to issuance of the first Prior to issuance Developer / Less than occupancy permit for Planning Area S construct of the first Contractor significant the intersection of Goetz Road (NS) and Project occupancy permit Driveway (North Goetz) (EW) with the following for Planning Area geometrics: 5 Northbound: One left turn lane. Two through lanes. Southbound: One through lane. One shared through and right turn lane. Eastbound: One shared left turn and right turn lane. Stop controlled. Westbound: Not Applicable. MM Trans 17: Concurrent with implementation Concurrent with Developer / Less than of MM Trans 9 construct the intersection of implementation Contractor significant Goetz Road -Valley Boulevard (NS) and Goetz of MM Trans 9 Road (EW) with the following geometrics: Northbound: One left turn lane. One through lane. One shared through and right turn lane. Southbound: One left turn lane. One through lane. One shared through and right turn lane. Albert A. © Associates 3-28 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Mitigation Measure Eastbound: One left turn lane. One shared Implementation Timing Responsible Party through and right turn lane. Stop controlled. Westbound: One left turn lane. One shared through and right turn lane. Stop controlled. MM Trans IS: Prior to issuance of the first Prior to issuance Developer / Less than occupancy permit for Planning Area 5 construct of the first Contractor significant the intersection of Goetz Road (NS) and Project occupancy permit Driveway (South Goetz) (EW) with the following for Planning Area geometrics: 5 Northbound: One left turn, through and shared right turn lane. Southbound: One left turn, through and shared right turn lane. Eastbound: One shared left turn, through and right turn lane. Stop controlled. Westbound: One shared left turn, through and right turn lane. Stop controlled. MM Trans 29: Prior to issuance of 61" Prior to issuance Developer / Less than occupancy permit for Planning Area 2 construct of 61" occupancy Contractor significant Goetz Road as a major roadway from westerly permit for project boundary (475 feet south of Goetz Road Planning Area 2 and Valley) to Thornton Avenue with 64 feet of pavement/median within 110 feet of right-of- way, with 14' outside lanes, 12' inside lanes and a 12' center two-way left -turn lane. MM Trans 20: Prior to the issuance of the first Prior to issuance Developer / Significant until occupancy permit for Planning Area 1 the of 1" occupancy Contractor such time as Project applicant shall install a traffic signal at permit for the the intersection of Murrieta Road (NS) and Planning Area 1 improvements Ethanac Road (EW) to include the following are completed. geometrics: A Statement of Northbound: One shared left turn, through and Overriding right turn lane. Considerations is required Southbound: One shared left turn and through I prior to Project Albert A. Associates 3_29 City of Menifee Section 3 Cimarron Ridge FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation ' Responsible 1 ImpactAfter Category Timing Party Mitigation lane. One right turn lane. I I I approval. Eastbound: One left turn lane. One shared through and right turn lane. Westbound: One left turn lane. One shared through and right turn lane. MM Trans 21: Prior to the issuance of the first Prior to issuance Developer / Significant until occupancy permit for Planning Area 1, the of 1" occupancy Contractor such time as Project applicant shall pay fair share fees permit for the towards the installation of a westbound Planning Area 1 improvements overlapping right turn traffic signal at the are completed. intersection of Goetz Road (NS) and Ethanac A Statement of Road (EW) to include the following geometrics: Overriding Northbound: One left turn lane. One through lane. One right turn lane. Considerations is required prior to Project Southbound: One left turn lane. Two through approval. lanes. One right turn lane. Eastbound: One left turn lane. One through lane. One right turn lane. Westbound: Two left turn lanes. One through lane. One right turn lane. MM Trans 22: Prior to issuance of 1" occupancy Prior to issuance Developer / Less than permit for Planning Area 5 construct 32' of of 1" occupancy Contractor significant pavement (one lane in each direction) of permit for McLaughlin Road from easterly project Planning Area 5 boundary to Calle Emiliano with a 6' pedestrian walkway on one side. MM Trans 23: Prior to issuance of 61st Prior to issuance Developer / Less than occupancy permit for Planning Area 2 construct of 61st occupancy Contractor significant 32' of pavement (one lane in each direction) of permit for Valley Boulevard from 475' south of Goetz Road Planning Area 2 to Thornton Avenue. Construct a trail within the existing 110' section to provide connectivity to the proposed Project trail. Albert A. Associates 3-30 City of Menifee _ Section 3 Cimarron Ridge FEIR Impact Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Category Mitigation Measure MM Trans 24: Prior to issuance of 61st Implementation I Timin Prior to issuance Responsible Party Developer / Impact After Mitigation Less than occupancy permit for Planning Area 2 construct of 61st occupancy Contractor significant full width improvements of Goetz Road at its permit for ultimate cross-section as a major roadway from Planning Area 2 McLaughlin Road north 784' to existing Goetz Road. MM Trans 25: Prior to the issuance of the first Prior to issuance Developer / Phase II — Less occupancy permit for Planning Area 5 the of first occupancy Contractor than significant Project applicant shall pa install a traffic signal permit for at the intersection of Murrieta Road (NS) and Planning Area 5 Phase I - Thornton Avenue -Sun Meadows Drive (EW) to Significant until include the following geometrics: such time as Northbound: One left turn lane. One through the lane. One shared through and right turn lane. improvements are completed. Southbound: One left turn lane. One shared A Statement of through and right turn lane. Overriding Eastbound: One shared left turn, through and Considerations right turn lane. is required prior to Project Westbound: One shared left turn, through and approval. right turn lane. MM Trans 26: In addition to the requirements Prior to issuance Developer / Significant until of mitigation measures MM Trans 1 through of first occupancy Contractor such time as MM Trans 26, the Project will participate in the permit for the cost of off -site improvements through payment Planning Area 1 improvements of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee are completed. (TUMF) and City of Menifee Development A Statement of Impact Fees (DIF) at the time of construction as Overriding shown in Table 5.7-N and 5.7-0. Considerations is required prior to Project Albert A. t Associates 3-31 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation � Timin Responsible ty �Party. MM Trans 27: In addition to the requirements During Developer / Significant until of mitigation measures MM Trans 1 through Construction Contractor such time as MM Trans 26, the Proiect will participate in the the cost of off -site improvements through the improvements payment of fair share fee's at the time of are completed. construction as shown on Table 5.7 P and 5.7 A Statement of g Overriding Considerations is required prior to Project approval. MM Trans 28: Prior to the issuance of the first Prior to issuance Developer / Less than occupancy permit for the Project, the Central I- of first occupancy Contractor significant. 215 improvements to add one southbound and permit for one northbound lane to the 1-215 freeway Planning Area 1 segments between State Route 60 and Murrieta Hot Springs Road shall be constructed and operational. MM Trans 29. All new on -site and/or off -site During Developer / Less than traffic signals and traffic signal modifications Construction Contractor significant that are required to be installed by the Proiect shall include traffic signal communication infrastructure, network equipment, and/or Advanced Traffic Management System IATM51 license software. Said traffic signal control devices shall be submitted with the traffic signal design plans and shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer prior to testing of new signal. Albert A. UFM Associates 3-32 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Category impact Mitigation Measure MM Trans 30- Traffic signal timing plans for new Implementation Responsible Timing Party During Developer / Impact After Mitigation Less than signalized intersections shall be submitted with Construction Contractor Significant the traffic signal design plans and shall be aoproved by the City Traffic Engineer prior to installation and testing of new signal. The proposed Project will not result in a Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not change in air traffic patterns, including either required an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. The Project will not substantially increase Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp required curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g„ farm equipment) The proposed Project will not result in Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not inadequate emergency access. required The proposed Project will not conflict with Mitigation not required Not applicable Not applicable Mitigation not adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding required public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. Utilities The proposed Project will not exceed No mitigation is required. Not applicable. Not applicable. Less than wastewater treatment requirements of the significant. applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board. The proposed Project will not require or result No mitigation is required. Not applicable_ Not applicable. Less than in the construction of new water or significant. wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Albert A Associates 3-33 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Category Impact I The proposed Project will not require or result Mitigation Measure No mitigation is required. implementation Timi Not applicable. Responsible Party Not applicable. Impact After Mitigation Less than in the construction of new storm water significant. drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. The proposed Project will have sufficient water No mitigation is required. Not applicable. Not applicable. Less than supplies available to serve the project from significant. existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed. The proposed Project will not result in a No mitigation is required. Not applicable. Not applicable. Less than determination by the wastewater treatment significant. 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. The proposed Project will not be served by a MM Util 1: Prior to issuance of a building Prior to Developer/ Less than landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to permit for each phase, a Waste Recycling Plan construction Contractor significant accommodate the project's solid waste (WRP) shall be submitted to Riverside County disposal needs. Waste Management Department for approval. Ata minimum, the WRP must identify the materials (i.e., concrete, asphalt, wood, etc.) that will be generated by construction and development, the projected amounts, the measures/methods that will be taken to recycle, reuse, and/or reduce the amount of materials, the facilities and/or haulers that will be utilized, and the targeted recycling or reduction rate. During project construction, the project site shall have, at a minimum, two (2) bins, one for waste disposal and the other for the recycling of Construction and Demolition (C&D) materials. Additional bins are encouraged to be used for further source separation of C&D recyclable materials. Accurate record keeping (receipts) for recycling of C&D recyclable materials and solid waste disposal must be kept. Arrangements can be made through the AlbertA. � Associates 3-34 City of Menifee Cimarron Ridge FEIR Section 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Category Impact Mitigation Measure franchise hauler. Implementation Timing Responsible Party Impact After Mitigation MM Util 2: Prior to issuance of occupancy Prior to Developer/ Less than permits for each phase, evidence (i.e., receipts construction Contractor significant or other type of verification) to demonstrate project compliance with the approved WRP shall be presented by the project proponent to the Planning Division of the Riverside County Waste Management Department. The proposed Project will comply with federal, No mitigation is required. Not applicable. Not applicable. Less than state, and local statutes and regulations significant. related to solid waste. Albert A. Associates 3-35 City of Menifee Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project APPENDIX B HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS February 2024 Appendix B TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 36658 (PLN-0246) M AJOR MODIFICATION AND REVISION AND SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) AMENDMENT CITY OF MENIFEE, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ROMOLAND USGS 7.5-MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE SECTIONS 17, 20, 29, AND 30, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Consistency Analysis Prepared For: KIMLEY-HORN 3880 Lemon Street, Suite 420 Riverside, California 92501 Contact: Kari Cano Prepared By: ELMT Consulting, Inc. 2201 N. Grand Avenue #10098 Santa Ana, California 92711 Contact: Travis J. McGill September 2023 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 36658 (PLN-0246) MAJOR MODIFICATION AND REVISION AND SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) AMENDMENT CITY OF MENIFEE, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Consistency Analysis The undersigned certify that the statements furnished in this report and exhibits present data and information required for this biological evaluation, and the facts, statements, and information presented is a complete and accurate account of the findings and conclusions to the best of our knowledge and beliefs. Travis J. McGill Director/Biologist Thomas J. McGill, Ph.D. Managing Director September 2023 Table of Contents Section 1 Introduction....................................................... _ 1 1.1 PROJECT Location........................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Project Description............................................................................................................ 2 Section2 Methodology...................................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Literature Review............................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Field Investigation.............................................................................................................. 6 2.3 Soils Series Assessment ..................... 2.4 Plant Communities.......................................................................................................... 7 2.5 Plants...................................................................................................................................7 2.6 Wildlife...............................................................................................................................8 2.7 Jurisdictional Drainages and Wetlands .................................. Section3 Existing Conditions...........................................................................................................9 3.1 Local Climate..................................................................................•--................................ 9 3.2 Topography and Soils ............... ........................ _9 3.3 Surrounding Land Uses...................................................................................................... 9 Section4 Discussion........................................................................................................................10 4.1 Site Conditions................................................................................................................ 10 4.2 Vegetation.........................................................................................................................10 4.2.1 Disturbed...........................................................................................................................10 4.3 Wildlife ........................ ........................................................................................... _ . 10 4.3.1 Fish................................................................................................................................... 10 4.3.2 Amphibians......................................................................................................---.............. 11 4.3.3 Reptiles............................................................................................................................. 11 4.3.4 Birds..................................................................................................................................11 4.3.5 Mammals.................................................................................................... ....... ............... 11 4.4 Nesting Birds.................................................................................................................... 11 4.5 Wildlife Corridors and Linkages...................................................................................... 12 4.6 State and Federal Jurisdictional Areas.............................................................................. 12 4.7 Special -Status Biological Resources .......................... 4.7.1 Special -Status Plants......................................................................................................... 13 4.7.2 Special -Status Wildlife......................................................................................... 13 4.7.3 Special -Status Plant Communities.................................................................................... 14 TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consislencv Analvsis / Table of Contents 4.8 Critical Habitat.................................................................................................................. 14 Section5 MSHCP Consistency Analysis.......................................................................................16 5.1 Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools....................................................................... 16 5.1.1 Riparian/Riverine Areas................................................................................................... 16 5.1.2 Vernal Pools..................................................................................................................... 17 5.2 Narrow Endemic Plant Species ..................................................... 5.3 Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.............................................................. ............. 21 5.4 Additional MSHCP Considerations.................................................................................21 Section7 Conclusion and Recommendations............................................................................... 25 Section8 References........................................................................................................................ 28 EXHIBITS Exhibit1: Regional Vicinity ................................................................................................................3 Exhibit 2: Exhibit 3: Exhibit 4: Exhibit 5: Fly",0100 K/ Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D SiteVicinity ........................................................................................................................ 4 ProjectSite..........................................................................................................................5 Vegetation............................................................................... MSHCP Conservation Areas .................................................. Site Plan Site Photographs Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources Regulations .....................................15 ......................................... 24 TTMNo. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consisiencv Analvsis d Section I Introduction This report contains the findings of ELMT Consulting's (ELMT) Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) consistency analysis for the proposed Major Modification and Revision to Tentative Tract Map 36658 (PLN22-0246) and the Amendment to Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) (project, project site, site) located in the City of Menifee, Riverside County, California. The report was prepared to document baseline conditions and assess the potential for special -status t plant and wildlife species to occur within the proposed project site that could pose a constraint to implementation of the proposed project. Special attention was given to the suitability of the on -site habitat to support special -status species identified by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife's (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and other electronic databases as potentially occurring in the general vicinity of the project. Additionally, the report also addresses resources protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code (FGC), federal Clean Water Act (CWA) regulated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) respectively, and Section 1602 of the FGC administered by CDFW. The City of Menifee is a signatory to the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Since the City of Menifee will be the lead agency for the proposed project, the project will need to be consistent with the rules and regulations set forth in the MSHCP. The Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) MSHCP Information Map was queried to determine if the MSHCP identifies any potential survey requirements for the project. Further, the project site was reviewed against the MSHCP to determine if the site is located within any MSHCP areas including Criteria Cells (core habitat and wildlife movement corridors) or areas proposed for conservation. Based on the RCA MSHCP Information Map query and review of the MSHCP, it was determined that the project site is located within the Sun City/Menifee Valley Area Plan of the MSHCP but is not located within any Criteria Cells or MSHCP Conservation Areas. However, a portion of the western boundary of the site is located adjacent to Public/Quasi Public land, and the site is located within designated survey areas for burrowing owl (Alhene cunicularia) and Narrow Endemic Plant Species Munz's onion (Allium munzii), San Diego ambrosia (Ambrosia pumila), many -stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis), spreading navarretia (Navarretia fossallis), California Orcutt grass (Orcullia californica), and Wright's trichocoronis (Trichocoronis wrighlii var. wrightii). 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION The project site is generally located north and east of Interstate 15, west of Interstate 215, and south of State Route 74 in the City of Menifee, Riverside County, California (Exhibit 1, Regional Vicinity). The project site is depicted on the Romoland quadrangle of the United States Geological Survey's (USGS) 7.5-minute As used in this report, "special -status" refers to plant and wildlife species that are federally, State, and MSHCP listed, proposed, or candidates; plant species that have been designated with a California Native Plant Society Rare Plant Rank; wildlife species that are designated by the CDFW as fully protected, species of special concern, or watch list species; and specialty protected natural vegetation communities as designated by the CDFW. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific PlanN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analvsis / Introduction topographic map within Sections 17, 20, 29, and 30 of Township 5 South, Range 3 West (Exhibit 2, Site Vicinity). Specifically, the proiect site is roughly bounded to the north by McLaughlin Road and to the east by Byers Road and is located east of Goetz Road and north of Rouse Road (Exhibit 3, Project Site). 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Planning Application for Specific Plan Amendment No. PLN23-0060 (2013-247) TR36658 "Cimarron Ridge" is for the amendment of the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan (2013-247) adopted 10/21/2015 and proposes changes to the previously established Planning Area No. 4 (PA-4), Planning Area No. 5 (PA-5), and Planning Area No. 6 (PA-6). The Project proposes transferring 49 residential lots from PA-4 to PA-5 and transferring the 10.9-acre park from PA-5 to PA-4 but does not propose any alterations to density as a result of these revisions. Planning Area No. 4, will consist of 81 residential lots and include a 10.9-acre park consisting of active and passive uses and amenities, including a dog park for the community and on - site parking. Planning Area No. 5 will consist of 154 residential lots, a 1.5-acre recreation area, and 1.2- acre pickle ball facility in conjunction with Planning Area No. 6, which proposing 93 residential lots, and both Planning Areas will be age restricted gated communities. Proiect Description: Major Modification No. PLN22-0246 (Tentative Tract Map Revision for TR36658) The following modifications are proposed for Cimarron Ridge TR36658: All streets servicing TR36658-5, and TR36658-6, will be converted from public streets to private streets. The design of the intersection of Smokey Quartz Street, and Goetz Road, will be revised to accommodate the proposed gated entry turnaround prior to the gate addition. Gates will also be added to the east entry of phase TR36658-5 on Byers Road and the north entry on McLaughlin Road. Phase TR36658-4 proposes to relocate 49 residential lots to phase TR36658-5 where the 10.9 park would be located. The Project proposes to relocate 10.9 acres of park acreage from phase TR36658- 5 to the northern portion of phase TR36658-4. A 1.5-acre park is proposed to remain in phase TR36658-5. Refer to Attachment A, Site Plan. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specifrc Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analvsis Lake Arrowhead Big Bea City Big Bea Lake San Bernardln� ��'•—`••� land: ', .r- r _ _ - -r st,ryv_ ^ / rn% Linda - - rrace -Yucaipa — — — — — — — Ids Moreno Valley r r _ / 1 r ,r n ♦ N 0 0 1 ♦.+ _ • 0 Ans 1 )�( sun City iIvin %, \.LAriaL:A::� % aElsinore Co4�eta - Wndgaill .-l3 LakeFBrest Mmgarlt_ � on g"VNlgud Worrier � Muni Laguna P�yai ♦ S4 Clemente ♦1 f�= Fallbrook ♦3 - Ocea tds Vista r Catabad \ o \ Lnclnflaw ! t iJ t • "� / ~ j"f� lip •K �� Escondido �' 1Ratnaria i HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND MSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS 0 2.5 5 10 TPM No. 36658 ;� , , ,. ELMT ; Miles Re ional Vicinity Source: World Street Map, Riverside County Exhibit 1 HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND MSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS TPM No. 36658 A4 C LMTI r� 0 1,000 2,000 4,00o �-� - Site Vicinity ©_c, - ) 1 ��(A Source: USA Topographic Map, Riverside County Exhibit 2 Legend Tentative Tract No. 36658 Boundary Revised Planning Area Section 2 Methodology A literature review and records search were conducted to determine which special -status biological resources have the potential to occur on or within the general vicinity of the project site. In addition to the literature review, a general habitat assessment or field investigation was conducted. The field investigation was conducted to document existing conditions within the project site to assess the potential for special - status biological resources to occur. 2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW Prior to conducting the field investigation, species and habitat information was gathered from the reports related to the specific project and relevant databases for the Romoland USGS quadrangle to determine which species and/or habitats would be expected to occur on -site. These sources include: • California Native Plant Society Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) database; • California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Rarefind 5; • CNDDB Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS); • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Program "My Waters" data layers • Google Earth Pro historic aerial imagery (1985-2022); • Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan • United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), Soil Survey'-; • United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Critical Habitat designations for Threatened and Endangered Species; • USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI); • Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) MSHCP Information Map; and 2006 Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions for the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Area. The literature review provided a baseline from which to inventory the biological resources potentially occurring on the project site. The CNDDB database was used, in conjunction with ArcGIS software, to locate the nearest recorded occurrences of special -status species and determine the distance from the project site. 2.2 FIELD INVESTIGATION Following the literature review, biologist Megan E. Peukert inventoried and evaluated the condition of the habitat within the project site on September 7, 2023. Plant communities identified on aerial photographs '- A soil series is defined as a group of soils with similar profiles developed from similar parent materials under comparable climatic and vegetation conditions. These profiles include major horizons with similar thickness, arrangement, and other important characteristics, which may promote favorable conditions for certain biological resources. TTMNo. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific PlanN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consislency Analysis 6 Methodology during the literature review were verified by walking meandering transects through the plant communities and along boundaries between plant communities. All plant and wildlife species observed, as well as dominant plant species within each plant community, were recorded. Plant species observed during the field survey were identified by visual characteristics and morphology in the field. Unusual and less familiar plant species were photographed during the field survey and identified in the laboratory using taxonomical guides. Wildlife detections were made through observation of scat, trails, tracks, burrows, nests, and/or visual and aural observation. In addition, site characteristics such as soil condition, topography, hydrology, anthropogenic disturbances, indicator species, condition of on -site plant communities, and presence of potential jurisdictional drainage and/or wetland features were noted. Special attention was given to special -status habitats and/or undeveloped areas, which have higher potentials to support special -status plant and wildlife species. Areas providing suitable habitat for burrowing owl were closely surveyed for signs of presence during the field survey. Methods to detect the presence of burrowing owls included direct observation, aural detection, and signs of presence including pellets, whitewash, feathers, or prey remains. No limitations significantly affected the results and conclusions given herein_ Surveys were conducted during the appropriate season to observe the target species, in good weather conditions, by qualified biologists who followed all pertinent protocols. 2.3 SOILS SERIES ASSESSMENT On -site and adioining soils were researched prior to the field survey using the USDA NRCS Soil Survey for Western Riverside Area, California. In addition, a review of the local geological conditions and historical aerial photographs was conducted to assess the ecological changes that the project site has undergone. 2.4 PLANT COMMUNITIES Plant communities were mapped using 7.5-minute USGS topographic base maps and aerial photography. The plant communities were delineated on an aerial photograph, classified in accordance with those described in the MSHCP, and then digitized into GIS Arcview. The Arcview application was used to compute the area of each plant community in acres 2.5 PLANTS Common plant species observed during the field survey were identified by visual characteristics and morphology in the field and recorded in a field notebook. Unusual and less -familiar plants were photographed in the field and identified in the laboratory using taxonomic guides. Taxonomic nomenclature used in this study follows the 2012 Jepson Manual (Hickman 2012). In this report, scientific names are provided immediately following common names of plant species (first reference only). TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habilal Assessment and MSHCP Consisiencv Analvsis 7 Methodology 2.6 WILDLIFE Wildlife species detected during field surveys by sight, calls, tracks, scat, or other sign were recorded during surveys in a field notebook. Field guides were used to assist with identification of wildlife species during the survey included The Sibley Field Guide to the Birds of Western North America (Sibley 2003), A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians (Stebbins 2003), and A Field Guide to Mammals of North America (Reid 2006). Although common names of wildlife species are well -standardized, scientific names are provided immediately following common names in this report (first reference only). 2.7 JURISDICTIONAL DRAINAGES AND WETLANDS Aerial photography was reviewed prior to conducting a field investigation in order to locate and inspect any potential natural drainage features, ponded areas, or water bodies that may fall under the jurisdiction of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board), or CDFW. In general, surface drainage features indicated as blue -line streams on USGS maps that are observed or expected to exhibit evidence of flow are considered potential riparian/riverine habitat and are also subject to state and federal regulatory jurisdiction. In addition, ELMT reviewed jurisdictional waters information through examining historical aerial photographs to gain an understanding of the impact of land -use on natural drainage patterns in the area. The USFWS National Wetland Inventory (NWI) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Program "My Waters" data layers were also reviewed to determine whether any hydrologic features and wetland areas have been documented on or within the vicinity of the project site. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consisiencv Analvsis Section 3 Existing Conditions 3.1 LOCAL CLIMATE The City of Menifee features a somewhat cooler version of a Mediterranean climate, or semi -arid climate, with warm, sunny, dry summers and cool, rainy, mild winters. Relative to other areas in Southern California, winters are colder chilly to cold morning temperatures with frost common. Climatological data obtained for the City of Riverside indicates the annual precipitation averages 11.11 inches per year. Almost all of the precipitation in the form of rain occurs in the months between December and April, with hardly any occurring between the months of May and September. The wettest months are January and February, with monthly average totals precipitation of 2.24 and 3.29 inches, respectively, and the driest months are June and July, both with monthly average total precipitation of 0.04 inches. The average maximum and minimum temperatures are 86- and 46-degrees Fahrenheit (7), respectively, with July and August (monthly average high 100°F) being the hottest months and December and January (monthly average lows 34 and 35°F) being the coldest. The temperature during the site visit was in the high-80s°F with clear skies and calm winds. 3.2 TOPOGRAPHY AND SOILS On -site topography is relatively flat, except where recently graded areas and water detention basins are present to support ongoing construction activities. The site occurs at an approximate elevation of 1,430 to 1,670 feet above mean sea level and slopes from south to north. Based on the NRCS USDA Web Soil Survey, the project site is historically underlain by Auld clay (2 to 8 percent slopes), Auld clay (8 to 15 percent slopes), Cajalco fine sandy loam (8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded), Cajalco rocky fine sandy loam (5 to 15 percent slopes, eroded), Cajalco rocky fine sandy loam (15 to 50 percent slopes, eroded), and Las Posas loam (8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded). Soils on -site have been mechanically disturbed and heavily compacted from historic and ongoing land uses (i.e., site preparation activities). 3.3 SURROUNDING LAND USES The project site occurs a portion of the City of Menifee that is gradually transitioning from agricultural land uses to urbanization. Historically, the area supported agricultural practices. At present, the project site is bounded to the north by McLaughlin Road with a high -voltage transmission easement and undeveloped land beyond; to the east by Byers Road, undeveloped land, and residential development; to the south by undeveloped land; and to the west by Goetz Road, undeveloped land, and residential development. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific P1anN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistencv Analysis 9 Section 4 Discussion 4.1 SITE CONDITIONS The project site supports developed land and undeveloped land in varying stages of site preparation and construction for TTM No. 36658 (i.e., rough grading and street and infrastructure installation). Historic aerials indicate that site preparation has been ongoing in some fashion since at least 2005. These disturbances have eliminated the natural plant communities that historically occurred on the project site and surrounding area. No natural plant communities will be impacted by project implementation. Refer to Appendix B, Site Photographs, for representative site photographs of the project site. 4.2 VEGETATION Due to historic land uses and ongoing disturbances, no natural plant communities are supported within the project site. The site supports one (1) land cover types that would be classified as disturbed. Refer to Exhibit 4, Vegetation. 4.2.1 Disturbed Disturbed land is present along site boundaries where historic and ongoing disturbances have removed the natural plant communities that were formerly supported, but regular disturbance prevents the establishment of new plant communities. This land cover type is primarily consolidated to the northern and western site boundaries. Disturbed land supported by the site varies in vegetative density from barren to dense and is usually dominated by non-native weedy/early successional species with some native species present. Common plant species observed in the disturbed portions of the site include deerweed (Acmispon glaber), tocalote (Centaurea melitensis), doveweed (Croton setiger), brittlebush (Encelia farinosa), california buckwheat (Eriogonum californicum), common sunflower (Helianthus annuus), mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), tree tobacco (Nicoliana glauca), stinknet (Oncosiphon pihdifer), Jerusalem thorn (Parkinsonia aculeala), fountaingrass (Pennisetum selaceum), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), salt cedar (Tamarix ramossisima), and vinegarweed (Trichostema lanceolalum). 4.3 WILDLIFE Plant communities provide foraging habitat, nesting and denning sites for wildlife species, and shelter from adverse weather or predation. This section provides a discussion of wildlife species that were observed during the field survey or that are expected to occur within the project site. The discussion is to be used as a general reference and is limited by the season, time of day, and weather condition in which the field survey was conducted. Wildlife detections were based on calls, songs, scat, tracks, burrows, and direct observation. 4.3.1 Fish The MSHCP does not identify any covered or special -status fish species as potentially occurring on the project site. No fish or hydrogeomorphic features (e.g., perennial creeks, ponds, lakes, reservoirs) that TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific PlanN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habilat Assessment and MSHCP Consislencv Analvsis 10 Discussion would provide suitable habitat for fish were observed on the project site. Therefore, no fish are expected to occur and are presumed absent from the project site. 4.3.2 Amphibians The MSHCP does not identify any covered or special -status amphibian species as potentially occurring on the project site. No amphibians or hydrogeomorphic features (e.g., perennial creeks, ponds, lakes, reservoirs) that would provide suitable habitat for amphibian species were observed on or within the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, no amphibians are expected to occur on the project site and are presumed absent. 4.3.3 Reptiles The MSHCP does not identify any covered or special -status reptilian species as potentially occurring on the project site. The project site provides limited habitat for a few reptile species adapted to significantly degraded conditions and active construction. The only reptile observed during the field investigation was Great Basin fence lizard (Sceloporits occidentalis longipes). Other common reptilian species that could be expected to occur include western side -blotched lizard (Ula stansburiana elegans) and southern alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata). Due to the high level of anthropogenic disturbances within and surrounding the project site, no special -status reptilian species are expected to occur. 4.3.4 Birds In accordance with the MSHCP, the project site is located within the designated survey area for burrowing owl. The project site and surrounding area provide limited foraging habitat for avian species adapted to a high degree of human disturbance. Avian species detected during the field investigation include anna's hummingbird (Calyple anna), turkey vulture (Calharles aura), american crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), common raven (Comis corax), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), savannah sparrow (Passercuhls sandwichensis), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), and say's phoebe (Sayornis saya). 4.3.5 Mammals The MSHCP does not identify any covered or special -status mammalian species as potentially occurring on the project site. The project provides limited foraging and denning habitat for mammalian species adapted to degraded conditions and routine anthropogenic disturbance. The only mammalian species detected during the field investigation was coyote (Canis latrans). Due to ongoing ground disturbing activities, no fossorial mammal species are expected to occur on -site. Further, no bat species are expected to occur due to a lack of suitable roosting habitat (Le_, suitable trees, crevices, abandoned structures) within and surrounding the project site. 4.4 NESTING BIRDS No active nests were directly observed on -site during the field survey, which was conducted outside of the breeding season. Although heavily disturbed, the site has the potential to provide nesting habitat for year- TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consislencv Analvsis I1 Discussion round and seasonal avian residents, as well as migrating songbirds that could occur in the area that area adapted to a high degree of disturbance and active construction. Nesting birds are protected pursuant to the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513 prohibit the take, possession, or destruction of birds, their nests or eggs). If construction occurs between February Is` and August 31", a pre -construction clearance survey for nesting birds should be conducted prior to the start of any vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed during construction. 4.5 WILDLIFE CORRIDORS AND LINKAGES Habitat linkages provide links between larger undeveloped habitat areas that are separated by development. Wildlife corridors are similar to linkages but provide specific opportunities for animals to disperse or migrate between areas. A corridor can be defined as a linear landscape feature of sufficient width to allow animal movement between two comparatively undisturbed habitat fragments. Adequate cover is essential for a corridor to function as a wildlife movement area. It is possible for a habitat corridor to be adequate for one species yet inadequate for others. Wildlife corridors are significant features for dispersal, seasonal migration, breeding, and foraging. Additionally, open space can provide a buffer against both human disturbance and natural fluctuations in resources. The project site has not been identified as occurring in a wildlife corridor or linkage. The nearest linkage to the project, as identified by the MSHCP, occurs approximately 0.9 miles to the northwest in association with the San Jacinto River. 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 any 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_ 4.6 STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONAL AREAS There are three key agencies that regulate activities within inland streams, wetlands, and riparian areas in California. The Corps Regulatory Branch regulates discharge of dredge and/or fill materials into "waters of the United States" pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. Of the State agencies, the Regional Board regulates discharges into surface waters pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and the California Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act and the CDFW regulates alterations to streambed and associated plant communities pursuant to Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code. No discernible drainage courses, inundated areas, or wetland features/obligate plant species that would be considered jurisdictional by the United States Anny Corps of Engineers (Corps), Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board), or CDFW were observed within the proposed project site. Based on the proposed site plan, project activities will not result in impacts to Corps, Regional Board, or CDFW jurisdictional areas and regulatory approvals will not be required. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habilat Assessment and MSHCP Consistencv Analysis 12 Discussion 4.7 SPECIAL -STATUS BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES A records search was conducted to determine reported locations of special -status plant and wildlife species as well as natural communities of special concern in the Romoland USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle. Special - status plant and wildlife species were evaluated for their potential to occur within the project site based on habitat requirements, availability, and quality of suitable habitat, and known distributions. Seventeen (17) special status plant species, fifty-two (52) special -status wildlife species, and two (2) special -status plant communities have been recorded in the Romoland USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle. Species determined to have the potential to occur within the general vicinity are provided in Appendix C, Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources. 4.7.1 Special -Status Plants According to the CNDDB and CNPS, seventeen (17) special -status plant species have been recorded in the Romoland quadrangle (refer to Appendix Q. No special -status plant species were observed on the project site during the field investigation. The project site and surrounding area have been subject to decades of •anthropogenic disturbances which have removed native plant communities that historically occurred. Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of on -site habitats, it was determined that the site has a low potential to support particulate tarplant (Deinandra paniculala). It was further determined that the site does not have potential to support any of the other special -status plant species known to occur in the vicinity of the site and all are presumed to be absent. 4.7.2 Special -Status Wildlife According to the CNDDB, fifty-two (52) special -status wildlife species have been reported in the Romoland quadrangle (refer to Appendix Q. No special -status wildlife species were observed during the field investigation. Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of on -site habitats, it was determined that the project site has a low potential to support Cooper's hawk (Accipiler cooperii), sharp -shinned hawk (Accipiler sirialus), Costa's hummingbird (Calypie costae), and California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actin). It was further determined that the project site does not have the potential to support any of the other special -status wildlife species known to occur in the vicinity of the site and all are presumed to be absent. None of the aforementioned species are federally or state listed as threatened or endangered. Cooper's hawk, sharp -shinned hawk, and California horned lark are covered species under the MSHCP. None of these avian species are expected to nest on -site due to lack of suitable nesting opportunities, occurrence of the site outside of geographic breeding ranges, or severity of routine disturbances. To ensure impacts to aforementioned avian species do not occur from implementation of the proposed project, a pre -construction nesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance. With implementation of the pre -construction nesting bird clearance survey, impacts to the aforementioned species will be less than significant and no mitigation will be required. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habilat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analvsis 13 Discussion 4.7.3 Special -Status Plant Communities The CNDDB lists two (2) special -status habitats as being identified within the Romoland quadrangle: Southern Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest and Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest, which do not occur on the project site. No CDFW special -status plant communities occur within the boundaries of the project site. 4.8 CRITICAL HABITAT Under the federal Endangered Species Act, "Critical Habitat" is designated at the time of listing of a species or within one year of listing. Critical Habitat refers to specific areas within the geographical range of a species at the time it is listed that include the physical or biological features that are essential to the survival and eventual recovery of that species. Maintenance of these physical and biological features requires special management considerations or protection, regardless of whether individuals or the species are present or not. All federal agencies are required to consult with the USFWS regarding activities they authorize, fund, or permit which may affect a federally listed species or its designated Critical Habitat. The purpose of the consultation is to ensure that projects will not jeopardize the continued existence of the listed species or adversely modify or destroy its designated Critical Habitat. The designation of Critical Habitat does not affect private landowners, unless a project they are proposing is on federal lands, uses federal funds, or requires federal authorization or permits (e.g., funding from the Federal Highways Administration or a CWA Permit from the Corps). If a there is a federal nexus, then the federal agency that is responsible for providing the funding or permit would consult with the USFWS. The project site is not located with federally designated Critical Habitat. The nearest designated Critical Habitat is located approximately 290 feet to the west for coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica), beyond existing disturbed land and Goetz Road. No impacts to federally designated Critical Habitat will occur from project implementation. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-347 (PLN33-0060) Habitat Assessmeni and MSHCP Consistency Analvsis 14 o zso soo 1,000 TPM No. 36658 ELMT l� Feet Vegetation Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Riverside County Exhibit 4 Section 5 MSHCP Consistency Analysis The project site is located in the Sun City/Menifee Valley Area Plan of the MSHCP but is not located within any Criteria Cells or designated conservation areas (Exhibit 6, MSHCP Conservation Areas). Additionally, the project site is the project site is only located within the MSHCP designated survey area for burrowing owl. Since the City of Menifee is a permittee under the MSHCP and, while the project is not specifically identified as a Covered Activity under Section 7.1, Covered Activities Outside Criteria Area and PQP Lands, of the MSHCP, public and private development that are outside of Criteria Areas and Public/Quasi- Public (PQP)' Lands are permitted under the MSHCP, subject to consistency with MSHCP policies that apply to area outside of Criteria Areas. As such, to achieve coverage, the project must be consistent with the following policies of the MSHCP: • The policies for the protection of species associated with Riparian/Riverine areas and vernal pools as set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP; • The policies for the protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species as set forth in Section 6.1.3; • The Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.4; and • The requirements for conducting additional surveys as set forth in Section 6.3.2 5.1 RIPARIAN/RIVERINE AREAS AND VERNAL POOLS 5.1.1 Riparian/Riverine Areas As defined under Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP, Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools, riparian/riverine areas are areas dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergent plants, or emergent mosses and lichens which occur close to or are dependent upon nearby freshwater, or areas with freshwater flowing during all or a portion of the year. Conservation of these areas is intended to protect habitat that is essential to a number of listed or special -status water -dependent fish, amphibian, avian, and plant species. Any alteration or loss of riparian/riverine habitat from development of a Project will require the preparation of a Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) analysis to ensure the replacement of any lost functions and values of habitats in regards to the listed species. This assessment is independent from considerations given to waters of the United States and waters of the State under the CWA, the California Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and CDFW jurisdictional streambed under the California Fish and Game Code. No jurisdictional drainages, riparian/riverine and/or wetland features were observed within the project site during the field investigation. Additionally, the flood control channel on the eastern boundary of the project site is a man-made feature and does not qualify as riparian/riverine habitat. Development of the proposed project will not result in impacts to riparian/riverine habitats and a DBESP will not be required for the loss 3 PQP Lands are a subset of MSHCP Conservation Area lands totaling approximately 347,000 acres of lands known to be in public/private ownership and expected to be managed for open space value and/or in a manner that contributes to the Conservation of Covered Species (including lands contained in existing reserves). The acreage of PQP Lands has been accounted for in the MSHCP tracking process for assembling the Conservation Area. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific PlanN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analvsis 16 MSHCP Consistency Analysis of riparian/riverine habitat from development of the proposed project. Therefore, the project is consistent with Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. 5.1.2 Vernal Pools Vernal pools are seasonally inundated, ponded areas that only form in regions where specialized soil and climatic conditions exist. During fall and winter rains typical of Mediterranean climates, water collects in shallow depressions where downward percolation of water is prevented by the presence of a hard pan or clay pan layer (duripan) below the soil surface. Later in the spring when rains decrease and the weather warms, the water evaporates and the pools generally disappear by May. The shallow depressions remain relatively dry until late fall and early winter with the advent of greater precipitation and cooler temperatures. Vernal pools provide unusual "flood and drought" habitat conditions to which certain plant and wildlife species have specifically adapted as well as invertebrate species such as fairy shrimp. One of the factors for determining the suitability of the habitat for fairy shrimp would be demonstrable evidence of seasonal ponding in an area of topographic depression that is not subject to flowing waters. These astatic pools are typically characterized as vernal pools. More specifically, vernal pools are seasonal wetlands that occur in depression areas without a continual source of water. They have wetland indicators of all 3 parameters (soils, vegetation, and hydrology) during the wetter portion of the growing season but normally lack wetland indicators of hydrology and/or vegetation during the drier portion of the growing season. Obligate hydrophytes and facultative wetlands plant species are normally dominant during the wetter portion of the growing season. The determination that an area exhibits vernal pool characteristics and the definition of the watershed supporting vernal pool hydrology is made on a case -by -case basis. Such determinations should consider the length of time the area exhibits upland and wetland characteristics and the manner in which the area fits into the overall ecological system as a wetland. The seasonal hydrology of vernal pools provides for a unique environment, which supports plants and invertebrates specifically adapted to a regime of winter inundation, followed by an extended period when the pool soils are dry. The MSHCP lists two general classes of soils known to be associated with special -status plant species; clay soils and Traver -Domino Willow association soils. The specific clay soils known to be associated with special -status species within the MSHCP plan area include Bosanko, Auld, Altamont, and Porterville series soils, whereas Traver -Domino Willows association includes saline -alkali soils largely located along floodplain areas of the San Jacinto River and Salt Creek. Without the appropriate soils to create the impermeable restrictive layer, none of the special -status species associated with vernal pools can occur on the project site. Exeter sandy loam (0 to 2 percent slopes), and Madera fine sandy loam (0 to 2 percent slopes) are mapped as historically underlying the project site. In addition, agricultural land uses spanning much of the past century have thoroughly mixed and compacted on -site soils, such that conditions suitable for the forniation of vernal pools are no longer present. A review of recent and historic aerial photographs (1966-2022) of the project site during wet and dry seasons did not provide visual evidence of an astatic or vernal pool conditions within the project site. The site supported agricultural land uses for several decades and has been heavily degraded by recent installation of flood control infrastructure and staging and storage activities associated with nearby construction activities, which have resulted in heavy compaction of on -site soils. While surface water was observed in the southeast portion of the site, this was due to a series of storm events that concluded the day prior to the TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habital Assesswent and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 17 MSHCP Consistency Analysis field investigation, and ponding was only observed where recent disturbance had compacted on -site soils_ 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. Below is a summary of the fairy shrimp known to occur in Western Riverside County and their potential to occur on -site. Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni) Riverside fairy shrimp are restricted to deep seasonal venial pools, vernal pool like ephemeral ponds, and stock ponds and other human modified depressions The prefer warns -water pools that have low to moderate dissolved solids, are less predictable, and remained filled for extended periods of time. Basins that support Riverside fairy shrimp are typically dry a portion of the year, but usually are filled by late fall, winter or spring rains, and may persist through May. Know habitat occur within annual grasslands, which may be interspersed through chaparral or coastal sage scrub vegetation. In Riverside County, Riverside fairy shrimp have been found in pools formed over the following soils: Murrieta stony clay loams, Las Posas series, Wyman clay loam, and Willows soils. A Las Posas series soil type (Las Posas loam) is mapped as underlying the project site; however, soils underlying the project site and immediate vicinity have been subject to heavy mixing and compaction from landscape modifications associated with site preparation activities. No indicators of astatic water conditions were observed during the field investigation, and no ponding was observed on historic aerials during the wet season due to existing activities on -site. Therefore, the site was determined not to provide suitable habitat for Riverside fairy shrimp. Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp (Linderiella santarosae) Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp are restricted to seasonal southern basalt flow vernal pools with cool clear to milky waters that are moderately predictable and remain filled for extended periods of time and are known only from vernal pool on the Santa Rosa Plateau. Since the project site is not located within the known area where Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp have been documented, and no indicators of historic water ponding or astatic water conditions were observed on site, Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp are not expected to occur on -site. Therefore, the site was determined not to provide suitable habitat for Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp. Vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) Vernal pool fairy shrimp are restricted to seasonal vernal pools (vernal pools and alkali venial pools) and prefer cool -water pools that have low to moderate dissolved solids, are unpredictable, and often short lived. The venial pool fairy shrimp is known from four locations in Western Riverside County MSHCP Plan Area: Skunk Hollow, the Santa Rosa Plateau, Salt Creek, and the vicinity of the Pechanga Indian Reservation. Since the project site is not located within or adjacent to the four known populations, and no indicators of historic water ponding or astatic water conditions were observed on site. Therefore, the site was determined not to provide suitable habitat for vernal pool fairy shrimp. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 3013-247 (PLN33-0060) Habilat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 18 MSHCP Consistency Analvsis 5.2 NARROW ENDEMIC PLANT SPECIES Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP, Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species, states that the MSHCP database does not provide sufficient detail to determine the extent of the presence/distribution of Narrow Endemic Plant Species within the MSHCP Plan Area. Additional surveys may be needed to gather information to determine the presence/absence of these species to ensure that appropriate conservation of these species occurs. Based on the RCA MSHCP Information Map query and review of the MSHCP, it was determined that the project site is located within the designated survey area for Narrow Endemic Plant Species Munz's onion, San Diego ambrosia, many -stemmed dudleya, spreading navarretia, California Orcutt grass, and Wright's trichoronis as depicted in Figure 6-1 within Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP. Based on the results of the field investigation, the project site does not provide suitable habitat for these MSHCP listed Narrow Endemic Plant Species. Munz's onion (Allium munzii) Munz's onion (CNPS Rare Plant Rank 1B.1, federally and State threatened) is a slender plant that grows from a reddish bulb and produces a single stem. This species is found in heavy, often rocky, clay soils within grasslands and openings of coastal sage scrub on Elsinore Peak and in native grasslands and openings of chaparral in the Temescal Valley near Lake Elsinore. It grows in elevations ranging from 1,200 to 2,700 feet in elevation. It is endemic to western Riverside County and as of 2014, nineteen occurrences are presumed to still exist in the county. The project site is not located within any of the known occurrences of Munz's onion. Portions of the project site are historically underlain by soils that have the potential to provide suitable habitat for Munz's onion_ However, rough grading activities have contaminated and heavily mixed and compacted the soils within the project site, such that they no longer have the potential to provide suitable habitat for Munz's onion. As a result, the project site was determined not to have potential to support Munz's onion. No further surveys are recommended. San Diego Ambrosia (Ambrosia pumila) San Diego ambrosia, a federally endangered species, occurs in open habitats in coarse substrates near drainages, and in upland areas on clay slopes or on the dry margins of vernal pools. This species occurs in a variety of associations that are dominated by sparse grasslands or marginal wetland habitats such as river terraces, pools, and alkali playas. In Riverside County, San Diego ambrosia is associated with open, gently sloped grasslands and is generally associated with alkaline soils. Three populations of San Diego ambrosia have been mapped in Riverside County. The project site is not located within any of the known occurrences of San Diego ambrosia. Portions of the project site are historically underlain by soils that have the potential to provide suitable habitat for San Diego ambrosia. However, rough grading activities have contaminated and heavily mixed and compacted the soils within the project site, such that they no longer have the potential to provide suitable habitat for San Diego ambrosia. As a result, the project site was determined not to have potential to support San Diego ambrosia, and no further surveys are recommended. Many -stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis) Many -stemmed dudleya (CNPS Rare Plant Rank 1B2) is a succulent plant also known by the common name many -stemmed live -forever. It is a small plant with a basal rosette of 6 to 15 grass -like fleshy leaves that grow 4 to 15 cm long and 2 to 6 mm wide. The flowers are a lemon yellow color and flower between TTMNo. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habilat Assessment and MSHCP ConsistengAnalvsis 19 MSHCP Consistency Analysis the months of April to June. It grows in elevations ranging from 48 to 2,528 feet. Many -stemmed dudleya grows in heavy clay and rocky soils in barren areas within coastal sage scrub and chaparral habitats. It is endemic to southern California with most of the known occurrences being in Orange County. The project site is not located within any of the known occurrences of many -stemmed dudleya. Portions of the project site are historically underlain by soils that have the potential to provide suitable habitat for many -stemmed dudleya. However, rough grading activities have contaminated and heavily mixed and compacted the soils within the project site, such that they no longer have the potential to provide suitable habitat for many - stemmed dudleya. As a result, the project site was determined not to have potential to support many - stemmed dudleya, and no further surveys are recommended. Spreading Navarretia (Navarretia fossallis) Spreading navarretia is a federally threatened species that is associated with vernal pools and depressions and basins in areas that once supported vernal pools. In western Riverside County, spreading navarretia has been found within vernal floodplains dominated by annual alkali grassland or alkali playa. The vernal pool habitat found in the Hemet area is based primarily on silty clay soils in the Willows and Travers series. Spreading navarretia is an annual herb that blooms from April to June. The project site is not located within any of the known occurrences of spreading navarretia. Portions of the project site are historically underlain by soils that have the potential to provide suitable habitat for spreading navarretia. However, rough grading activities have contaminated and heavily mixed and compacted the soils within the project site, such that they no longer have the potential to provide suitable habitat for spreading navarretia. As a result, the project site was determined not to have potential to support spreading navarretia, and no further surveys are recommended. California Orcutt Grass (Orcullia californica) California Orcutt grass is a federally and State endangered species that is associated with vernal pools. In Riverside County, this species is found in southern basaltic claypan vernal pools and alkaline vernal pools. It is an annual herb that blooms from April to August. In Riverside County it is known to occur in Upper Salt Creek, Skunk Hollow, and the Santa Rosa Plateau. The project site is not located within any of the known occurrences of California Orcutt grass. Portions of the project site are historically underlain by soils that have the potential to provide suitable habitat for California Orcutt grass. However, rough grading activities have contaminated and heavily mixed and compacted the soils within the project site, such that they no longer have the potential to provide suitable habitat for California Orcutt grass. As a result, the project site was determined not to have potential to support California Orcutt grass, and no further surveys are recommended. Wright's trichocoronis (Trichocoronis wrightii var. wrightii) Wright's trichocoronis is a CNPS 2.1 species. It is an annual herb that blooms from May to September and occurs in marshes, riparian forest, meadows, seeps, and vernal pools. In western Riverside County, Wright's trichocoronis is found in the alkali vernal plains and associated with alkali playa, alkali annual grassland, and alkali vernal pool habitats. This species occupies the more mesic portions of these habitats. Wright's trichocoronis is known from four locations along the San Jacinto River in the vicinity of the Ramona and Expressway and San Jacinto Wildlife Area. The project site is not located within any of the known occurrences of Wright's trichocoronis. Portions of the project site are historically underlain by soils that TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habilat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analvsis 20 MSHCP Consislency Analysis have the potential to provide suitable habitat for Wright's trichocoronis. However, rough grading activities have contaminated and heavily mixed and compacted the soils within the project site, such that they no longer have the potential to provide suitable habitat for Wright's trichocoronis. As a result, the project site was determined not to have potential to support habitat for Wright's trichocoroms, and no further surveys are recommended. 5.3 URBAN/WILDLANDS INTERFACE GUIDELINES Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP, Guidelines Pertaining to Urban/Wildlands Interface, is intended to address indirect effects associated with development in proximity to MSHCP Conservation Areas. The Urban/Wildlife Interface Guidelines are intended to ensure that indirect project -related impacts to the MSHCP Conservation Area, including drainage, toxics, lighting, noise, invasive plant species, barriers, and grading/land development, are avoided or minimized. The project site is not located within or in close proximity of any Criteria Cells or designated conservation areas. Therefore, the proposed project will not need to comply with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines. 5.4 ADDITIONAL MSHCP CONSIDERATIONS In accordance with Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP, Additional Survey Needs and Procedures, additional surveys may be needed for certain species in order to achieve coverage for these species. The query of the RCA MSHCP Information Map and review of the MSHCP determined that the project site is located within the designated survey area for burrowing owl as depicted in Figure 6-4 within Section 6.32 of the MSHCP. No other special -status wildlife species surveys were identified. Burrowing Owl Burrowing owl is currently designated as a California Species of Special Concern. The burrowing owl is a grassland specialist distributed throughout western North America where it occupies open areas with short vegetation and bare ground within shrub, desert, and grassland environments. Burrowing owls use a wide variety of arid and semi -arid environments with level to gently -sloping areas characterized by open vegetation and bare ground. The western burrowing owl (A.c. hlpugaea), which occurs throughout the western United States including California, rarely digs its own burrows and is instead dependent upon the presence of burrowing mammals (i.e., California ground squirrels, coyotes, and badgers) whose burrows are often used for roosting and nesting. The presence or absence of colonial mammal burrows is often a major factor that limits the presence or absence of burrowing owls. Where manurial burrows are scarce, burrowing owls have been found occupying man-made cavities, such as buried and non-functioning drain pipes, stand -pipes, and dry culverts. They also require low growth or open vegetation allowing line -of -sight observation of the surrounding habitat to forage and watch for predators. In California, the burrowing owl breeding season extends from the beginning of February through the end of August. Under the MSHCP burrowing owl is considered an adequately conserved covered species that may still require focused surveys in certain areas as designated in Figure 6-4 of the MSHCP. The project site occurs within the MSHCP burrowing owl survey area and a habitat assessment was conducted for the species to ensure compliance with MSHCP guidelines for the species. In accordance with the MSHCP Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions (2006), survey protocol consists of two steps, Step I — Habitat Assessment and TTMNo. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habitat Assessment and MSHCP C'onsislencv Analvsis 21 MSHCP Consistency Analysis Step II — Locating Burrows and Burrowing Owls. The following section describes the methodology followed during the burrowing owl habitat assessment conducted for this project. • Step I — Habitat Assessment: Step 1 of the MSHCP habitat assessment for burrowing owl consists of a walking survey to determine if suitable habitat is present on -site. The habitat assessment was conducted on September 7, 2023. Upon arrival at the project site, and prior to initiating the assessment survey, binoculars were used to scan all suitable habitats on and adjacent to the property, including perch locations, to establish owl presence. All suitable areas of the project site were surveyed on foot by walking slowly and methodically while recording/mapping areas that may represent suitable owl habitat on -site. Primary indicators of suitable burrowing owl habitat in western Riverside County include, but are not limited to, native and non-native grassland, interstitial grassland within shrub lands, shrub lands with low density shrub cover, golf courses, drainage ditches, earthen berms, unpaved airfields, pastureland, dairies, fallow fields, and agricultural use areas. Burrowing owls typically use burrows made by fossorial mammals, but will readily utilize man-made structures, such as earthen berms, cement culverts, cement, asphalt, rock, wood debris piles, openings beneath cement or asphalt pavement. Burrowing owls are often found within, under, or in close proximity to man-made structures. According to the MSHCP guidelines, if suitable habitat is present, the biologist should also walk the perimeter of the property, which consists of a 150-meter (approximately 500 feet) buffer zone around the project site boundary. If permission to access the buffer area cannot be obtained, the biologist shall not trespass, but visually inspect adjacent habitats with binoculars. In addition to surveying the entire Project Site all bordering natural habitats located immediately adjacent to the Project Site were assessed. Results from the habitat assessment indicate that suitable habitat (i.e., low growing vegetation that provides line of site opportunities) for burrowing owl are present throughout the project site. Accordingly, if suitable habitat is documented on -site or within adjacent habitats, both Step II, focused burrow surveys and the 30-day preconstruction surveys are required in order to comply with the MSHCP guidelines. • Step Il — Locating Burrows and Burrowing Owls: Concurrent with the initial habitat assessment, a detailed focused burrow survey was conducted and included documentation of appropriately sized natural burrows or suitable man-made structures that may be utilized by burrowing owl - as part of the MSHCP protocol, which is described below under Part A, Focused Burrow Survey. The MSHCP protocol indicates that no more than 100 acres should be surveyed per day/per biologist. o Part A — Focused Burrow Survey: A systematic survey for burrows, including burrowing owl sign, was conducted concurrently with the September 7, 2023, habitat assessment by walking across all suitable habitats within the project site. Pedestrian survey transects were spaced to allow 100% visual coverage of the ground surface. The distances between transect centerlines were no more than 30 meters (approximately 100 feet) apart, and owing to the terrain, often much smaller. Transect routes were also adjusted to account for topography and in general ground surface visibility. Areas providing potential habitat for burrowing owls were surveyed for suitable burrows, consisting of natural and non -natural substrates in areas with low, open vegetation. All burrows encountered were examined for TTM No. 36658 (PLN-O246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habilat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 22 MSHCP Consistency Analysis shape, scat, pellets, white -wash, feathers, tracks, and prey remains. Suitable burrows/sites, including rock piles and non -natural substrates, were thoroughly examined for signs of presence. Despite a systematic search of the project site, no burrowing owls or sign (i.e., pellets, feathers, castings, or whitewash) were observed during the focused survey. Portions of the project site are barren or vegetated with a variety of low -growing plant species that allow for minimal line -of -sight observation favored by burrowing owls. However, no suitable burrows or man-made roosting opportunities for burrowing owl were observed within or near the project site during the field investigation. Recent site preparation activities have removed any suitable burrows that may have .occurred, and continued disturbance associated with site preparation precludes fossorial mammals from establishing. Further, in association with ongoing site preparation activities, no man-made roosting opportunities are maintained within or near the site. As such, it was determined that the project site does not have potential to support burrowing owl and this species is presumed to be absent. Therefore, the project is consistent with Section 6.3.2. Out of an abundance of caution, a 30-day pre -construction survey for burrowing owls is should be conducted prior to initial ground -disturbing activities (e.g., vegetation clearing, clearing and grubbing, tree removal, site watering) to ensure that no owls have colonized the site in the days or weeks preceding the ground -disturbing activities. If burrowing owls have colonized the project site prior to the initiation of ground -disturbing activities, the project proponent will immediately inform the Wildlife Agencies and the Regional Conservation Authority (RCA), and will need to coordinate further with RCA and the Wildlife Agencies, including the possibility of preparing a Burrowing Owl Protection and Relocation Plan, prior to initiating ground disturbance. If ground -disturbing activities occur, but the site is left undisturbed for more than 30 days, a pre -construction survey will again be necessary to ensure burrowing owl has not colonized the site since it was last disturbed. If burrowing owls are found, the same coordination described above will be necessary. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habital Assessment and MSHCP Consistencv Analvsis 23 _ � •o D�� --ter Fretdstoro JA 3' 570 3565 • - 1} s Mum Wo 1110 i yis • �i+ir - ElhersecjRd _ %ttunrtr+Rd -- — KuiTc Rd ~ E jRuflranRd •� •-• Floyd�Ave 3665cc J1r� Atbn�me'ti 3 rn N i. :A�rCa•Ln__."� f''�e( a �Goldervod A a _ •+• I f+ s aQ �, . 1.14 1 , �fi ieAb Q rAAalachrte Ln .,. I @ Pim Nova'Ln .r, to°�vaw t • �✓.i�, •r ` _ _ _ _ I .ir . -.'� l t s • urota��C 3760 Big I♦�.rrxlJ rt P•Ln. ILI r Y RoiaorRtl „ J"Sumymnnd S i wsa+Edge Cl' 3, + ••• -,woo( _ T � I 2 urfivaod-St Mr�z= iSh�ru001: ywo- All,w : ' ' Sotelorhv �; � a.. a°t BliaDellfS rn Ar bo r Fe rt .. +►ram Thorton'Ave Thornton Ave Sunmeadowa0r ' � •`�" � Hold ♦3 c: .: -- lD� r o 1 ROB TfepC�` J 3 Fsther Ln - •w ifir.aE �• 'Parlor are wp a s n oRn-.:i co. �Mis.+ur ��w: G I m be rs'Avc cresone 0 Q Lear Ln 1 a Albany Dr v Ellison YVay Boston 0 ' �s�'� r `��• m 8 0 �'o�ear orv��g+ o atb i St Sun Smt -? w Legend r ,,• 4.., ra • Planning 1 rea - Y Criteria Cells PQP Conserved Lands O� r Section 7 Conclusion and Recommendations The discussion below provides a summary of survey results; avoidance and minimization efforts; direct, indirect, and cumulative project impacts; and compensatory mitigation measures for each biological resource area required to be analyzed according to CEQA, based on Appendix G (Environmental Checklist Form) of the CEQA Guidelines: CEQA Threshold: Would the proposed Project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Special-Slatus Plant Specie-s No special -status plant species were observed during the field investigation. Based on habitat requirements for the identified special -status species, known species distributions, and the quality and availability of habitats present, it was determined that the project site has a low potential to support paniculate tarplant. The proposed project will be confined to existing developed and heavily disturbed areas that have been subject to several decades of agricultural land uses and recent site preparation activities, and the site is isolated from known occupied areas. As such, any paniculate tarplant supported on -site is not expected to make a meaningful contribution to the conservation of the species, if present. No additional surveys are recommended. Special -Status ff ildli% Species Recommendations for avoidance and minimization: In order to avoid violation of the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code site -preparation activities (removal of trees and vegetation) shall be avoided, to the greatest extent possible, during the nesting season (generally January 1 to September 15) of potentially occurring native and migratory bird species. If site preparation activities are proposed during the nesting/breeding season (generally considered January 1 to September 15), a pre -activity field survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist three (3) days prior to initiation of construction activities, to determine if active nests of species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) or the California Fish and Game Code, are present in the construction zone. If project activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days from the date of the pre -activity survey, surveys shall be repeated. If active nests are observed and located appropriate buffers (e.g., 500 feet of an active listed species or raptor nest, 300 feet of other sensitive or protected bird nests (non -listed), within 100 feet of sensitive or protected songbird nests) shall be established and maintained during clearing and grubbing activities within the nesting season. No grading or heavy equipment activity shall take place within the established buffer until the nest is no longer active as determined by a qualified biologist. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific PlanN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habilal Assessment and MSHCP Consislencv Analvsis 25 Conclusion and Recommendations CEQA Threshold: Would the proposed Project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Marian Habitat and Special -Status Natural Communities No jurisdictional drainage features, riparian/riverine areas, or vernal pools were observed within the project site during the field survey. Therefore, regulatory approvals from the Corps, Regional Board, and/or CDFW will not be required for implementation of the project. Further, site development will not result in impacts to nparian/riverine habitats and a DBESP will not be required under the MSHCP for the loss of riparian/riverine habitat. Further, no sensitive habitats were identified within the Project site. Thus, no sensitive natural communities will be impacted from Project implementation. CEQA Threshold. Would the proposed Project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (inchiding, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, fulling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 1'ederallr Protected lVellandc No inundated areas, wetland features, or wetland plant species that would be considered wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act occur within the proposed Project footprint. As a result, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any impacts or have substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands. CEQA Threshold. Would the proposed Proiecl 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? Wildlife COrridors The project site has not been identified as occurring in a wildlife corridor or linkage. The nearest linkage to project, as identified by the MSHCP, occurs approximately 0.9 miles to the northwest in association with the San Jacinto River. The proposed project will be confined to existing areas that have been heavily disturbed and are isolated from regional wildlife corridors. Therefore, the project site does not function as a major wildlife movement corridor or linkage. As such, implementation of the proposed project is not expected to have a significant impact to wildlife movement opportunities or prevent local wildlife movement through the area. Due to the lack of any identified impacts to wildlife movement, migratory corridors or linkages or native wildlife nurseries, no mitigation is required. Therefore, impacts to wildlife corridors or linkages are not expected to occur. TTMNo. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 26 Conclusion and Recommendations CEQA Threshold: Would the proposed Project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Local Policies or Ordinances There are no local policies or ordinances that pertain to the proposed project. Therefore, impacts to local polices or ordinances are not expected to occur from development of the proposed project, and mitigation is not required. CEQA Threshold. Would the proposed Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state Habitat Conservation Plan? Local. Regional. and State flans The project site is located in the within the Sun City/Menifee Valley Area Plan of the MSHCP, but is not located within any designated Criteria Cells or conservation areas. Based on the analysis provided in this report and with completion of recommendations provided below and payment of the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee, development of the project site will be fully consistent with the MSHCP_ Recommendations for avoidance and minimization: Consistent with MSHCP Species Specific Conservation Objectives for burrowing owl, Objective 6 (page E-12), a pre -construction presence/absence survey burrowing owls shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 30 days prior to commencement of grading and construction activities on -site as well as for off -site improvements. If ground disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre -construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. Take of active nests will be avoided. Passive relocation (use of one way doors and collapse of burrows) will occur when owls are present outside the nesting season. TTMNo. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habilal Assessment and MSHCP Consistencv Analysis 27 Section 8 References California Burrowing Owl Consortium, 1993. Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines. Accessed on the internet at: ww�%.dt,,.ca-Lov/wildlife/nongame/docs/boconsortium.ndf California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2010. List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations (Natural Communities List). Available online at http://www dfp,.ca o� v/biogeodata/vegcamp/natural Comm list.asp. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2023. RareFind 5, California Natural Diversity Data Base, California. Data Base report on threatened, endangered, rare or otherwise sensitive species and communities for the Ronioland 7.5-minute USGS quadrangle. California Native Plant Society. 2023. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California. Rare Plant Scientific Advisory Committee, David P. Tibor, Convening Editor. California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, California. Available at: httn://www.cnps.ore/inventory. Google, Inc. 2021. Google Earth Pro version 7.3.6.9285, build date 12/29/2022. Historical aerial imagery from 1985 to 2023. Hickman, J.C., ed. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California. University of California Press. Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. Calif. Dept. of Fish and Game, Sacramento, CA. Munz, P.A. 1974. A Flora of Southern California. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC, 1999. Historic Aerials Viewers. Available online at htips://www.historicacrials.com/viewer. Riverside County. 2003 (June). Final Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. http://rcdina.ore/ Riverside County. 2006. Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions for the Western Riverside Mulitple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Area. Available online at htt2://rctlma org/Portals/l/EPD/consultant/burrowinp owl survey instructions.udf. Sibley, D.A. 2014. The Sibley Guide to Birds, Second Edition. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York, New York. Stebbins, R.C. 2003. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians, Third Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, New York, New York. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific P1anN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habilal Assessment and MSHCP Consislencv Analvsis 78 References U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2018. Web Soil Survey. Online at http://wcbsoilsurvcv.nres.usda.eov/aat) . TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan Specific Plan 2013-247 (PLN73-0060) Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 29 Appendix A Site Plan o.� ■„ii A a UTWIES OOaaaaa a a iiVM Mew TENTATIVE TRACT as = r.w��ya•�, �., �-- -: �� aDaA�� •, lair :79J NO. 36658 sofW) .-N tot ern STATISTWAJ SUAWRY zr- ZI J. Oct - I. J. I%QW MEN LOT 5Qj .,VfN WACI lot$. zt, I" lots ALI vnit�Qfftma Wf WA0AF04WONAYE T- -- - -, ----- . iF9- Zen,. 7 OWNER PREPARED fl`V� PREPARED FM' TENTA77OPMeT V�. Dd. H— NO. 36658 0, Zt i • __ .� a _ -, icy, rFcv,D s OWNER PRPARM FOIL FWARfD 61^. my oxa, uc van [lad. Hann u............. nfO.C. a1L'I IaR hN • � � a.an �n�w CONwG1i0N TO aa,f IaM n i f01DG'a (K a16N!ORN RQIp 1 ,a.o.la%=avwla TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 3665E IRV JillR zu see•- 'as a OWNER PREPARED FOR: PREPARED Rr AYPH VI ..«ra..a�.r Van Dade Hanes •W, LJ TENTATIVE TRACT NO.36658 CIMARRON RIDGE TENTATIVE TRACT 36658 AMENDMENT#1 TRACT NO. 366W-4 I ' Ns Appendix B Site Photographs Appendix B - Site Photographs Photograph 1: From the northwest corner of the project site looking south along the western boundary. Photograph 2: From the northwest corner of the project site looking east along the northern boundary. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) BE L M T � Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 915 1ry i , n i r , B - Site Pbotograpbs Photograph 3: From the northeast comer of the project site looking west along the northern boundary. �• j _i•T . Photograph 4: From the northeast corner of the project site looking south along the eastern boundary. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) CD d ELM T Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis Appendix B - Site Photographs Photograph 5: From the southeast corner of the project site looking north along the eastern boundary. Photograph 6: From the southeast corner of the project site looking west. TTNI No. 36658 (PLN-0216) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) A I .;L T Habitat.4ssessinent and MSHCP ConsisrencyAnalysh; ELM .!'I* ' I Appendix B - Site Photographs Photograph 7: From the middle of the project site looking northeast across the site. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) ELM T Habitat Assessment and NISHCP Consistency Analysis Appendix C Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources AADPndiX C- f nr<•nu.rOr throrclui Soecial-Status Biological Resources Table C-1: Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources Sclrni fir Name Status Habitat Covered by Observed Polrmial to Occur t..ommnn \amc 11SHCP On•site WILDLIFE SPECIES Generally found in forested areas up to 3,000 feel in Low Accipiter coopeiii Fed None elevation, especially near edges and rivers Prefershardwood Limited foraging habitat is Cooper's hawk CA. WL stands and mature forests but can be found in urban and Yes No present within and surrounding suburban areas where there are tall trees for nesting. the project site. No nesting Common in open areas during nesting season. opportunities are present. Found in pine, fir and aspen forests. They can be found Low Accipitersirialus Fed None hunting in forest interior and edges from sea level to near Limited foraging habitat is sharp -shinned hawk CA WL alpine areas. Can also be found in rural, suburban and Yes No resent within and surroundin p g agricultural areas, where they often hunt a[ bird feeders. the project site. This species Typically found in southern California in the winter months. does not nest in the region. Range is limited to the coastal areas of the Pacific coast of North America, from Northern California to upper Baja California. Can be found in a wide variety of habitat including annual grasslands, wet and dry vernal pools and other seasonal wetlands, agricultural fields, cattle feedlots, and Presumed Absent Agelafus bicolor Fed: None dairies. Occasionally forage in riparian scrub habitats along yes No There is no suitable habitat tricolored blackbird CA: THRISSC marsh borders. Basic habitat requirements for breeding present within or adjacent to include open accessible water, protected nesting substrate the project site. (freshwater marsh dominated by cattails, willows, and bulrushes [Schoenopleciussp.l), and either flooded or thorny or spiny vegetation and suitable foraging space providing adequate insect prey. Typically Found between 3,000 and 6,000 feet in elevation. Aimophila ruficeps Breed in sparsely vegetated scrubland on hillsides and Presumed Absent canescens Fed: None canyons. Prefers coastal sage scrub dominated by California yes No There is no suitable habitat southern California CA' WL sagebrush (Artemisia calitornica), but they can also be found present within or adjacent to rufous -crowned sparrow breeding in coastal bluff scrub, low -growing serpentine the project site. chaparral, and along the edges of tall chaparral habitats. Occurs in grassland, upland meadow, pasture, hayfield, and Ammodramus old Field habitats. Optimal habitat contains short- to medium- Presumed Absent savannarum Fed: None height bunch grasses interspersed with patches of bare yes (e) No There is no suitable habitat grasshopper sparrow CA: SSC ground, a shallow litter layer, scattered (orbs, and few shrubs. p resent within or adjacent to May inhabit thickets, weed lawns, vegetated landfills, fence Y Y g the project site. t rows, open fields, or grasslands. ITMNo. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN2013-247 (PLN23-0060) O ELM T Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis OQ c, xv � . �_ i i i i N I, Appendix C - Potentially Occurrine Special -Status BioloQicel Resources Jcfrntffir Ague Status Habitat Covered by MSHCP Obsrrved Potential sooceur (be. nnr N mw On -site Occupies nearly all terrestrial habitats of the western states except densely forested areas. Favors secluded cliffs with Presumed Absent Aquila chrysaelos Fed. None overhanging ledges and large trees for nesting and cover. There is no suitable habitat golden eagle CA FP; WL Hilly or mountainous country where takeoff and soaring are Yes No resent within scent to P j supported by updrafts is generally preferred to flat habitats. ct site. the project sire. Deeply cut canyons rising to open mountain slopes and crags are ideal habitat. Yearlong resident throughout California, except for the high Presumed Absent Ardea albs Fed: None mountains and deserts. Feeds and rests in fresh, and saline There is no suitable habitat teat e g gret CA: None emergent wetlands, along the margins of estuaries, lakes, and No No P resent within ascent [o slow -moving streams, on mudflals and salt ponds, and in the projeccttsite. irrigated croplands and pastures. Presumed Absent Ardea herodfas Fed: None Forages along streams, marshes, lakes, and meadows. Nests There is no suitable habitat great blue heron CA: None colonially in tall trees (typically Eucalyptus sp.), on cliffsides, Yes No present within or adjacent to or in isolated spots in marshes. the project site. Presumed Absent Arizona elegans occidentalis Fed: None Inhabits and scrub, rocky washes, grasslands, and chaparral No No There is no suitable habitat CA: SSC habitats. present within adjacent to California glossy snake the project site. Presumed Absent ArtemisfWLm be/li be/li Fed: None Generally prefers semi -open habitats with evenly spaced No There is no suitable habitat Bell's sparrow CA: WL shrubs 1 - 2 meters in height. Dry chaparral and coastal sage Yes present within or adjacent to scrub. Less common in tall dense, old chaparral. the project site. Presumed Absent Aspidosce/is hyperylhra Fed None Semi -arid brushy areas typically with loose soil and rocks, Yes No There is no suitable habitat orangethroa[ whiptail CA. WL including washes, streamsides, rocky hillsides, and coastal present within or adjacent to chaparral. the project site. Presumed Absent Aspidosce6sTigris Fed: None Found in a variety of ecosystems, primarily hot and dry open There is suitable habitat slejnegeri CA: SCC areas with sparse foliage - chaparral, woodland, and riparian Yes No present wadjacent to coastal whi tail P areas. the project site. Occurs in open, annual or perennial grasslands, deserts, and Presumed Absent Athene cunicularia Fed: None scrublands characterized by low -growing vegetation. Yes (c) No There is no suitable habitat burrowing owl CA: SSC Dependent upon Possorfal mammals for burrows, most present within or adjacent to notable ground squirrels. the project site 7TVINo. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN2013-247 (PLN23-0060) d ELM T Habitat Assessment and AJSHCP Consislency Analysis C - Potentially Occurring Special -Status Biological Resources .SdeaBficNdnw Status Habitat Covered by Observed Potential to Occur Comecon Nmw MSNCP On -site Presumed Absent Bombus crotchii Fed None Exclusive to coastal California east towards the Sierra- No No There is no suitable habitat Crotch bumblebee CA CE Cascade Crest: less common in western Nevada. present within or adjacent to the project site. Bombus pensy/vanicus Fed. None Found in desert habitats and adjacent areas Prefers Presumed Absent American bumblebee CA: None farmlands, grasslands, and open fields. Nests embedded in No No No suitable habitat is present P grass or belowground. within or adjacent to the project site. Occurs primarily in open grasslands and fields, but may be Presumed Absent Buteo regalis Fed: None Found in sagebrush Flats, desert scrub, low foothills, or along the edges of pinyon juniper woodland Feeds primarily on Yes No There is no suitable habitat Ferruginous hawk CA WL small mammals and typically found in agricultural or open present within or adjacent to fields. the project site. Typical habitat is open desert, grassland, or cropland containing scattered, large trees or small groves Breeds in Presumed Absent Buteo swainsoni Fed: None stands with few trees in juniper -sage flats, riparian areas. and Yes No There is no suitable habitat Swainson's hawk CA THR in oak savannah in the Central Valley. Forages in adjacent present within or adjacent to grassland or suitable grain or alfalfa fields or livestock the project site. pastures. Low Desert and semi -desert, and brushy foothills and chaparral, A Limited foraging habitat is Calypte costae Fed: None desert hummingbird that breeds in the Sonoran and Mojave No No present within and surrounding Costa's hummingbird CA None Deserts. Departs desert heal moving into chaparral, scrub, and the project site. Routine woodland habitats. disturbance likely prevents this ' species from nesting. Occurs in desert and coastal habitats in southern California, Chaetodipus Mexico, and northern Baja California, from sea level to at Presumed Absent californicus femoralis Fed None least 1.400 meters. Found in a variety of temperate habitats No No There is no suitable habitat Dulzura pocket mouse CA: None ranging from chaparral and grasslands to scrub forests and present within or adjacent to deserts Requires low growing vegetation or rocky the project site. outcroppings, as well as sandy soils for burrowing Occurs in desert and coastal habitats in southern California, Chaetodipusfallax Mexico, and northern Baja California, from sea level to at Presumed Absent fallax Fed None least 1,400 meters. Found in a variety of temperate habitats Yes No There is no suitable habitat northwestern San Diego CA None ranging from chaparral and grasslands to scrub Forests and present within or adjacent to pocket mouse desens. Requires low growing vegetation or rocky the project site. outcroppings, as well as sandy soils for burrowing. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) �� E L M T Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis O a U ra y i-u i i n1 i , Aooendix C - Potentially (krurrin; Special -Status Bioloeical Resources &*vdfirNawr Sam covered by Observrtl Potential to Occur comtri m to On,site Prefers redwood and Douglas -Fir habitats with nest -sites in Presumed Absent Chaetura vauxi Fed: None large hollow trees and snags, especially tall, burned -out No No There is no suitable habitat Vaux's swift CA: SSC snags Fairly common migrant throughout most of the stale in present within or adjacent to April and May, and August and September. the project site. Frequents meadows, grasslands, open rangelands, desert Presumed Absent Circushudsonius Fed: None sinks, fresh and saltwater emergent wetlands; seldom found No There is no suitable habitat harrier CA' SSC in wooded areas. Mostly found in flat, or hummocky, open Yes resent within or adjacent to present northern areas of tall, dense grasses moist or dry shrubs, and edges for the project site. nesting, cover, and feeding. Occurs in coastal and cismontane southern California from Presumed Absent Co%onyx variegatus Fed: None interior Ventura County south, although it is absent from the There is no suitable habitat abbot(/ CA SCC extreme outer coast. It is uncommon in coastal scrub and Yes No present within or adjacent to San Diego banded gecko chaparral, most often occurring in granite or rocky outcrops the project site. in these habitats. It can be found from the desert, through dense chaparral in the foothills (it avoids the mountains above around 4.000 feet), to warm inland mesas and valleys, all the way to the cool ocean shore. It is most commonly associated with heavy brush with Presumed Absent Crota/us tuber Fed: None large rocks or boulders. Dense chaparral in the foothills, There is no suitable habitat red -diamond rattlesnake CA SSC cactus or boulder associated coastal sage scrub, oak and pine woodlands, and desert slope scrub associations are known to Yes No present within or adjacent to carry populations of the northem red -diamond rattlesnake: the project site. however, chamise and red shank associations may offer better structural habitat for refuges and food resources for this species than other habitats. Primarily found in Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub and Dipodomysrrrerriami sandy loam soils. alluvial fans and flood plains, and along Presumed Absent parvus Fed: END washes with nearby sage scrub. May occur at lower densities Yes (c) No There is no suitable habitat San Bernardino kangaroo CA CE; SSC in Riversidian upland sage scrub, chaparral and grassland a uplands and tributaries in proximity to Riversidian alluvial l present within or adjacent to rat fan sage scrub habitats. Tend to avoid rocky substrates and the project site. prefer sandy loam substrates for digging of shallow burrows. Typical habitat is open desert, grassland, or cropland containing scattered, large trees or small groves. Breeds in Presumed Absent Dipodomys simu/ans Fed None stands with few trees in juniper -sage flats, riparian areas, and yes No There is no suitable habitat Dulzura kangaroo rat CA: None in oak savannah in the Central Valley. Forages in adjacent present within or adjacent to grassland or suitable grain or alfalfa Fields or livestock the project site. pastures. ITAI[No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific P/an SPECIFIC PLAN2013-247 (PLN23-0060) ELM T Habitat Assessment and AISHCP Consistency Analysis ®® r_r v ti r i i I i N r, Appendix C - Potential/v (k rurrn!:, Special -Status Bioloeical Resources SrienriLc A'Ante l 1:ur, Stouts HabitatCovered by MSNCP Otnerved Potential to Occur in u:on On -site Occur in arid and semi -arid habitats with some grass or brush. Presumed Absent Dipodomysstephensi Fed: THR Prefer open habitats with less than 50% protective cover. Yes No There is no suitable habitat Stephens' kangaroo rat CA: THR Require soft, well -drained substrate for building burrows and present within or adjacent to are typically found in areas with sandy soil. the project site. Widespread in California along shores of coastal estuaries. Presumed Absent Egrella thu/a Fed. None fresh and saline emergent wetlands, ponds, slow -moving There is no suitable habitat snowy egret CA. None rivers, irrigation ditches• and wet fields In southern California, common yearlong in the Imperial Valley and No No present within or adjacent to along the Colorado River. the project site. E/anusleucurus Fed: None Occurs in low elevation, open grasslands, savannah -like Presumed Absent white-tailed kite CA: FP habitats, agricultural areas, wetlands, and oak woodlands. Yes No There is no suitable habitat Uses trees with dense canopies for cover. present within or adjacent to the project site. A rare to locally uncommon, summer resident in wet meadow Presumed Absent Empidonax trai/li/ Fed: None and montane riparian habitats (2.000 to 8,000 fl) in the Sierra There is no suitable habitat willow flycatcher CA. END Nevada and Cascade Range. Most often occurs in broad, open No No present within or adjacent to river valleys or large mountain meadows with lush growth of shrubby willows. the project site. Generally found in shortgrass prairies, grasslands, disturbed Low Eremophila alpestris Fed: None fields, or stypes along imilar habitat the coast or in deserts. Limited foraging habitat is art/a Trees are shrubs are usually scarce or absent. Generally rare Yes No present within and surrounding California homed lark CA. WL in montane, coniferous, or chaparral habitats. Forms large the project site. Routine Flocks outside of the breeding season, disturbance likely prevents this species from nesting. Primarily a cliff -dwelling species, roost generally under exfoliating rock slabs. Roosts are generally high above the Eumopsperods ground, usually allowing a clear vertical drop of at least 3 Presumed Absent californicus Fed: None meters below the entrance for Flight. In California. it is most No No There is no suitable habitat western mastiff bat CA SSC frequently encountered in broad open areas. Its foraging present within or adjacent to habitat includes dry desert washes. Flood plains, chaparral, the project site. oak woodland, open ponderosa pine forest, grassland, and agricultural areas. Euphydryas editha quino Fed: END Range is now limited to a few populations in Riverside and Presumed Absent Quino checkerspot CA: None San Diego counties. Common in meadows and upland sage Yes No There is no suitable habitat scrub/chapprral habitat. present within or adjacent to butterfly the project site 7TM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECLF/C PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) O i�A] ELM T Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis OO '-1 jfJ `.I II I I�yf. C - Potentially 01 t w w Sixr rrd Sruu. Bioloeical Resources SrlertGlii':Varor Status nothat Covered by MSHCP Observe Potential to Occur On -site Nest in forested openings, edges, and along rivers across Presumed Absent Falco columbarius Fed None northern North America. Found in open forests, grasslands, Yes No There is no suitable habitat merlin CA WL and especially coastal areas with }locks of small songbirds or present within or adjacent to shorebirds. the project site Uncommon winter resident of the inland region of southern Falco peregrinus California. Active nesting sites are known along the coast Presumed Absent analunr Fed: DL north of Santa Barbara, in the Sierra Nevada, and in other There is no suitable habitat American peregrine CA: DL: FP mountains of northern California Breeds mostly in woodland, forest, and coastal habitats. Riparian areas and Yes No resent within or adjacent P to falcon coastal and inland wetlands are important habitats yearlong, the project site. especially in nonbreeding seasons. Primarily found in tall, dense. relatively wide riparian woodlands and thickets of willows, vine tangles, and dense Presumed Absent Icieria wens Fed None brush with well -developed understories. Nesting areas are Yes No There is no suitable habitat yellow -breasted chat CA SSC associated with streams, swampy ground, and the borders of present within or adjacent to small ponds. Breeding habitat must be dense to provide shade the project site. and concealment. It winters south the Central America. Presumed Absent Laniusludovicianus Fed: None Often found in broken woodlands, shrublands, and other There is no suitable habitat loggerhead shrike CA: SSC habitats. Prefers open country with scattered perches for Yes No present within or adjacent to hunting and fairly dense brush for nesting. the project site. Presumed Absent Laslurus xanthbms Fed None Roosts in palm trees in foothill riparian, desert wash, and No No There is no suitable habitat western yellow bat CA SSC palm oasis habitats with access to water for foraging. present within or adjacent to the project site. Lepus californicus Occurs in diverse habitats, but primarily is found in and Presumed Absent bennellii Fed: None regions supporting shortgrass habitats. Openness of open Yes No There is no suitable habitat San Diego black -tailed CA None scrub habitat is preferred over dense chaparral. present within or to jackrabbit the project site. Neotoma lepida Occurs in coastal scrub communities between San Luis Presumed Absent intermedia Fed' None Obispo and San Diego Counties. Prefers moderate to dense Yes No There is no suitable habitat San Diego desert CA. SSC canopies, and especially rocky outcrops. resent within or adjacent P scent to woodrat the project site. 7TM No 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) O a ELM T Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 7 '_UFJ tii 11 IIN,. C - Potentially l hrm rin, Special -Status Biological Resources Srlont%1'r Aar m Status Habitat Covered Covered by Observed P®ttdl�ll�leOltcnr lu:uu::,n`Javu Oq-,rite Numrnlusamrr/r.Tnus Fed None Preferred winter habitats include large coastal estuaries, Presumed Absent long -billed curlew CA WL upland herbaceous areas, and croplands. On estuaries, feeding No No There is no suitable habitat occurs mostly on intertidal mudtlats. present within or adjacent to the project site. Fairly common, yearlong resident in lowlands and foothills Nycdco_ nycdcor- throughout most of Califomia, including the Salton Sea and Colorado River areas, and very common locally in large Presumed Absent black -crowned night FedNone CA- nesting colonies. Feeds along the margins of lacustrine, large Yes No There is no suitable habitat heron None riverine, and fresh and saline emergent habitats and rarely, on present within or adjacent to kelp beds in marine sub tidal habitats. Nests and roosts in the project site. dense -foliaged trees and dense emergent wetlands. Inhabits alkali desert scrub and other desert scrub habitats, Onychomys lorWdus and to a lesser extent succulent shrubs, desert washes, desert Presumed Absent ramona Fed- None riparian, coastal scrub, mixed chaparral, and sagebrush No No There is no suitable habitat southern grasshopper CA: SSC habitats. Generally rare in valley foothill and montane present within or adjacent to mouse riparian habitats. Prefers low to moderate shrub cover and the project site. requires friable soils. Perognathas Occurs in lower elevation grasslands and coastal sage scrub Presumed Absent lon membris � Fed: None communities in and around the Los Angeles Basin. Prefers brevinasus CA: SSC open ground with fine sandy soils. May not dig extensive Yes (c) No There is no suitable habitat Los Angeles pocket burrows, but instead will seek refuge under weeds and dead present within or adjacent to mouse leaves instead. the project site. Occurs in a wide variety of vegetation types including coastal sage scrub, annual grassland, chaparral, oak woodland. riparian woodland and coniferous forest. In inland areas, this species is restricted to areas with pockets of open Presumed Absent Phrynosoma blainrryllii Fed None microhabilal, created by disturbance (i,e. fire, floods, roads, yes No There is no suitable habitat coast horned lizard CA SSC grazing, fire breaks). The key elements of such habitats are present within or adjacent to loose, fine soils with a high sand fraction: an abundance of the project site. native ants or other insects: and open areas with limited overstory for basking and low, but relatively dense shrubs for refuge. Prefers to feed in fresh emergent wetland. shallow lacusttine Presumed Absent Plegadis chihi Fed: None waters, muddy ground or wet meadows. and irrigated or Yes No There is no suitable habitat while -faced ibis CA. WL flooded partures and croplands. Nests in dense, fresh present within or adjacent to emergent wetland. the nro'ect site 1TM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) o C n A T Habitat Assessment and AISHCP Consistency Analysis O Q L I V I I Appendix C - %tendally t hrumn&! Special -Status Biological Resources saknaft toe Satus Habitar— Covered by MSHCP Observed MP PutxatiW to ©tear Common Name Oen,tdt Obligate resident of sage scrub habitats that are dominated by California sagebrush (Attemisia californica). This species PoGapala californica generally occurs below 750 feet elevation in coastal regions Presumed Absent califorrtica Fed. THR and below 1,500 feet inland. Ranges from the Ventura Yes No There is no suitable habitat coastal California CA SSC County, south to San Diego County and northern Baja present within or adjacent to gnatcatcher California and it is less common in sage scrub with a high the project site. percentage of tall shrubs. Prefers habitat with more low - growing vegetation. Nests over all of California except the Central Valley, the Mojave Desert region, and high altitudes and the eastern side Presumed Absent Selophaga pelechia Fed. None of the Sierra Nevada. Winters along the Colorado River and There is no suitable habitat yellow warbler CA SSC in pans of Imperial and Riverside Counties. Nests in riparian No No present within or adjacent to areas dominated by willows, cottonwoods, sycamores, or the project site. alders or in mature chaparral. May also use oaks, conifers, and urban areas near stream courses. Prefers open areas with sandy or gravelly soils, in a variety of habitats including mixed woodlands, grasslands, coastal sage Presumed Absent Spea hammondu Fed None scrub, chaparral, sandy washed, lowlands, river floodplains. Yes No There is no suitable habitat western spadefoot CA: SSC alluvial fans, playas, alkali flats, foothills, and mountains. present within or adjacent to Rainpools which do not contain bullfrogs, fish. or crayfish are the project site. necessary for breeding. Presumed Absent Splauslawrencei Fed: None Open woodlands, chaparral. and weedy fields. Closely No There is suitable habitat Lawrence's goldfinch CA None associated with oaks. Nests in open oak or other and No within adjacent to present w woodland and chaparral near water. the project site. Presumed Absent Slreplocephalus woolloni Fed: END Freshwater crustacean that is found in vernal pools in the Yes (a) o There is no suitable habitat CA; None coastal California area. present within or adjacent to Riverside fairy shrimp the project site. Primarily occupy Riverine riparian habitat that typically feature dense cover within 1 -2 meters of the ground and a dense, stratified canopy. Typically it is associated with Presumed Absent Vireo bellii pusillus Fed: END southern willow scrub, cottonwood -willow forest. mule Fat Yes (a) No There is no suitable habitat least Bell's vireo CA END scrub, sycamore alluvial woodlands, coast live oak riparian present within or adjacent to forest, arroyo willow riparian forest, or mesquite in desert the project site. localities. It uses habitat which is limited to the immediate vicinity of water courses, 2,000 feet elevation in the interior. 7TAJ No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) ❑Q ELM T Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis �r Appendix C - Potential/ Qeeu"4g Special -Status Biological Resources Fed: END Found in chaparral, cismontane woodland. coastal scrub, Presumed Absent Allium inunzii CA: THR pinyon and juniper woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Yes (b) No There is no suitable habitat Munz's onion CNPS: 16.1 Found at elevations ranging from 974 to 3,510 feet. Blooming g g g present within or adjacent to period is from March to May. the project site. Fed: THR Grows in chaparral openings, cismontane woodland, coastal Presumed Absent Brod/aea frl/folia CA: END scrub, playas, valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools, Yes (d) No There is no suitable habitat thread -leaved brodiaea CNPS: IBA often in claysoils. Found at elevations ranging from 82 to g g present within or adjacent to 3,675 feet. Blooming period is from March to June the project site. Cau/anthus simu/ans Fed: None Occurs on Ogranitic sand soils in chaparral and coastal scrub y P Presumed Absent Pa sott's 'ewelFlower y CA: None habitats. Found at elevations ranging from 295 to 7,218 Feel. Yes No There is no suitable habitat CNPS: 4.2 Blooming period is from February to June. present within or adjacent to the project site Centromadia pungens Fed: None Found in alkaline soils within chenopod scrub, meadows and Presumed Absent ss . laevis W. CA: None seeps, playas, riparian woodland, valley, and foothill Yes (d) No There is no suitable habitat smooth latplant CNPS: 1B 1 grassland habitats. Found at elevations ranging from 0 to g g g present within or adjacent to 2,100 feel. Blooming period is from April to September. the project site. Fed: None Found in granitic soils within chaparral, coast scrub, and Presumed Absent Chorizanthe leptotheca CA: None lower montane coniferous forest habitats- Found at elevations Yes (e) No There is no suitable habitat Peninsular s ineflower P CNPS: 4 2 ranging from 984 to 6.234 feet. Blooming nod is from May g g g Pe y present within or adjacent to to August. the project site. Chorizandre parryivar. Fed: None Occurs on sandy and/or rocky soils in chaparral, coastal sage Presumed Absent Pan3 i CA: None scrub, and sandy openings within alluvial washes and Yes (e) No There is no suitable habitat Parry's s ineflower rY P CNPS: I B.1 margins. Found at elevations ranging from 951 l0 3,773 feel. present within or adjacent to Blooming period is from April to June, the project site. Chorizanthe Fed: None Typically found on clay lenses which are largely devoid of Presumed Absent polygonoides var. shrubs. Can be found on the periphery of vernal pool habitat long/spina CA: None and even on the periphery of montane meadows near vernal P P ry Yes No There is no suitable habitat ton -s ineds ine0ower g P CNPS: IB.Z seeps. Found at elevations ranging From 98 l0 5,020 feel. present within or adjacent acent to P Blooming period is from April to July, the project site. COnVO/Vn/nS S/mulans Fed: None Grows in clay soils within serpentinite seeps, chaparral. Presumed Absent small -dowered morning- CA: None coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland habitats. Found at Yes No There is no suitable habitat glory CNPS: 9.2 elevations ranging from 98 to 2,297 feel. Blooming period is g g g � present within or adjacent to from March to July. the project site 7TiUl No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIRC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) ELM T Habitat Assessment and .MSHCP Consistency Analysis ,4ppendi.e C - Potentially Occuning Special -Status Biological Resources Low Fed: None Typically found in vernally mesic, sometimes sandy soils in Marginal habitat is present Deinandra paniculala CA: None coastal scrub, valley and foothill grasslands, and vernal pools. No No within the project site. This particulate tarplant CNPS: 4.2 Found at elevations ranging from 82 to 3,084 feet. Blooming species often occurs in period is from April to November. disturbed areas. Absent Harpagonella palrrteri FediPresumed one Occurs on clay soils in chaparral, coastal scrub, and valley y p There is no suitable habitat Palmer's A: None CA: and foothill grasslands. Found at elevations ranging From 66 Yes No present within or adjacent to grapplinghook CNPS: 4.2 to 3.133 feet. Blooming period is from March to Ma • g P y the project site. Ju lans californica g Fed: None Occurs in alluvial soils in chaparral cismomane woodland, Presumed Absent There is no suitable habitat southern California black CA: None coastal scrub, and riparian woodlands. From 15 to 5,875 feet Yes No present within or adjacent to walnut CNPS: 4.2 in elevation. Blooming period is from May to June. the projectsite, Lastheniaglabralassp. Fed: None Prefers playas, vernal pools, and coastal salt marshes and Presumed Absent There is no suitable habitat couller/ CA: None swamps. Found at elevations ranging from 3 to 4.003 feet. Yes (d) No present within adjacent to Coulter's goldfields CNPS: 1B 1 Blooming period is from February to June. the project site. Le idiom vir inicum p g Fed: None Dry soils on chaparral and coastal sage scrub. Found at Presumed Absent There is no suitable habitat vac robinsoni/ CA: None elevations ranging from 3 to 2,904 feet. Blooming period is No No present within or adjacent to Robinson's pepper -grass CNPS: 4.3 from January to July the project site. Microseris douglasi/ssp. Fed: None Occurs in day soils in cismoniane woodland, coastal scrub. Presumed Absent platycarpha valley and foothill grasslands, and around vernal pools. No No There is no suitable habitat small -flowered CA: None Found at elevations ranging from 49 to 3.510 feet. Blooming present within or adjacent to nticroseris CNPS: 4.2 period is from March to May. tte project site. lYlyosurusminimusssp. Fed: None Occurs in alkaline soils in galley and foothill grassland and Presumed Absent There is no suitable habitat apus CA: None vernal pools. Found at elevations ranging from 66 to 2.100 Yes (d) No present within or adjacent to little mousetail CNPS: 3.1 feet. Blooming period is From March to June, the project site. Fed: THR Grows in chenopod scrub, assorted shallow freshwater Presumed Absent Navarreda fossalis CA: None marshes and swamps, playas, and venial pools. Found at Yes (b) No There is no suitable habitat spreading navarrelia elevations ranging from 98 to 2,149 feet. Blooming period is present within or adjacent to CNPS: I13,1 from April to,june, the project site. Primarily restricted to the southern basaltic claypan vernal Presumed Absent Orcullia ca/ifornica Fed: END pools at the Santa Rosa Plateau, and alkali vernal pools at P P There is no suitable habitat California Orcult grass CA: END Skunk Hollow. and at tab Creek. Grows in elevations urging Yes (b) No present within or adjacent to CNPS: ]B.I from -15 10 2,165 feel above msl. Blooming period is From the project site, April to August_ TTUNo. 36658 (PLN-0296) and SpecXc Plan SPECIFICPL.IN2013-217 (PLN23-0060) ^ - E E M T Habitat Assessment and ,LISHCP Consisrencp rI nalysis Appendix C - Potentially (katrrinq Special -Status Bioloeical Resources CDFW SENS IF Open to locally dense evergreen riparian woodlands dominated by Quercus agrifolia. This type appears to be Southern Coast Live Oak CDFW Sensitive richer in herbs and poorer in understory shrubs than other Riparian Forest Habitat riparian communities. Botlomlands and outer floodplains NA No Absent along larger streams, on fine-grained. rich alluvium. Canyons and valleys of coastal southern California. Dominated by cottonwood (Populus sp.) and willow (Salix Southern Cottonwood CDFW Sensitive sp.) trees and shrubs. Considered to be an early successional Willow Riparian Forest Habitat stage as both species are known to germinate almost NA No Absent exclusively on recenliv deoosited or exposed alluvial snits. U.S. Fish and Wildlife California Department of Fish Service (Fed) - Federal and Wildlife (CA) - California END- Federal END- California Endangered Endangered THR- California Threatened THR- Federal Candidate- Candidate for listing Threatened under the California Endangered Species Act FP- California Fully Protected SSC- Species of Special Concern WL- Watch List California Native Plant Society (CNPS) CNPS Threat Ranks Western Riverside County MSHCP California Rare Plant Rank 0.1- Seriously Yes- Fully covered 1B Plants Rare. Threatened, or Endangered threatened in No- Not covered in California and Elsewhere California Yes (a)- May require surveys under 2B Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered 0.2- Moderately MSHCP Section 6.1.2 in California. But More Common threatened in Yes (b)- May require surveys under Elsewhere California MSHCP Section 6.1.3 3 Plants About Which More Information is 0.3- Not very Yes (c)- May require surveys under Needed - A Review List threatened in MSHCP Section 6.3.2 4 Plants of Limited Distribution - A California Yes (d)- May require surveys under Watch List MSHCP Section 6.3.2 Yes (e)- Conditionally covered pending the achievement of species - specific conservation measures TTAI No. 36658 (PIN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN201,3-247 (PLN23-0060) O ELM T Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis Appendix D Regulations Appendix D - Regulations Special status species are native species that have been afforded special legal or management protection because of concern for their continued existence. There are several categories ofprotection at both federal and state levels, depending on the magnitude of threat to continued existence and existing knowledge of population levels. Federal Regulations Endangered Species Act of 1973 Federally listed threatened and endangered species and their habitats are protected under provisions of the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). Section 9 of the ESA prohibits "take" of threatened or endangered species. "Take" under the ESA is defined as to "harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any of the specifically enumerated conduct." The presence of any federally threatened or endangered species that are in a project area generally imposes severe constraints on development, particularly if development would result in "take" of the species or its habitat. Under the regulations of the ESA, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) may authorize "take" when it is incidental to, but not the purpose of, an otherwise lawful act. Critical Habitat is designated for the survival and recovery of species listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA. Critical Habitat includes those areas occupied by the species, in which are found physical and biological features that are essential to the conservation of an ESA listed species and which may require special management considerations or protection. Critical Habitat may also include unoccupied habitat if it is determined that the unoccupied habitat is essential for the conservation of the species. Whenever federal agencies authorize, fund, or carry out actions that may adversely modify or destroy Critical Habitat, they must consult with USFWS under Section 7 of the ESA. The designation of Critical Habitat does not affect private landowners, unless a project they are proposing uses federal funds, or requires federal authorization or permits (e.g., funding from the Federal Highway Administration or a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)). If USFWS determines that Critical Habitat will be adversely modified or destroyed from a proposed action, the USFWS will develop reasonable and prudent alternatives in cooperation with the federal institution to ensure the purpose of the proposed action can be achieved without loss of Critical Habitat. If the action is not likely to adversely modify or destroy Critical Habitat, USFWS will include a statement in its biological opinion concerning any incidental take that may be authorized and specify terms and conditions to ensure the agency is in compliance with the opinion. Migratory Bird Treaty Act The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 U.S. Government Code [USC] 703) makes it unlawful to pursue, capture, kill, possess, or attempt to do the same to any migratory bird or part, nest, or egg of any such bird listed in wildlife protection treaties between the United States, Great Britain, Mexico, Japan, and the countries of the former Soviet Union, and authorizes the U.S. Secretary of the Interior to protect and regulate the taking of migratory birds. It establishes seasons and bag limits for hunted species and protects migratory birds, their occupied nests, and their eggs (16 USC 703; 50 CFR 10, 21). TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) O C I n Habitat Assessment and NISHCP Consistency Analysis L I �/ I as Appendix D - Regulations The MBTA covers the taking of any nests or eggs of migratory birds, except as allowed by permit pursuant to 50 CFR, Part 21. Disturbances causing nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort (i.e., killing or abandonment of eggs or young) may also be considered "take." This regulation seeks to protect migratory birds and active nests. In 1972, the MBTA was amended to include protection for migratory birds of prey (e.g., raptors). Six families of raptors occurring in North America were included in the amendment: Accipitridae (kites, hawks, and eagles); Cathartidae (New World vultures); Falconidae (falcons and caracaras); Pandionidae (ospreys); Strigidae (typical owls); and Tytonidae (barn owls). The provisions of the 1972 amendment to the MBTA protects all species and subspecies of the families listed above. The MBTA protects over 800 species including geese, ducks, shorebirds, raptors, songbirds and many relatively common species. State Regulations California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provides for the protection of the environment within the State of California by establishing State policy to prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures for projects. It applies to actions directly undertaken, financed, or permitted by State lead agencies. If a project is determined to be subject to CEQA, the lead agency will be required to conduct an Initial Study (IS) ; if the IS determines that the project may have significant impacts on the environment, the lead agency will subsequently be required to write an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). A finding of non -significant effects will require either a Negative Declaration or a Mitigated Negative Declaration instead of an EIR. Section 15380 of the CEQA Guidelines independently defines "endangered" and "rare" species separately from the definitions of the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). Under CEQA, "endangered" species of plants or animals are defined as those whose survival and reproduction in the wild are in immediate jeopardy, while "rare" species are defined as those who are in such low numbers that they could become endangered if their environment worsens. California Endangered Species Act (CESA) In addition to federal laws, the state of California implements the CESA which is enforced by CDFW. The CESA program maintains a separate listing of species beyond the FESA, although the provisions of each act are similar. State -listed threatened and endangered species are protected under provisions of the CESA. Activities that may result in "take" of individuals (defined in CESA as; "hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill") are regulated by CDFW. Habitat degradation or modification is not included in the definition of "take" under CESA. Nonetheless, CDFW has interpreted "take" to include the destruction of nesting, denning, or foraging habitat necessary to maintain a viable breeding population of protected species. The State of California considers an endangered species as one whose prospects of survival and reproduction are in immediate jeopardy. A threatened species is considered as one present in such small numbers throughout its range that it is likely to become an endangered species in the near future in the 7T'M No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) L M T Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis Y® �,o)Nsii_ali JG Appendix D - Regulations absence of special protection or management. A rare species is one that is considered present in such small numbers throughout its range that it may become endangered if its present environment worsens. State threatened and endangered species are fully protected against take, as defined above. The CDFW has also produced a species of special concern list to serve as a species watch list. Species on this list are either of limited distribution or their habitats have been reduced substantially, such that a threat to their populations may be imminent. Species of special concern may receive special attention during environmental review, but they do not have formal statutory protection. At the federal level, USFWS also uses the label species of concern, as an informal term that refers to species which might be in need of concentrated conservation actions. As the Species of Concern designated by USFWS do not receive formal legal protection, the use of the term does not necessarily ensure that the species will be proposed for listing as a threatened or endangered species. Fish and Game Code Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513 are applicable to natural resource management. For example, Section 3503 of the Code makes it unlawful to destroy any birds' nest or any birds' eggs that are protected under the MBTA. Further, any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (Birds of Prey, such as hawks, eagles, and owls) are protected under Section 3503.5 of the Fish and Game Code which makes it unlawful to take, possess, or destroy their nest or eggs. A consultation with CDFW may be required prior to the removal of any bird of prey nest that may occur on a project site. Section 3511 of the Fish and Game Code lists fully protected bird species, where the CDFW is unable to authorize the issuance of permits or licenses to take these species. Pertinent species that are State fully protected by the State include golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and white-tailed kite (Elanusleucurus). Section 3513 of the Fish and Game Code makes it unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the MBTA or any part of such migratory nongame bird except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the MBTA. Native Plant Protection Act Sections 1900-1913 of the Fish and Game Code were developed to preserve, protect, and enhance Rare and Endangered plants in the state of California. The act requires all state agencies to use their authority to carry out programs to conserve Endangered and Rare native plants. Provisions of the Native Plant Protection Act prohibit the taking of listed plants from the wild and require notification of the CDFW at least ten days in advance of any change in land use which would adversely impact listed plants. This allows the CDFW to salvage listed plant species that would otherwise be destroyed. California Native Plant Society Rare and Endangered Plant Species Vascular plants listed as rare or endangered by the CNPS, but which have no designated status under FESA or CESA are defined as follows: California Rare Plant Rank IA- Plants Presumed Extirpated in California and either Rare or Extinct Elsewhere 1B- Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and Elsewhere TTNI No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) O C r I n Habitat Assessment and A11SHCP Consistency Analysis L L V I F**1 ' ')rl`_, JI IIrl(_, D - Regulations 2A- Plants Presumed Extirpated in California, But More Common Elsewhere 2B- Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, But More Common Elsewhere 3- Plants about Which More Information is Needed - A Review List 4- Plants of Limited Distribution - A Watch List Threat Ranks 1- Seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened / high degree and immediacy of threat) 2- Moderately threatened in California (20-80% occurrences threatened / moderate degree and immediacy of threat) 3- Not very threatened in California (<20% of occurrences threatened / low degree and immediacy of threat or no current threats known). Local Policies Western Riverside County MSHCP The MSHCP is a comprehensive, multi jurisdictional HCP focusing on conservation of species and their associated habitats in western Riverside County. The goal of the MSHCP is to maintain biological and ecological diversity within a rapidly urbanizing region. The approval of the MSHCP and execution of the Implementing Agreement (IA) by the wildlife agencies allows signatories of the IA to issue "take" authorizations for all species covered by the MSHCP, including state- and federal -listed species as well as other identified sensitive species and/or their habitats. Each city or local jurisdiction will impose a Development Mitigation Fee for projects within their jurisdiction. With payment of the mitigation fee to the County and compliance with the survey requirements of the MSHCP where required, full mitigation in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), CESA, and FESA will be granted. The Development Mitigation Fee varies according to project size and project description. The fee for industrial development is $7,382 per acre (County Ordinance 810.2). Payment of the mitigation fee and compliance with the requirements of Section 6.0 of the MSHCP are intended to provide full mitigation under CEQA, NEPA, CESA, and FESA for impacts to the species and habitats covered by the MSHCP pursuant to agreements with the USFWS, the CDFW, and/or any other appropriate participating regulatory agencies and as set forth in the IA for the MSHCP. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) a C n T Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis I V I I ©® C��N'=UI_IIPJG Appendix D - Regulations There are three key agencies that regulate activities within Inland streams, wetlands, and riparian areas in California. The Corps Regulatory Branch regulates activities pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CW4) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. Of the State agencies, the CDFG regulates activities under the Fish and Game Code Section 1600-1616, and the Regional Board regulates activities pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and the California Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Federal Regulations Section 404 of the Clean Water Act In accordance with the Revised Definition of "Waters of the United States"; Conforming (September 8, 2023), "waters of the United Sates" are defined as follows: (a) Waters of the United States means: (1) Waters which are: (i) Currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; (ii) The territorial seas; or (iii) Interstate waters; (2) Impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under this definition, other than impoundments of waters identified under paragraph (a) (5) of this section; (3) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraph (a) (1) or (2) of this section that are relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water; (4) Wetlands adjacent to the following waters: (i) Waters identified in paragraph (a) (1) of this section; or (ii) Relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water identified in paragraph (a) (2) or (a) (3) of this section and with a continuous surface connection to those waters; (5) Intrastate lakes and ponds not identified in paragraphs (a) (1) through (4) of this section that are relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water with a continuous surface connection to the waters identified in paragraph (a) (1) or (a) (3) of this section (b) The following are not "waters of the United States" even where they otherwise meet the terms of paragraphs (a) (2) through (5) of this section: (1) Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons, designed to meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act; (2) Prior converted cropland designated by the Secretary of Agriculture. The exclusion would cease upon a change of use, which means that the area is no longer available for the production of agricultural commodities. Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status as prior converted TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) D C L M T Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis Appendix D - Regulations cropland by any other Federal agency, for the purposes of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction remains with EPA; (3) Ditches (including roadside ditches) excavated wholly in and draining only dry land and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water; (4) Artificially irrigated areas that would revert to dry land if the irrigation ceased; (5) Artificial lakes or ponds created by excavating or diking dry land to collect and retain water and which are used exclusively for such purposes as stock watering, irrigation, settling basins, or rice growing; (6) Artificial reflecting or swimming pools or other small ornamental bodies of water created by excavating or diking dry land to retain water for primarily aesthetic reasons; (7) Waterfilled depressions created in dry land incidental to construction activity and pits excavated in dry land for the purpose of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel unless and until the construction or excavation operation is abandoned and the resulting body of water meets the definition of waters of the United States; and (8) Swales and erosional features (e.g., gullies, small washes) characterized by low volume, infrequent, or short duration flow. (c) In this section, the following definitions apply: (1) Wetlands means those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. (2) Adjacent means having a continuous surface connection (3) High tide line means the line of intersection of the land with the water's surface at the maximum height reached by a rising tide. The high tide line may be determined, in the absence of actual data, by a line of oil or scum along shore objects, a more or less continuous deposit of fine shell or debris on the foreshore or berm, other physical markings or characteristics, vegetation lines, tidal gages, or other suitable means that delineate the general height reached by a rising tide. The line encompasses spring high tides and other high tides that occur with periodic frequency but does not include storm surges in which there is a departure from the normal or predicted reach of the tide due to the piling up of water against a coast by strong winds such as those accompanying a hurricane or other intense storm. (4) Ordinary high watermark means that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis E LMT :-IONSU1 TING Appendix D - Regulations (5) Tidal waters means those waters that rise and fall in a predictable and measurable rhythm or cycle due to the gravitational pulls of the moon and sun. Tidal waters end where the rise and fall of the water surface can no longer be practically measured in a predictable rhythm due to masking by hydrologic, wind, or other effects. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act Pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA, any applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity which may result in any discharge to waters of the United States must provide certification from the State or Indian tribe in which the discharge originates. This certification provides for the protection of the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of waters, addresses impacts to water quality that may result from issuance of federal permits, and helps insure that federal actions will not violate water quality standards of the State or Indian tribe. In California, there are nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (Regional Board) that issue or deny certification for discharges to waters of the United States and waters of the State, including wetlands, within their geographical jurisdiction. The State Water Resources Control Board assumed this responsibility when a project has the potential to result in the discharge to waters within multiple Regional Boards. State Regulations Fish and Came Code Fish and Game Code Sections 1600 et. seq. establishes a fee -based process to ensure that projects conducted in and around lakes, rivers, or streams do not adversely impact fish and wildlife resources, or, when adverse impacts cannot be avoided, ensures that adequate mitigation and/or compensation is provided. Fish and Game Code Section 1602 requires any person, state, or local governmental agency or public utility to notify the CDFW before beginning any activity that will do one or more of the following: (1) substantially obstruct or divert the natural flow of a river, stream, or lake; (2) substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of a river, stream, or lake; or (3) deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it can pass into a river, stream, or lake. Fish and Game Code Section 1602 applies to all perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral rivers, streams, and lakes in the State. CDFW's regulatory authority extends to include riparian habitat (including wetlands) supported by a river, stream, or lake regardless of the presence or absence of hydric soils and saturated soil conditions. Generally, the CDFW takes jurisdiction to the top of bank of the stream or to the outer limit of the adjacent riparian vegetation (outer drip line), whichever is greater. Notification is generally required for any project that will take place in or in the vicinity of a river, stream, lake, or their tributaries. This includes rivers or streams that flow at least periodically or permanently through a bed or channel with banks that support fish or other aquatic life and watercourses having a surface or subsurface flow that support or have supported riparian vegetation. A Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement would be required if impacts to identified CDFW jurisdictional areas occur. 77M No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) Habitat Assessment and NISHCP Consistency Analysis C EMT Appendix D - Reivulations Porter Cologne Act The California Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Actgives the State very broad authority to regulate waters of the State, which are defined as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters. The Porter -Cologne Act has become an important tool in the post SWANCC and Rapanos regulatory environment, with respect to the state's authority over isolated and insignificant waters. Generally, any person proposing to discharge waste into a water body that could affect its water quality must file a Report of Waste Discharge in the event that there is no Section 404/401 nexus. Although "waste" is partially defined as any waste substance associated with human habitation, the Regional Board also interprets this to include fill discharged into water bodies. TTM No. 36658 (PLN-0246) and Specific Plan SPECIFIC PLAN 2013-247 (PLN23-0060) QCAD r n T Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis L— I V I I ®© '-ON` 1)[ 11NG City of Menifee Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project APPENDIX C UPDATED CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT February 2024 Appendix C Kimley»>Horn MEMORANDUM To: Desiree McGriff, Associate Planner City of Menifee Community Development Department 29844 Haun Road, Menifee, CA 92586 From: Jessica Mauck, MA, RPA Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 3801 University Ave., Ste 300, Riverside, CA 92501 Date: 22 September 2023 Subject: Updated Cultural Resources Assessment for the TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013- 247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project in the City of Menifee, Riverside County, California Dear Ms. McGriff: At the request of the City of Menifee, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA) conducted a Cultural Resources Assessment Update for the TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project (Project). This study was completed to support an anticipated Addendum Environmental Impact Report that may be required for the Project a result of a proposed amendment to the Specific Plan and proposed changes to Planning Areas 4, 5, and 6. A literature review was conducted for the property to identify the likelihood of present cultural resources that would be adversely impacted by the Project, the results of which are presented in this memorandum. All research, analysis, and reporting for this effort was conducted by a cultural resources management professional that meets Secretary of Interior (SOI) Professional Qualifications in Archaeology. Please note that this assessment does not include the consideration of Tribal Cultural Resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended), as that would be identified and assessed via government -to -government consultation between the City of Menifee and Tribes that have requested to be notified of Projects within the City's jurisdiction. Proiect Location The Project area is in the northwestern portion of the City of Menifee within the western portion of the County of Riverside, California (Figure 1). For the purposes of this assessment, the Project area is considered the portion of the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan included within the proposed amendment, including APN 330-070-055, 330-220-016, 330-220-017, and 330-230-042 for a total of approximately 114 acres. The Project area vacant, though modified, and is generally bordered by additional vacant land and residential developments to the northwest and southeast. Regional 3801 University Ave, Ste 300, Riverside, CA 92501 W., boN'� • , vasu�. 4r• —mot: `�` r Proiect Locabon :Riyerslde• , x helrT,t, _ S• .l CO"SEADO RIV Irvine. 19) ^Ci PR�AQION - ImOes �ln� .,o Ouuaarizsar r eJ \ • v 1� 9 yt Te ulA so E rc 9 San Diego • ROMJI .,IP 21 • M 1 1 1 1 • d • `A.tj,.SUN CITY QUAIL VALLEY" -• �Z. ••,,:•k ' kimley-horn.com 1 3801 University Ave, Ste 300, Riverside, CA 92501 1 951-543-9868 Kimley >>Horn Page 3 access is provided by Interstate 215 (1-215) located just over 1 mile east of the project site and local access to the Project area is provided from Goetz Rd and Valley Blvd (Figure 2). Cultural and Natural Setting The Project area is located within the southern portion of Perris Valley. This valley is a sub -basin of the San Jacinto watershed, which is one of three major geographical subdivisions of the Santa Ana Basin. It is bounded on the northeast by the San Jacinto Mountains and the southwest by the Santa Ana Mountains. A portion of the San Jacinto River is located approximately 0.8 miles to the northwest. The area, like much of California, contains a unique and diverse climate and environment. This regional diversity provided Native Californians the ability to exploit a range of different plants, animals, and natural resources (Lightfoot 2009). The proposed Project area is located within the ancestral territory of the Luiseno. Although Alfred Kroeber recorded the territories of southern California tribes in 1925, the ancient territorial borders remain vague for two reasons: first, territorial boundaries were flexible and, secondly, indigenous borders and land use were not recorded until after European contact destroyed native lifeways. Although firm and defining borders cannot be known, archaeological, ethnographic, and historic evidence exists to support the prehistoric occupation and use by the Luiseno. Research A review of available historical and topographic maps and technical studies was conducted to ascertain the potential for existing buried and built cultural resources. The entirety of the Project area was previously reviewed as a part of a cultural resources assessment and associated addendum completed in 2014 for the Cimarron Specific Plan. The records search conducted for the effort identified nine (9) prior surveys that overlapped with the Project area and resulted in the recordation of three (3) prehistoric archaeological sites within or adjacent to the Project area. This includes CA-RIV-4486 (single bedrock milling feature with associated stone tools and debitage), CA- RIV-7028 (two milling slicks on two boulders), and P-33-001078 (two milling slicks on one boulder). The survey conducted for the 2014 study did not successfully relocate CA-RIV-4486 or CA-RIV-7028, and noted that the boulder within P-33-001078 had been relocated to the northern portion of the Project area and sustained extensive damage. The survey did not identify any new cultural resources and noted that the entirety of the Project area was highly disturbed as a result of grading and excavation operations and that the likelihood of present intact cultural resources within the Project area was low (Tang and Hogan 2014). Review of historic and current aerials of the Project area show the entirety of the Project area was subjected to minor modifications in the 1990s before undergoing extensive grading sometime between 2002 and 2005 (Historic Aerials). 3801 University Ave, Ste 300, Riverside, CA 92501 Kimley»>Horn Page 4 Results The Project area has been subjected to multiple prior cultural resources assessments, during which time three (3) prehistoric archaeological sites were recorded within the Project area: CA-RIV-4486, CA-RIV-7028, and 33-001078. However, the 2014 study conducted for the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan noted that the entirety of the Project area had been subject to extensive grading and excavation that all previously recorded sites were destroyed. This observation is corroborated by historical aerials, which show that the site was subject to extensive grading sometime between 2002 and 2005. Due to the presence of extensive grading and excavation, the likelihood of archaeological resources being present within the Project area is low. Finally, the site does not contain any standing buildings or structures that are older than 45 years, or any younger buildings that hold more recent historical value, that meet the definition of a cultural resource that require consideration. Recommendations Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA) did not identify any existing cultural resources, nor the potential for unknown buried cultural resources, as a part of the Cultural Resources Assessment Update for the Project. As such, no further consideration regarding the impacts to cultural resources as a result of the Project is recommended during the environmental review process. However, it is recommended that Project include conditions that outline process for the inadvertent discovery and treatment of cultural resources, as well as conditions outlining the legal process for inadvertent discovery of human remains referenced in California State Health and Safety Code 7050.5 and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The mitigation measures included in the 2015 Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan EIR, as well as the City of Menifee's standard conditions of approval related to cultural resources, sufficiently address this recommendation. Sincerely, Jessica Mauck, MA, RPA Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Register of Professional Archaeologists (RPA) Number: 37243944 I 13801 University Ave, Ste 300, Riverside, CA 92501 Kimley>»Horn References Historic Aerials. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer. Accessed March 29, 2023. Page 5 Kroeber, Alfred L. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin No. 78. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. Reprinted in 1976, New York: Dover. Lightfoot, Kent G. and Otis Parrish 2009. California Indians and Their Environment. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, California. Tang, Bai "Tom". 2014. Second Addendum to Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment: Tentative Tract Map No. 36658 (Off -site Improvements), City of Menifee, Riverside County, California. On file with CRM Tech, Colton, CA. Tang, Bai "Tom", and Michael Hogan. 2014. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment: Tentative Tract Map No. 36658, City of Menifee, Riverside County, California. On file with CRM Tech, Colton, CA. - 3801 University Ave, Ste 300, Riverside, CA 92501 City of Menifee Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project APPENDIX D ALUC DEVELOPMENT REIVEW - DIRECTOR'S DETERMINATION February 2024 Appendix D RIVERSIDE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION November 29, 2023 Desiree McGriff, Project Planner CHAIR City of Menifee Community Development Department Steve Mantis 29844 Haun Road Lake Elsinore Menifee CA 92586 VICE CHAIR Russell Betts Desert Hot Springs RE: AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION ALUC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW— DIRECTOR'S DETERMINATION COMMISSIONERS John Lyon File NO.: ZAP1033PV23 Riverside Related File Nos . PLN23-0060 (Specific Plan Amendment), PLN22-0246 (Major Russell Betts Modification Tentative Tract Map No. 36658) Desert Hot Springs Compatibility Zone: Zone E (partially outside the airport influence area) Richard Stewart APNs: 330-230-042, 330-230-043, 330-220-016, 330-220-017 Moreno Valley Michelle Geller Riverside Dear Ms. McGriff: Vernon Poole As authorized b the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission ALUC pursuant to its Murrieta y ry P (ALUC) Resolution No. 2020-02, as ALUC Director, I have reviewed City of Menifee Case Nos. PLN23- STAFF 0060 (Specific Plan Amendment), PLN22-0246 (Major Modification Tentative Tract Map No. 36658), a proposal modifying previously found consistent case ZAP1006PV14, amending the Director Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan transferring 49 residential lots from PA-4 to PA-5 and transferring Paul Rull g P 9 g the 10.9-acre park from PA-5 to PA-4 but does not propose any alterations to density as a result Simon A Housman of these revisions. Planning Area No. 4, will consist of 81 residential lots and include a 10.9-acre Jackie Vega ark consisting of active and passive uses and amenities, including a do ark, concession Barbara Santos P 9 P 9 9 P stand, and bathrooms for the community and on -site parking. Planning Area No. 5 will consist of aurtyAchnstrali'eariff 151 single-family residential lots, a 1.5-acre recreation area, and 12-acre pickle ball facility in W Lean &.141h Roar. rav�decA93 t conjunction with Planning Area No. 6, which proposing 96 residential lots, and both Planning (951)955-51-v Areas are age restricted, gated communities. The modifications are proposed for all streets servicing TR36658-5, and TR36658-6, will be converted from public streets to private streets. The design of the intersection of Smokey Quartz Street, and Goetz Road, will be revised to accommodate the proposed gated entry turnaround prior to the gate addition. Gates will also be added to the east entry of phase 5 on Byers Road and the north entry on McLaughlin Road. The proposed modifications to the tentative tract map will not add or reduce the approved number of residential lots. The site is located within Airport Compatibility Zone E of the Perris Valley Airport Influence Area (and partially outside the AIA), which does not restrict residential density or non-residential intensity. The proposed amendments do not involve changes in development standards or allowable land uses that would increase residential density or non-residential intensity. Therefore, these amendments have no possibility of having an impact on the safety of air navigation within the Perris Valley Airport Influence Area. As ALUC Director, I hereby find the above -referenced project CONSISTENT, with the 2011 Perris Valley Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, provided that the City of Menifee applies the AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION following recommended conditions: CONDITIONS: Any outdoor lighting installed shall be hooded or shielded to prevent either the spillage of lumens or reflection into the sky. The following uses shall be prohibited: (a) Any use which would direct a steady light or flashing light of red, white, green, or amber colors associated with airport operations toward an aircraft engaged in an initial straight climb following takeoff or toward an aircraft engaged in a straight final approach toward a landing at an airport, other than an FAA -approved navigational signal light or visual approach slope indicator. (b) Any use which would cause sunlight to be reflected towards an aircraft engaged in an initial straight climb following takeoff or towards an aircraft engaged in a straight final approach towards a landing at an airport. (0 Any use which would generate smoke or water vapor or which would attract large concentrations of birds. or which may otherwise affect safe air navigation within the area. (Such uses include landscaping utilizing water features, aquaculture. production of cereal grains, sunflower, and row crops, composting operations, trash transfer stations that are open on one or more sides, recycling centers containing putrescible wastes, construction and demolition debris facilities, fly ash disposal, and incinerators.) (d) Any use which would generate electrical interference that may be detrimental to the operation of aircraft and/or aircraft instrumentation. The attached notice shall be given to all prospective purchasers and/or tenants of the portions of the property within the Perris Valley Airport Influence Area. Any new retention basins on the site shall be designed so as to provide for a maximum 48-hour detention period following the conclusion of the storm eventforthe design storm (may be less, but not more), and to remain totally dry between rainfalls. Vegetation in and around the retention basin(s) that would provide food or cover for bird species that would be incompatible with airport operations shall not be utilized in project landscaping. Prior to adoption of this Specific Plan by the City Council, the applicant shall have received a determination of "Not a Hazard to Air Navigation" from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Obstruction Evaluation Service for the following lots: 11, 146, 168, 177, 232, 242, 271, 338, 343, 465, 500, 512, 518, 521, 580, 583, and 586. (as amended by ALUC on May 8, 2014) (Condition No. 5 is considered to have been MET as of May 27, 2014.) The following conditions have been added subsequent to the ALUC hearing pursuant to the terms of the FAA Obstruction Evaluation Service letters issued on May 19, 2014 and May 27, 2014 for Aeronautical Study Nos. 2014-AWP-3132-OE through 2014-AWP-3147-OE, and 2014-AWP-3149-OE. The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted aeronautical studies of a sample of 17 lots within the proposed tract map (Aeronautical Study Nos. 2014- 2 AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION AWP-3132-OE through 2014-AWP-3147-OE, and 2014-AWP-3149-OE) and has determined that neither marking nor lighting of structures will be necessary for aviation safety. However, if marking and/or lighting for aviation safety are accomplished on a voluntary basis, such marking and/or lighting (if any) shall be installed in accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 70/7460-1 K Change 2 and shall be maintained in accordance therewith for the life of the project. 7. The maximum elevation at the top of any proposed structure, including all roof - mounted appurtenances (if any), shall not exceed 1,688 feet above mean sea level. The maximum elevation cited above shall not be increased, nor shall any structure be developed at coordinates that are closer than 8,153 feet from the southerly terminus of the runway without further review by the Airport Land Use Commission and the Federal Aviation Administration. 9. Temporary construction equipment such as cranes used during actual construction of structures shall not exceed a height of 40 feet unless separate notice is provided to the Federal Aviation Administration through the Form 7460-1 process. 10. Within five (5) days after construction of structures on each of the 17 lots cited above reaches its greatest height, FAA Form 7460-2 (Part II), Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, shall be completed by the project proponent or his/her designee and a -filed with the Federal Aviation Administration. (Go to https:iioeaaa.faa.gov for instructions.) This requirement is also applicable in the event the project is abandoned. [Note: Prior to issuance of building permits for any lot within Tentative Tract Map No. 36658, the applicant shall provide evidence that either: (a) the elevation of the structure at its top point in feet above mean sea level would not exceed the elevation of the runway at Perris Valley Airport at its southerly terminus by more than one foot for every 100 feet of distance between the structure and said southerly terminus of the runway; (b) the Federal Aviation Administration has issued a Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation for that lot allowing for a top point elevation that equals or exceeds the proposed top point elevation; or (c) the Federal Aviation Administration Obstruction Evaluation Service has issued a statement that review of the proposal for the specific lot is not required due to its previous review and determination for the 17 lots specified above.] If you have any questions, please contact me at (951) 955-6893. Sincerely, R -lVERSIDE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION Paul Rull, ALUC Director Attachments: Notice of Airport in Vicinity cc: Pulte Group (applicant/representative/property owner) Gary Gosliga, March Inland Port Airport Authority Major. David Shaw, Base Civil Engineer, March Air Reserve Base ALUC Case File X:\AIRPORT CASE FILES\Perris Valley\ZAP1033PV23\ZAP1033PV23.LTR doc ki City of Menifee Addendum Environmental Impact Report for the TTM 36658 and Specific Plan 2013-247 (Cimarron Ridge) Project APPENDIX E TRAFFIC CONSISTENCY MEMORANDUM February 2024 Appendix E Kimley»>Horn MEMORANDUM To: Desiree A. McGriff Associate Planner Community Development Department City of Menifee From: Trevor Briggs, P.E. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Date: October 11, 2023 Subject: Traffic Consistency Memorandum for the Modified Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan in the City of Menifee Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. has prepared a traffic consistency memorandum to evaluate the consistency of the modified Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan (modified CRSP) with the original CRSP (adopted in October 2015) in the City of Menifee. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The CRSP is located within the City of Menifee. A copy of the original CRSP land use map is shown on Figure 1. The original CRSP was approved in October 2015 and consists of 756 single-family detached dwelling units (DU) and 10 acres of regional park across 7 planning areas (PA) as noted below: • PA-1: 134 DU • PA-2: 116 DU • PA-3: 104 DU • PA-4: 130 DU • PA-5: 102 DU and 10 acres of regional park • PA-6: 96 DU • PA-7: 74 DU As part of the CEQA documentation for the original CRSP, an environmental impact report (EIR) was prepared, which included a traffic study (Revised Traffic Impact Analysis Report, Cimmaron Ridge Specific Plan, December 2014) for the Specific Plan. The traffic study provided a program -level traffic evaluation of the original CRSP. The EIR for the CRSP was approved by the City of Menifee in October 2015. VE• / PA3�� A MDR a ! �26.2AC, *.., 1 PA 1B— a/ 104 Dlh y ) i 1 OS R2 1 AC THORNTON AVE. 4 1tf-"f ff� Tr•-� Y:Q p' 4 V y MDR MDR , j 11 S A( • 36.8 AC I 1 116 DU5 134 DU5 ? i i i -------r.r t CHAMBE FIGURE 1 ORIGINAL CIMARRON RIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN (CRSP) NOT TO SCALE Kimley)>)Horn Kimley >>Horn PROJECT DESCRIPTION Ms. McGriff, October 11, 2023, Page 3 The applicant proposes to modify the Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan as noted below: • Relocating 49 single-family dwelling units from PA-4 to PA-5 • Relocating the 10.9-acre regional park from PA-5 to PA-4 As a result, PA-4 would consist of 81 single-family dwelling units and include a 10.9-acre park consisting of active and passive uses and amenities, including a dog park for the community and on - site parking. PA-5 would consist of 151 single-family dwelling units. The overall modified Specific Plan would consist of 756 single-family dwelling units. The proposed modifications to the Specific Plan would not alter the overall density of the Specific Plan. A copy of the modified CRSP is provided on Figure 2. TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON A trip generation analysis has been prepared to evaluate the trip -generating characteristics for the modified CRSP, compared to the approved trips within the original CRSP. Approved Specific Plan Trips The CRSP traffic study (December 2014) provides trip generation estimates for the original CRSP, which were approved by the City of Menifee. These trip generation estimates are based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9Lh Edition. The traffic study assumed 782 DU and 10 acres of regional park as a worst -case scenario. Based on the 2014 traffic study, the original CRSP would generate 7,491 daily trips, with 589 trips (148 inbound and 441 outbound) in the morning peak hour, and 784 trips (494 inbound and 290 outbound) in the evening peak hour. The approved trip generation estimates for the original CRSP are provided in Appendix A. Modified Specific Plan Trips For consistency with the original CRSP traffic study, the modified CRSP trip generation estimates were based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 91h Edition. Trip generation rates and the resulting trip generation estimates for the modified CRSP are summarized on Table 1. Based Table 1, the modified CRSP is estimated to generate approximately 7,197 daily trips, with 568 trips (142 inbound and 426 outbound) in the morning peak hour, and 756 trips (476 inbound and 280 outbound) in the evening peak hour. 1100 Town and Country Road, Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714 939 1030 NOT TO SCALE FIGURE 2 PROPOSED MODIFIED SPECIFIC PLAN Kimley >> Horn -4- TABLE 1 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON ORIGINAL CRSP TRAFFIC STUDY VS. MODIFIED CRSP Land Use ITE Code Unit Trip Generation Rates' Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total Single -Family Detached Housing 210 DU 9.52 0.19 0.56 0.75 0.63 0.37 1.00 Regonal Park 417 Acre 4.57 0.09 0.11 0.20 0.09 0.06 1 0.15 Land Use Quantity Unit Trip Generation Estimates Daily AM Peak Hour = PM Peak Hour In Out Total In I Out Total Original CRSP Single -Family Detached Housing 782 DU 7,445 147 440 587 493 289 782 Regonal Park 10.000 Acre 46 1 1 2 1 1 2 Total Original CRSPTrips 7,491 148 441 589 494 290 784 Modred CRSP Single -Family Detached Housing 756 DU 7,197 142 426 568 476 280 756 Regonal Park 10.000 Acre 46 1 1 2 1 1 2 Total Proposed CRSP Trips 7,197 142 426 568 476 280 756 Net Difference (Modified Minus Original) -294 -6 -15 1 .21 -18 -10 -28 1 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. 9th Edition Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Traffic Consistency Memorandum - 5 - October 2023 Kimley >>> Horn Ms. McGriff, October 11, 2023, Page 6 Compared to the original CRSP, the modified CRSP would generate 294 fewer daily trips, with 21 fewer trips in the morning peak hour and 28 fewer trips in the evening peak hour. As a result, the modified CRSP would be consistent with the findings and conclusions noted in the 2014 traffic study for the original CRSP. FOCUSED LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) ANALYSIS The CRSP bisects Valley Boulevard. The proposed modifications to the Specific Plan would relocate 49 single-family dwelling units originally located on the west side of Valley Boulevard to the east side of Valley Boulevard. As such, a focused traffic analysis was conducted to evaluate the traffic - related effects at the intersection of Valley Boulevard and Goetz Road. Analysis Methodology Analysis Scenarios As a worst -case scenario, the focused LOS analysis was conducted for the following scenario: 0 Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Plus Project Phase I&II Plus Modified CRSP The "Plus Modified CRSP" scenario will include the addition of the trips generated by the 49 DU relocated to the east of Valley Boulevard. Analysis Volumes The analysis volumes from the 2014 traffic study for "Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Plus Project Phase I&II" condition at the intersection of Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard were used as the base volumes for the analysis scenario noted above. The base volumes from the 2014 traffic study for the intersection of Goetz Road at Valley Boulevard (Intersection #12) are shown in Appendix A. As noted in the section above, the "Plus Modified CRSP" scenario will include the addition of trips generated by the 49 DU relocated to the east side of Valley Boulevard. Level ofService Standards Peak hour intersection operations were evaluated using the methodology outlined in the Transportation Resource Board (TRB) Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 7th Edition), consistent with the requirements of the City of Menifee. The intersection analysis was conducted using the Vistro software program and using the input parameters specified in the City of Menifee LOS Traffic Study Guidelines. 1100 Town and Country Road, Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 714 939 1030 Kimley>>> Horn Ms. McGriff, October 11, 2023, Page 7 The City of Menifee LOS Traffic Study Guidelines (October 2020) establishes minimum Level of Service standards, which has identified LOS D as the threshold for acceptable operating conditions for intersections. Trip Generation and Distribution Based on the average trip rates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, the relocated 49 DU would generate approximately 466 daily trips, with 37 trips (9 inbound and 28 outbound) in the morning peak hour and 49 trips (31 inbound and 18 outbound) in the evening peak hour. These trip generation estimates are summarized on Table 2. The trip distribution for the 49 relocated residential DU was based on the trip distribution assumptions for the original CRSP in the 2014 traffic study and is provided in Appendix A. Based on Appendix A, the trip distribution for the 49 relocated DU at the intersection of Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard would assume 50% to the north, 45% to the south, and 5% to the west. Intersection LOS Analysis A focused intersection Level of Service analysis was conducted during the morning and evening peak hours under Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Plus Project Phase I&II Plus Modified CRSP conditions for the intersection of Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard. The results are shown on Table 3. Intersection analysis worksheets for this scenario are provided in Appendix B. Based on review of Table 3 and consistent with the LOS results for the intersection of Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard in the 2014 traffic study, the intersection would continue to operate at an acceptable LOS. Therefore, the proposed lane configurations for the intersection of Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard can adequately accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed modifications. VMT ASSESSMENT An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified by the City of Menifee for the original CRSP. It is proposed that an Addendum to the CRSP EIR be prepared for the modified CRSP. Level of Service was the applicable threshold when the City certified the CRSP EIR. The mandate requiring lead agencies to use VMT as a threshold for evaluating traffic impacts was adopted in 2018 and effective in 2020. VMT does not constitute as "new information" requiring additional environmental review nor does it affect the assessment of project transportation impacts or mitigation measures compared to those analyzed in the original CRSP EIR. As noted earlier, compared to the original CRSP, the modified CRSP would generate 294 fewer daily trips, with 21 fewer trips in the morning peak hour and 28 fewer trips in the evening peak hour. 1100 Town and Country Road, Suite 700, Orange, CA 92868 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF PROJECT TRIP GENERATION RELOCATED DWELLING UNITS IN PA 5 OF THE MODIFIED CRSP Land Use ITE Code Unit Trip Generation Rates 1 Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total Single -Family Detached Housing 210 1 DU 9.52 0.19 0.56 0.75 0.63 0.37 1.00 Land Use Quantity Unit Trip Generation Estimates Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total Single -Family Detached Housing 49 DU 466 9 28 37 31 18 49 Total Project Trips 466 9 28 37 31 18 49 ' Source. Institute of Transportation Engineers CITE) Trip Generation Manual. 9`h Edition Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Traffic Consistency Memorandum - 8 . October 2023 TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION OPERATIONS EXISTING PLUS AMBIENT GROWTH PLUS CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT PHASE I&II PLUS MODIFIED CRSP Traffic AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Control Delay LOS Delay LOS Goetz Road at Valley Boulevard U 12.9 B 14.8 B Notes: - Delay values for unsignalized intersections represent the average vehicle delay on the worst (highest delay) intersection approach. U = Unsignalized Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Traffic Consistency Memorandum 9 October 2023 Kim I ey >>> H o r n Ms. McGriff, October 11, 2023, Page 10 Since the forecasted trip generation for the modified CRSP is less than what was previously analyzed for the original CRSP, the modified CRSP would not change the CRSP EIR determination with regards to transportation -related impacts. Therefore, the modified CRSP would create a less -than -significant VMT impact, and no further VMT analysis is required for the modified CRSP. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The traffic impacts of the modified CRSP are consistent with those analyzed in the 2014 traffic study. The modified CRSP would generate fewer daily trips and peak hour trips than what was analyzed in the original 2014 traffic study for the original CRSP EIR. The traffic generated by the modified CRSP would not cause additional impacts at the intersection of Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard than those analyzed in the 2014 traffic study. Based on the focused LOS analysis, the proposed lane configurations for the intersection of Goetz Road and Valley Boulevard can adequately accommodate the traffic generated by the modified CRSP. In addition, since the modified CRSP would generate less trips than what was previously analyzed, the modified CRSP would create a less -than -significant VMT impact, and no further VMT analysis is required for the modified CRSP. 714 939 1030 APPENDIX A EXCREPTS FROM REVISED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT, CIMARRON RIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN (DECEMBER 2014) - - — Traffic Impact Analysis Report, Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan Table 4-1— Trip Generation Rates DU = Dwelling Units. Average trip generation rates from Trip Generation Manual, ITE, 9th Edition (2012). Project Trip Generation Table 4-2 presents the daily and peak hour trip generation for the proposed project. As shown, the proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately 7,491 daily trip -ends, including 589 trip -ends during the AM peak hour and 784 trip -ends during the PM peak hour. Table 4-2 — Project Trip Generation DU = Dwelling Units. Project Trip Distribution Trip distribution represents the directional orientation of traffic to and from the project site. Trip distribution is influenced by the geographical location of the site, type of land use in the study area, such as shopping centers and recreational sites, and proximity to the regional freeway system. The trip directional orientation of traffic for the proposed project was determined based upon the existing roadway system, existing traffic patterns, and existing and future land uses. The directional distribution for the proposed project traffic assumed in this study is shown on Figure 4-A. Project Modal Split The traffic reducing potential of public transit has not been considered in this study. Therefore, the traffic projections provided in this report are considered conservative since public transit could reduce traffic volumes in the project area. Bicycle and pedestrian modes have also not been considered but the site plan includes provisions for bicycle and pedestrian shown in the roadway cross sections, Figure 4-B and the non -vehicular circulation plan, Figure 4-C. 5'fize�fi�,.�s!i2oe�li. LvvJ�o'U}. a.,,.cl i.�n,,ova%rio+,, Traffic Impact Analysis Report Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan Figure 5-G — Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Plus Project Phase I & II AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes **'— 133 R 463 414-14 1 t I 381---p. coN 5. 1-215 Northbound Ramps (NS) / Ethanac Road (EW) m e `rII i 1 t 13- 4 11-X v rn LO O �l 247--4I 1 t M M 6� 6. Gow Road (NS) / Monument Parkway (EW) 14 �Mm t-6 �34 I 333- I t I 2� 5� to k-15 u00i�w t0 ,,— o 189--4 �I Itf 0� vo 11 ro 7. GOetZ KOad (N5) I Goldenrod Avenue - McLaughlin Road N L 406 53 m�v 45 Nu`Oico t571 168 - 93 731 �t� s1 �t� 41 107� Nm� 1046� nNm 6� me 94 NN 1. Goetz Road (NS) ! 2. Murrieta Road (NS) / Ethanac Road (EW) Ethanac Road (EW) i 334 N r- �irn cc',649 N N a f 745 3♦8 1 or-178 169- �I I I I 1081-9� ro ; 4 676- 14-�4 653-x 3. Case Roa"arnelt 4. 1-215 Soulhbound Road (NS) / Ethanac Ramps (NS) / Ethanac Road (EW) Road (EW) f 1 o- 5-X 8. McLaughlin Prolecl Dwy (NS) / McLaughlin Road (EW) M �64 m �62 v�N 0 �NCNn F4 J I l s `R7 `R37 1i11a I t l 351 I t (� 0--- W 04 7N 12--o- vru� 7-�k N 27� �QN 11. Goetz Road (NS), 12. Goetz Road -Valley 13. Goetz Road (N5)1 14. Murneta Koad (Ns) r North Goetz Project Dwy Boulevard (NS) / Goetz South Goetz Project Dwy Rouse Road (EW) (EW) Road (EW) (EW) N Fle- 21 11 aoNo0 42 zs� �t� 33 � � 1 � 'o M 0� 27-1k v 9. Byers Road (NS) / 10. Murnela Road (NS) / McLaughlin Road (EW) McLaughlin Road (EW) r o�N J I l s i2-- �66 0 �R11 ��� 12 30 �R2 Itr �I 0- Itr �I 0� oor 87--► N�� 0- N 72-,, 15. Goetz Road (NS) r 16. Valley Boulevard (NS) Sotelo Road -Thornton / Thornton Avenue (EW) Avenue (EW) j'f2li!'I.N�W'144oLVA �O?Ny G—d'4i'NWY 10s'li Traffic Impact Analysis Report Cimarron Ridge Specific Plan Figure 5-H — Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Plus Project Phase I & II PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes �225 o `lO 10 F 544I N mI 0 I� + Ir ♦ a /r 0 3971 �t(� 93- �t 63--X �t� 501-0. WNW u m 0-0.mLOo m N 5. 1-215 Northbound 6. Goetz Road (NS) / 7. Goetz Road (NS) / Ramps (NS) I Ethanac Monument Parkway (EW) Goldenrod Avenue - Road (EW) McLaughlin Road u� *-- 9 �otlOi mNI 4 rr ri� /Rr22�/ 9--W �t 2454 1t( �2 6 7� N 3� 11. Goetz Road (NS)r 12. Goetz Road -Valley North Goetz Project Dwy Boulevard (NS) / Goetz (EW) Road (EW) vN �584 t13 mNU1 Ji � 68 3366 959 - 297 43 r 790 --► in m N 114� �2 iy 1. Goetz Road (NS) / Ethanac Road (EW) 2. Murrieta Road (NS) / Ethanac Road (EW) m m � 360 N o 1031 ) i � r-26 223-4 ) I I 813— 17-,A 3.Case Road -Barnett Road (NS) / Ethanac Road (EW) 8. McLaughlin Project 9. Byers Read (NS) i Dwy (NS) I McLaughlin McLaughlin Road (EW) Road (EW) t42 �74 N0 0 nmm e mI m 9 I7 f- 334 7-X I I I 20-4 1 I I 0-4� mmm 8--W mom 5-,k N 13-X rmi`r 13. Goetz Road INS), 14. Murneta Road (NS) / South Goetz Project Dwy Rouse Road (EW) (EW) L 48 o n 0 jR 15 2 f� 0 0� 15. Goetz Road (NS) / Sotelo Road-Thomton Avenue (EW) o F 883 256 707 ---m- 569 --%k 4. 1-215 Southbound Ramps (NS) I Ethanac Road (EW) m �12 /1 ♦ a Ir 1 23� I * r �I 0-1- W(nCq 20-X Nv 10. Mumeta Road (NS) / McLaughlin Read (EW) "t- 39 ONNl �96 1a/r3 0-f 59� motor 47� 16. Valley Boulevard (NS) / Thornton Avenue (EW) Figure 4-A — Directional Distribution of Project Traffic Project Site Future Roadway X% Directional Distribution To/From Proposed Project Site City/County Boundary APPENDIX B INTERSECTION ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS Generated with = Version 2023 (SP 0-7) Cimarron Ridge Traffic Memorandum Vistro File: K:\...\Cimarron Ridge_AM.vistro Scenario 2 OY CUM WP AM Report File: K:\...\OY CUM WP AM.pdf 9/20/2023 Intersection Analysis Summary ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS Valley Boulevard at Goetz Two-way stop HCM 7th EB Left 0.423 12.9 B Road Edition V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. Cimarron Ridge Traffic Memorandum Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Scenario 2: 2 OY CUM WP AM Generated with Version 2023 (SP 0-7) Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: Valley Boulevard at Goetz Road Control Type: Two-way stop Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition Analysis Period: 15 minutes Intersection Setup Delay (sec / veh): 129 Level Of Service: B Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.423 Name Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration #7 I F - t F r1 F -1 F Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 1200 12.00 No of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 10000 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] Speed [mph] 3000 30.00 30.00 3000 Grade [%] 0.00 000 0.00 000 Crosswalk No No Yes Yes Volumes Name Base Volume Input [veh/h] 2 12 11 5 32 137 333 2 1 5 34 6 14 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1 0000 1 0000 1.0000 1 0000 1.0000 1 0000 1 1 0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 200 200 200 2.00 200 2 00 2.00 200 2.00 200 200 200 Growth Factor 1 0000 1 0000 1.0000 1 0000 1 0000 1 0000 1.0000 1 0000 F1 0000 1.0000 1 0000 1 0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 13 1 14 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 2 12 15 10 32 137 333 2 5 47 7 28 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1 0000 1 0000 1 0000 1 0000 1.0000 1 0000 1 0000 1.0000 1 0000 1 0000 1 0000 Other Adjustment Factor 1 0000 1 0000 1 0000 1 0000 1 0000 1 0000 1.0000 1.0000 1 0000 1 0000 1.0000 1 0000 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 1 3 4 3 8 34 83 1 1 12 2 7 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 2 12 15 10 32 137 333 2 5 47 7 28 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 Cimarron Ridge Traffic Memorandum Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Scenario 2: 2 OY CUM WP AM Generated with 1W9, Version 2023 (SP 0-7) Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance No No Number of Storage Spaces in Median Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.01 0.42 1 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.03 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 7.56 7.29 12.87 9.94 8.79 9.15 10.45 8.53 Movement LOS A A A A A A B A A A B A 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.00 0.00 000 0.02 0.00 000 2.12 0.02 0.02 0.16 0.11 0.11 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 0.11 1 0.00 0.00 0.48 1 0.00 1 0.00 52.91 0.60 1 0.60 4.06 1 2.85 1 2.85 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.52 0.41 12.79 9.05 Approach LOS A A B A d I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 8.22 Intersection LOS B Cimarron Ridge Traffic Memorandum Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Scenario 2: 2 OY CUM WP AM Generated with Version 2023 (SP 0-7) Cimarron Ridge Traffic Memorandum Vistro File: K:\...\Cimarron Ridge_PM.vistro Report File: K:\...\OY CUM WP PM.pdf Intersection Analysis Summary Scenario 2 OY CUM WP PM 9/20/2023 ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS 1 Valley Boulevard at Goetz 7th Road Two-wayHCM stop Edition EB Left 0.400 14.8 B V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection. Cimarron Ridge Traffic Memorandum Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Scenario 2: 2 OY CUM WP PM Generated with Version 2023 (SP 0-7) Intersection Level Of Service Report Intersection 1: Valley Boulevard at Goetz Road Control Type: Two-way stop Delay (sec / veh): 14.8 Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition Level Of Service: B Analysis Period: 15 minutes Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.400 Intersection Setup Name Approach Northbound South*bound Eastbound Westbound Lane Configuration i I F i I F +1 F -1 F Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Width [ft] 12.00 1200. 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 No of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 10000 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Pocket Length [ft] Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 3000 Grade [%] 000 0.00 000 000 Crosswalk No No Yes Yes Volumes Name Base Volume Input [veh/h] 6 36 38 15 22 335 245 6 3 22 4 9 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1 0000 1.0000 1 0000 1 0000 1 0000 1 0000F0000 1.0000 1.0000 1 0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 200 200 2.00 2.00 2.00 200 2.00 2.00 Growth Factor 1 0000 1.0000 1 0000 1 0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1 0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 In -Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site -Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 14 16 0 0 0 2 0 8 1 9 Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass -by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 6 36 52 31 22 335 245 8 3 30 5 18 Peak Hour Factor 1 0000 1 0000 1.0000 1 0000 1 0000 1.0000 1 0000 1 0000 1 0000 1 0000 1 0000 1 0000 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1 0000 1.0000 1 0000 1.0000 1.0000 1 0000 1.0000 1.0000 1 0000 1.0000 1 0000 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 2 9 13 8 6 84 61 2 1 8 1 5 Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 6 36 52 31 22 335 245 8 3 30 5 18 Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 Cimarron Ridge Traffic Memorandum Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Scenario 2: 2 OY CUM WP PM Generated with Version 2023 (SP 0-7) Intersection Settings Priority Scheme Free Free Stop Stop Flared Lane No No Storage Area [veh] Two -Stage Gap Acceptance No No Number of Storage Spaces in Median Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.02 040 0.01 000 0.04 0.01 0.02 d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 8.02 744 14.75 11.57 9.43 9.88 12.90 8.67 Movement LOS A A A A A A B B A A B A 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/In] 0.02 0-00 0.00 006 000 000 1 92 005 0.05 0.12 009 0.09 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/In] 0.38 0.00 0.00 1 58 0.00 0.00 4805 1 37 1.37 3.05 2.20 220 d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.51 0.59 14.59 9.75 Approach LOS A A B A d I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 5.73 Intersection LOS B Cimarron Ridge Traffic Memorandum Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Scenario 2: 2 OY CUM WP PM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF MENIFEE ) I, Stephanie Roseen, Acting City Clerk of the City of Menifee, do hereby certify that the foregoing City Council Resolution No. 24-1406 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Menifee at a meeting thereof held on the 20th Day of March 2024 by the following vote: Ayes: Deines, Estrada, Karwin, Sobek, Zimmerman Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: None uc�� f aw� hanie Roseen, Acting City Clerk