Calimesa City Council
September 18, 2023

Regular Meeting of the Calimesa City Council
Monday, September 18, 2023

CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL: MAYOR DAVIS, MAYOR PRO TEM HEWITT, COUNCIL MEMBER CERVANTEZ, COUNCIL MEMBER MANLY AND COUNCIL MEMBER MOLINA.

STAFF: CITY MANAGER KOLBOW, CITY ATTORNEY BARROW, CITY CLERK

GERDES, FINANCE DIRECTOR REID, PLANNING DIRECTOR LUCIA, PUBLIC

WORKS DIRECTOR MONSON, CITY ENGINEER THORNTON, FIRE CHIEF O’CONNELL AND SHERIFF CAPTAIN PETERSON.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
Pursuant to the Brown Act, this is the opportunity for members of the public to directly address the Council on any item within the Council’s subject matter jurisdiction.. Please note that this is also the time in which members of the public may address the Council on any item on the Consent Calendar. This is not the time for City Council discussion of non-agenda items. After receiving public comments, Council Members, or staff, after being recognized by the Mayor, may briefly respond to statements made by the public or questions posed by the public. In addition, Council Members may ask questions for clarification or make a referral to staff for factual information to be reported back to the Council at a later meeting.

APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA, CONSENT CALENDAR AND WAIVER OF FULL READING OF ORDINANCES This is the time for the City Council to notify the public of any changes to the agenda; such as removal of an agenda item, rearrangement of the agenda, postponement of an agenda item or continuance of an item to a future meeting. This is also the time for the City Council to remove items from the Consent Calendar for individual consideration. Waiver of full reading of ordinances does not take policy action or approve or disapprove any ordinances on the agenda, it simply means that the entire text of the ordinance will not be read.

Regular Meeting of the Calimesa City Council
Meeting Agenda
Monday, September 18, 2023 – 6:00 p.m.

Norton Younglove Multipurpose Senior Center
908 Park Avenue, Calimesa, CA 92320
William Davis, Mayor  Wendy Hewitt, Mayor Pro Tem
Jeff Cervantez, Council Member  John Manly, Council Member  Linda Molina, Council Member Will Kolbow, City Manager  Quinn Barrow, City Attorney The Calimesa City Council will be conducting this meeting in the Norton Younglove Senior Center. Members of the public may attend this meeting in person at the Norton Younglove Senior Center, 908 Park Avenue, Calimesa, CA 92320, or the public may view the City Council meetings live at https://www.facebook.com/cityof.calimesa or https://www.youtube.com/@calimesacity900/live beginning at 6:00 p.m.

Submission of Public Comments: If attending the meeting, public comment will be allowed by completing a speaker slip and providing it to the City Clerk at the meeting. Please observe a time limit of three (3) minutes when giving your presentation. When called upon, please step forward to the microphone, state your name for the record, whom you represent and any statement you wish to make. Please be advised that you may not defer your three (3) minutes to another speaker.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in a City meeting or other services offered by this City, please contact the City Clerk’s Office, (909) 795-9801. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service. Any public writings distributed by the City to at least a majority of the Council Members regarding any item on this regular meeting agenda will be made available at the public counter at City Hall located at 908 Park Avenue, Calimesa, CA 92320.

Regular Meeting of the Calimesa City Council
Monday, September 18, 2023

RECOMMENDATION: Move to approve the agenda and consent calendar Motion________________________ Second_______________________ Vote___________________________ CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 1 – 10)
The following items on the Consent Calendar are routine and customary items and are enacted by a single motion, with the exception of items previously removed during “Approval of the Agenda” for individual consideration. Any items removed shall be individually considered immediately after taking action on the Consent Calendar.

1. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION MINUTES.
a) City Council action minutes of a regular meeting of August 21, 2023.

2. RECEIVE AND FILE CITY COMMISSION & BOARD MINUTES.
a) Library Commission action minutes of a regular meeting of 5/2/2023 b) Parks, Trails & Community Services Commission action minutes of regular meeting of 8/8/2023
c) Planning Commission action minutes of a regular meeting of 8/14/2023. d) Planning Commission action minutes of a special meeting of 8/28/2023

3. APPROVAL OF WARRANT REGISTERS.
a) Check Register Report with a total of $1,658,726.35(Check Nos. 40781 to 40900) b) August 17, 2023 Payroll of $111,951.54
August 31, 2023 Payroll of $118,029.13
September 1, 2023 Council Payroll o$1,683.75

4. COUNCIL TRAVEL EXPENSES.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council move to approve the Council Travel Training and Meeting/Mileage Expenses Report through August 31, 2023.

5. TREASURER’S REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDED JULY 31, 2023.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the Investment Report for the month ended July 31, 2023.

6. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 2023-52 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR, MAYOR PRO-TEM, CITY MANAGER AND DEPUTY CITY MANAGER TO BE AUTHORIZED SIGNATORIES AT THE CITY’S BANKING INSTITUTIONS.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-52, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Calimesa, California authorizing the Mayor, Mayor Pro-Tem, City Manager and Deputy City Manager to be authorized signatories at the City’s banking institutions.

7. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2023-53 EXTENDING ABANDONED VEHICLE ABATEMENT PROGRAM.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-53 authorizing the extension of the service fee collected on behalf of the riverside county abandoned vehicle abatement service authority until May 2034.

8. SORENSON DEVELOPMENT– RIGHT-OF-WAY OFFER OF DEDICATION FOR 7TH STREET.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accept and authorize City staff to record the 7th Street offer of dedication.

Regular Meeting of the Calimesa City Council
Monday, September 18, 2023

9. CALIMESA BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT AT CHERRY VALLEY BOULEVARD – GRANT CONTRACT WITH RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORATION COMMISSION (RCTC).

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. An Agreement with RCTC authorizing the Mayor to enter into a Grant Agreement with RCTC for Construction of Street Improvements along Calimesa Boulevard near Cherry Valley Boulevard and

2. Authorize City Manager to make non-substantive changes to the Agreement prior to Agreement execution with RCTC.

10. AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROJECT NO. 5.CM.03-22, NORTON YOUNGLOVE SENIOR CENTER ADA IMPROVEMENTS, PHASE II, PROJECT NO 2021-09.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Award a construction contract to Three Peaks Corp. for the amount of $67,990.95 for the construction of the Norton Younglove Senior Center ADA Improvements, Phase II, Project No 2021-09; and

2. Approve a construction contingency for the amount of $6,800, a design budget of $18,413 for expenses to date for plans, specifications, bidding and project management, and a budget for the management of construction including inspection and materials testing of in the amount of up to $10,200; for a total project cost of $103,403.95 and

3. Approve the Plans and Specifications; and

4. Approve Resolution 2023-54, a Resolution of the City of Calimesa authorizing award to a single bidder for the construction of the Norton Younglove Senior Center ADA Improvements, Phase II Project No 2021-09.

CALIMESA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE REPORTS

PUBLIC HEARINGS
The order of business for the Public Hearing shall be:

Open Public Hearing
Staff Presentation
Applicant/Representative Presentation
Public Testimony
Applicant Rebuttal (if necessary)
Public Testimony Closed
. Close Public Hearing
Council Discussion
Council Motion and Vote
Speakers are encouraged to be brief and remain within the established time limit of three (3) minutes per speaker. Once the public hearing has been closed, no further testimony will be taken.

11. PUBLIC HEARING: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 22-05, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 22-01, AND ZONE CHANGE 21-01 FOR THE RESIDENTIAL INFILL PRIORITY AREA OVERLAY ZONE PROJECT.

RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

Regular Meeting of the Calimesa City Council
Monday, September 18, 2023

1. Adopt CC Resolution 2023-55, 1) approving Environmental Assessment 22-05, certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone (SCH# 2022030754), adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and 2) approving General Plan Amendment 22-01 for the Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone 2 Adopt Ordinance No. 392, approving Zone Change 21-01 the City prepared the RIPAOZ as Zone Change 21-01 (“ZC-21-01”) to encourage infill development and allow for higher density residential development than the underlying zoning designation as established by Chapter 18.20 of the Calimesa Municipal Code (CMC).

MAYOR & COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTING OF COUNTY & REGIONAL MEETINGS/CONFERENCES This is the time for general comments, announcements, reports on meetings attended at public expense as required by AB 1234, requests of staff, and other issues of concern to Council Members may be presented briefly at this time. The Council may not legally take action on any item presented at this time other than to direct staff to investigate a complaint or place an item on a future agenda unless (1) by a majority vote, the Council determines that an emergency situation exists, as defined by Government Code § 54956.5 or (2) by a four-fifths vote, the Council determines that there is a need for immediate action and the need for action arose subsequent to the agenda being posted as required by Government Code § 54954.2(b).

CITY MANAGER COMMENTS & REPORTS

ADJOURNMENT
Adjourn to the Regular Meeting of the City Council on October 2, 2023 at 6:00 p.m.

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 1
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
MEETING DATE: September 18, 2023
PREPARED BY: Darlene Gerdes, Deputy City Manager/City Clerk RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the action minutes as presented for the Regular City Council meeting of August 21, 2023.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: City Council action minutes of August 21, 2023 regular meeting.

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 2
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
MEETING DATE: September 18, 2023
PREPARED BY: Darlene Gerdes, Deputy City Manager/City Clerk RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the action minutes as presented for the Library Commission regular meeting of May 2, 2023, Parks, Trails & Community Services Commission regular meeting of August 2, 2023, Planning Commission regular meeting of August 14, 2023 and Planning Commission special meeting of August 28, 2023.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Library Commission action minutes of regular meeting of May 2, 2023 Attachment B: Parks, Trails & Community Services Commission action minutes of regular meeting of August 2, 2023.

Attachment C: Planning Commission action minutes of regular meeting of August 14, 2023.

Attachment D: Planning Commission action minutes of special meeting of August 28, 2023

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 3
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF WARRANT REGISTER
MEETING DATE: September 18, 2023
PREPARED BY: Celeste Reid, Finance Director
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the Warrant Register as presented.

SUMMARY: The attached Check Register Report for City Council’s approval is as follows:
a) Check Register Report with a total of $1,658,726.35 (Check Nos. 40781-40900) b) August 17, 2023 Payroll of $111,951.54
August 31, 2023 Payroll of $118,029.13
September 1, 2023 Council Payroll of $1,683.75

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 4
SUBJECT: COUNCIL TRAVEL, TRAINING AND MEETING/MILEAGE

EXPENSES
MEETING DATE: September 18, 2023
PREPARED BY: Darlene Gerdes, Deputy City Manager/City Clerk RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the Council Travel, Training and Meeting/Mileage Expenses Report through August 31, 2023.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Council Travel, Training and Meeting/Mileage Expenses Report through August 31 2023.

FISCAL YEAR 2023-24

COUNCIL TRAVEL AND MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES
ATTACHMENT 4A
MEETING/MILEAGE 01-1100-7590

DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
TOTAL TRAVEL/TRAINING $ - TOTAL MEETING/MILEAGE $ -
REMAINING BALANCE $ 1,450.00 REMAINING BALANCE $ 600.00 MEETING/MILEAGE 01-1100-7590

DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
TOTAL TRAVEL/TRAINING $ - TOTAL MEETING/MILEAGE $ -
REMAINING BALANCE $ 1,450.00 REMAINING BALANCE $ 600.00

JEFF CERVANTEZ TRAVEL - MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES
TRAVEL/TRAINING 01-1100-7585

WENDY HEWITT TRAVEL - MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES
TRAVEL/TRAINING 01-1100-7585

FISCAL YEAR 2023-24

COUNCIL TRAVEL AND MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES
ATTACHMENT 4A
MEETING/MILEAGE 01-1100-7590

DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
TOTAL TRAVEL/TRAINING $ - TOTAL MEETING/MILEAGE $ -
REMAINING BALANCE $ 1,900.00 REMAINING BALANCE $ 600.00 MEETING/MILEAGE 01-1100-7590

DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
1-Jul LOCC Annual Conf Registration $ 650.00 10-Jul LOCC Riverside Division Meeting $ 40.00 31-Jul Airline ticket for Conference $ 336.97
TOTAL TRAVEL/TRAINING $ 986.97 TOTAL MEETING/MILEAGE $ 40.00 REMAINING BALANCE $ 463.03 REMAINING BALANCE $ 560.00

LINDA MOLINA TRAVEL - MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES
TRAVEL/TRAINING 01-1100-7585

BILL DAVIS TRAVEL - MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES
TRAVEL/TRAINING 01-1100-7585

FISCAL YEAR 2023-24

COUNCIL TRAVEL AND MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES
ATTACHMENT 4A
MEETING/MILEAGE 01-1100-7590

DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
TOTAL TRAVEL/TRAINING $ - TOTAL MEETING/MILEAGE $ -
REMAINING BALANCE $ 1,450.00 REMAINING BALANCE $ 600.00

JOHN MANLY TRAVEL - MEETING/MILEAGE EXPENSES
TRAVEL/TRAINING 01-1100-7585

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 5
SUBJECT: TREASURER’S REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDED JULY 31, 2023
MEETING DATE: September 18, 2023
PREPARED BY: Celeste Reid, Finance Director and Treasurer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the Investment Report for the month ended July 31, 2023.

BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Council Resolution No. 2022-61 approved on November 7, 2022, the monthly Treasurer’s Report is hereby submitted. The report complies with the aforementioned Council resolution, as well as Government Code Section 53646.

DISCUSSION: The investment report provides information in accordance with the Investment Policy approved by Council Resolution No. 2022-61. Information includes the reporting of realized and unrealized gain and loss activity for the respective month of reporting. Generally, unrealized gains and losses are the day-to-day increases or decreases in an assets value. Until an investment is sold for cash, the gains or losses remain unrealized. Realized gains and losses reflect the results of selling of investments and are the difference between the cost basis and the market value as of the transaction date of sale. The City will continually have reportable changes of unrealized gain and loss activity between cost basis and market value as underlying investments are subject to the variability of market conditions. Staff evaluates investment options on an ongoing basis to ensure reasonable access to funds and reserves are set aside to maintain availability of cash position for general operations and capital assets.

Significant transactions during the month include a transfer on July 19, 2023 of $1,000,000 from the LAIF investment fund to the General Checking account.

FISCAL IMPACT: Revenue was recognized for interest and dividend earnings of $221,201 from LAIF Investment fund and $8,759 for CFD and Successor Agency funds.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Treasurer’s Report for the month ended July 31, 2023.

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 2023-52 OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE

MAYOR, MAYOR PRO-TEM, CITY MANAGER AND DEPUTY CITY
MANAGER TO BE AUTHORIZED SIGNATORIES AT THE CITY’S

BANKING INSTITUTIONS
MEETING DATE: September 18, 2023
PREPARED BY: Celeste Reid, Finance Director and Treasurer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-52, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Calimesa, California authorizing the Mayor, Mayor Pro-Tem, City Manager and Deputy City Manager to be authorized signatories at the City’s banking institutions.

DISCUSSION: State law authorizes the Treasurer and other officials authorized to deposit and withdraw moneys from the City’s accounts with banking institutions. The Resolution identifies the positions of the Mayor, Mayor Pro-Tem, City Manager and Deputy City Manager to be authorized signatories on the City’s accounts with banking institutions. Staff is respectfully requesting that the Council adopt Resolution 2023-52 to document and affirm the authorized officials.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Resolution 2023-52

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-52

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR, MAYOR

PRO-TEM, CITY MANAGER AND DEPUTY CITY MANAGER TO
BE AUTHORIZED SIGNATORIES AT THE CITY’S BANKING

INSTITUTIONS
WHEREAS, the State of California Government Code Section 53642 provides for the City’s money deposited at banking institutions to be drawn out by check or order of the Treasurer or other Official authorized to make such deposit on behalf of the City of Calimesa, and
WHEREAS, the City Council recommends the authorized officials be identified as Mayor, Mayor Pro-Tem, City Manager and Deputy City Manager in accordance with Government Code Section 53642 and is in the best interest of the City of Calimesa.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1.The City Council of the City of Calimesa does hereby authorize the officials identified as Mayor, Mayor Pro-Tem, City Manager and Deputy City Manager to be authorized signatories for deposit and withdrawal of the City of Calimesa monies in accordance with California Government Code Section 53642 Section 2. This Resolution shall be effective September 18, 2023.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of September 2023. ________________________________

WILLIAM DAVIS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_____________________________

DARLENE GERDES CITY CLERK
Attachment 6A

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2023-53 EXTENDING ABANDONED

VEHICLE ABATEMENT PROGRAM
MEETING DATE: September 18, 2023
PREPARED BY: Darlene Gerdes, Deputy City Manager/City Clerk RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-53 authorizing the extension of the service fee collected on behalf of the riverside county abandoned vehicle abatement service authority until May 2034.

BACKGROUND: In 1990, the California State Legislature enacted legislation allowing for the creation of county-based vehicle service authorities, pursuant to the provisions of Vehicle Code Section 22710.

In June 1994, the Riverside County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority was formed and imposed a one-dollar vehicle registration fee on vehicles registered to all owners with addresses in the County of Riverside.

Vehicle registration fees are collected by the Department of Motor Vehicles and allocated to Riverside County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority by the State Controller pursuant to Vehicle Code Section 9250.7. Fees are then allocated to participating entities on the basis of the size and population of each entity in relation to the total size and population of Riverside County, and on the basis of a percentage of the vehicles abated by each entity in relation to the total vehicles abated by the Riverside County Abandoned Vehicle Service Authority as a whole.

Since the inception of the program, the Riverside County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority has disbursed $35,128,331.25 in funding, to participating cities for reimbursement of staff time in the abatement of approximately 189,776 abandoned, wrecked, dismantled or inoperative vehicles. The current service authority program is scheduled to sunset in May 2024. Senate Bill 106 (SB 106), chaptered on August 13, 2001, allows local agencies to extend the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority program every 10 years with the approval of the county and a majority of the cities comprising a majority of the population of the incorporated areas.

A majority of the participating cities are currently in the process of adopting their respective resolutions approving the 10-year extension of the Service Authority. Adoption of the attached resolution is the first step of this important program that is necessary prior to submitting the Service Authority extension package to the Riverside County Board of Supervisors for their review and approval.

Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-53, authorizing the extension of the service fee collected on behalf of the riverside county abandoned vehicle abatement service authority until May 2034
Acceptance of staff’s recommendation will continue to allow the City of Calimesa to remove and dispose of abandoned, wrecked, dismantled, or inoperative vehicles, and be reimbursed through the Riverside County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority for staff time and costs incurred by the City in the abatement of these vehicles.

FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Resolution No. 2023-53

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-53

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIMESA,

CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE EXTENSION OF THE SERVICE FEE

COLLECTED ON BEHALF OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY ABANDONED
VEHICLE ABATEMENT SERVICE AUTHORITY UNTIL MAY 2034 AND
RESCIND RESOLUTION NO. 2012-41 IN ITS ENTIRETY
WHEREAS, the Riverside County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority was formed on or about June 1, 1994, pursuant to the provisions of California Vehicle Code §§ 9950.7 and 22710 enacted by the Legislature in 1990 which authorize the establishment of a service authority and imposition of a service fee on all registered motor vehicles located within a county; and
WHEREAS, beginning in June 1994 and continuing to the present, the Riverside County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority has been the recipient of service fees collected on its behalf by the California Department of Motor Vehicles; and WHEREAS, the service fees received by the Riverside County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority are used to reimburse local governmental agencies for a portion of their costs incurred as a result of the abatement, removal and disposal as public nuisances of any abandoned, wrecked, dismantled, or inoperative vehicles or parts thereof; and
WHEREAS, the Riverside County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority apportions and distributes service fee proceeds to each member agency according to the formula set forth in California Vehicle Code §§ 22710; and WHEREAS, since the establishment of the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement program in June 1994, it has disbursed $35,128,331.25 in service fee proceeds to member agencies and caused the abatement of approximately 189,776 abandoned, wrecked, dismantled, or inoperative vehicles located in various cities and the unincorporated area of Riverside County; and
WHEREAS, the service fee collected as part of the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority program is set to expire in May 2024; and WHEREAS, the Legislature recently amended California Vehicle Code § 9250.7 to allow for an extension of the service fee collected as part of the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement program in increments of up to 10 years each if the board of supervisors of the county, by a two-thirds vote, and a majority of the cities comprising a majority of the population of the incorporated areas within the county adopt resolutions providing for the extension of the service fee; and
WHEREAS, it is desirable to the City of Calimesa to have the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement program continue beyond its current termination date of May 2024.

Attachment 7A

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIMESA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council approves the extension of the service fee collected on behalf of the Riverside County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority until May 31, 2034.

SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution which shall become effective immediately upon its adoption.

SECTION 3. Resolution No. 2012-41 is hereby rescinded in its entirety.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of September, 2023 ‘
________________________________

WILLIAM DAVIS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
______________________________________

DARLENE GERDES, CITY CLERK

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8
SUBJECT: SORENSON DEVELOPMENT– RIGHT-OF-WAY OFFER OF
DEDICATION FOR 7

TH STREET
MEETING DATE: September 18, 2023
PREPARED BY: Will Kolbow, City Manager
Michael Thornton, City Engineer
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that City Council accept and authorize City staff to record the 7
th Street offer of dedication.

BACKGROUND: Sorenson Engineering is developing the property at 1091 7th Street. As part of this site development, Sorenson was required to dedicate the ultimate half width right-of-way of 7th Street along the property frontage. The City’s General Plan identifies 7 th Street as a Secondary
Arterial which requires an ultimate half width for right-of-way of 44 feet. The existing right-of-way half width for 7th Steet along the property frontage is 30 feet, as such, Sorenson is dedicating to an additional 14-feet to provide the required ultimate right-of-way half width.

FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Offer of Dedication

Recording Requested by
and when recorded return to:

CITY OF CALIMESA
908 Park Avenue
Calimesa, California 92320
Attention: City Clerk
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER’S USE
Assessor’s Parcel No. [411-190-005] [X] Portion
Documentary Transfer Tax $0.00
This Instrument is for the benefit of the City of Calimesa and is exempt from Recording Fees (Govt. Code § 27383), Filing Fees (Govt. Code § 6103), and Documentary Transfer Tax (Rev & Tax Code § 11922).

GRANT OF PERMANENT EASEMENT
On this _________, day of ________________, 2023, pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code Section §7050, Calimesa 7th LLC, a California Limited Liability Company (“Grantor”), irrevocable offer for dedication to the CITY OF CALIMESA, a California municipal corporation, its successors and assigns, for public street and highway purposes, together with all rights to construct and maintain utilities, sanitary sewers, storm drains and other improvements consistent with the use as a public street and highway, that real property described on “Exhibit A” and depicted on “Exhibit B” attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference located in the City of Calimesa, County of Riverside, State of California.

Signatures on the following page
Attachment 8A

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has executed this Grant of Permanent Easement as of the date set forth below.

GRANTOR
Calimesa 7th LLC, a California Limited Liability
Company
Dated: ___________________________________
By: ______________________________________

SIGNATURE
By: ______________________________________

PRINTED NAME AND TITLE

EXHIBIT "A"
7th STREET OFFER OF DEDICATION

THE WESTERLY 14.00 FEET OF THAT PORTION OF LOT 233 AS SHOWN BY MAP ENTITLED RESURVEY OF PART OF SUBDIVISION NO. 9 OF A PART OF YUCAIPA VALLEY, IN THE CITY OF CALIMESA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ON FILE IN BOOK 10, PAGE 32 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 233;
THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 590 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT, 236 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY PARALLEL WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT, 590 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT, 236 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE SOUTHERLY 110.75 FEET.

ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT, 233 AND THE

SOUTHERLY LINE OF THAT PARCEL OF LAND AS CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BY DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 16, 1949 IN BOOK 1052 PAGE 72 OF

OFFICIAL RECORDS, OF SAID COUNTY
THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE SOUTH 41 ° 33' 00" EAST 97 .09 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 233;
THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE SOUTH 0° 07' 24" EAST 52.45 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE SOUTHERLY 166.08 FEET OF THE NORTHERLY 291.33 FEET OF SAID LOT 233;
THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE SOUTH 89° 53' OS" WEST 193.85 FEET;

THENCE ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY WITH A RADIUS OF 6,097 FEET FROM A TANGENT BEARING NORTH 26° 28' 29" WEST THROUGH AN ANGLE OF 1 ° 18' 23" A DISTANCE OF 139.02 FEET TO SAID NORTH LINE OF LOT 233, DISTANT ALONG SAID LINE SOUTH 89° 53' 05" WEST 189.88 FEET FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, NORTH 89° 53' OS" EAST 189.88 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

SUBJECT TO ALL OTHER EASEMENTS AND OFFERS OF DEDICATION OF RECORD; AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART THEREOF; CONTAINING AN AREA OF APPROXIMATELY 2593.5 SQUARE FEET.

SEE EXHIBIT “B” FOR PLAT
PREPARED BY:

STEVE A. LEJA - PLS 5933

LEJA SURVEYING CORP

City of Calimesa
908 Park Avenue
Calimesa, California 92320

CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER OF DEDICATION
(Gov’t Code § 27281)
(Permanent Easement on APN 411-190-005)
This is to certify that the grant to the City of Calimesa of that certain portion of that certain real property identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor’s Parcel Number 411-190-005, which is described more particularly in Exhibit “A” and depicted on Exhibit “B” to the attached Offer of Dedication is hereby accepted under the authority of the City Council of the City of Calimesa, and the City of Calimesa hereby consents to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.

Dated: _________________________
City of Calimesa, a municipal corporation
By: ______________________________
William Davis, City Mayor
Attest:

By: _________________________________
Darlene Gerdes, Deputy City Manager/
City Clerk
Approved as to form:

By: _________________________________
Quinn Barrow, City Attorney

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 9
SUBJECT: CALIMESA BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT AT CHERRY VALLEY BOULEVARD – GRANT CONTRACT WITH RIVERSIDE COUNTY

TRANSPORATION COMMISSION (RCTC)
MEETING DATE: September 18, 2023
PREPARED BY: Will Kolbow, City Manager
Michael Thornton, City Engineer
RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully recommended that the City Council approve

1. An Agreement with RCTC authorizing the Mayor to enter into a Grant Agreement with RCTC for Construction of Street Improvements along Calimesa Boulevard near Cherry Valley Boulevard and

2. Authorize City Manager to make non-substantive changes to the Agreement prior to Agreement execution with RCTC.

BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: On February 8, 2023, Riverside County Transportation Commission issued a Regional Arterial call for projects. The available funding consists of local Measure A Western Riverside County Regional Arterial and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Regional Arterial funds for a total of approximately $135 million. Transportation projects eligible for this Call for Projects generally include construction activities for arterial capacity enhancement and improvements, signal synchronization, freeway interchanges, and grade separations.

The City is planning an interchange improvement project along Interstate 10 at Cherry Valley Boulevard. Since Interstate 10’s initial construction in the 1960’s, no improvements have been made to the interchange while growth in the area continues. To accommodate the proposed interchange improvements, Calimesa Boulevard, a frontage street along the East side of the freeway, must be realigned to create required separation between the new interchange and a local street so that the local roadway does not impact interchange operations.

The City is processing a Project Approval and Environmental Document with Caltrans. It is anticipated that the Environmental Document will be approved by Caltrans in September or October of 2023.

Staff proposes to construct interchange improvements in two phases – the environmental document includes both phases. The first phase will be to complete the Calimesa Boulevard realignment – all work will be completed beyond the State’s right-of-way – and the second phase will be all work within

the State’s right-of-way and other portions beyond the State right-of-way including the improved interchange. The City applied to fund Phase 1.

Phase 1 includes construction of a realigned roadway along Calimesa Boulevard and widening improvements along Cherry Valley Boulevard. The proposed project will horizontally realign roughly 2,000 linear feet of Calimesa Boulevard approximately 600 feet to the east of the current location of the intersection of Calimesa and Cherry Valley Boulevards. This project will require the acquisition of right-of-way. The ultimate street improvements for the project limits includes curb, gutter and sidewalk.

On May 5, 2023, RCTC advised that the City had been selected for award in the amount of $5.2 million. Summary of grant awards is attached.

FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Award Summary
Attachment B: Draft Agreement

2023 Western Riverside County Regional Arterials Call for Projects Funding Recommendations Lead Agency Project Name Phase Phase Start TUMF Backbone? Average Score Request MARA Funding TUMF Funding Funding Recommendation Eastvale Limonite Avenue Gap Closure Project CON October 2023 No, secondary 45.2 $ 13,500,000 $ 13,500,000 Priority Beaumont Potrero Interchange Phase II CON March 2024 Yes 44.8 $ 8,000,000 $ 8,000,000 Conditional - need to fulfill $33.5M funding gap San Jacinto Esplanade Ave. Widening - Sanderson to Warren Rd. CON March 2024 No, secondary 40.8 $ 3,960,000 $ 3,960,000 Priority Murrieta Murrieta Hot Springs Road Widening - Margarita Road to SR-79 CON September 2023 No, secondary 37.8 $ 3,000,000 $ 3,000,000 Priority Wildomar Bundy Canyon Rd. Improvement Project, Segment 2 CON March 2024 Yes, max share reached 37.4 $ 13,298,440 $ 13,298,440 $ - Priority Wildomar Clinton Keith Rd. Widening Project CON May 2024 Yes, max share reached 37.4 $ 5,651,140 $ 2,254,919 $ 3,396,221 Priority Perris Ethanac Rd. Bridge over San Jacinto River & Roadway Extension, East of the River CON March 2024 Yes 37 $ 8,798,000 $ 8,798,000 Priority Temecula Ynez Road Improvements CON April 2024 No 36.6 $ 1,475,000 $ 1,475,000 Priority Beaumont Second Street Extension CON July 2023 No 36.6 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 Priority Banning Sun Lakes Extension Project CON July 2024 No, secondary 36.4 $ 13,500,000 $ 13,500,000 Conditional - need to fulfill $11.5M funding gap Riverside Third Street Grade Separation CON April 2025 No, secondary 36 $ 12,000,000 $ 12,000,000 Conditional - schedule Menifee McCall Boulevard Widening Project CON July 2024 No, secondary 35.4 $ 3,140,000 $ 3,140,000 Priority Menifee Bundy Canyon Road/Scott Road Widening Project CON May 2025 Yes, max share reached 32.8 $ 10,000,000 $ 632,440 $ 9,367,560 Conditional - schedule Riverside County Cajalco Road Widening and Safety Enhancement Project PS&E July 2023 Yes 32.6 $ 15,000,000 $ 15,000,000 Priority (PS&E) Wildomar Bundy Canyon Rd. Improvement Project, Segment 3 CON December 2024 Yes, max share reached 31.6 $ 13,200,000 $ 8,050,420 $ - Conditional - schedule Calimesa Realignment of Calimesa Boulevard at Cherry Valley Boulevard ROW + CON April 2024 No 28.2 $ 5,200,000 $ 5,200,000 Priority Moreno Valley Indian Street/Cardinal Avenue Bridge (Over Lateral A) PS&E Underway (complete Spring '24) No 27.6 $ 750,000 $ 750,000 Priority (PS&E) Corona Ontario Avenue Widening Project CON June 2025 No, secondary 25.6 $ 13,500,000 $ 7,938,781 Conditional - need to fulfill $5.5M funding gap $ 145,472,580 $ 85,000,000 $ 49,761,781
Moreno Valley SR-60/World Logistic Center Parkway Interchange PS&E Winter 2023 No, secondary 25.4 $ 6,500,000 $ 6,500,000 Contingency list Riverside SR-91/Adams Street Interchange Reconfiguration PS&E July 2024 No, secondary 25.4 $ 4,000,000 $ 4,000,000 Contingency list Corona Magnolia Avenue Bridge and Road Widening Project CON June 2025 No, secondary 25 $ 13,050,000 $ 13,050,000 Contingency list Moreno Valley Traffic Signal Communications Fiber Network Phase 1 PS&E + CON May 2024 & August 2024 No 23.8 $ 5,346,000 $ 5,346,000 Contingency list Moreno Valley Traffic Signal Synchronization on Arterials PS&E + CON May 2024 & August 2024 No 23.8 $ 1,782,000 $ 1,782,000 Contingency list Jurupa Valley SR-60/Rubidoux Boulevard Interchange Project PA/ED August 2023 No, secondary 22.75 $ 1,500,000 $ - Ineligible (PA/ED) Moreno Valley SR-60/Redlands Boulevard Interchange PS&E Winter 2023 No, secondary 15 $ 7,000,000 $ 7,000,000 Contingency list $ 184,650,580 $ 122,678,000 $ 49,761,781
SUBTOTAL: Projects Recommended for Funding
TOTAL: All Projects
Attachment 9A

1 Agreement No. 23-72-092-00

AGREEMENT FOR THE FUNDING OF

TUMF REGIONAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS

WITH THE CITY OF CALIMESA
For

REALIGNMENT OF CALIMESA BOULEVARD AT CHERRY VALLEY BOULEVARD

1. Parties and Date.

1.1 This Agreement is executed and entered into this day of , 2023, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (“RCTC”) and the CITY OF CALIMESA (“City”). RCTC and City are sometimes collectively referred to herein as the “Parties”.

2. Recitals.

2.1 RCTC is a county transportation commission created and existing pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Sections 130053 and 130053.5.

2.2 On November 5, 2002 the voters of Riverside County approved Measure A authorizing the collection of a one-half percent (1/2%) retail transactions and use tax to fund transportation programs and improvements within the County of Riverside, and adopting the Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan (the “Plan”).

2.3 The Plan requires cities and the County in western Riverside County to participate in a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program to be eligible to receive Local Streets and Roads funds generated by Measure A.

2.4 The Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) has been selected to administer the overall TUMF Program pursuant to applicable state laws including Government Code Sections 66000 et seq. and has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with RCTC dated July 10, 2003, and revised on September 10, 2008 regarding the allocation of the TUMF Regional Funds to be made available to RCTC for programming.

2.5 RCTC has adopted a TUMF Regional Arterial Program, which is updated from time to time, and identifies the projects and the maximum funding commitments awarded for specific phases of work.

2.6 RCTC intends, by this Agreement, to distribute TUMF Regional Funds, subject to the conditions provided herein, and to participate in the joint development of the Project, as defined herein.

3. Terms.

3.1 Description of Work. This Agreement is intended to distribute TUMF Regional Funds to the City for the Realignment of Calimesa Boulevard at Cherry Valley Boulevard Attachment 9B

2 Project (“the Work”). The Work, including a timetable and a detailed scope of work, is more fully described in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and, pursuant to Section 3.15 below, is subject to modification as requested by the City and approved by RCTC. The Work shall be consistent with one or more of the defined phases detailed herein as follows:
1) R/W – Right of Way Acquisition and Utility Relocation 2) CONS – Construction
The Work phases funded pursuant to this Agreement shall be consistent with the City’s Call for Projects Nomination form submitted to RCTC (“the Project”). The Project is more fully described in Exhibit “A” and depicted in Exhibit “B” attached hereto. It is understood and agreed that the City shall expend TUMF Regional Funds only as set forth in this Agreement and only for the Work. To this end, any use of funds provided pursuant to this Agreement shall be subject to the review and approval of RCTC.

3.2 RCTC Funding Amount. RCTC hereby agrees to distribute to the City, on the terms and conditions set forth herein, a sum not to exceed Five Million Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($5,200,000), to be used exclusively for reimbursing the City for eligible Work expenses as described herein (“Funding Amount”). The City acknowledges and agrees that the Funding Amount may be less than the actual cost of the Work, and that RCTC shall not contribute TUMF Regional Funds in excess of the maximum TUMF share for the phase/project identified in the current TUMF Nexus Study.

3.2.1 Eligible Work Costs. The total Work costs (“Total Work Cost”) may include the following items, provided that such items are included in the scope of work attached as Exhibit “A”: (1) City and/or consultant costs associated with direct Work coordination and support; (2) construction costs, including change orders to construction contract approved by the City; and (3) construction management, field inspection and material testing costs.

3.2.1.1 Right-of-Way Acquisition. The Parties acknowledge that in order to protect the City’s ability to deliver the Project in a timely cost effective manner, the City may purchase parcels of property in advance of the completion of the Project’s final design (PS&E). The Parties acknowledge that acquired parcels or remnants purchased in advance of final design may not ultimately be required for the Project. Upon completion of the Project’s final design, the City shall provide RCTC with a detailed list of all parcels purchased by the City for which it received TUMF Regional Funds pursuant to this Agreement. The City shall identify any parcels or remnants thereof which were acquired using TUMF Regional Funds and are not required for construction of the Project. A preliminary list shall be submitted to the RCTC 30 days before the issuance of bid documents for construction of the Project and a final list shall be submitted to the RCTC no later than 30 days following the recording of the Certificate of Completion for the Project.

3.2.1.2 Valuation and Repayment of Any Property Remnants. Upon receipt of the City final list, RCTC shall meet with the City for the purpose of identifying any parcel or reasonably usable remnant of a parcel for which TUMF Regional Funds were expended that may reasonably be developed for other use by the City and/or sold. The Parties shall confer in good faith to agree upon the disposition of such parcels and remnant parcels and their fair market value as of a date agreed to by the parties, but in no event later than the date of

3 completion of the Project. “Fair Market Value” shall have the definition set forth in Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.320 and “remnant” shall have the definition set forth in Code of Civil Procedure Section 1240.410. Nothing herein shall preclude the City and RCTC from beginning the meetings earlier in the event both parties agree that the parcel or remnant will not be used for the Project.

3.2.1.3 Reimbursement for Unused Parcels. Following recordation of the Certificate of Completion for the Project, the City shall be responsible for promptly reimbursing RCTC for any TUMF Regional Funds which were used to acquire parcels which are completely unused in the Project. If City funds other than TUMF were used to purchase the Parcel, those local funds shall be considered in determining the reimbursement amount.

3.2.1.4 Appeal to RCTC. In the event of a disagreement between the Parties regarding the reimbursement of TUMF Regional Funds under this section 3.2.1, either party may appeal, in writing, to the RCTC Board. The RCTC Board’s determination regarding excess right-of-way and value pursuant to this section shall be final.

3.2.2 Ineligible Work Costs. The Total Work Cost shall not include the following items which shall be borne solely by the City without reimbursement: (1) City/County and/or consultant costs associated with direct Work coordination and support; (2) all costs associated with right-of-way acquisition, including right-of-way engineering, appraisal, acquisition, legal costs for condemnation procedures if authorized by the City/County, and costs of reviewing appraisals and offers for property acquisition; (3) costs reasonably incurred if condemnation proceeds; (4) City administrative costs; (5) City costs attributed to the preparation of invoices, billings and payments; (6) any City fees attributed to the processing of the Work; and (7) expenses for items of work not included within the scope of work in Exhibit “A”.

3.2.3 Increases in Work Funding. The Funding Amount may, in RCTC’s sole discretion, be augmented with additional TUMF Regional Funds if the Project is eligible to receive additional TUMF Regional Funds under the TUMF Nexus Study. Any such increase in the Funding Amount must be approved in writing by RCTC’s Executive Director. In no case shall the amount of TUMF Regional Funds allocated to the City exceed the then-current maximum eligible TUMF share for the Work. No such increased funding shall be expended to pay for any Work already completed. For purposes of this Agreement, the Work or any portion thereof shall be deemed complete upon its acceptance by RCTC’s Executive Director.

3.2.4 Cost Savings. In the event that bids for the Work are lower than anticipated, or there are cost savings for any other reason, the Funding Amount shall be reduced dollar for dollar in an amount proportional to the savings on the Work. The City shall inform RCTC of any cost savings.

3.2.5 No Funding for Temporary Improvements. Only segments or components of the Work that are intended to form part of or be integrated into the Work may be funded by TUMF Regional Funds. No improvement which is temporary in nature, including but not limited to temporary roads, curbs, or drainage facilities, shall be funded with TUMF Regional Funds except as needed for staged construction of the Work.

4 3.3 City’s Funding Obligation to Complete the Work. In the event that the TUMF Regional Funds allocated to the Work represent less than the total cost of the Work, the City shall be responsible for identifying such additional funds as may be required to complete the Work as described in Exhibit “A”.

3.3.1 City’s Obligation to Repay TUMF Regional Funds to RCTC. In the event that: (i) the City, for any reason, determines not to proceed with or complete the Work; or (ii) the Work is not timely completed, subject to any extension of time granted by RCTC pursuant to Section 3.15; the City agrees that any TUMF Regional Funds that were distributed to the City for the Work shall be repaid in full to RCTC. The Parties shall enter into good faith negotiations to establish a reasonable repayment schedule and repayment mechanism which may include, but is not limited to, withholding of Measure A Local Streets and Roads revenues. The City acknowledges and agrees that RCTC shall have the right to withhold any Measure A Local Streets and Roads revenues due the City, in an amount not to exceed the total of the funds distributed to the City, and/or initiate legal action to compel repayment, if the City fails to repay RCTC within a reasonable time period not to exceed 180 days from receipt of written notification from RCTC that repayment is required.

3.3.2 City’s Local Match Contribution. The City shall provide at least Three Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($350,000) of funding toward the Work, as shown in Exhibit “A” and as called out in the City’s Project Nomination Form submitted to RCTC in response to its Call for Projects.

3.4 Work Responsibilities of the City. The City shall be responsible for the following aspects of the Work, in compliance with state and federal law provided that such items are included in the Project scope of work attached as Exhibit “A”: (i) development and approval of plans, specifications and engineer’s estimate (PS&E), environmental clearance, right of way acquisition, and obtaining all permits required by impacted agencies prior to commencement of the Work ; (ii) all aspects of bidding, awarding, and administration of the contracts for the Work; (iii) all construction management of any construction activities undertaken in connection with the Work, including survey and material testing; and (iv) development of a budget for the Work prior to award of any contract for the Work, taking into consideration available funding, including TUMF Regional Funds.

3.5 Term/Notice of Completion. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date first herein above written until: (i) the date RCTC formally accepts the Work as complete, pursuant to Section 3.2.3; (ii) termination of this Agreement pursuant to Section 3.9; or (iii) the City has fully satisfied its obligations under this Agreement, “including full repayment of TUMF Regional Funds to RCTC as provided herein”. All applicable indemnification provisions of this Agreement shall remain in effect following the termination of this Agreement.

3.6 Representatives of the Parties. RCTC’s Executive Director, or his or her designee, shall serve as RCTC’s representative and shall have the authority to act on behalf of RCTC for all purposes under this Agreement. The City hereby designates Will Kolbow, City Manager, or his or her designee, as the City’s representative to RCTC. The City’s representative shall have the authority to act on behalf of the City for all purposes under this Agreement and shall coordinate all activities of the Work under the City’s responsibility. The City shall work

5 closely and cooperate fully with RCTC’s representative and any other agencies which may have jurisdiction over or an interest in the Work.

3.7 Expenditure of Funds by City Prior to Execution of Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent or preclude the City from expending funds on the Work prior to the execution of the Agreement, or from being reimbursed by RCTC for such expenditures. However, the City understands and acknowledges that any expenditure of funds on the Work prior to the execution of the Agreement is made at the City’s sole risk, and that some expenditures by the City may not be eligible for reimbursement under this Agreement.

3.8 Review of Services. The City shall allow RCTC’s Representative to inspect or review the progress of the Work at any reasonable time in order to determine whether the terms of this Agreement are being met.

3.9 Termination. This Agreement may be terminated for cause or convenience as further specified below.

3.9.1 Termination for Convenience.

3.9.1.1 Notice. Either RCTC or the City may, by written notice to the other party, terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, for convenience by giving thirty (30) days' written notice to the other party of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof.

3.9.1.2 Effect of Termination for Convenience. In the event that the City terminates this Agreement for convenience, the City shall, within 180 days, repay to RCTC in full all TUMF Regional Funds provided to the City under this Agreement. In the event that RCTC terminates this Agreement for convenience, RCTC shall, within 90 days, distribute to the City TUMF Regional Funds in an amount equal to the aggregate total of all unpaid invoices which have been received from the City regarding the Work at the time of the notice of termination; provided, however, that RCTC shall be entitled to exercise its rights under Section

3.14.2, including but not limited to conducting a review of the invoices and requesting additional information. This Agreement shall terminate upon receipt by the non-terminating party of the amounts due it under this Section 3.9.1.2.

3.9.2 Termination for Cause.

3.9.2.1 Notice. Either RCTC or the City may, by written notice to the other party, terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, in response to a material breach hereof by the other party, by giving written notice to the other party of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof. The written notice shall provide a 30 day period to cure any alleged breach. During the 30 day cure period, the Parties shall discuss, in good faith, the manner in which the breach can be cured.

3.9.2.2 Effect of Termination for Cause. In the event that the City terminates this Agreement in response to RCTC's uncured material breach hereof, RCTC shall, within 90 days, distribute to the City TUMF Regional Funds in an amount equal to the aggregate total of all unpaid invoices which have been received from the City regarding the Work at the

6 time of the notice of termination. In the event that RCTC terminates this Agreement in response to the City's uncured material breach hereof, the City shall, within 180 days, repay to RCTC in full all TUMF Regional Funds provided to the City under this Agreement.

Notwithstanding termination of this Agreement by RCTC pursuant to this Section 3.9.2.2, RCTC shall be entitled to exercise its rights under Section 3.14.2, including but not limited to conducting a review of the invoices and requesting additional information. This Agreement shall terminate upon receipt by the terminating party of the amounts due it under this Section 3.9.2.2.

3.9.3 Cumulative Remedies. The rights and remedies of the Parties provided in this Section are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this Agreement.

3.10 Prevailing Wages. The City and any other person or entity hired to perform services on the Work are alerted to the requirements of California Labor Code Sections 1770 et seq., which would require the payment of prevailing wages were the services or any portion thereof determined to be a public work, as defined therein. The City shall ensure compliance with these prevailing wage requirements by any person or entity hired to perform the Work. The City shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless RCTC, its officers, employees, consultants, and agents from any claim or liability, including without limitation attorneys, fees, arising from its failure or alleged failure to comply with California Labor Code Sections 1770 et seq.

3.11 Progress Reports. RCTC may request the City to provide RCTC with progress reports concerning the status of the Work.

3.12 Indemnification.

3.12.1 City Responsibilities. In addition to the indemnification required under Section 3.10, the City agrees to indemnify and hold harmless RCTC, its officers, agents, consultants, and employees from any and all claims, demands, costs or liability (“Claims”) arising from or connected with all activities governed by this Agreement including all design and construction activities, due to acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct of the City or its contractors. The City will reimburse RCTC for any expenditures, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by RCTC, in defending against Claims ultimately determined to be due to acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct of the City or its contractors. The indemnity herein shall not apply to Claims caused by the sole negligence of RCTC.

3.12.2 Effect of Acceptance. The City shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy and the coordination of any services provided to complete the Work.

RCTC’s review, acceptance or funding of any services performed by the City or any other person or entity under this agreement shall not be construed to operate as a waiver of any rights RCTC may hold under this Agreement or of any cause of action arising out of this Agreement. Further, the City shall be and remain liable to RCTC, in accordance with applicable law, for all damages to RCTC caused by the City’s performance of this Agreement or supervision of any services provided to complete the Work.

3.13 Insurance. The City shall require, at a minimum, all persons or entities hired to perform the Work to obtain, and require their subcontractors to obtain, insurance of the types and in the amounts described below and satisfactory to the City and RCTC. Such insurance shall be

7 maintained throughout the term of this Agreement, or until completion of the Work, whichever occurs last.

3.13.1 Commercial General Liability Insurance. Occurrence version commercial general liability insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of not less than $2,000,000.00 per occurrence. If such insurance contains a general aggregate limit, it shall apply separately to the Work or be no less than two times the occurrence limit. Such insurance shall:

3.13.1.1 Name RCTC and City, and their respective officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants as additional insureds with respect to performance of the services on the Work and shall contain no special limitations on the scope of coverage or the protection afforded to these additional insured;

3.13.1.2 Be primary with respect to any insurance or self-insurance programs covering RCTC and City, and/or their respective officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants; and

3.13.1.3 Contain standard separation of insured provisions.

3.13.2 Business Automobile Liability Insurance. Business automobile liability insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000.00 per occurrence. Such insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired and non-owned automobiles.

3.13.3 Professional Liability Insurance. Errors and omissions liability insurance with a limit of not less than $1,000,000.00 Professional liability insurance shall only be required of design or engineering professionals.

3.13.4 Workers’ Compensation Insurance. Workers’ compensation insurance with statutory limits and employers’ liability insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000.00 each accident.

3.14 Procedures for Distribution of TUMF Regional Funds to City.

3.14.1 Initial Payment by the City. The City shall be responsible for initial payment of all the Work costs as they are incurred. Following payment of such Work costs, and after all other funding sources identified in Exhibit “A” have been expended, for the applicable phase, the City shall submit invoices to RCTC requesting reimbursement of eligible Work costs.

Each invoice shall be accompanied by detailed contractor invoices, or other demands for payment addressed to the City, and documents evidencing the City’s payment of the invoices or demands for payment. The City shall submit invoices not more often than monthly and not less often than quarterly.

3.14.2 Review and Reimbursement by RCTC. Upon receipt of an invoice from the City, RCTC may request additional documentation or explanation of the Work costs for which reimbursement is sought. Undisputed amounts shall be paid by RCTC to the City within thirty (30) days. In the event that RCTC disputes the eligibility of the City for reimbursement of

8 all or a portion of an invoiced amount, the Parties shall meet and confer in an attempt to resolve the dispute. If the meet and confer process is unsuccessful in resolving the dispute, the City may appeal RCTC’s decision as to the eligibility of one or more invoices to RCTC’s Executive Director. The City may appeal the decision of the Executive Director to the full RCTC Board, the decision of which shall be final. Additional details concerning the procedure for the City’s submittal of invoices to RCTC and RCTC’s consideration and payment of submitted invoices are set forth in Exhibit “C”, attached hereto.

3.14.3 Funding Amount/Adjustment. If a post Work audit or review indicates that RCTC has provided reimbursement to the City in an amount in excess of the maximum eligible TUMF share of the Work, as determined by the TUMF Nexus Study, or has provided reimbursement of ineligible Work costs, the City shall reimburse RCTC for the excess or ineligible payments within 30 days of notification by RCTC.

3.15 Work Amendments. Changes to the characteristics of the Work, including the deadline for Work completion, and any responsibilities of the City or RCTC may be requested in writing by the City and are subject to the approval of RCTC’s Representative, which approval will not be unreasonably withheld, provided that extensions of time for completion of the Work shall be approved in the sole discretion of RCTC’s Representative. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to require or allow completion of the Work without full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; “CEQA”), and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 USC 4231 et seq.) as applicable, but the necessity of compliance with CEQA, and NEPA as applicable, shall not justify, excuse, or permit a delay in completion of the Work.

3.16 Conflict of Interest. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer or employee of the City or RCTC, during the term of his or her service with the City or RCTC, as the case may be, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom.

3.17 Limited Scope of Duties. RCTC’s and the City’s duties and obligations under this Agreement are limited to those described herein. RCTC has no obligation with respect to the safety of any Work performed at a job site. In addition, RCTC shall not be liable for any action of City or its contractors relating to the condemnation of property undertaken by City or construction related to the Work.

3.18 Books and Records. Each party shall maintain complete, accurate, and clearly identifiable records with respect to costs incurred for the Work under this Agreement. They shall make available for examination by the other party, its authorized agents, officers or employees any and all ledgers and books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or related to the expenditures and disbursements charged to the other party pursuant to this Agreement. Further, each party shall furnish to the other party, its agents or employees such other evidence or information as they may require with respect to any such expense or disbursement charged by them. All such information shall be retained by the Parties for at least three (3) years following termination of this Agreement, and they shall have access to such information during the three-year period for the purposes of examination or audit.

9 3.19 Equal Opportunity Employment. The Parties represent that they are equal opportunity employers and they shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant of reemployment because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex or age. Such nondiscrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination.

3.20 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed with the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County.

3.21 Attorneys’ Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of suit.

3.22 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement.

3.23 Headings. Article and Section Headings, paragraph captions or marginal headings contained in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall have no effect in the construction or interpretation of any provision herein.

3.24 Notification. All notices hereunder and communications regarding interpretation of the terms of the Agreement or changes thereto shall be provided by the mailing thereof by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows:

CITY OF CALIMESA RCTC
908 Park Avenue Riverside County Transportation Commission Calimesa, CA 92320 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor
Mailing address: P.O. Box 12008
Riverside, CA 92501
ATTN: Will Kolbow, City Manager ATTN: Executive Director Any notice so given shall be considered served on the other party three (3) days after deposit in the U.S. mail, first class postage prepaid, return receipt requested, and addressed to the party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred regardless of the method of service.

3.25 Conflicting Provisions. In the event that provisions of any attached appendices or exhibits conflict in any way with the provisions set forth in this Agreement, the language, terms and conditions contained in this Agreement shall control the actions and obligations of the Parties and the interpretation of the Parties’ understanding concerning the performance of the Work.

3.26 Contract Amendment. In the event that the Parties determine that the provisions of this Agreement should be altered, the Parties may execute a contract amendment to add any provision to this Agreement, or delete or amend any provision of this Agreement. All such contract amendments must be in the form of a written instrument signed by the original signatories to this Agreement, or their successors or designees.

10 3.27 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties relating to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any previous agreements or understandings.

3.28 No Waiver. Failure of RCTC to insist on any one occasion upon strict compliance with any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof shall not be deemed a waiver of such term, covenant or condition, nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of any rights or powers hereunder at any one time or more times be deemed a waiver or relinquishment of such other right or power at any other time or times.

3.29 Validity of Agreement. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement.

3.30 Independent Contractors. Any person or entities retained by the City or any contractor shall be retained on an independent contractor basis and shall not be employees of RCTC. Any personnel performing services on the Work shall at all times be under the exclusive direction and control of the City or contractor, whichever is applicable. The City or contractor shall pay all wages, salaries and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of services on the Work and as required by law. The City or consultant shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance and workers’ compensation insurance.

3.31 Survival. All rights and obligations hereunder that by their nature are to be performed after any expiration or termination of this Agreement shall survive any such expiration or termination.

3.32 No Third Party Beneficiaries. There are no intended third party beneficiaries of any right or obligation assumed by the Parties.

3.33 Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original.

3.34 Electronically Transmitted Signatures; Electronic Signatures. A manually signed copy of this Agreement which is transmitted by facsimile, email or other means of electronic transmission shall be deemed to have the same legal effect as delivery of an original executed copy of this Agreement for all purposes. This Agreement may be signed using an electronic signature.
[Signatures on following page]

11 SIGNATURE PAGE
TO

AGREEMENT FOR THE FUNDING OF

TUMF REGIONAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS

RIVERSIDE COUNTY CITY OF CALIMESA

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
By: By: ________________________
Anne Mayer, Executive Director William Davis, Mayor
ATTEST:

By: ________________________
Darlene Gerdes, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: _________________________________ By: ________________________ Best, Best & Krieger Quinn Barrow, City Attorney
Counsel to the Riverside County
Transportation Commission

17336.02600\34700205.1

EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT “A”

SCOPE OF WORK,

FUNDING AND TIMETABLE
SCOPE OF WORK: The City is planning an interchange improvement project along Interstate 10 at Cherry Valley Boulevard. Since Interstate 10’s initial construction in the 1960’s, no improvements have been made to the interchange while growth in the area continues. To accommodate the proposed interchange improvements, Calimesa Boulevard, a frontage street along the East side of the freeway, must be realigned to create required separation between the new interchange and a local street so that the local roadway does not impact interchange operations.

The City proposes to construct the improvements in two phases. The first phase will be for the City to complete the Calimesa Boulevard realignment – all work will be completed beyond the State’s right-of-way – and the second phase will be all work within the State’s right-of-way and other portions beyond the State right-of-way including the improved interchange. The City will complete design, right-of-way acquisition, permitting, and construction for Phase 1 work.

Phase 1 includes construction of a realigned roadway along Calimesa Boulevard and widening improvements along Cherry Valley Boulevard. The proposed project will horizontally realign roughly 2,000 linear feet of Calimesa Boulevard approximately 600 feet to the east of the current location of the intersection of Calimesa and Cherry Valley Boulevards. This project will require the acquisition of right-of-way through four separate properties. It is the City’s intent to construct the ultimate street improvements for the project limits including curb, gutter and sidewalk during Phase 1 construction.

FUNDING:

PHASE TUMF Regional Arterials LOCAL TOTAL
RIGHT OF WAY $2,500,000 $0 $2,500,000
CONSTRUCTION $2,700,000 $350,000 $3,050,000
TOTAL $5,200,000 $350,000 $5,550,000
TIMETABLE: Provide at a minimum the beginning and ending dates for each phase of work including major milestones within a phase.

PHASE START DATE END DATE COMMENTS
DESIGN NA 12/2023 None
RIGHT OF WAY 12/2023 02/2024
CONSTRUCTION 07/2024 10/2025 ___ Working Days

17336.02600\34700205.1

EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT “B”

PROJECT LOCATION MAP

SHEET 1 OF 2

SHEET 1 OF 2
LEGEND OF SYMBOLS:

17336.02600\34700205.1

EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT “C”

PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTAL, CONSIDERATION AND PAYMENT OF INVOICES

1. RCTC recommends that the City incorporate Exhibit “C-1” into its contracts with any subcontractors to establish a standard method for preparation of invoices by contractors to the City and ultimately to RCTC for reimbursement of City contractor costs.

2. Each month the City shall submit an invoice for eligible Work costs incurred during the preceding month. The original invoice shall be submitted to RCTC’s Executive Director with a copy to RCTC’s Project Coordinator. Each invoice shall be accompanied by a cover letter in a format substantially similar to that of Exhibit “C-2”.

3. Each invoice shall include documentation from each contractor used by the City for the Work, listing labor costs, subcontractor costs, and other expenses. Each invoice shall also include a monthly progress report and spreadsheets showing the hours or amounts expended by each contractor or consultant for the month and for the entire Work to date.

A sample of an acceptable progress report is attached as Exhibits “C-4”. All documentation from the City’s contractors should be accompanied by a cover letter in a format substantially similar to that of Exhibit “C-3”.

4. If the City is seeking reimbursement for direct expenses incurred by City staff for eligible Work costs, the City shall detail the same level of information for its labor and any expenses in the same level of detail as required of contractors pursuant to Exhibit “C” and its attachments.

5. Charges for each task and milestone listed in Exhibit “A” shall be listed separately in the invoice.

6. Each invoice shall include a certification signed by the City Representative or his or her designee which reads as follows:
“I hereby certify that the hours and salary rates submitted for reimbursement in this invoice are the actual hours and rates worked and paid to the consultants or contractors listed.

Signed ________________________________
Title __________________________________
Date __________________________________
Invoice No. ____________________________

17336.02600\34700205.1

EXHIBIT C

7. RCTC will pay the City within 30 days after receipt by RCTC of an invoice. If RCTC disputes any portion of an invoice, payment for that portion will be withheld, without interest, pending resolution of the dispute, but the uncontested balance will be paid.

8. The final payment under this Agreement will be made only after: (i) the City has obtained a Release and Certificate of Final Payment from each contractor or consultant used on the Work; (ii) the City has executed a Release and Certificate of Final Payment; and (iii) the City has provided copies of each such Release to RCTC.

17336.02600\34592611.2
Exhibit “C-1”
EXHIBIT “C-1”

ELEMENTS OF COMPENSATION
For the satisfactory performance and completion of the Work under this Agreement, City will pay the Consultant compensation as set forth herein. The total compensation for this service shall not exceed (_____INSERT WRITTEN DOLLAR AMOUNT___) ($___INSERT NUMERICAL DOLLAR AMOUNT___) without written approval of City’s Engineer (“Total Compensation”).

1. ELEMENTS OF COMPENSATION.

Compensation for the Work will be comprised of the following elements: 1.1 Direct Labor Costs; 1.2 Fixed Fee; and 1.3 Additional Direct Costs.

1.1 DIRECT LABOR COSTS.

Direct Labor costs shall be paid in an amount equal to the product of the Direct Salary Costs and the Multiplier which are defined as follows:

1.1.1 DIRECT SALARY COSTS
Direct Salary Costs are the base salaries and wages actually paid to the Consultant's personnel directly engaged in performance of the Work under the Agreement. (The range of hourly rates paid to the Consultant's personnel appears in Section 2 below.)

1.1.2 MULTIPLIER
The Multiplier to be applied to the Direct Salary Costs to determine the Direct Labor Costs is _________________, and is the sum of the following components:

1.1.2.1 Direct Salary Costs ____________________

1.1.2.2 Payroll Additives ____________________
The Decimal Ratio of Payroll Additives to Direct Salary Costs. Payroll Additives include all employee benefits, allowances for vacation, sick leave, and holidays, and company portion of employee insurance and social and retirement benefits, all federal and state payroll taxes, premiums for insurance which are measured by payroll costs, and other contributions and benefits imposed by applicable laws and regulations.

17336.02600\34592611.2
Exhibit “C-1”

1.1.2.3 Overhead Costs ____________________
The Decimal ratio of Allowable Overhead Costs to the Consultant Firm's Total Direct Salary Costs. Allowable Overhead Costs include general, administrative and overhead costs of maintaining and operating established offices, and consistent with established firm policies, and as defined in the Federal Acquisitions Regulations, Part 31.2.

Total Multiplier ____________________
(sum of 1.1.2.1, 1.1.2.2, and 1.1.2.3)

1.2 FIXED FEE.

1.2.1 A Fixed Fee of _______________ shall be paid to Consultant for Consultant’s complete and satisfactory performance of this Agreement and all Services required. The Fixed Fee shall be paid in monthly installments based upon the percentage of the Services completed at the end of each billing period, as determined in the sole discretion of the City. Consultant shall not be entitled to and shall forfeit any portion of the Fixed Fee not earned as provided herein.

1.2.2 A pro-rata share of the Fixed Fee shall be applied to the total Direct Labor Costs expended for services each month, and shall be included on each monthly invoice.

1.3 ADDITIONAL DIRECT COSTS.

Additional Direct Costs directly identifiable to the performance of the services of this Agreement shall be reimbursed at the rates below, or at actual invoiced cost.

Rates for identified Additional Direct Costs are as follows:

ITEM REIMBURSEMENT RATE
[___insert charges___]
Per Diem $ /day
Car mileage $ /mile
Travel $ /trip
Computer Charges $ /hour
Photocopies $ /copy
Blueline $ /sheet
LD Telephone $ /call
Fax $ /sheet
Photographs $ /sheet
Travel by air and travel in excess of 100 miles from the Consultant's office nearest to City’s office must have City’s prior written approval to be reimbursed under this Agreement.

17336.02600\34592611.2
Exhibit “C-1”

2. DIRECT SALARY RATES
Direct Salary Rates, which are the range of hourly rates to be used in determining Direct Salary Costs in Section 1.1.1 above, are given below and are subject to the following:

2.1 Direct Salary Rates shall be applicable to both straight time and overtime work, unless payment of a premium for overtime work is required by law, regulation or craft agreement, or is otherwise specified in this Agreement. In such event, the premium portion of Direct Salary Costs will not be subject to the Multiplier defined in Paragraph 1.1.2 above.

2.2 Direct Salary Rates shown herein are in effect for one year following the effective date of the Agreement. Thereafter, they may be adjusted annually to reflect the Consultant's adjustments to individual compensation. The Consultant shall notify City in writing prior to a change in the range of rates included herein, and prior to each subsequent change.

POSITION OR CLASSIFICATION RANGE OF HOURLY RATES
[___sample___]
Principal $ .00 - $ .00/hour
Project Manager $ .00 - $ .00/hour
Sr. Engineer/Planner $ .00 - $ .00/hour
Project Engineer/Planner $ .00 - $ .00/hour
Assoc. Engineer/Planner $ .00 - $ .00/hour
Technician $ .00 - $ .00/hour
Drafter/CADD Operator $ .00 - $ .00/hour
Word Processor $ .00 - $ .00/hour

2.3 The above rates are for the Consultant only. All rates for subconsultants to the Consultant will be in accordance with the Consultant's cost proposal.

3. INVOICING.

3.1 Each month the Consultant shall submit an invoice for Work performed during the preceding month. The original invoice shall be submitted to City’s Engineer with two (2) copies to City’s Project Coordinator.

3.2 Charges shall be billed in accordance with the terms and rates included herein, unless otherwise agreed in writing by City’s Representative.

17336.02600\34592611.2
Exhibit “C-1”

3.3 Base Work and Extra Work shall be charged separately, and the charges for each task and Milestone listed in the Scope of Work, shall be listed separately. The charges for each individual assigned by the Consultant under this Agreement shall be listed separately on an attachment to the invoice.

3.4 A charge of $500 or more for any one item of Additional Direct Costs shall be accompanied by substantiating documentation satisfactory to City such as invoices, telephone logs, etc.

3.5 Each copy of each invoice shall be accompanied by a Monthly Progress Report and spreadsheets showing hours expended by task for each month and total project to date.

3.6 Each invoice shall indicate payments to DBE subconsultants or supplies by dollar amount and as a percentage of the total invoice.

3.7 Each invoice shall include a certification signed by the Consultant's Representative or an officer of the firm which reads as follows:

I hereby certify that the hours and salary rates charged in this invoice are the actual hours and rates worked and paid to the employees listed.

Signed _____________________________
Title _____________________________
Date _____________________________
Invoice No. _____________________________

4. PAYMENT

4.1 City shall pay the Consultant within four to six weeks after receipt by City of an original invoice. Should City contest any portion of an invoice, that portion shall be held for resolution, without interest, but the uncontested balance shall be paid.

The final payment for Work under this Agreement will be made only after the Consultant has executed a Release and Certificate of Final Payment.

17336.02600\34592611.2
Exhibit “C-2”
EXHIBIT “C-2”
Sample Cover Letter to RCTC
Date
Ms. Anne Mayer
Executive Director
Riverside County Transportation Commission
4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor
Riverside, CA 92501
ATTN: Accounts Payable
Re: Project Title - Invoice #__
Enclosed for your review and payment approval is the City of _____________’s invoice for professional and technical services that was rendered by our contractors in connection with the _______________ Agreement No. ________ effective (Month/Day/Year). The required support documentation received from each contractor is included as backup to the invoice.

Invoice period covered is from Month/Date/Year to Month/Date/Year.

Total Authorized Agreement Amount: $0,000,000.00
Total Invoiced to Date: $0,000,000.00
Total Previously Invoiced: $0,000,000.00
Balance Remaining: $0,000,000.00
Amount due this Invoice: $0,000,000.00
===========
I certify that the hours and salary rates charged in this invoice are the actual hours and rates worked and paid to the contractors listed.

By: _____________________________
Name
Title
cc:

17336.02600\34592611.2
Exhibit “C-3”
EXHIBIT “C-3”
Sample Letter from Contractor to City
Month/Date/Year
______________
______________
______________
Attn: Accounts Payable Invoice
#____________
For [type of services] rendered by [contractor name] in connection with [name of project] This is per agreement No. XX-XX-XXX effective Month/Date/Year.

Invoice period covered is from Month/Date/Year to Month/Date/Year.

Total Base Contract Amount: $000,000.00
Authorized Extra Work (if Applicable) $000,000.00
------------------
TOTAL AUTHORIZED CONTRACT AMOUNT: $000,000.00
Total Invoice to Date: $000,000.00
Total Previously Billed: $000,000.00
Balance Remaining: $000,000.00
Amount Due this Invoice: $000,000.00
==========
I certify that the hours and salary rates charged in this invoice are the actual hours and rates worked and paid to the employees listed,
By: ____________________
Name
Title

17336.02600\34592611.2
Exhibit “C-4”
EXHIBIT C-4
Sample Progress Report
REPORTING PERIOD: Month/Date/Year to Month/Date/Year
PROGRESS REPORT: #1
A. Activities and Work Completed during Current Work Periods TASK 01 – 100% PS&E SUBMITTAL

1. Responded to Segment 1 comments from Department of Transportation

2. Completed and submitted Segment 1 final PS&E
B. Current/Potential Problems Encountered & Corrective Action Problems Corrective Action
None None
C. Work Planned Next Period
TASK 01 – 100% PS&E SUBMITTAL

1. Completing and to submit Traffic Signal and Electrical Design plans

2. Responding to review comments

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 10
SUBJECT: AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROJECT NO. 5.CM.03-22,

NORTON YOUNGLOVE SENIOR CENTER ADA
IMPROVEMENTS, PHASE II, PROJECT NO 2021-09.

MEETING DATE: September 18, 2023
PREPARED BY: Will Kolbow, City Manager
Margaret Monson, Public Works Director
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:

1. Award a construction contract to Three Peaks Corp. for the amount of $67,990.95 for the construction of the Norton Younglove Senior Center ADA Improvements, Phase II, Project No 2021-09; and

2. Approve a construction contingency for the amount of $6,800, a design budget of $18,413 for expenses to date for plans, specifications, bidding and project management, and a budget for the management of construction including inspection and materials testing of in the amount of up to $10,200; for a total project cost of $103,403.95 and

3. Approve the Plans and Specifications; and

4. Approve Resolution 2023-54, a Resolution of the City of Calimesa authorizing award to a single bidder for the construction of the Norton Younglove Senior Center ADA Improvements, Phase II Project No 2021-09.

BACKGROUND: The City Council approved an application for funding from the federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and a plan for the Norton Younglove Senior Center ADA Improvements, Phase II Project No 2021-09 (Project) in December of 2021. This plan would provide for additional parking spaces for the Senior Center. Construction of the remaining concrete between City Hall and the Senior Center and additional handrails at the main entrance as required by ADA code. The original engineer’s estimate for construction at the time of application was approximately $73,414. Following Council approval, staff began the design of the plans for the Project. Riverside County Department of Housing, Homeless Prevention and Workforce Solutions (HHPWS) administers CDBG funding on behalf of the federal government and awarded the grant in June of 2022. The agreement was fully executed and an Authorization to incur costs was issued in January of 2023.

DISCUSSION: Staff advertised for public bidding the construction project in eleven publications and electronic bid websites as well as personal contact with contractors. There were two (2) plan holders and the bid opening was held on July 27, 2023. One bid was received with Three Peaks

Corp. being the only responsive bidder. Feedback from other contractors determined the project was too small to warrant bidding given the staffing shortages, increased material cost and gas price increases. Staff determined that re-bidding the project would garner the same results.

The table below lists the bid as received:

BIDDER BID AMOUNT
1 Three Peaks Corp. $67,990.95
Staff recommends awarding the construction contract to Three Peaks Corp. for the bid amount of $67,990.95. Their bid has been deemed responsive, licenses and references are all favorable.

FISCAL IMPACT: Council approved a preliminary construction budget of $36,868 for the Project in October, 2021. With the passing of over a year, the increased construction costs, the lowest bid is $67,990.95. Additional costs are necessary to complete the construction as outlined in the table below:

BUDGET AMOUNT
Available Funding
1 CDBG Funding (Original) $31,931.00
2 CDBG Program Income Balance $53,095.95
3 Public Works Budget $13,413.00
4 ADA Fund $ 5,000.00
Total $103,439.95
Design, Construction, Management
1 Design/Bidding/Project Management $ 18,413.00
2 Construction $67,990.95
3 Contingency $ 6,800.00
4 Construction management, estimated
(materials testing and survey included)
$10,200.00
5 GRAND TOTAL $103,403.95
The existing CDBG funding is $31,931. Staff has requested and received approval for the City’s CDBG Program Income Balance to be applied for the full construction, contingency and construction management shortfall from HHPWS. The agreement with HHPWS for additional funding will come before the Council at a later date, following approval by the County Board of Supervisors. Based on the table above, the City has adequate funding to pay for this project.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Resolution 2023-54

RESOLUTION 2023-54

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIMESA

CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE AWARD TO A SINGLE BIDDER IN

PUBLIC BIDDING FOR THE NORTON YOUNGLOVE SENIOR CENTER

ADA IMPROVEMENTS, PHASE II PROJECT AND AMENDING THE
CITY’S BUDGET TO INCORPORATE THE PROJECT BUDGET
WHEREAS, the City is required to provide disabled access to City facilities and based on the ADA Access Report, the Norton Younglove Senior Center access is inadequate to meet code; and WHEREAS, with the award of Community Development Block Grant funding, City Council determined the Norton Younglove Senior Center ADA Improvement Project would be a priority approved the project for bidding; and
WHEREAS, the City received only one bid at the publicly advertised bid opening; and WHEREAS, City staff advertised the project for public bidding for thirty days in the local newspaper and eleven publications required by Riverside County Department of Housing, Homeless Prevention and Workforce Solutions (HHPWS) who administers CDBG funding on behalf of the federal government, electronic bid websites as well as personal contact of contractors; and WHEREAS, City staff determined through follow up interviews with the two plan holders that re-bidding of the project would not produce different results due to the size of the project, lack of staffing, increased cost of materials and gasoline; and WHEREAS, the City Council now deems it appropriate to award construction contract to the single bidder, Three Peaks Corp. for the bid amount of $67,990.95; and WHEREAS, the current construction funding totals $31,931 leaving a construction, contingency and construction management shortfall of $53,059.95; and WHEREAS, the County of Riverside has indicated that the City may request use of its CDBG Program Fund Balance to cover the shortfall.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIMESA HEREBY FINDS, DETERMINES, RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1: Awards the construction contract for Norton Younglove Senior Center ADA Improvements, Phase II Project. to Three Peaks Corp in the amount of $67,990.95.

Section 2: Authorizes a project contingency in the amount of $6,800.00.

Section 3: Authorizes application of the CDBG Program Fund Balance allocation to fund in the amount of $$53,059.95 to fund the shortfall as noted in the accompanying Staff report.

Section 4: Directs Staff to incorporate the appropriate changes to the approved 2023/2024 Budget to incorporate the project budget.

Attachment 10A

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 18th day of September, 2023. _____________________________________

WILLIAM DAVIS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_________________________________

DARLENE GERDES, CITY CLERK

City Council Meeting
Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 11
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING – ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 22-05, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 22-01, AND ZONE CHANGE 21-01

FOR THE RESIDENTIAL INFILL PRIORITY AREA OVERLAY

ZONE PROJECT
MEETING DATE: September 18, 2023
PREPARED BY: Kelly Lucia, Planning Director
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
• Adopt CC Resolution 2023-55, 1) approving Environmental Assessment 22-05, certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone (SCH# 2022030754), adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and 2) approving General Plan Amendment 22-01 for the Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone • Adopt Ordinance No. 392, approving Zone Change 21-01 the City prepared the RIPAOZ as Zone Change 21-01 (“ZC-21-01”) to encourage infill development and allow for higher density residential development than the underlying zoning designation as established by Chapter

18.20 of the Calimesa Municipal Code (CMC).

BACKGROUND: In recent years, the California Legislature enacted the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 and declared the following:
• California is experiencing a housing supply crisis, with housing demand far outstripping supply. In 2018, California ranked 49th out of the 50 states in housing units per capita.
• Consequently, existing housing in this state, especially in its largest cities, has become very expensive. Seven of the 10 most expensive real estate markets in the United States are in California.
• California is also experiencing rapid year-over-year rent growth with three cities in the state having had overall rent growth of 10 percent or more year-over-year, and of the 50 United States cities with the highest United States rents, 33 are cities in California.
• California needs an estimated 180,000 additional homes annually to keep up with population growth, and the Governor has called for 3.5 million new homes to be built over the next 7 years.
• The housing crisis has particularly exacerbated the need for affordable homes at prices below market rates. Reusing existing infrastructure and developed

properties and building more smaller homes with good access to schools, parks, and services, will provide the most immediate help with the lowest greenhouse gas footprint to state residents. California housing has become the most expensive in the nation. The excessive cost of the state’s housing supply is partially caused by activities and policies of many local governments that limit the approval of housing, increase the cost of land for housing, and require that high fees and exactions be paid by producers of housing. • Among the consequences of those actions are discrimination against low-income and minority households, lack of housing to support employment growth, imbalance in jobs and housing, reduced mobility, urban sprawl, excessive commuting, and air quality deterioration.
• Many local governments do not give adequate attention to the economic, environmental, and social costs of decisions that result in disapproval of housing development projects, reduction in density of housing projects, and excessive standards for housing development projects.
• California’s overall homeownership rate is at its lowest level since the 1940s.

The state ranks 49th out of the 50 states in homeownership rates as well as in the supply of housing per capita. Only one-half of California’s households are able to afford the cost of housing in their local regions.
1 Housing Elements2
Since 1969, California has required that all local governments (cities and counties) adequately plan to meet the housing needs of everyone in the community. California’s local governments meet this requirement by adopting housing plans (also called “housing elements”) as part of their “general plan”. General plans serve as the local government’s "blueprint" for how the city and/or county will grow and develop and include seven elements: land use, transportation, conservation, noise, open space, safety, and housing.

California’s housing-element law acknowledges that, in order for the private market to adequately address the housing needs and demand of Californians, local governments must adopt plans and regulatory systems that provide opportunities for (and do not unduly constrain) housing development. As a result, housing policy in California rests largely on the effective implementation of local general plans and, in particular, local housing elements.

Updating a jurisdiction’s housing element, while important to meeting one of the most basic needs of Californians, can be daunting, and a lot is at stake. Individuals and families are directly affected by each jurisdiction’s ability to plan for the housing needs of those who will live, work, and play in every community.

Those who build homes and apartments and help families become homeowners often rely on funding from state and federal housing programs administered by HCD and other state departments and agencies. In some cases, funding from state/federal housing programs can only be accessed 1 The Housing Crisis Act of 2019, codified in California Government Code Section 66300(d). 2 More information about the housing element requirements is available at the following link:
https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/index.shtml.

if the jurisdiction has a compliant housing element. In other cases, a compliant housing element is not a requirement in order to apply for funding; however, those applying for funding will receive extra points on their application if they do have a compliant housing element (thereby increasing their chances in the competitive application process).

In order to create a housing element showing it could meet the local housing needs, a jurisdiction must first know how much housing it must plan for, and estimate how much will be needed at a variety of affordability levels in order to match the needs of the people who will live there. This is determined by a process called the regional housing needs assessment.

The Role of the California Department of Housing and Community Development The California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) plays the critical role of reviewing every local government’s housing element to determine whether it complies with state law and then submits written findings back to each local government. HCD’s approval is required before a local government can adopt its housing element as part of its overall General Plan.

Grant Funding to Accelerate Housing Production (SB 2 and LEAP Planning Grants) The State has been aware of California’s housing shortage for some time. In 2017, Governor Brown signed a 15-bill housing package aimed at addressing the State’s housing shortage and high housing costs. The package included the Building Homes and Jobs Act (SB 2), which established a funding source to increase the supply of affordable homes in California by collecting a $75 recording fee on real estate documents. These funds were made available to all local governments in California to help prepare, adopt, and implement plans that streamline housing approvals and accelerate housing production. On October 7, 2019, the City Council adopted CC Resolution 2019- 48 authorizing application for, and receipt of, SB 2 Planning Grant Program Funds.

Staff subsequently submitted an application to the HCD SB 2 program describing the concept of a “Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone” (“Overlay”). The Overlay would up-zone certain residential properties identified by the City to allow higher density development including duplexes, townhomes, condos, and a limited amount of apartments by-right. The Overlay zone concept was approved by HCD to receive $160,000 grant funding on February 6, 2020.

On January 27, 2020, HCD released a Notice of Funding Availability (“NOFA”) for approximately $119,040,000 as part of the Local Early Action Planning Grants Program (“LEAP”). Similar to the SB 2 program, the LEAP program provides funding to jurisdictions for the preparation and adoption of planning documents, process improvements that accelerate housing production, and facilitate compliance in implementing the sixth cycle of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (“RHNA”).

On July 20, 2020, the City Council adopted CC Resolution 2020-32 authorizing application for, and receipt of LEAP program funds. Staff subsequently submitted an application to HCD to supplement the grant funds previously awarded by the SB 2 grant. On January 27, 2021, staff was notified that the City of Calimesa was awarded $65,000 in LEAP funds to develop the Overlay Zone.

Public Workshops
During development of the Overlay Zone planning documents, public workshops focused on housing issues in Calimesa were conducted by the Planning Commission on May 10, 2021, and the City Council on June 7, 2021, respectively. The workshops were advertised on the City website, posted in multiple locations at City Hall, and advertised in the Yucaipa-Calimesa News Mirror. Each workshop featured discussion of the 6th Cycle Housing Element update, introduction of the Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone project, residential infill development policies, possible density increases, zone changes, general plan amendments, and changes to allowable housing product types (to include apartments, condominiums, townhomes, duplexes, triplexes, and other multi-family products) at various locations throughout the City.

City of Calimesa Regional Housing Needs Assessment (“RHNA”) Allocation Calimesa’s 6th Cycle (2021-2029) RHNA Allocation:

Total: 2,017 Residential Units
Very-Low Income: 495
Low Income: 275
Moderate Income: 379
Above Moderate Income: 868
The above RHNA allocation is the minimum number of residential units that the City is required to plan for during the subject planning period. The allocation is determined by the Southern California Association of Governments (“SCAG”), and the City is not able to modify these numbers. However, the City Council is able to decide where the units will be located3. The City’s draft Housing Element that is currently going through the HCD review process proposes to distribute the units Citywide and locate the required housing units at existing residentially zoned sites, within the Summerwind Specific Plan, the Mesa Verde Specific Plan, the JP Ranch (east) community, the Riedman map, within the proposed (not approved) multi-family Heights at Calimesa Specific Plan, through construction of Accessory Dwelling Units (“ADU”s), and through implementation of the Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project. Please see Table 1 below for additional information.
3 SB 35 limits the City’s discretion by requiring a ministerial approval process of certain housing projects.

See Attachment A for reference only. SB 35 information is provided for context as it is existing State legislation that the limits the City Council’s ability to determine where certain income restricted units can be constructed. The Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project does not propose any income restricted units.

Table 1: Summary of RHNA Status and Site Inventory
Extremely
Low/Very
Low Income
Low
Income
Moderate
Income
Above Moderate
Income
Total
2021-2029 RHNA 495 275 379 868 2,017
Pipeline Project (The Heights at
Calimesa)
113 1,068 1,067 2,248
Projected ADU construction 17 10 5 32
Remaining RHNA 640 0 0 0
Existing Sites Available
Residentially Zoned Sites 154 52 506 712
Summerwind Ranch Specific Plan 150 1,266 1,675 3,091
Mesa Verde Specific Plan 185 2,909 556 3,650
Heritage Oaks Specific Plan 0 0 45 45
JP Ranch (east) 24 227 227 478
Riedman Map 9 0 170 179
Subtotal Potential Capacity
Based on Existing GP and Zoning

522 4,454 3,179

8,155
Sites to Accommodate Remaining RHNA Need
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay
Zone - Area 1 (up to 15 du/acre)

0 0 671

2,156
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay
Zone - Area 2 (up to 35 du/acre)

372

372

741
Total Development
Potential Capacity 1,024 5,904 5,663

12,591
Planning Commission
The Planning Commission considered the Project at a public hearing held at a special meeting on August 28, 2023. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Project as presented with a 3-0 vote in favor of recommending approval. Two Planning Commissioners were conflicted from voting on the item, due to their material financial interest in real property due to the proximity of their primary resident to proposed rezone parcels. See Attachment B (PC Resolution 2023-09).

DISCUSSION:

Rezoning to Expand Housing Options (Rezone to Permit By-Right) In response to the State housing crisis, the Planning Department is proposing a “Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone” (RIPAOZ), which if approved, would modify the General Plan and Zoning designation of thirty-six (36) properties throughout the City to permit by-right densities up to 15 dwelling units to the acres (Area 1) or up to 35 dwelling units to the acre (Area 2). This means that in these areas, townhomes, condominiums, duplexes, townhomes, and apartments (Area 2 only) would be permitted subject to staff level approval of a Minor Development Plan Review. No future public hearings or discretionary actions would be required for projects that comply with

objective design standards written in the draft ordinance. Please note, a subsequent public hearing may be required if an applicant proposes a subdivision.

Property Selection
The methodology for selection of properties within the Project generally included identification of vacant, undeveloped, unentitled residential infill parcels that are in close proximity to existing infrastructure. All of the properties are already zoned residential, with the exception of one property that has a split designation of residential and commercial. The three planning areas that would allow apartment development were selected due to their close proximity to I-10 interchanges, the Downtown Business District, and existing multi-family development, as applicable. The 36 properties included in the proposed Project are identified in Attachment C.

If approved, the RIPAOZ would encourage residential infill development, provide a flexible approach to providing affordable housing through density, increase the variety of housing options in existing residential neighborhoods, foster compact development, promote efficiency in the utilization of existing infrastructure and services, facilitate integrated physical design, promote a high level of design quality, facilitate development proposals responsive to current and future market conditions, and provide safe vehicular circulation patterns for residents and safety/service providers.

General Plan Amendment 22-01 (See Attachments D, E, and G) GPA 22-01 would amend the General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2) to:
o Amend Table LU-B – General Plan Land Use Categories to define RIPAOZ Area 1 and Area 2;
o Amend Table LU-C – List of Zoning Districts Compatible with General Plan Land Use Categories to add the RIPAOZ; and
o Amend Figure LU-1 – Land Use Map to reflect the boundary of the RIPAOZ Area 1 and Area 2 on the City’s “single map” General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designation Map.

Zone Change 21-01 (See Attachment F)
Zone Change 21-01 would amend Calimesa Municipal Code (CMC), Title 18 – Zoning, Land Use and Development Regulations; specifically Chapters 18.05 – General Provisions, 18.20 – Residential Zone Districts , 18.45 – Off-Street Parking, and 18.90 – Development Plan Review in order to:
o Amend Section 18.05.08 – Zone Districts Established to add “Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone” (RIPAOZ);
o Amend Section 18.20.020 – Residential Zone Districts to add new Subsection H to establish the RIPAOZ;
o Amend Table 18.20.030 – Uses Permitted within Residential Districts to identify allowable uses within the RIPAOZ:

o Amend Table 18.20.040 – Residential Development Standards to establish development standards for the RIPAOZ and allow for increased density of up to 15 dwelling units per acre in RIPAOZ Area 1 and 35 dwelling units per acre in RIPAOZ Area 2;
o Amend Section 18.20.050 – Specific Standards for Residential Districts to add new Subsection P to define Design, Screening, and Privacy Standards; o Amend Table 18.45.060 – Number of Parking Spaces Required to establish parking standards for the RIPAOZ; and
o Amend Section 18.90.030 – Minor Development Plan Review to add new Subsection 11 of Subdivision B to identify that all single family attached, single family detached, multi-family dwellings, and accessory dwelling units (if permitted by State law) proposed within the Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone (“RIPAOZ”) may be considered for Minor Development Plan Review.

Environmental Assessment 22-05 (See Attachment H)
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared to inform decision-makers and the public of the potentially significant environmental effects associated with the Project. The EIR was prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, known as CEQA (California Public Resources Code, Sections 21000 et seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.). The City of Calimesa is the Lead Agency for the proposed project under CEQA and is responsible for its preparation. As summarized in EIR, the public review of the Initial Study and Notice of Preparation (IS/NOP) began on March 29, 2022, and ended on April 27, 2022. A scoping meeting was held on April 7, 2022, via Zoom. Written comments received during the IS/NOP public period and verbal comments received during the scoping meeting are addressed and outlined in Section 2.0 – Introduction of the DEIR. Additionally, the public review of the DEIR began on March 31, 2023 and ended on May 15, 2023. As such the Project has engaged the public and complied with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15082, 15083 and 15087. A total of twentyfour (24) public comment letters were received. The anticipated environmental impacts associated with the Project, submitted comment letters, Responses to Comments, suggested mitigation measures, technical studies, and other environmental information can be found here as Attachment H.

Grant implications
As discussed above, the Project was primarily funded through the State SB 2 and LEAP grant programs. The total amount of grant funds awarded was $225,000. To date, the State has reimbursed the City $170,080.23. In order to receive the final reimbursement amount totaling $54,919.77, the City must provide the State with evidence that the Project has been approved. If the City Council chooses not to approve the Project, which is within its authority as a legislative body, the City will not be eligible to receive the remaining reimbursement.

Other Considerations
Staff has been working diligently with HCD on the draft 6th Cycle Housing Element Update since 2021. Although the draft Housing Element has not yet received approval, it has gone through several rounds of HCD review and comment. It should be noted that the Overlay Zone Project is programmed into the draft Housing Element as a rezone program to be implemented in an effort to accelerate housing production. If the City Council chooses not to approve the Project, which is within its authority as a legislative body, the City will need to revise its draft Housing Element and submit it to HCD for further review.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: SB 35 Guidelines (for reference only)
Attachment B: PC Resolution 2023-09 (for reference)
Attachment C: Project Site, Existing and Proposed General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designations Attachment D Proposed General Plan Land Use Chapter
Attachment E: Proposed General Plan Land Use and Zoning Map Attachment F: Proposed CC Resolution No. 2023-55 Approving EA 22-05 and GPA 22-01 Attachment G: Proposed Ordinance No. 392 adopting Zone Change 21-01 Attachment H: Draft and Final Environmental Impact Reports (SCH#2022030754)

1 SB 35 AFFORDABLE HOUSING
STREAMLINED APPROVAL:

MINISTERIAL ACTION –
No CEQA Required
Introduction
Enacted in 2017, SB 35 added Government Code
§65913.4 to the Housing Development Approvals
provisions (Government Code §§65913 - 65914.5)
to require streamlining of affordable housing
development approvals in cities and counties that
have insufficient progress toward their Regional
Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) goal and/or have not
submitted the latest Housing Element Annual Progress
Report (APR). Since its passing, several other bills have made amendments to Government Code §65913.4,
such as AB 1485, AB 168, and AB 831, to clarify certain provisions of this code section.

SB 35 requires local entities to streamline the approval by providing a ministerial process through which a
project is only reviewed against objective standards.

Qualifying projects are considered ministerial and are
not subject to a conditional use permit (CUP). This is a voluntary program that a project sponsor may elect to
pursue, provided that certain eligibility criteria are met.

These provisions sunset on January 1, 2026.

Eligibility for Streamlining
In order to be eligible for streamlining, the project must meet all of the following criteria:

HOUSING TYPES
 Multifamily or Mixed-Use: The development
must be a multifamily housing development
containing at least two or more net new
residential units, or a mixed-use project where at
least 2/3 of the square footage is dedicated to
residential uses.
 Consistency with Objective Standards:

The project must meet all objective standards
of the Planning Code at the time of SB 35
application submittal. Objective standards are
those that require no personal or subjective
(discretionary) judgment, such as objective
dimensional requirements.

Attachment 11A

2 SITE REQUIREMENTS
 Infill Development: At least 75 percent of the
perimeter of the site adjoins parcels currently or
formerly developed with urban uses, including
parcels separated by a street or highway.
 Zoning or General Plan Consistency: The
development must be located on a legal parcel
or parcels that are zoned for or designated by
the general plan for residential or residential
mixed uses.
 Not Located in Sensitive Environments: The
development must be located on a property
that is not within a coastal zone, prime farmland,
wetlands, a community conservation plan area,
a habitat for protected species, or under a
conservation easement.
 Not Subject to Hazardous Conditions: The
project site is not within a high or very high
fire hazard severity zone, hazardous waste site,
delineated earthquake fault zone, flood plain,
or floodway.
 No Demolition of Residential Units: The
project does not demolish any housing units
that have been occupied by tenants in the last
10 years; or demolish housing that is subject to
any form of rent or price control, or are subject
to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that
restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and
families of moderate, low, or very low incomes.
 Historic Structures: The project does not
demolish a historic structure that has been
placed on a national, state, or local historic
register.
 Subdivisions: The development did not or
does not involve a subdivision of a parcel that
is subject to the California Subdivision Map Act,
unless the development either (a) receives a
low-income housing tax credit and is subject
to the requirement that prevailing wages be
paid, or (b) is subject to the requirements to pay
prevailing wages and to use a skilled and trained
workforce.

AFFORDABILITY PROVISIONS
 Affordability: At least 10 or 50 percent
depending upon the jurisdiction’s insufficient
progress toward their Above Moderate income
or Lower Income (Very Low and Low Income)
RHNA allocation of the proposed residential
units must be dedicated as affordable to
households at or below 80 percent AMI for
either rental or ownership projects. See the
latest SB 35 Statewide Determination Summary
for the jurisdictions that are eligible with ≥10
percent affordability and the jurisdictions that
are eligible with ≥50 percent affordability.

3 LABOR PROVISIONS
 Prevailing Wages: If the development is more
than 10 units and not in its entirety a public
work, as defined in Government Code §65913.4
(a)(8)(A), all construction workers employed in
the execution of the development must be paid
at least the general prevailing rate of per diem
wages for the type of work and geographic area.
 Skilled and Trained Workforce Provisions:

A skilled and trained workforce, as defined in
Section 2601 of the California Public Contracts
Code, must complete the development if the
project consists of units that are not 100 percent
subsidized affordable housing as follows:

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
 Notification to California Native American
Tribes: After providing notice of the intent to
develop the site to California Native American
tribes that are traditionally and culturally
affiliated with the geographic area of the
proposed development site, a determination
shall be made by the city or county that: the
development site is not a tribal or cultural
resource on a national, state, tribal or local
historic register list; that the parties involved in
the scoping consultation have documented an
enforceable agreement on methods, measures,
and conditions for tribal cultural resource
treatment; or that the parties to the scoping
consultation do not disagree as to whether a
potential tribal cultural resource will be affected
by the proposed development.
 Parking: Project must provide at least one
parking space per unit. Parking standards shall
not be imposed if the project meets any of the
following:
• The project is located within one half mile of a
public transit stop.
• The development is located within an
architecturally and historically significant
historic district.
• The project is located within one block of a car
share vehicle station.
• When on-street parking permits are required
but not offered to the development occupants.

See SB 35 Worksheet to determine whether the
project is eligible for SB 35.

County Type Population
Density
Number of
Housing Units
Coastal 225,000
or more
50 or more
Non-Coastal Fewer than
550,000 More than 25

4 Process for Streamlined Approval
Applicants must submit to a lead agency a
“preliminary application” with a notice of intent to
invoke the provisions of SB 35. The “preliminary
application” is the same as mentioned in SB 330
(Government Code §65941.1). Many agencies have
developed SB 35 applications to evaluate project
eligibility and provide a framework for the lead
agency’s SB 35 review procedures.

Within 30 calendar days of receiving the applicant’s
“preliminary application” for SB 35, the lead agency
must provide formal notice to each California
Native American tribes about the proposed
development. The formal notice must include
the location and description of the proposed
development, and an invitation to engage in
scoping consultation. Each Tribe then has 30
calendar days to respond and accept the invitation
to engage in consultation, and after the receiving
the acceptance to invitation, the agency has 30
calendar days to initiate consultation. If there is no
response to the notification of intent or there is an
agreement reached in a scoping consultation and
the project application is deemed complete and
qualifies for SB 35 review, the project is eligible for SB 35 ministerial approval. If agreement with one
or more tribes is not reached, then a project is
not eligible for SB 35 approval. Provided that the
notification and scoping session result in either an
agreement or no response, SB 35 timelines shall
commence provided an application is submitted.

SB 35 establishes mandatory timelines for lead
agencies to complete their streamlined review.

Lead agencies must determine if a project is
eligible for streamlining within:
 60 days of application submittal for projects of
150 or fewer units, or
 90 days of application submittal for projects
containing more than 150 units.

When determining consistency, a local government
shall find that a development is consistent with the
objective planning standards if there is substantial
evidence that would allow a reasonable person to
conclude that the development is consistent with
the objective standards. The local government may
only find that a development is inconsistent with
one or more objective planning standards, if the
local government finds no substantial evidence
in favor of consistency and that, based on the
entire record, no reasonable person could
conclude that the development is consistent
with the objective standards. A determination
of inconsistency with objective planning
standards does not preclude the development
proponent from correcting any deficiencies and
resubmitting an application for streamlined
review.

If the lead agency provides written comments
to an applicant detailing that a project, as
proposed, is not SB 35 eligible, or requests
additional information to make such a
determination, then the 60- or 90-day timeline
will restart upon submittal of a revised
development application in response to that
written notice. SB 35 projects are ministerial,
which do not require public hearings. Design
review or public oversight may be conducted
by Planning Commission, City Council or
an equivalent board but can only assess
streamlining criteria such as if the city or
county so chooses, objective design review or
development standards. Design review or public
oversight must be completed within:
 90 days of application submittal for projects
with 150 or fewer units, or
 180 days of application submittal for projects
with more than 150 units.

If the lead agency does not meet the applicable
timeline, then the project is automatically
approved. See Gov. Code §65913.4(e) for permit
approval expiration guidelines.

SCAG DEVELOPMENT STREAMLINING TOOLS | HCD REAP GRANT PROGRAM 5 Modifications
AB 831 amended SB 35 to allow applicants to make modification requests to their project prior to the issuance of the final building permit. The modification has to be consistent with development standards that applied to original application, with limited exceptions to changes to unit count and total floor area [Gov. Code §65913.4 (f)(3)].

In addition, AB 1174 amended and added that if the development proponent requests a modification to a development that has been approved pursuant to SB 35, then the time during which the approval will remain valid is extended for the number of days between the submittal of the modification request and the date of its final approval, plus an additional 180 days to allow time to obtain a building permit. If litigation is filed relating to the modification request, the time is further extended during the pendency of the litigation. However, these required extensions apply only to the first request for a modification submitted by the development proponent.

Additional Resources
 SB 35 Streamlined Ministerial Approval Program Guidelines: Last updated March 2021.

Developments that may be experiencing barriers to utilizing SB 35 Streamlining may contact [email protected].
 SB 35 Statewide Determination Summary: Summary of jurisdictions that are not subject to SB 35 streamlining, are currently subject to SB 35 streamlining for developments with at least 10 percent affordability, and are currently subject to SB 35 streamlining for developments with at least 50 percent affordability (as of June 1, 2022).
 SB 35 Determination Methodology and Background Data: Additional detail on the determination methodology and background data.
 Interactive SB 35 Determination Online Map: This online interactive map can quickly allow users to view whether a city/county:
• has an HCD-approved housing element,
• is subject to streamlined ministerial housing approvals, and • has been submitting its Annual Progress Reports.

SCAG DEVELOPMENT STREAMLINING TOOLS | HCD REAP GRANT PROGRAM 6 SB 35 PROCESS
Applicant
submits a
“preliminary
application” with
a notice of intent
to invoke SB 35
Agency notifies
and invites
tribes to engage
in scoping
consultation
Application
submitted to
lead agency
SB 35
Streamlined
Approval
Agency
Determines
Eligibility
Lead agency
may provide
written comments
determining
project is not
eligible for
SB 35 (i.e.,
inconsistencies
and conflicts with
objective design
standards) or
request additional
information
to make a
determination. 60-
or 90-day timeline
restarts
If no agreement,
project is not
eligible for
SB 35
Lead agency
determines project
is eligible for
SB 35
•Within 60 days for
projects of ≤150 units
•Within 90 days for
projects with >150 units
•Within 90 days for
projects of ≤150 units
•Within 180 days for
projects with >150 units
If agreement
reached or no
response from
tribes, project may
proceed and be
eligible for SB 35
2 1
3 4
5 The purpose of this material is to provide guidance, which agencies and other entities may use at their discretion. This guidance does not alter lead agency discretion in decision-making, independent judgment and analysis, and preparing environmental documents for project or governmental action subject to CEQA requirements. This material is for general information only and should not be construed as legal advice or legal opinion.
*If the lead agency does not meet the applicable timeline, then the project is automatically approved.

7 WORKSHEETS
SB 35 Eligibility Checklist
Requirements Applicability Yes No N/A

HOUSING TYPES
Multi-family or
Mixed-use
The development is a multifamily housing development
containing at least two or more net new residential units, or a mixed-use project where at least 2/3 of the square footage is dedicated to residential uses.

Consistent with
Objective Standards
The project meets all objective standards of the Planning Code at the time of SB 35 application submittal.

SITE REQUIREMENTS
Infill Development At least 75 percent of the perimeter of the site adjoins parcels currently or formerly developed with urban uses, including parcels separated by a street or highway.

Zoning or General Plan
Consistency
The development is located on a legal parcel or parcels that are zoned or designated by the general plan for residential or mixed uses.

Not Located in Sensitive
Environments
The project site is not within a coastal zone, prime farmland, wetlands, a community conservation plan area, a habitat for protected species, or under a conservation easement.

Not Subject to
Hazardous Conditions
The project site is not within a high fire hazard severity zone, hazardous waste site, delineated earthquake fault zone, flood plain, or floodway.

No Demolition of
Residential Units
The project does not demolish any housing units that have been occupied by tenants in the last 10 years; or demolish housing subject to any form of rent or price control, or are subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low incomes.

Historic Structures The project does not demolish a historic structure that has been placed on a national, state, or local historic register.

Subdivisions The development did not or does not involve a subdivision of a parcel that is subject to the California Subdivision Map Act, unless the development either (a) receives a low-income housing tax credit and is subject to the requirement that prevailing wages be paid, or (b) is subject to the requirements to pay prevailing wages and to use a skilled and trained workforce.

8 Requirements Applicability Yes No N/A

AFFORDABILITY PROVISIONS
Affordability At least 10 percent or 50 percent (depending upon the jurisdiction’s insufficient progress toward their Above Moderate income or Lower Income RHNA, Very Low and Low Income) of the proposed residential units will be dedicated as affordable to households at 80% AMI for either rental or ownership projects. (See the latest Statewide Determination Summary for the jurisdictions that are eligible with >10 percent affordability and the jurisdictions that are eligible with >50 percent affordability).

LABOR PROVISIONS
Prevailing Wages If the development is more than 10 units and not in its entirety a public work, as defined in Government Code Section 65913.4 (a) (8)(A), all construction workers employed in the execution of the development will be paid at least the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for the type of work and geographic area.

Skilled and Trained
Workforce Provisions
A skilled and trained workforce, as defined in Section 2601 of the California Public Contracts Code, will complete the development if the project consists of:
• 50 or more units in coastal counties with populations of 225,000 or more,
• More than 25 units in non-coastal counties with populations fewer than 550,000.

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Notification to
California Native
American Tribes
The lead agency has provided notice of the intent to develop the site to California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed development site, and a determination has been made by the lead agency that: the development site is not a tribal or cultural resource on a national, state, tribal or local historic register list; that the parties to a scoping consultation have documented an enforceable agreement on methods,
measures, and conditions for tribal cultural resource treatment; or that the parties to the scoping consultation do not disagree as to whether a potential tribal cultural resource will be affected by the proposed development.

Parking The project provides at least one parking space per unit, unless it meets any of the following:
• The project is located within one half mile of a public transit stop.
• The development is located within an architecturally and historically significant historic district.
• The project is located within one block of a car share vehicle station.
• When on-street parking permits are required but not offered to the development occupants.

Attachment 11B

Attachment A - Project Site Sources: Riverside Co. GIS, 2021; RCIT, 2020 (imagery).

CALIMESA BLVD
3RD ST
5TH ST

WOODHOUSE RD

SINGLETON RD
7TH ST

MYRTLEWOOD DR

ROBERTS RD
AVENUE L 7TH PL
2ND ST
C ST

SANDALWOOD DR

CALIFORNIA ST

COUNTY LINE ROAD

ENGLEMAN DR

CHERRY VALLEY BLVD

BUENA MESA DR

BRYANT ST

AVENUE L
§¨¦10
411200007
409100011
411200008
410170007
410170025
411171041
413320003
410080006
411200022
411200001
411171018 410162013
410080050
410162012
410092012
409100009
410080045
410080013
410170013
410162014
410181013
411200004 410080014
410080003
411200003
410080009
411200002
410170012
410080019
410080005
410170009
410170010
410170011
410080007
410181011
410181012
LEGEND
Overlay Zone Properties
RIPAOZ Area 1
RIPAOZ Area 2
City Boundary
H:\2020\20-0238\GIS\Project_Site.mxd; Map revised 08 Nov 2021 0 1,000
I
2,000 3,000
Feet
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project
Attachment 11C

Figure 4 –Existing General Plan Land Use
and Zoning Designations
Source: Riverside Co. GIS, 2021.

City of Calimesa 2014.
411200007
411200008
410170007
410170025
411171041
413320003
410080006
411200022
411200001
411171018
410162013
410080050
410162012
410092012
411200004
410080045
410080013
410080014
410080003
411200003
410170013
410170012 410080005
410181013
410080009
411200002
410080019 410170009
410170010
410170011
410080007
410162014 410181011
410181012
409100009 409100011

CALIMES A
BLV D

WOODHOUSE RD

SINGLETON RD

COUNTY LINE RD

AVENUE L
7TH PL
2ND ST
C ST

SAND A LW OOD D R

COUNTRY C LUB DR
R-L
R-R
OS
SPA1
OS-R
B-P
QP
L-I
R-L-M
SPA2
C-C
R-H
O-P
C-R
C-N
D-N-C
D-V-C
D-V-S
§¨¦
10 §¨¦
10 LEGEND
Overlay Zone Properties
City Boundary
Calimesa Zoning Districts
R-E - Residential Estate
R-R - Rural Residential (0-2 DU/AC)
R-L - Residential Low (2-4 DU/AC)
R-L-M - Residential low/Medium (4-7 DU/AC)
R-H - Residential High (14-20 DU/AC)
C-N - Neighborhood Commercial
C-C - Community Commercial
C-R - Regional Commercial
O-P - Office Professional
B-P - Business Park
L-I - Light Industrial
OS-R - Planned Residential (1 DU/10 AC)
OS - Open Space
QP - Public/Quasi-Public
SPA1 - Summerwind Ranch
SPA2 - Mesa Verde Estates
D-V-C - Downtown Village Commercial
D-V-S - Downtown Visitor-Serving Commercial
D-N-C - Downtown Neighborhood Commercial
H:\2020\20-0238\GIS\EX_Zoning_LU.mxd; Map created 08 Nov 2021 I Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project 0 2,000 4,000
Feet

Figure 5 – Proposed General Plan
and Zoning Amendments
Source: Riverside Co. GIS, 2021.

City of Calimesa 2014.
409100011
409100009
411200007
411200008
410170007
410170025
411171041
413320003
410080006
411200022
411200001
411171018 410162013
410080050
410162012
410092012
411200004
410080045
410080013
410080014
410080003
411200003
410170013
410170012
410080005
410181013
410080009
411200002 410080019 410170009
410170010
410170011
410080007
410162014
410181011
410181012

CALIMES A
BLV D

WOODHOUSE RD
5TH ST

SINGLETON RD

UNTY LINE RD

AVENUE L
7TH PL
2ND ST
C ST

SA N D AL W OO D D R
3RD ST

CALIFORNIA
ST

COUNTRY C LUB DR
R-L
R-R
OS
OS-R
B-P
SPA1
L-I
R-L-M
QP
SPA2
C-C

O-P R-H
C-R
C-N
D-V-C
D-N-C
D-V-S
§¨¦
10 LEGEND
RIPAOZ Area 1 - 15 max du/acre - no apartments
Calimesa Zoning Districts
R-E - Residential Estate
R-R - Rural Residential (0-2 DU/AC)
R-L - Residential Low (2-4 DU/AC)
R-L-M - Residential low/Medium (4-7 DU/AC)
R-H - Residential High (14-20 DU/AC)
C-N - Neighborhood Commercial
C-C - Community Commercial
C-R - Regional Commercial
O-P - Office Professional
B-P - Business Park
L-I - Light Industrial
OS-R - Planned Residential (1 DU/10 AC)
OS - Open Space
QP - Public/Quasi-Public
SPA1 - Summerwind Ranch
SPA2 - Mesa Verde Estates
D-V-C - Downtown Village Commercial
D-V-S - Downtown Visitor-Serving Commercial
D-N-C - Downtown Neighborhood Commercial
\\elsinore\WO4\2020\20-0238\GIS\Proposed_Zoning_LU.mxd; Map created 16 Mar 2022 I Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project 0 2,000 4,000
Feet
RIPAOZ Area 2 - 35 max du/acre - apartments allowed
City Boundary

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN revised AUGUST 28, 2023
2014
2-1

INTRODUCTION
The Land Use Chapter is what people typically think of when they think of the “plan” for the city. This chapter establishes the pattern of activity for the community and provides the central framework for the General Plan by serving as a compass to guide planners, the development community, the general public, and decision-makers on the desired pattern of development in Calimesa.

The Land Use Chapter defines areas of the city for housing, business, industry, open space, recreation, education, and other public services and describes future land use activity. Text, maps, and diagrams establish the blueprint for future land uses within the city and describe how these uses are integrated with the other General Plan chapters and policies.

BACKGROUND
The Trails End Trading Post was a landmark in Calimesa’s earlydays.

Calimesa began as a small rural town with mostly
single-family homes and ranches. Withcompletion
of US Route 99 (now Interstate 10), businesses
opened in the community and Calimesa began to
create a separate identity from the larger
neighboring town of Yucaipa. Residents of the
community came together and applied for their
own post office, which was opened in 1929 and
was located at CalimesaBoulevard and Avenue K.

At the same time, the residents initiated a name
contest. Calimesa was chosen from 107 names
submitted and is said tocome from “Cali,” meaning
California, and “mesa” from the Spanish word
meaning table or tablelands.

In 1947, the Calimesa Improvement Association was formed. The purpose of the association was the development and improvement of Calimesa and the community. In 1962, the Calimesa Improvement Association became the Calimesa Chamber of Commerce.

The community incorporated in 1990 as the City of Calimesa.

Commented [KL1]: The proposed additions to this
chapter are shown in italicized green text
throughout, beginning on Page 2-20
Attachment 11D

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
2-2 CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT
Calimesa developed primarily as a low-density residential community that has fostered a friendly, small-town
atmosphere enjoyed by Calimesa residents since its
beginnings.

Many of the existing residential lots are sized to
accommodate horses and other animals. As a result, many residents of Calimesa maintain an equestrian lifestyle and keep other small animals, which is an aspect of the
community that is integral to its identity. However, much of the population growth in recent years has been accommodated in newer developments, including those subdivisions around the Calimesa Golf and Country Club, located in the eastern portion of the city.

Calimesa is characterized by foothills in the city’s eastern area, with a mesa area extending through the central and western portions of the city, gradually sloping south and west toward San Timoteo Creek. Although Calimesa has a variety of topography, the majority of urban development has occurred on land with slopes of less than 15 percent.

The proximity of Calimesa to the surrounding hillsides, canyons, nearby state parks, and San Bernardino National Forest has encouraged a history of preserving land for varied recreation activities, including walking, biking, and equestrian activities, as well as providing connectivity for wildlife migrations.

FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
A majority of the future growth expected to occur over the next 22 years will likely be accommodated in the adopted specific plan areas.

As new development occurs, the City’s focus will be on retaining those qualities of life associatedwith a small community while recognizing the need for growth to fulfill the City’s goals for economic opportunity and adequate support services in the community, as summarized in the Calimesa Community Vision:

The City of Calimesa is dedicated to remaining a community that honors its beautiful natural setting through open space preservation, wildlife corridors, and extensive trail systems, as well as enriching the quality of life for Calimesa through sensitive planning that creates increased business activity, local jobs, new parks, and schools.

The population at the time of
incorporation, according to the 1990
Census, was 6,659. Growth over the next
20 years was slow: the 2010 Census
showed a population of 7,879, an
average growth rate of just 61 persons
each year.

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN revised AUGUST 28, 2023
2014
2-3
The General Plan addresses this challenge and begins to chart a path to the future for Calimesa on both a local and regional level.

EXISTING LAND USES
The Planning Area examined in this General Plan encompasses approximately 9,533 acres, or 14.9 square miles.

Existing (2013) land uses in the Planning Area are summarized in the table below. This marks the starting point for the future growth of Calimesa.

TABLE LU-A: EXISTING PLANNING AREA LAND USES (2013)
Land Use Acreage Percentage
Agricultural 16 0.2%
Commercial 435 4.6%
Manufactured/Mobile Home 50 0.5%
Multi-Family Residential 100 1.0%
Open Space 108 1.1%
Residential 45 0.5%
Roads 503 5.3%
Single-Family Residential 1209 12.7%
Vacant 7067 74.1%
Total 9533 100.0%
The US Census (2010) reported the following population and housing information for Calimesa:

Total Population: 7,879
Total Housing Units: 3,687
Occupied Housing Units: 89.9% (3,314)
Vacant Housing Units: 10.1% (373)

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
2-4 CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014

RELATED PLANS AND PROGRAMS
The Land Use Chapter relates to several other plans and programs, including the following:
• City of Calimesa Zoning Code. The Zoning Code establishes zoning districts that implement this General Plan’s land use designations. The Zoning Code also establishes development standards for each zoning district; these standards help create the physical form of the community (e.g., building setbacks, heights).

The Zoning Code also contains the Hillside Ordinance and the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance, which were adopted to restrict development on significant hillsides and ridges and address the protection of oak trees.
• Downtown Business District Code. The intent of the Downtown Business District is to encourage the creation of a pedestrian-friendly downtown area along Calimesa Boulevard. The Downtown Business District Code includes attractive storefronts, gathering areas, pedestrian and vehicular links, and other features aimed at encouraging retail and mixed-use development in a downtown setting.
• Calimesa Creek Master Plan, July 2012. The intent of this Master Plan is to promote public access to and pedestrian use along Calimesa Creek, to protect and enhance the scenic characterof the downtown, and to improve development potential within the overlay zone. The Master Plan provides conceptual analyses of the creek drainage system and explores measures for creek stabilization and flood control while preserving the natural look of the creek to functionas a recreational amenity for the community. Shared parking strategies for properties along the creek are also included in the plan.
• Adopted Specific Plans. There are three adopted specific plans in the City of Calimesa (see Figure LU-1). They are:
− Summerwind Ranch, January 2005. 2,590.1 acres approved for the development of up to 3,841 dwelling units, as well as commercial, business park, open space, recreation, and public facility uses.
− Mesa Verde Estates, February 2007. 1,493 acres approved for the development of up to 3,850 dwelling units, as well as mixed-use, open space, recreation, and public facility uses. − Heritage Oaks Equestrian Community Specific Plan, May 2007. 54 acres approved for the development of 45 single-family homes.
• Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. The Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) is a comprehensive, multijurisdictional habitat conservation plan focusing on conservation of species and their associated

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN revised AUGUST 28, 2023
2014
2-5
habitats in western Riverside County. The overall goal of this plan is to maintain biological and ecological diversity within a rapidly urbanizing region. The MSHCP allows jurisdictions within its approximately 1.26-million-acre plan area boundary, including Calimesa, to better control local land use decisions and maintain a strong economic climate in the region while addressing the requirements of the state and federal Endangered Species Acts. Detailed, up-to-date information on the MSHCP is available at http://www.rctlma.org/epd/wrmshcp.aspx. • City of Calimesa Redevelopment Plans. The City of Calimesa has three existing redevelopment plans:
− Redevelopment Plan Area No. 5, July 1999. Prior to the incorporation of Calimesa, the Riverside County Redevelopment Agency established a redevelopment project area, referred to as Area 5, encompassing approximately 172 acres to provide for the elimination of blight conditions. Subsequent to Calimesa’s incorporation, the City Council activated the Calimesa Redevelopment Agency in 1992. Pursuant to a Jurisdictional Transfer Agreement executed on June 13, 2000, the Riverside County Redevelopment Agency transferred jurisdiction of Area 5 retroactively as of July 1, 1999. − Redevelopment Plan Area No. 1, December 1993. This plan was the first initiated and adopted by the Calimesa Redevelopment Agency. The plan was adopted on December 30, 1993, and consists of about 762 acres located in four subareas. − Redevelopment Plan Area No. 2, May 2011. This plan was pursued in response to the failure of residential subdivisions in the city after the collapse of the residential real estate market in 2007. Area 2 contains a portion of the former Summerwind Ranch project by SunCal, the Mastercraft Project, and a portion of JP Ranch, in addition to the existing developed subdivisions known as Rancho Calimesa Mobile Home Park and The Plantation by the Lake. The plan was adopted on May 2, 2011, and consists of about 1,143 acres.

Note: As of February 1, 2012, all redevelopment agencies in California were dissolved per legislation enacted in 2011. Each redevelopment agency has what is known as a successor agency to finish redevelopment activities in progress. The existing redevelopment plans in Calimesa will remain in place and continue to guide the successor agency in meeting obligationsin place prior to the dissolution of redevelopment agencies.

KEY ISSUES
This Land Use Chapter addresses issues identified during the preparation of the City’s General Plan through discussions with the General Plan Advisory Committee and City staff, and feedback received during the various public meetings. The goals, policies, and actions included in this chapter have been prepared in consideration of these issues, which include the need to:

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
2-6 CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
GOAL LU-1:

GOAL LU-2:

GOAL LU-3:

GOAL LU-4:

Preserve and enhance the small-town atmosphere of Calimesa.

A logical and efficient pattern of development that reduces infrastructure costs and maintains the character of Calimesa.

An arrangement of land uses that achieves maximum compatibility between land uses and especially with existing neighborhoods.

Commercial and industrial development that serves the needs of Calimesa and the surrounding area, provides local job opportunities, and creates a greater job/housing balance.
• Establish Calimesa as a distinct community with an identity that preserves a rural atmosphere. • Improve accessibility to commercial and other services, including entertainment and health-care facilities.
• Provide for increased employment opportunities in the community.

LAND USE ELEMENT GOALS

LAND USE ELEMENT POLICIES
Policies are provided in this chapter for the following topics:
• Calimesa General Plan Land Use Map – Page 2-6
• Maintaining Calimesa’s Character – Page 2-28
• Location and Timing of Land Uses – Page 2-29
• Economic Development – Page 2-30
• Calimesa Downtown Business Corridor – Page 2-30
• Service Commercial Improvement Area – Page 2-32
• Southern Calimesa Boulevard Corridor Area – Page 2-34 • Design – Page 2-36
Note to the Reader: The policies and action items designated with (MM) provide mitigation for impacts identified through the Environmental Impact Report analysis prepared for this General Plan.

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN revised AUGUST 28, 2023
2014
2-7

CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
POLICY LU-1: Figure LU-1, Land Use Map, depicts the land use policy of the City ofCalimesa.

The Land Use Map is an illustration of the City’s land use policy for all of the lands in the city.

ACTION ITEM LU-1.1: Review those areas susceptible to flooding for boundary changes on an annual basis.

Note to the Reader: Refer to Figure SAF-5, Flood Zones, for areas susceptible to flooding.

POLICY LU-2: The Land Use Map’s designations are intended to generally follow parcel lines. Some parcels may be covered by more than one land use designation.

In some cases, interpretation may be needed to determine the exact boundaries of a land use classification where parcel lines are unclear, have been moved, or have been deleted. The exact boundaries of a land use designation may be adjusted at the City’s discretion to reflect conditions on the ground, ownership boundaries, or other conditions. Minor changes of this type shall not be considered an amendment to this General Plan.

POLICY LU-3: Zoning in the city limits shall be consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map. Where multiple zoning districts may be compatible, the City shall apply the most compatible district that best achieves the goals and policies of this General Plan. (MM)
POLICY LU-4: The following shall apply to the use and interpretation of the Land Use Map:
• The official Land Use Map shall be the printed, signed copy on file in the office of the City Clerk, including any adopted amendments. • Electronic files used to create the map are not the official map. • The official Land Use Map shall be printed for viewing and interpretation at a scale of 1 inch = 1,000 feet.

POLICY LU-5: Questions regarding the location of land use designations shall be resolved by the City using the official Land Use Map or a printed copy at the scale specified above.

POLICY LU-6: Although Calimesa has operated under a “one-map” system with a single General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map, the City intends to create a traditional “two-map” system in which the General Plan Land Use Map’s

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
2-8 CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
designations are implemented by a separate Zoning Map. This will ultimately provide for the use of more specific zoning designations that fall within the General Plan’s land use categories and will eliminate the need for a concurrent General Plan amendment with every change of zone.

ACTION ITEM LU-6.1: Adopt a separate Zoning Map that implements and is consistent with the Land Use Map of this General Plan. (MM) ACTION ITEM LU-6.2: Create residential and other zoning categories that provide more specificity than the land use categories of this General Plan and apply them to parcels as part of future changes of zone. (MM)
POLICY LU-7: The following are the City’s land use designations. All references to acreage or acres, unless otherwise specified, are to gross acreage.

Note to the Reader: Some of these categories may not appear on the Land Use Map but are available for use where appropriate.

FIGURE LU-1: LAND USE MAP
CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
Commented [KL2]: If the Residential Infill Priority
Area Overlay Zone project is approved, this
General Plan land use map will be updated to
include the overlay designation depicted in
Attachment C of the Staff Report
CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST 2-9
2014

This page intentionally left blank
CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE

CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
2-10

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE

CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
2-11
TABLE LU-B: GENERAL PLAN LAND USE CATEGORIES
Land Use
Designation
Building
Intensity
Range
(du/acre or
FAR)1,2
and
Population
Density
(persons/acre)3
General Plan Land Use Categories
Residential Land Use Categories
See also the Open Space Residential and Open Space land use categories, included in the Resource Lands designations. Both of these categories allow residential uses.

Residential
Estate
(RE)
0 to 1 du/5
acres
0 to 3
persons/5 acres
Residential Estate is characterized by single-family detached homes and by buildings and structures related to agriculture, farm use, animal keeping, and equestrian uses. Minimum lot sizes of 5 gross acres are required.

The following apply to land with the RE land use designation:
• This designation helps preserve the rural character of Calimesaby permitting existing Residential Estate uses to continue and expand.
• Homes and buildings constructed within this designation may have a variety of styles and construction, but are primarily of aresidential nature.
• Homes constructed in this category are likely to be served by streets that may not have curbs, gutters, sidewalks, or streetlights. The lots may be served by septic systems and well water, if standards for provision and service, as required by theYucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD), the Santa Ana
Regional Water Quality Control Board, and/or the City, are met.
• Equestrian/pedestrian trails are likely to be found.
• Precise determination of any development shall be on the basis of a detailed slope analysis and biological, archeological, and paleontological assessment prior to approval of any
development.

Residential
Rural
(RR)

0.2 to 2
du/acre
Residential Rural is characterized by single-family detached homes on 0.5-acre and 1-acre lots.

The following apply to land with the RR land use designation:
• This designation provides for light agricultural uses, in conjunction with single-family residential units. It also permits 1 to 5
persons/acre

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
2-12 CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
Land Use
Designation
Building
Intensity
Range
(du/acre or
FAR)1,2
and
Population
Density
(persons/acre)3
General Plan Land Use Categories
residential subdivisions with equestrian uses.
• The intent of this category is to preserve the country atmosphere, while providing a transition from Residential Estateinto Residential Low areas.
• Lots in this area are likely to be served by both public and privatestreets, some with curb, gutter, sidewalks, and
streetlights. Somelots in this category may be served by septic systems and well water, if the standards required by the YVWD, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, and/or the City are met.
• Precise determination of any development shall be on the basis of a detailed slope analysis and biological, archeological, and paleontological assessment prior to approval of any
development.
• Some lots in the Rural Residential designation may be limited to a maximum density of one dwelling unit per 2 acres, when they have steep slopes or other constraints which would pose hazards to development.

Residential
Low
(RL)

2.1 to 4
du/acre
Residential Low is characterized by single-family detached homes on not less than 7,200-square-foot lots to 0.5-acre lots.

The following apply to land with the RL land use designation:
• Residential developments in this category are intended to reflect a more urban residential character.
• Housing types will include single-family detached homes on streets with curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights. • Lots are expected to be served by a domestic water and sewer system.
5 to 10
persons/acre
Residential
Low Medium
(RLM)

4.1 to 7
du/acre
Residential Low Medium is characterized by single-family residential development on lots ranging from 6,000 to 10,000 square feet in size.

The following apply to land with the RLM land use designation:
• Development in this category will consist of single-family detached homes typical of urban residential subdivisions. 10 to 17
persons/acre

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE

CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
2-13
Land Use
Designation
Building
Intensity
Range
(du/acre or
FAR)1,2
and
Population
Density
(persons/acre)3
General Plan Land Use Categories
• Public facilities, services, and infrastructure shall be available,including water and sewer services, storm
drainage, streets, sidewalks, and streetlights.

Residential
Medium
(RM)

7.1 to 14
du/acre
17 to 34
persons/acre
Residential Medium is characterized by residential homes either on small lots or in an attached configuration, including townhomes, condominiums, or apartments.

The following apply to land with the RM land use designation:
• Development in this category will consist of single-family detached and attached single-family and multi-family homes. • Public facilities, services, and infrastructure shall be available,including water and sewer services, storm
drainage, streets, sidewalks, and streetlights.

Residential
High
(RH)

14.1 to 20
du/acre
34 to 48
persons/acre
Residential High is the high-density category. It will allow dwelling unit densities that will provide housing opportunities for highdensity multiple-family living and for people of low and moderate incomes.

The following apply to land with the RH land use designation:
• This designation allows a wide range of living accommodations ranging from small-lot detached housing to apartments.
• Building intensity at the lower end of the density range would be appropriate near the Residential Low areas.
• Building intensity at the higher end of the range is more appropriate adjacent to commercial areas and major
transitroutes.
• Developments within this category are expected to be served by the public water and sewer system.

Commercial and Office Land Use Categories
Commercial
Neighborhood
(CN)
Up to 0.25 FAR Commercial Neighborhood allows for small-scale commercial uses (within a 1- to 2-mile service radius) that provide goods and services for the needs of residents in the immediate area. Examples of Commercial Neighborhood uses include grocery stores,
supermarkets, convenience stores, drugstores, and retail service

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
2-14 CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
Land Use
Designation
Building
Intensity
Range
(du/acre or
FAR)1,2
and
Population
Density
(persons/acre)3
General Plan Land Use Categories
businesses such as cleaners, office supplies, card shops, offices, clothing stores, and restaurants.

This land use category should be located along arterial roads or at major intersections.

Areas with this designation should be 5 to 10 acres in size.

Commercial
Community
(CC)
Up to 0.50 FAR Commercial Community provides for large-scale commercial activities serving the city or the subregion. Examples of Commercial Community uses include junior department stores, discount or warehouse stores, furniture/appliance outlets, home improvement centers,
entertainment centers, and community centers.

Development in this category generally occurs on sites 15 to 30 acres in size located at key intersections of major arterial roads orat major off-ramps from Interstate 10.

Commercial Community developments should be accessible to automobiles and pedestrians, as well as to public transit.

Commercial
Regional
(CR)
Up to 0.75 FAR Commercial Regional allows for the development of commercial uses that will cater to a wide market, including a full range of retail shops and services within a shopping center environment. Typically, a population of at least 150,000 persons within 5 to 50 miles of the site is necessary to support the variety of businesses found in a regional center development.

The Commercial Regional designation should be located near major thoroughfares and along Interstate 10 to permit maximum potential for the dispersal of traffic and sufficient opportunities for ingress and egress.

The CR designation should be applied to contiguous areas of 40 or more acres of land that would provide at least 425,000 square feet of building area.

Office
Professional
(OP)
Up to 0.50 FAR Office Professional provides for activities such as business and service offices, cultural and community facilities, financial institutions, legal and medical services, restaurants, and other similar uses which together represent major concentrations of community and employment activities. Some limited retail and

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE

CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
2-15
Land Use
Designation
Building
Intensity
Range
(du/acre or
FAR)1,2
and
Population
Density
(persons/acre)3
General Plan Land Use Categories
commercial service uses are permitted.

The Office Professional designation should be located on arterial roadways for convenient automobile access and public transit service.

Mixed Use Land Use Categories
Residential
Mixed Use
(RMU)4
Up to 20
du/acre
Up to 48
persons/acre
Up to 0.50 FAR
The Residential Mixed Use category is characterized by
predominantly residential development at medium to high densities.

It allows for commercial or office uses to be co-located on the same property either vertically or horizontally. It does not preclude solely residential development within the category, but rather encourages a mixing of uses.

The following apply in the RMU category:
• Development shall take place pursuant to a master plan orcomprehensive plan that includes development
standards tailored to the specific mix of uses proposed. • Residential density shall not exceed 20 du/acre.

Commercial
Mixed Use
(CMU) 4
Up to 20
du/acre
Up to 48
persons/acre
Up to 0.50 FAR
The Commercial Mixed Use category encourages the integration of retail and service commercial uses with office and/or residential uses. This land use category may also include hospitals and other public/quasi-public uses.

The following apply in the CMU category:
• Development shall take place pursuant to a master plan orcomprehensive plan that includes development
standards tailored to the specific mix of uses proposed. • Commercial use shall be the predominant use on the ground floor.
• Parking for different uses may be combined or
separated,depending on the characteristics of the
project.

Office Mixed
Use
(OMU) 4
Up to 20
du/acre
The Office Mixed Use category encourages the integration of commercial and/or residential use in conjunction with office use of a site. The OMU category may also include hospitals and other public/quasi-public uses.

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
2-16 CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
Land Use
Designation
Building
Intensity
Range
(du/acre or
FAR)1,2
and
Population
Density
(persons/acre)3
General Plan Land Use Categories
Up to 48
persons/acre
Up to 0.50 FAR
The following apply in the OMU category:
• Development shall take place pursuant to a master plan orcomprehensive plan that includes development
standards tailored to the specific mix of uses proposed. • Office uses shall be the predominant use, although others may be included in a vertical or horizontal configuration. (For example, a site may be developed with an office building in which the ground floor is occupied by retail and restaurant uses.) Industrial Land Use Designations
Business Park
(BP)
Up to 0.50 FAR Business Park provides for activities such as business/professional offices, light manufacturing, storage, warehousing/distribution, wholesaling, small-scale warehouse retail, service commercial services, and public uses. Developments in this category, except for warehousing, are generally within a campus-like setting.

Retail and commercial service uses shall not be greater than 25percent of the gross floor area.

The Business Park designation should be located on arterial roadways and freeway routes, providing automobile and
publictransit access.

Light
Industrial
(LI)
Up to 0.50 FAR Light Industrial will accommodate industrial activities such as lowintensity packing, manufacturing, assembly of nonhazardous products and materials, and limited retail sales and services related to or supportive of manufacturing activity and employees.

Resource Land Use Designations
Open Space
Residential
(OSR)
0 to 1 du/10
acres
0 to 3
persons/10
acres
Open Space Residential preserves open space while allowing for limited detached single-family development on parcels of 10 acres or greater. Public lands, flood control channels, groundwater percolation basins, agricultural uses, and recreational facilities such as parks, trails, riding schools, stables and facilities, wildlife preserves, archery ranges, golf courses, driving ranges, country clubs, and similar uses are permitted in this category.

The following apply to development in the OSR land use category:

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE

CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
2-17
Land Use
Designation
Building
Intensity
Range
(du/acre or
FAR)1,2
and
Population
Density
(persons/acre)3
General Plan Land Use Categories
• Strict controls on grading for roads and building pads are required to protect the visual and environmental resources in these areas.
• Future developments within this area shall be in accordance withthe Calimesa Hillside Development Guidelines, development standards, and good engineering and land planning practices. • The character of land in the Open Space Residential category is intended to remain undisturbed, while permitting limited singlefamily detached residential development.

Open Space
(OS)
0 to 1 du/20
acres
0 to 3
persons/20
acres
Open Space identifies areas within the Planning Area that have beenplanned to remain in a natural condition due to environmental and geologic constraints, steep slopes, visual resources and significant ridgelines, archeological and paleontological sensitivity, ecological quality and sensitive biological habitats, and public open space and/or recreational need. The OS category includes rock knolls and outcroppings, and mountainous landforms which have slopes in excess of 15 percent. The extremely rocky subsoil conditions of these areas cannot sustain typical grading for development withoutmassive disruption of existing contours. Strict controls on grading for roads and building pads are required to protect visual and environmental resources in these areas. Land uses such as flood control channels, groundwater percolation basins, agricultural uses and recreational facilities such as parks, trails, riding schools, stables and facilities, wildlife reserves, archery ranges, golf courses,driving ranges, country clubs, and similar uses are allowed in this category.

The following apply to development in the OS land use category:
• Precise determination of any development shall be on the basis of a detailed slope analysis and biological, archeological, and paleontological assessment prior to approval of any
development.
• The character of Open Space areas is intended to reflect thenatural environment, which provides the city its rural atmosphere.

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
2-18 CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
Land Use
Designation
Building
Intensity
Range
(du/acre or
FAR)1,2
and
Population
Density
(persons/acre)3
General Plan Land Use Categories
• The operation of recreation businesses, such as golf courses, equestrian facilities, private recreation parks, and the like, is permitted subject to appropriate zoning regulations, such as a conditional use permit.
• Consideration of new or expanded recreation facilities should include consideration of whether the use would be consistent with the open space preservation goals of the OS land use category.

Public/Quasi
Public
(PQP)
Up to 0.50 FAR The Public/Quasi Public designation will accommodate uses such as Calimesa City Hall, the post office, the fire station, institutional uses (private schools, churches), libraries, and other similar development.

Other Categories and Overlays
Specific Plan
(SPA)
N/A A Specific Plan Area is a land use category that allows for designation of areas of the city which are currently under the requirements of a specific plan, such as Oak Valley, and designationof other areas in the city where the flexibility of a specific plan will aid in the development or redevelopment of the area.

The following apply to all SPA areas:
• Specific plans are best utilized when prepared for land that is environmentally constrained, has unique land use concerns, or requires the flexibility of a specific plan to design a development which is mutually beneficial to the City and the property owner. • Specific plans are required to be consistent with all elements of the General Plan.
• Each specific plan area shall be designated with SPA-#. • Intensities and densities of development shall be determined on a case-by-case basis.

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE

CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
2-19
Land Use
Designation
Building
Intensity
Range
(du/acre or
FAR)1,2
and
Population
Density
(persons/acre)3
General Plan Land Use Categories
Park
Overlay(P)
N/A A Park Overlay designation has been provided in areas which should be developed with a park or recreation facility.

The following apply to the P Overlay:
• This designation does not call for the entire site/parcel to be dedicated as a park. Rather, a portion shall be reserved for a park facility when the parcel is developed.
• The actual size and location of the park shall be determined during project planning and development review.

Hillside
Overla
y(H)
N/A Development within these areas shall be subject to the Hillside Development Ordinance of the City and the following standards:
• Field surveys and investigations must be made to identify significant natural resources that may be present on site.

Developments should be designed to preserve these resources to the maximum extent feasible. Development should also be sensitive to significant natural resources located in nearby areas. • Geologic studies shall be conducted in areas where landslide, erosion, liquefaction, or other geologic and seismic hazards may be present. Development shall be limited in areas with geologic and seismic hazards that cannot be eliminated by construction methods.
• Developments shall be designed to reduce hazards associated with wildfire and brush fires through the provision of
setbacks,access roadways, fire-resistant construction, etc.

Brush control programs for fire prevention should be sensitive to natural vegetation and special-status animals.
• Responsible and trustee agencies and local environmental groups should be consulted to ensure the environmental review is thorough, prior to development approval.
• Off-road vehicle use, which may destroy existing resources, shall be limited on the hillsides.

Earthquake
Fault
Overlay(E)
N/A The Earthquake Fault Overlay applies to earthquake hazard zones along the Banning and Cherry Valley faults, as well as to areas within 150 feet of other local faults and photo lineaments in

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
2-20 CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
Land Use
Designation
Building
Intensity
Range
(du/acre or
FAR)1,2
and
Population
Density
(persons/acre)3
General Plan Land Use Categories
Calimesa.

The following apply in the Earthquake Fault Overlay:
• Proposed residential projects, critical facilities (fire and police stations, hospitals, emergency centers and shelters), schools, and other uses with dependent populations shall be required to submit a geologic report that evaluates the potential for surfacerupture and other seismic hazards on site.
• Development shall be allowed only when the geologic report shows that no surface rupture or extreme seismic hazard exists, as approved by the county and state geologists.
• If an active fault is determined on site, setbacks and other seismic design considerations shall be required based on the recommendations of the geologic report.

Residential
Infill Priority
Area Overlay
Zone
(RIPAOZ)
Area 1

0.2 to 15
du/acre
1 to 35
persons/acre5
Development within these areas shall be subject to the Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Ordinance of the City. It will allow dwelling unit densities that will provide housing opportunities for higher density living, opportunities for people of low and moderate incomes, and is characterized by residential homes either on large or small lots or in an attached or detached configuration. The following apply to land with the RIPAOZ Area 1designation:
• Development in this category will consist of single-family attached and detached homes.
• This designation allows a wide range of living
accommodationsranging from large to small-lot attached
and detached housing.
• Developments shall be designed to high development
standards so as to integrate cohesively with the existing neighborhood. Developments within this category are expected to be promote efficiency by utilizing existing infrastructure and services.

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE

CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
2-21
RIPAOZ
Area 2
2 to 35 du/acre
5 to 83
persons/acre5
Development within these areas shall be subject to the Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Ordinance of the City. It will allow dwelling unit densities that will provide housing opportunities for higher density living, opportunities for people of low and moderate incomes, and is characterized by residential homes on small lots in an attached or detached configuration, including townhomes, condominiums, or apartments. The following apply to land with the RIPAOZ Area 2 designation:
• Development in this category will consist of single-family detached and attached and multi-family homes.
• This designation allows a wide range of living accommodations ranging from small-lot detached and attached housing to apartments.
• Developments shall be designed to high development standards so as to integrate cohesively with the existing neighborhood.

Developments within this category are expected to be promote efficiency by utilizing existing infrastructure and services.

Notes:
1 FAR = Floor Area Ratio, which is the measurement of the amount of nonresidential building square footage in relation to the size of the lot. Du/ac = dwelling units per acre.
2 The building intensity range noted is exclusive; that is, the range noted provides a minimum and maximum building intensity. 3 The population density range noted was calculated using 2.36 persons per household multiplied by the stated dwelling units/acre for each land use designation. Any resulting fraction thereof was rounded up to the nearest whole number.

Note: Pursuant to state law, each land use designation that provides for residential development (other than caretakers dwellings) is assigned a population density standard for the purposes of projection and infrastructure planning. These populationdensity standards are relevant only for planning purposes and shall not be interpreted as constituting legal limitations on the number of persons who may reside at any particular location or parcel. Further, this information is not intended to limit or regulate the amount of development. Source for persons per household: US Census Bureau, 2010. 4 Density standards have been provided for residential and nonresidential uses as this land use designation allows for both categories of use. FAR shall apply only to that portion of a building used for nonresidential purposes. Du/ac and persons/acre shall apply only to that portion of a building used for residential purposes. 5 The population density range noted was calculated using 2.44 persons per household multiplied by the stated dwelling units/acre for each land use designation. Any resulting fraction thereof was rounded up to the nearest whole number.

Note: Pursuant to state law, each land use designation that provides for residential development (other than caretakers dwellings) is assigned a population density standard for the purposes of projection and infrastructure planning. These populationdensity standards are relevant only for planning purposes and shall not be interpreted as constituting legal limitations on the number of persons who may reside at any particular location or parcel. Further, this information is not intended to limit or regulate the amount of development. Source for persons per household: US Census Bureau, 2020.

POLICY LU-8: The Land Use Map does not constitute a guarantee that any particularproperty can be developed as shown on the map. A variety of constraints, including regulatory requirements, General Plan policies, and other factors, will affect a site’s development potential. The actual intensity of development approved for a site or project may be less than the potential maximum due to physical constraints and other requirements, and will be determined through the project approval process.

POLICY LU-9: Calculations of the potential intensity of development on any site shall be based on gross acreage. A variety of constraints may affect a site’s

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
2-22 CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
development potential, including land required for right-of-way for collector and arterial streets shown on the Circulation Map; public parks (as defined in the Open Space, Parks, and Recreation Chapter); public facilities such as schools, fire stations, and police facilities; floodways or floodplains; protected biological habitats; and other unique constraints applicable to the property as determined by the City.

POLICY LU-10: Where a density range is specified for residential development, developments shall provide at least the minimum density. Maximum density may be exceeded pursuant to an applicable density bonus provision. (MM) Note to the Reader: Please see the Housing Chapter of this General Plan for information on density bonus provisions that may be applied.

POLICY LU-11: Table LU-C shows the zoning districts that are compatible with the land use categories shown on the General Plan Land Use Map. All zoning decisions must be consistent with Table LU-B. (MM)

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE

CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
2-23
TABLE LU-C: LIST OF ZONING DISTRICTS

COMPATIBLE WITH GENERAL PLAN LAND USE CATEGORIES
Land Use Designation Compatible Zoning Districts
Residential Estate (RE) Residential Estate (R-E) Zone
Residential Rural (RR) Rural Residential (R-R) Zone
Residential Low (RL) Residential Low (R-L) Zone
Residential Low Medium (RLM) Residential Low/Medium (R-L-M) Zone Residential Medium (RM) Residential Medium (R-M)
Residential High (RH) Residential High (R-H) Zone
Commercial Neighborhood (CN) Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Zone Commercial Community (CC) Community Commercial (C-C) Zone Commercial Regional (CR) Regional Commercial (C-R) Zone Office Professional (OP) Office Professional (O-P) Zone Residential Mixed Use (RMU) To be created
Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) To be created
Office Mixed Use (OMU) To be created
Business Park (BP) Business Park (B-P) Zone
Light Industrial (LI) Light Industrial (L-I) Zone
Open Space Residential (OSR) Planned Residential District Open Space (OS) Open Space District
Public/Quasi Public (PQP) Public/Quasi Public District/Special District Specific Plan (SPA) Specific Plan
Park Overlay (P) May be applied to any zone
Hillside Overlay (H) Hillside Development District
Earthquake Fault Overlay (E) May be applied to any zone Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay
Zone (RIPAOZ) Area 1
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay
District
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay
Zone (RIPAOZ) Area 2
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay
District

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
2-24 CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
MAINTAINING CALIMESA’S CHARACTER
POLICY LU-12: Preserve the desired small-town characteristics of Calimesa through the selection and placement of land uses. (MM)
ACTION ITEM LU-12.1: Coordinate with adjacent cities and communities on land use planning for the preservation of the small-town character of the area. (MM)
POLICY LU-13: Preserve the natural character and visual quality of Calimesa’s hillsides through sensitive site design and grading. (MM)
POLICY LU-14: Protect existing stable residential neighborhoods by encouraging maintenance and upkeep. (MM)
POLICY LU-15: Commercial and industrial developments shall be designed to reflect the small-town atmosphere of Calimesa, using building materials such as exposed heavy timbers, weathered wood, and new and used bricks and stone, while maintaining good planning and design principles. (MM) ACTION ITEM LU-15.1: Commercial or industrial developments on lots greater than 5 acres in size shall be required to prepare plans that include, but are not limited to, the location of buildings, landscaping, parking, driveways, signage, architectural character, and development phasing. (MM)
POLICY LU-16: Discourage land use conflicts and incompatibilities by providing buffers to include, but not be limited to, landscaping, setbacks, walls/fencing, site design, architectural features, density/intensity/operation reduction, or shielding of lighting between incompatible land uses and new development. (MM)
POLICY LU-17: Encourage and facilitate the transition of nonconforming land uses to conforming land uses. (MM)
ACTION ITEM LU-17.1: Establish regulations that control the size, height, scale, and mass of infill residential development in order to enhance the choices of existing property owners to renovate, rebuild, and sell their homes or remain as is. (MM)

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE

CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
2-25

LOCATION AND TIMING OF LAND USES
POLICY LU-18: New development should be contiguous or close to existing development and in locations where infrastructure, public facilities, and services are available when needed.

POLICY LU-19: Locate commercial and industrial development in areas where street rightsof-way and capacity are available, as well as sufficient infrastructure and public services.

Note to the Reader: Please see the Infrastructure and Public Services Chapter of this General Plan for additional policies related to the coordination of infrastructure and services with development.

POLICY LU-20: Locate land uses to achieve maximum compatibility with existing neighborhoods. (MM)
POLICY LU-21: Proposed zone changes and general plan amendments shall respect the logical extension of land uses. (MM)
POLICY LU-22: Locate high-density residential developments in areas served by existing and/or planned transit routes, infrastructure, and commercial development.

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
2-26 CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
POLICY LU-23: Encourage the development of commercial and industrial centers to expand the employment and fiscal base of Calimesa.

POLICY LU-24: Encourage existing and new employers in Calimesa to hire local residents when seeking to fill employment positions.

Note to the Reader: Please refer to the Sustainability Chapter of this General Plan for additional policies related to LU-23.

CALIMESA DOWNTOWN BUSINESS CORRIDOR
POLICY LU-25: The area shown in Figure LU-2 is designated as the Calimesa Downtown Business Corridor.

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE

CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
2-27
FIGURE LU-2: CALIMESA DOWNTOWN BUSINESS CORRIDOR POLICIES

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
2-28 CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
POLICY LU-26: Calimesa Boulevard is envisioned as a commercial district offering a variety of businesses and serving a local and regional customer base.

POLICY LU-27: The west side of Calimesa Boulevard between Avenue L and Myrtlewood Drive shall accommodate regional shopping oriented to Interstate 10.

POLICY LU-28: The light industrial uses that exist within the corridor and provide jobs for Calimesa residents will be retained and provide areas for expansion.

POLICY LU-29: Improve existing development and encourage new development that will result in a downtown area that reflects a small-town shopping district.

POLICY LU-30: Existing businesses shall be supported by providing investment in public infrastructure and attracting additional businesses and people to the corridor.

POLICY LU-31: The image of the Calimesa Downtown Business Corridor shall be enhanced and a traditional downtown environment will be created, especially east of Calimesa Boulevard between Avenue L and Myrtlewood Drive.

SERVICE COMMERCIAL IMPROVEMENT AREA
POLICY LU-32: The area west of Interstate 10, shown in Figure LU-3, is designated as the Service Commercial Improvement Area.

POLICY LU-33: Provide development of uses west of Interstate 10 that will create job opportunities and complement the Calimesa Downtown Business Corridor.

POLICY LU-34: In the Service Commercial Improvement Area, the City will encourage designs that transition from and complement any existing residential uses.

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE

CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
2-29
FIGURE LU-3: SERVICE COMMERCIAL IMPROVEMENT AREA POLICIES

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
2-30 CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014

SOUTHERN CALIMESA BOULEVARD CORRIDOR AREA
POLICY LU-35: The area along Calimesa Boulevard, shown in Figure LU-4, is designated as the Southern Calimesa Boulevard Corridor Area.

FIGURE LU-4: SOUTHERN CALIMESA BOULEVARD CORRIDOR AREA

POLICIES

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE

CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
2-31
POLICY LU-36: Create development in the Southern Calimesa Boulevard Corridor Area that will provide an effective use of the area to capture business from theregional market.

POLICY LU-37: Encourage design in the Southern Calimesa Boulevard Corridor Area that will be compatible with and complement the existing residential uses in this area. (MM)
POLICY LU-38: Land uses in the Southern Calimesa Boulevard Corridor Area should strengthen and complement the Calimesa Downtown Business Corridor to the north and the planned commercial area to the west.

DESIGN
POLICY LU-39: To the extent possible, hillside areas should be preserved and protected. (MM)
ACTION ITEM LU-39.1: Review all development in areas having a slope of 25 percent or greater for compliance with the Calimesa Hillside Ordinance. (MM) POLICY LU-40: Stepped or multilevel foundations are encouraged for use in hillside development to reduce grading and maintain the rural appearance of the hillside areas. (MM)
POLICY LU-41: In hillside areas and areas affected by natural hazards (earthquakes, earthquake faults, major drainage flows, and landslides), the City encourages the use of development standards specific to the project to protect hillsides and protect life and property. (MM)
ACTION ITEM LU-41.1: Consider the use of a Residential Planned Development Zone to encourage creative site designs that would preserve significant natural resources and protect slopes and improve safety in areas affected by earthquakes, earthquake faults, major drainage flows, and landslides.(MM)

CHAPTER 2: LAND
USE
2-32 CALIMESA GENERAL PLAN AUGUST
2014
POLICY LU-42: On a site having a slope of 25 percent or greater, minimum lot sizes may be reduced below those otherwise required by a Residential Plan Development or other method to:
• Preserve steep slope areas;
• Avoid known faults and landslides;
• Preserve significant biological and drainage areas; and • Add open space to existing contiguous open space lands. (MM)

City of Calimesa Land Use and Zoning
I
0 0.51
Miles
Downtown Business District
§¨¦10
§¨¦10
·|þ}60
Mesa Verde Estates Specific Plan
Heritage Oaks
Equestrian Community
Specific Plan
Summerwind Ranch
Specific Plan

OAK VALLEY PKWY

SELROCCO
DR

CALIMESA BLVD

NANCY AVE

MOUNTAIN VIEW AVE

UNION ST

HOLMES WAY
B
RO
O
K

SIDE AVE

F REMONT ST

SINGLETON RD

WOODHOUSE RD
SA
N

TIMOTEO CANYON RD

AVENUE LSANDALWOOD
D
R

CHERRY VALLEY BLVD B EAUMONT R EDLAN
DS
R D
H:\2020\20-0238\GIS\Calimesa_Zoning\Calimesa_Zoning\Calimesa_Zoning.aprx Map created 21 Jun 2022 Source: City of Calimesa GP Land Use 10/22
Legend
Overlay Zone Properties
RIPAOZ Area 1 - 15 du/acre - no aparments
RIPAOZ Area 2 - 35 du/acre - aparments permitted
City Limits
General Plan Planning Area
Downtown Business District
Summerwind Ranch Specific Plan
Heritage Oaks Equestrian Community Specific Plan
General Plan Land Use
BP - Residential Estate
CC - Community Commercial (FAR 50:1)
CN - Commercial Neighborhood (FAR 25:1)
CR - Regional Commercial (FAR 75:1)
LI - Light Industrial
OP - Office Professional
OS - Open Space
OSR - Open Space Residential (1 DU/10 AC)
QP - Quasi-Public (Public Buildings, Parks)
RE - Residential Estates
RH - Residential High (14-20 DU/AC)
RL - Residential Low (2-4 DU/AC)
RLM - Residential Low Medium (4-7 DU/AC)
RR - Residential Rural (0-2 DU/AC)
Down Town Business District
DNC - Downtown Neighborhood Commercial
DVC - Downtown Village Commercial
DVS - Downtown Neighborhood Commercial
Mesa Verde Specific Plan
Basin
Mixed Use
Open Space
Park
Recreation
Residential
Road
School
Water Tank
Summerwind Ranch Specific Plan
Buisiness Park
Bungalows
Commercial
Community Recreation
Cottages
Garden Air Wash
Garden Courts
Linear Park
Manors
Nature Park
Open Space
Park
RLC Option Lands
ROW
Schools
Townhomes
Villas
Water Reclamation Facility
Summerwind Ranch Specific Plan
Heritage Oaks Equestrian Community Specific Plan
Heritage Residential
Open Space
Heritage Oaks Equestrian Community Specific Plan
Note: Minor, non-substantive revisions needed to the Mesa Verde and Summerwind Specifc Plan color schemes to be consistent with each adopted specific plan graphic.

Attachment 11E

CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-55

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIMESA

CERTIFYING AND ADOPTING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (STATE CLEARNING HOUSE NO. 2022030754) FOR THE RESIDENTIAL INFILL

PRIORITY AREA OVERLAY ZONE PROJECT, MAKING THE CEQA FINDINGS OF

FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, ADOPTING THE

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 22-01, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT

THEREOF
WHEREAS, in 2017, Governor Brown signed a 15-bill housing package aimed at addressing the state’s housing shortage and high housing costs. The package included the Building Homes and Jobs Act (SB 2), which established a funding source to increase the supply of affordable homes in California by collecting a $75 recording fee on real estate documents. These funds were made available to all local governments in California to help prepare, adopt, and implement plans that streamline housing approvals and accelerate housing production; and
WHEREAS, the City was awarded a $160,000 grant by the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) SB 2 program to prepare a “Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone”, also referred to as the “RIPAOZ,” to upzone certain residential properties identified by the City to allow higher density development including duplexes, townhomes, condos, and a limited amount of apartments by-right; and
WHEREAS, the City was awarded a $65,000 supplementary grant by HCD Local Early Action Grants program, also referred to as the “LEAP” program, to assist in the preparation and adoption of planning documents and process improvements that accelerate housing production and facilitate compliance to implement the sixth cycle of the regional housing need assessment; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council conducted four public workshops from May to November of 2021 to discuss local housing policy, the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (“RHNA”), Housing Element law, and the Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone concept; and
WHEREAS, the City has prepared General Plan Amendment 22-01 (“GPA 22-01”) to amend Table LU-B - General Plan Land Use Categories, to define RIPAOZ Area 1 and Area 2; Amendment Table LU-C- List of Zoning Districts Compatible with General Plan Land Use Categories to add the RIPAOZ, and Amend Figure LU-1 Land Use Map to reflect the boundaries of RIPAOZ Area 1 and Area 2 on the City’s “single map” General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designation Map; and
WHEREAS, the City prepared the RIPAOZ as Zone Change 21-01 (“ZC-21-01”) to encourage infill development and allow for higher density residential development than the underlying zoning designation as established by Chapter 18.20 of the Calimesa Municipal Code (CMC). The RIPAOZ establishes areas where infill residential development is encouraged which will maintain the character of existing neighborhood buildings and structures, permit a flexible approach to providing affordable housing, Attachment 11F

increase property values in residential neighborhoods, and foster well-planned, compact developments keeping with the character of the existing neighborhood.

WHEREAS, the RIPAOZ is intended to (i) provide opportunities for the development of affordable housing, (ii) promote efficiency in the utilization of existing infrastructure and services, (iii) facilitate integrated physical design, (iv)) promote a high level of design quality, (v) facilitate development proposals responsive to current and future market conditions, and (vi) provide safe vehicular circulation patterns for residents and safety/service providers; and,
WHEREAS, GPA 22-01 and ZC 21-01, together, constitute the Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project (the “RPIAOZ Project” or “Project”), and are considered a “project” pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq. and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq. (collectively “CEQA”); and, WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report (SCH#2022030754) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program were prepared for the Project by the City of Calimesa (“City”), in accordance with CEQA to evaluate the development of the properties included in the RIPAOZ; and,
WHEREAS, on March 28, 2022, the City’s on-call CEQA consultant distributed copies of the Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) on the City’s behalf to 536 State Agencies, Responsible Agencies, Native American Tribes, local agencies, surrounding property owners, and other interested parties. The City’s on-call CEQA consultant submitted a PDF of the NOP, Notice of Completion, and SCH Summary Form to the California Office of Planning and Research State Clearing House for posting, and the NOP was also posted on the City’s website. The NOP was available for public review for 30 days between March 29, 2022 and April 27, 2022; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 21083.9(a)(2) of the Public Resources Code and CEQA Guidelines Section 15082(c), the City held a public scoping meeting on April 7, 2022, where agencies, organizations, and members of the public received a brief presentation on the Project and had an opportunity to provide comments on the scope of the information and analysis to be included in the EIR; and, WHEREAS, on March 28, 2023, the City’s on-call CEQA consultant distributed copies of the Notice of Availability of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (“NOA”) on the City’s behalf to 570 State Agencies, Responsible Agencies, Native American Tribes, local agencies, surrounding property owners, and other interested parties. The City’s on-call CEQA consultant submitted a PDF of the NOA, Notice of Completion, and SCH Summary Form to the California Office of Planning and Research State Clearing House for posting, and the NOA was also posted on the City’s website. The NOA was available for public review for 45 days between March 31, 2023 and May 15, 2023; and, WHEREAS, on August 18, 2023, the City gave public notice as required under Chapter 18.15.080 (Hearings and Appeals) of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code by advertising in the Yucaipa Calimesa News Mirror newspaper of the holding of a public hearing at a special meeting of the Planning Commission at which Environmental Assessment 22-05, General Plan Amendment 22-01, and Zone Change 21-01 were

considered for a recommended action for the City Council; and, WHEREAS, on August 28, 2023, during a duly noticed public hearing at a special meeting, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 2023-09 recommending to the City Council the approval of Environmental Assessment 22-05, General Plan Amendment 22-01, and Zone Change 21-01, approving the RIPAOZ, and, WHEREAS, on September 8, 2023, the City gave public notice as required under Chapter 18.15.080 (Hearings and Appeals) of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code by advertising in the Yucaipa Calimesa News Mirror newspaper of the holding of a public hearing at a regular meeting of the City Council at which Environmental Assessment 22- 05, General Plan Amendment 22-01, and Zone Change 21-01 would be considered by the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, on the September 18, 2023, the City Council held the duly noticed public hearing at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify in support of, or opposition to, the proposed ordinance, and at which time the City Council considered EA 22-05, GPA 22-01, and ZC 21-01; and,
WHEREAS, City Council of the City of Calimesa desires to approve General Plan Amendment 22-01, also known as GPA 22-01 and Zone Change 21-01, also known as ZC 21-01, amending provisions of the Land Use Element of the General Plan and adopting the RIPAOZ and amending various sections of the Zoning Code (Title 18 of the Calimesa Municipal Code); and,
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Calimesa does hereby find, order and resolve as follows:

SECTION 1. The City Council finds that the recitals contained above in this Resolution are true and correct.

SECTION 2. The City Council makes the findings and determinations set forth in this Resolution in connection with the Final EIR and proposed General Plan Amendment based on the entire record before the City Council, including but expressly not limited to the NOP, NOA, Draft EIR, the comments to the NOP and Draft EIR, the responses to all comments, the Final EIR, the CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Final EIR (attached hereto as Exhibit “A”), the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (attached hereto as Exhibit “B”), additional public comments, and the written and oral staff report (collectively the “record of proceedings”), and the recitals set forth above.

SECTION 3. The City Council finds as follows in connection with the proposed Final EIR for the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project:

A. Final EIR for the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.

B. That the Final EIR was presented to the City Council and the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the FEIR and public

testimony received thereon during the hearing prior to the City Council taking any action on the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project.

C. That the Final EIR reflects and represents the City Council’s independent judgment and analysis and adequately addresses the impacts of, and proposes appropriate mitigation measures upon, the City’s actions in approving or taking action on the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project.

D. That the Final EIR is the appropriate and applicable environmental document pursuant to CEQA for the City’s actions in approving the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project.

E. That the modifications to the Final EIR that have been made since circulation of the Draft EIR do not constitute the addition of new significant information to the Final EIR within the meaning of CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.

F. The City Council finds, based on the record of proceedings, that the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project will not cause significant environmental impacts except with respect to Air Quality, Greenhouse Gases, Noise, Population and Housing, and Cumulative Transportation and Traffic Impacts. The specific impacts in each of these issue areas are explained in the “Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Effects” of the CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit “A” attached hereto) and the Final EIR.

1. With respect to Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, and Energy, the Final EIR identifies feasible mitigation measures for each impact that reduce the level of impact to less than significant, and those mitigation measures are set forth in Exhibit B of this Resolution.

2. With respect to other significant environmental impacts identified in this Section 3F, the impacts could not be reduced to levels less than significant, and in some cases, even with the implementation of mitigation measures, and consequently the Final EIR identifies and recommends overriding considerations that support approval of the project, as set forth in this Resolution and the CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit “A”, attached hereto).

G. The City Council further finds that in response to each significant impact identified in the Final EIR, and listed in Section 3.F of this Resolution, changes or alterations are hereby required in, or incorporated into the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone, which avoid or substantially lessen certain impacts to less than significant. The proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone includes required development standards to mitigate and/or reduce to a level of significance potential adverse environmental impacts resulting from the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone, and therefore the City should require compliance with those development standards when the City approves future development projects. In addition, the mitigation measures set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, (Exhibit “B”) avoid or substantially lessen the potentially significant biological resource

impacts, cultural resource impacts, and energy of the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone. The City Council finds that the mitigation measures listed in Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as set forth in Exhibit “B” will avoid or mitigate all significant biological, cultural, and energy related environmental effects of the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone that can feasibly be avoided or mitigated, as identified in the Final EIR.

H. The City Council finds that the Final EIR describes a reasonable alternative to the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone which might fulfill the Project’s basic objectives. This alternative is the “No Development/Existing Land Use – Alternative 1”. However, the City Council also finds that the No Development/Existing Land Use alternative is not feasible because it would not achieve the basic objectives of the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone and therefore leave unaddressed significant goals the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone was designed to achieve. As set forth in this Section 2.H, this alternative is thus infeasible due to the Project objectives to increase the amount of housing opportunities available and to provide ways to meet the City’s fair share of affordable housing units.

I. The City Council also finds that the Final EIR properly rejected three other alternatives for analysis, the “Reduced Project Size – Alternative 2,” the “15 Dwelling Units/Acre Maximum - Alternative 3”, the “Elimination of Parcels East of Bryant Street Alternative – Alternative 4”.

1. The City Council finds that the Reduced Project Size - Alternative 2, which would reduce development of the Project by 25 percent, was properly rejected as infeasible pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c) on the basis that demand for sites of this size – especially for infill development, attendant land costs, and the low Inland Empire market lease rates for product of this type --, this Alternative may result in a return on investment too low to justify the cost and risk of investment. The feasibility of the Reduced Project Size Alternative is further impacted by the loss of economies of scale in the construction of smaller buildings, which would drive the rate of return on the investment. Due to all of these factors, a reasonable developer may not take the risk to develop the Reduced Project Size Alternative. Therefore, despite meeting all Project objectives, Alternative 2 is not feasible since developers may not take risk to develop and because it does not maximize the housing opportunity to meet the States residential laws slated to increase housing supply.

2. The City Council finds that the 15 Dwelling Units/Acre Maximum – Alternative 3 was also properly rejected as infeasible pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c). Alternative 3 would reduce development of the Project site in comparison to the proposed Project site. This alternative would have reduced impacts to air quality because it would generate fewer operational VOCs and are assumed to fall below SCAQMD’s regional threshold of significance. Greenhouse gas emission would also be reduced; however, emissions would still exceed the SCAQMD threshold. This alternative development would remain inconsistent with the 2016 AQMP. It would also reduce impacts to traffic related noise and population because

fewer dwelling units could be developed resulting in lower traffic trips and population. Alternative 3 would have the same cumulative traffic impacts as the Project because the priority and timing of road improvements through fair share contributions are not under the sole control of a project proponent.

Although this Alternative partially meets the Project objectives, these objectives are met to a lesser degree than the proposed Project because it reduces the amount of development that could occur. However, Alternative 3 is not feasible since it does not maximize the housing opportunity to meet the States newly adopted residential laws intended to increase housing supply. For these reasons, a reduced density alternative is considered infeasible pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c) and is being rejected as a feasible project alternative.

3. The City Council finds that the Elimination of Parcels East of Bryant Street - Alternative 4 was also properly rejected as infeasible pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c). Alternative 4 would reduce development of the Project in comparison to the proposed Project through eliminating two parcels which could experience higher development densities. This alternative would have reduced impacts to air quality because it would generate fewer operational VOC emissions, albeit the VOCs would not be reduced below SCAQMD’s regional threshold of significance. Greenhouse gas emission would also be reduced by 7.5 percent; however, emissions would still exceed the SCAQMD threshold. This alternative development would remain inconsistent with the 2016 AQMP since overall the higher densities were not included in the AQMP. Alternative 4 would also reduce impacts to traffic related noise and population because fewer dwelling units could be developed resulting in lower traffic trips and population. Alternative 4 would have the same cumulative traffic impacts as the Project because the priority and timing of road improvements through fair share contributions are not under the sole control of a project proponent. Although Alternative 4 partially meets the Project objectives, these objectives are met to a slightly lesser degree than the proposed Project. This Alternative reduces the amount of development that could occur. However, despite meeting some of the Project objectives, Alternative 4 is not feasible since it does not maximize the housing opportunity to meet the States newly adopted residential laws intended to increase housing supply.

J. The City Council finds that the following substantial benefits will occur as a result of the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project:

1. As stated in Government Code Section 65589.5, the State of California has a housing supply and affordability crisis of historic proportions. The consequences of failing to effectively and aggressively confront this crisis are hurting millions of Californians, robbing future generations of the chance to call California home, stifling economic opportunities for workers and businesses, worsening poverty and homelessness, and undermining the state’s environmental and climate objectives. The Legislature adopted the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) which states that “In 2018, California ranked 49th out of the 50 states in housing units per capita…

California needs an estimated 180,000 additional homes annually to keep up with population growth, and the Governor has called for 3.5 million new homes to be built over 7 years.” By implementing the Project, which allows for additional housing opportunities, the City is helping to address this statewide crisis at a local level.

2. The Project will provide the ability to build 1,759 additional dwelling units, a portion of which may be developed to satisfy the City’s fair share of Regional Housing Need allocation. State law requires that jurisdictions provide their fair share of regional housing needs by conducting a Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) and adopting a General Plan for future growth (California Government Code Section 65300). The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is mandated to determine state-wide housing needs by income category for each Council of Governments (COG) throughout the state. The housing need is determined based on four broad household income categories:
very low (households making less than 50 percent of median family income), low (50 to 80 percent of median family income), moderate (80 to 120 percent of median family income), and above moderate (more than 120 percent of median family income). The intent of the future needs allocation by income groups is to relieve the undue concentration of very low and low-income households in a single jurisdiction and to help allocate resources in a fair and equitable manner. SCAG determined that Calimesa’s projected RHNA share for the 6th Cycle Housing Element (2021 ‐ 2029) is 2,017 housing units. The City is currently in the process of updating for the 6th Cycle Housing Element (2021-2029). RHNA for this planning period has projected the need for 2,017 housing units, consistent with SCAG. Of the 2,017 units, 495 are classified in the income categories of very low and 275 in classified in the low category. Because the City is partially developed, infill sites, allowing for higher density residential products, will provide opportunity to fulfill RHNA housing needs. While the Project will result in an increase to projected planned population, the Project will satisfy the State requirements to provide new housing opportunities to increase housing supplies.

3. Because many areas of the City are built out, in order to comply with State regulation and attempt to meet fair share RHNA allocations, the City sought out vacant parcels that can be utilized for infill development allowing for higher density residential product types within areas of existing residential development or existing uses that are compatible with higher density residential development. Directing growth to these areas fosters well-planned, compact developments.

4. The areas within the Project were chosen for their proximity to existing streets, interchanges, utilities, and existing multi-family product to ensure existing infrastructure is available to future implementing development projects. Promoting efficiency in the utilization of existing infrastructure and services facilitates integrated physical design within the City.

K. The City Council finds, after balancing the unavoidable and irreversible environmental impacts of the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project with the benefits of the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project as described in Section J of this Resolution, in the Findings of Fact attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, that to the extent that adverse and potentially adverse impacts of the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project have not been mitigated to a level of less than significant, that the specific economic, social, legal, environmental and technological or other benefits of the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project, as described herein, outweigh the significant and irreversible impacts to the environment. The City Council further finds that due to overriding benefits of the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project and because the alternatives identified in the EIR are not feasible, as discussed in Sections 3H and 3I above, any unavoidable impacts of the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project, including Air Quality, Greenhouse Gases, Noise, Population and Housing, and Cumulative Transportation and Traffic , as identified in the FEIR, are acceptable. The City Council finds that this determination shall constitute a statement of overriding considerations within the meaning of CEQA and is based on the benefits of the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project identified in the Final EIR and the record of proceedings, and that each overriding benefit is severable from any other consideration should one or more consideration be shown or determined to be legally insufficient for any reason.

SECTION 4. In accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(e), the documents and other materials that constitute the record of the proceedings upon which the City Council findings are based, are located in the Planning Department of the City of Calimesa, at 908 Park Avenue, Calimesa, California 92320. As provided above, the record of proceedings includes, but is not limited to, the NOA and all other notices issued by the City in conjunction with the proposed project, the Draft EIR and all documents included in the appendices and referenced in the Draft EIR, the Final EIR and all documents included in the appendices and referenced in the Final EIR, all comments received in response to the NOA and all other notices issued by the City in connection with the preparation of the Draft EIR and Final EIR, the staff reports for the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone, as well as all of the materials that comprise and support the Final EIR and all of the materials that support the staff reports for the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project. The custodian of these documents is the Planning Department of the City of Calimesa.

SECTION 5. Based on all the evidence in the record, the City Council makes the following general findings in connection with the proposed General Plan Amendment 22- 01 for the Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone:

1. The City Council finds that the proposed General Plan Amendment (GPA 22- 01) is consistent with the textual portions of the General Plan, and the proposed amendments are internally consistent with other portions of the General Plan as required by law.

2. The City Council finds that the proposed General Plan Amendment (GPA 21- 01) is consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, and programs of the General Plan, and will not result in any internal inconsistencies with the General Plan or the General Plan Land Use Map.

3. The City Council finds that the proposed General Plan Amendment (GPA 22- 01) will not adversely affect the overall public health, safety, and welfare of the City. Environmental impacts associated with the GPA are evaluated within the DEIR/FEIR and the required Statement of Overriding Considerations is provided as Exhibit A.

In making these findings, the City Council has reviewed and considered the Draft EIR and Final EIR consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15025(c).

SECTION 6. Based on all the evidence in the record of proceedings and the findings contained in Sections 1 through 5 of this Resolution, the City Council of the City of Calimesa hereby takes the following actions:

A. Certifies Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2022030754) for the Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone Project;
B. Approves and adopts the CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth in Exhibit “A”, attached to this Resolution and incorporated herein by this reference;
D. Adopts the “Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program” attached hereto as Exhibit “B” and incorporated herein by reference, and requires that the Mitigation Monitoring Program be used to monitor compliance with the mitigation measures that have been adopted or made a condition of approval of the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone.

SECTION 7. Based on all the findings contained in Sections 1 through 6 of this Resolution , the City Council of the City of Calimesa hereby approves General Plan Amendment No. 22-01.

SECTION 8. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.

APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 18th day of September, 2023. _____________________________
William Davis, Mayor
Attest:
____________________________
Darlene Gerdes, City Clerk
Approved as to form:

_______________________________
Quinn Barrow, City Attorney

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) §

CITY OF CALIMESA )
I, Darlene Gerdes, City Clerk of the City of Calimesa, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing City Council Resolution, No. 2023-XX, was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Calimesa, California, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18 th day of September 2023, by
the following vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
____________________________________
Darlene Gerdes, City Clerk
City of Calimesa, California

Exhibit “A”
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that in the event an agency chooses to approve a project that includes significant and unavoidable impacts which cannot be reduced to acceptable levels the agency must adopt a written Statement of Overriding Considerations which identifies why the local agency is willing to accept the significant unavoidable effect(s).

Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council adopts and makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the remaining significant unavoidable impacts of the proposed Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone (RIPOAZ) project (Project), and the anticipated economic, social and other benefits of the Project.

The purpose of the statement of overriding considerations is defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 (a and b):
a) CEQA requires the decision-maker to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record.

The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.

The Statement of Overriding Considerations should be used in decision making to balance the benefits of the project against the unavoidable environmental risks. CEQA also requires that the Statement of Overriding Considerations be included in the record of project approval and mentioned in the Notice of Determination.

Significant and Unavoidable Effects
Air Quality
1) The Project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is required to develop an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which sets forth a comprehensive program for the South Coast Air Basin (the Basin) designed to bring the Basin into compliance with all federal and state air quality standards. The control measures and related emission reduction estimates included in the current 2020 AQMP are based on emissions projections for a future development scenario derived from land use, population, and employment estimates defined in consultation with local governments.

Implementation of the Project would increase the population within the Project area and add 4,292 persons, an increase in population of almost 20 percent over previous projections for the City. The proposed Project would not obstruct implementation of the control measures contained within the 2022 AQMP. However, the Project is not consistent with growth projections which were used in the 2022 AQMP. As a result, the Project may conflict with the 2022 AQMP. No feasible mitigation is available to reduce

impacts related to this inconsistency, and therefore, the Project’s impacts in this regard are significant and unavoidable.
2) The Project could result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards. Based on the Regional Significance Threshold for the proposed Project, short-term emissions will not exceed the daily regional thresholds set by SCAQMD. However, the exact extent of construction activity, construction schedule and specific equipment needs for each future implementing development project is unknown and may vary in the future.

Therefore, although the modeled analysis for the Project indicates that emissions will fall under applicable thresholds for construction emissions, there is a potential for future construction emissions to exceed applicable thresholds. Modeled long-term operational emissions will only exceed the daily regional threshold set by SCAQMD for volatile organic compounds (VOC). Since most of the operational VOC emissions are generated by consumer product usage and mobile sources that are outside of the City’s control/jurisdiction, operational impacts are considered significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation measures MM AQ 2 through MM AQ 8 will be implemented to reduce operational VOC emissions from buildout of the Project. However, there are no quantitative reductions associated with those measures and no further mitigation measures are available that would reduce impacts to below applicable SCAQMD significance thresholds due to the magnitude and associated emissions generated by the Project and the fact that the operational VOC emissions are primarily from consumer product usage and mobile sources, which are outside the City’s jurisdictional control. Therefore, operational air quality impacts remain significant and unavoidable. 3) The Project could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The SCAQMD Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) analysis for the short-term construction modeled scenario for the Project will not result in localized air quality impacts. However, the exact construction schedule and equipment needs for each future implementing development projects is unknown and vary. Therefore, the potential exists for construction emissions to exceed applicable thresholds. Therefore, the Project may result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations during Project construction, and impacts are considered significant and unavoidable.

Greenhouse Gases
1) The Project could generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. The total GHG emissions from the RIPAOZ parcels are above the SCAQMD screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2E/yr for residential projects and exceed the adjusted SCAQMD efficiency target of 2.6 MTCO2E/yr per service population. Mitigation measures MM AQ 2 through MM AQ 8 would contribute to reduced GHG emissions from transportation and MM GHG 1 through MM GHG 4 would reduce GHG emissions from energy consumption associated with buildout of the RIPAOZ. However, no quantitative reductions are associated with these mitigation measures given that no development is proposed and the majority of GHG emissions are from mobile sources, which are outside the City’s jurisdictional control. Since the GHG emissions reductions attributable to the mitigation measures cannot be definitively assessed at this time, and since the GHG emissions exceed the SCAQMD screening threshold for residential projects and do not meet the adjusted SCAQMD efficiency target of 2.6 MTCO2E/yr per service population, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable after implementation of mitigation.

Noise
1) The Project may result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project area in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. The City’s General Plan Policy N-14 states that the maximum acceptable interior noise level created by exterior noise sources in residential areas is 45 dBA. The traffic noise levels at 50 feet from roadway centerlines near Project parcels exceed 65 dBA and there is potential for noise levels to exceed 65 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) at sensitive land uses; therefore, a projectspecific noise study would be required for future implementing development projects to evaluate the noise environment at Project parcels and recommend structural and site design features that will adequately mitigate noise impacts, as applicable. As such, implementation of MM NOI 1 will reduce noise impacts. The feasibility of these measures would be determined on a project-by-project basis. However, it may not be possible to fully mitigate traffic noise in all areas, particularly in existing developed areas constrained due to placement or other factors which limit the feasibility of mitigation such as residences fronting the right of way that limit the placement of noise barriers. As a result, increases in transportation noise associated with the future implementing development of Project parcels could result in a permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project area in excess of standards established in the City’s General Plan. Therefore, impacts are significant and unavoidable.

Population and Housing
1) The Project would induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure). The Project is proposing a change in existing allowable density from a total of 397 units to 2,156 units; an increase of 1,759 units. Assuming a generation factor of 2.44 persons per dwelling unit, population under existing build out conditions for subject parcels would result in 969 persons. With implementation of the Project, projections would increase to 5,261 persons; a total of 4,292 more people. As such, the Project may induce a substantial population growth resulting in potential impacts associated with direct or indirect unplanned population growth in an area. With a projected total of 4,292 more people, the proposed Project has the potential to result in an increase in population of almost 20 percent over SCAG projections for the City for year 2045. Thus, the proposed Project will have a substantial impact on unplanned population growth in the project area, either directly or indirectly. Therefore, impacts are significant and unavoidable.

Transportation
1) The project would result in significant cumulative transportation impacts. The precise timing of future development that would occur to reach general plan buildout cannot be determined presently because of the complex nature of land development. It is anticipated that as development proceeds, each development will pay for and construct GP level road improvements on roads adjacent to the development sites and would pay “fair share” fees for use by local jurisdictions to construct road improvements necessary to address the cumulative impact of area-wide development. However, the timing of road improvements needed to improve levels of service on a regional basis would be determined by the City of Calimesa, County of Riverside, and Caltrans based upon need and the availability of funding. The priority and timing of these road improvements cannot be determined at this time, nor are they under the sole control of the project proponent and in case of other jurisdictions, the City, to implement. Hence, it

is possible that the required improvements will not be constructed in time to mitigate the Project’s cumulative impacts upon off-site intersections and roads to below the level of significance. Thus, although after paying fair share fees, the Project’s cumulative trafficrelated impacts to would be reduced to less than significant, impacts would remain significant until such time as the improvements are completed. Therefore, because of the uncertainty of when improvements would be implemented in relationship to project development, cumulative impacts are significant and unavoidable Statement of Overriding Considerations
The City Council recognizes that significant and unavoidable environmental impacts would result from implementation of the Project. The City Council hereby finds that, for the reasons set forth below, the economic, social and other considerations prompted by the Project outweigh the unavoidable impacts for the reasons stated below. The City finds and determines that:
(i) the majority of the significant impacts of the Project will be reduced to less-than significant and acceptable levels by the mitigation measures described in the Final EIR and approved and adopted by these Findings;
(ii) the City's approval of the Project will result in certain significant adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided even with the incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures into the Project; and
(iii) there are no other feasible mitigation measures or feasible Project alternatives that would further mitigate or avoid the remaining significant environmental effects. The significant effects that have not been mitigated to a less-than-significant level and are therefore considered significant and unavoidable.

After balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the proposed project, the City of Calimesa has determined that the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified above may be considered “acceptable” due to the following specific considerations, which outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of the Project. The City Council finds that each one of the following overriding considerations independently, grouped by overarching theme, or collectively, is/are sufficient to outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project:
1) As stated in Government Code Section 65589.5, the State of California has a housing supply and affordability crisis of historic proportions. The consequences of failing to effectively and aggressively confront this crisis are hurting millions of Californians, robbing future generations of the chance to call California home, stifling economic opportunities for workers and businesses, worsening poverty and homelessness, and undermining the state’s environmental and climate objectives. The Legislature adopted the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) which states that “In 2018, California ranked 49th out of the 50 states in housing units per capita… California needs an estimated 180,000 additional homes annually to keep up with population growth, and the Governor has called for 3.5 million new homes to be built over 7 years.” By implementing the Project, which allows for additional housing opportunities, the City is helping to address this statewide crisis at a local level.
2) The Project will provide the ability to build 1,759 additional dwelling units, a portion of which may be developed to satisfy the City’s fair share of Regional Housing Need allocation. State law requires that jurisdictions provide their fair share of regional housing needs by conducting a Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) and adopting a general plan for future growth (California Government Code Section 65300). The California Department of

Housing and Community Development (HCD) is mandated to determine state-wide housing needs by income category for each Council of Governments (COG) throughout the state. The housing need is determined based on four broad household income categories: very low (households making less than 50 percent of median family income), low (50 to 80 percent of median family income), moderate (80 to 120 percent of median family income), and above moderate (more than 120 percent of median family income). The intent of the future needs allocation by income groups is to relieve the undue concentration of very low and low-income households in a single jurisdiction and to help allocate resources in a fair and equitable manner. SCAG determined that Calimesa’s projected RHNA share for the 6th Cycle Housing Element (2021 ‐ 2029) is 2,017 housing units. The City is currently in the process of updating for the 6th Cycle Housing Element (2021- 2029). RHNA for this planning period has projected the need for 2,017 housing units, consistent with SCAG. Of the 2,017 units, 495 are classified in the income categories of very low and 275 in classified in the low category.

Because the City is largely developed, infill sites, allowing for higher density residential products, will provide opportunity to fulfill RHNA housing needs.

While the Project will result in an increase to projected planned population, the Project will satisfy the State requirements to provide new housing opportunities to increase housing supplies.
3) Because many areas of the City are built out, in order to comply with State regulation and attempt to meet fair share RHNA allocations, the City sought out vacant parcels that can be utilized for infill development allowing for higher density residential product types within areas of existing residential development or existing uses that are compatible with higher density residential development. Directing growth to these areas fosters wellplanned, compact developments.

The areas within the Project were chosen for their proximity to existing streets, interchanges, the Downtown Business District, other existing multi-family product, and utilities to ensure existing infrastructure is available to future implementing development projects. Promoting efficiency in the utilization of existing infrastructure and services, facilitates integrated physical design within the City Findings of Fact
On the basis of the foregoing analysis, and the substantial evidence in the whole record of this proceeding, it is specifically found that there are significant benefits of the Project in spite of the unavoidable significant impact. It is further found that, as part of the process of obtaining Project approval, all significant effects on the environment from implementation of the Project have been eliminated or substantially lessened where feasible. Any remaining significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable are found to be acceptable due to the abovediscussed specific overriding economic, technical, legal, social and other considerations.

Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(b), these adverse effects are considered acceptable.

Exhibit B”
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-2
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
Air Quality
Result in a
cumulatively
considerable net
increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the
project region is nonattainment under an
applicable federal or
state ambient air
quality standard
MM AQ 1: In order to reduce impacts related to
short-term construction impacts, prior to approval
of future development within the RIPAOZ, each
individual implementing project shall prepare a
construction-related air quality analysis and submit
to the City of Calimesa for review and approval. The
air quality analysis shall evaluate project-specific
construction impacts from criteria pollutants. The
analysis shall be prepared in conformance with
current SCAQMD methodology for assessing
criteria pollutant impacts at both the regional and
localized level. If the analysis identifies the
emissions exceed applicable thresholds, feasible
mitigation measures for each implementing
development project shall be incorporated. If
emissions cannot be reduced below applicable
thresholds, then subsequent environmental review
shall be required.

Prior to approval of
future individual
implementation
developments within
RIPAOZ
Submit copy of Air Quality
Analysis
City of Calimesa
Planning Division
MM AQ 2: In order to reduce impacts related to
long-term operation impacts, prior to approval of
future development within the RIPAOZ, each
individual implementing project shall consult with
local transit officials on the need to provide
infrastructure to connect the project with transit
services. Evidence of compliance with this
requirement may include correspondence from the
local transit provider regarding the need for
installing bus turnouts, shelters or bus stops at the
implementing development project site.

Prior to approval of
future individual
implementation
developments within
RIPAOZ
Submit correspondence
from local transit provider
City of Calimesa
Planning Division

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-3
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
MM AQ 3: In order to reduce impacts related to
long-term operation impacts, upon a residential
dwelling unit being sold, offered for sale or rented,
the Project Applicant or its designee shall notify and
offer to the prospective buyer or tenant, as soon as
it may be done, disclosure materials describing
available public transit, ridesharing and nonmotorized commuting opportunities available in the vicinity of the implementing development project
site. Such information shall be transmitted no later
than the close of escrow or finalization of a rental
contract. A draft of this disclosure shall be
submitted to the City Planning Department for
review prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy of each implementing development
project.

Prior to the close of
escrow or finalization of
rental contract
Submit disclosure
documentation
City of Calimesa
Planning Division
MM AQ 4: In order to reduce impacts related to
long-term operation impacts, each implementing
development project shall install broadband
infrastructure or other communication technologies
that encourage telecommuting and working from
home. The applicant shall submit documentation to
the City Building and Safety Department prior to
occupancy.

Prior to tenant
occupancy
Submit documentation of
installation completion for
communication technologies
City of Calimesa
Building and Safety
Department
MM AQ 5: In order to reduce impacts related to
long-term operation impacts, each implementing
development project shall offer natural gas or
propane hookups, exterior electrical outlets, and
prohibit wood-burning fireplaces. The City Planning
Department shall verify architectural plans for
implementing tract maps include such requirements
before implementing project approval. The City
Planning Department shall verify the conditions of
approval include the exterior electrical hookups and
Prior to approval of
future individual
implementation
developments within
RIPAOZ
Submit architectural plans City of Calimesa
Planning Division

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-4
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
prohibition of applicable wood-burning devices
consistent with SCAQMD Rule 445.

MM AQ 6: In order to reduce impacts related to
long-term operation impacts, implementing project
developers of multi-family development shall
encourage use of electric landscape maintenance
equipment for public common areas maintained by
the property owner’s association by providing
information to the property owner’s association
about the benefits of such equipment and the
incentive programs offered by SCAQMD. This
information shall be provided to the City Planning
Department for verification prior to occupancy.

Prior to occupancy Submit evidence of
incentive programs offered
by SCAQMD
City of Calimesa
Planning Division

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-5
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
MM AQ 7: In order to reduce impacts related to
long-term operation impacts, prior to the issuance
of multi-family residential building permits, each
implementing development applicant, or its
designee shall submit building design plans to the
City that demonstrate that the parking areas for
multi-family residential buildings are equipped with
EV charging stations that provide charging
opportunities to at least two (2) percent of the total
number of required parking spaces. The EV
charging stations shall achieve a similar or better
functionality as a Level 2 charging station. In the
event that the installed charging stations use more
superior functionality/technology other than Level 2
charging stations, the parameters of the mitigation
obligation (i.e., number of parking spaces served by
EV charging stations) shall reflect the comparative
equivalency of Level 2 charging stations to the
installed charging stations on the basis of average
charge rate per hour. For purposes of this
equivalency determination, Level 2 charging
stations shall be assumed to provide charging
capabilities of 25 range-miles per hour. Compliance
shall be verified by the City Building and Safety
Department prior to occupancy.

Prior to building permits Submit documentation
showing compliance
City of Calimesa
Building and Safety
Department
MM AQ 8: In order to reduce impacts related to
long-term operation impacts, prior to approval of
future development within the RIPAOZ, each
individual implementing project shall evaluate active
transportation measures and incorporate feasible
measures into design to increase connectivity and
opportunities for residents to walk and bike to
reduce VMT.

Prior to approval of
future individual
implementation
developments within
RIPAOZ
Submit Traffic Memo
showing transportation
measure were evaluated.

City of Calimesa
Planning Division

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-6
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
See MM AQ 1 through MM AQ 8 above.

Biological Resources
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
MM BIO 1: Burrowing Owl Survey. Prior to any
ground disturbing activities involving Assessor
Parcel Numbers 410-170-007,410-170-025, 411-
200-001, 411-200-004, 411-200-007, 411-200-008,
411-200-022, and 413-320-003, a qualified biologist
shall conduct a burrowing owl survey per Burrowing
Owl Survey Instructions for the Western Riverside
County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
(WRCMSHCP). A 30-day burrowing owl preconstruction survey shall also be conducted in accordance with the WRCMSHCP.

Prior to ground
disturbing activities
Submit Biologist’s field
notes with findings
City of Calimesa
Planning Division
MM BIO 2: Nesting Bird Pre-Construction
Clearance Survey. During construction of
Assessor Parcel Numbers: 410-080-005, 410-080-
007, 410-080-009, 410-162-012, 410-162-013, 410-
170-011, 410-181-011, 411-200-022 ,411-200-001,
411-200-002, 411-200-003, 411-200-007, 411-200-
008, 411-200-022, and 413-320-003, or any parcels
with existing trees, direct impacts to nesting birds
shall be avoided in accordance with the Migratory
Bird Treaty Act and California Department of Fish
and Wildlife Code Section 3503. If grounddisturbance activities occur during the avian nesting season, a preconstruction survey and avoidance
measures shall be conducted by a qualified
biologist. A copy of the survey results and
During construction of
parcels with existing
trees or if construction
occurs during nesting
season
Submit a copy of survey
results
City of Calimesa
Planning Division

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-7
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
avoidance measures (if applicable) shall be
provided to the City of Calimesa Planning
Department.

Would the 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
the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service
MM BIO 3: Jurisdictional Waters. Prior to
issuance of a grading permit for APN 411-200-022,
a formal jurisdictional delineation shall be
conducted to determine the extent of onsite
resources regulated by the USACE, CDFW, or
RWQCB. The project applicant may be required to
obtain all applicable permits which may include,
404 Nationwide Permit from the USACE, 1602
Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW, and a
401 Certification issued by the RWQCB pursuant to
the California Water Code Section 13260.

Prior to issuance of a
grading permit
Submit copy of Jurisdiction
Delineation Report
City of Calimesa
Planning Division
MM BIO 4: MSHCP Riverine and Riparian
Resources Section 6.1.2. Prior to issuance of a
grading permit for assessor parcel numbers 411-
200-001, 411-200-003, and 411-200-022,a Western
Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Determination of
Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation
shall be conducted to determine direct or indirect
impacts to MSHCP Riparian/Riverine resources that
includes a plan to avoid or replace any impacted
riparian/riverine habitat.

Prior to issuance of a
grading permit
Submit a copy of Western
Riverside County Multiple
Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (MSHCP)
Determination of Biologically
Equivalent Report
City of Calimesa
Planning Division
Would the Project
have a substantial
adverse effect on
state or federally
protected wetlands
(including, but not
See MM BIO 3 above

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-8
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct
removal, filling,
hydrological
interruption, or other
means
Would the 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
See MM BIO 1, MM BIO 2, MM BIO 3, and MM BIO 4 above
MM BIO 5: MSHCP Appendix C Standard Best
Management Practices and Section 7.5.3
Construction Measures. Prior to issuance of a
grading permit, any future implementing project on
the Parcels located on Figure 5.3-3 of this EIR shall
incorporate all feasible measures outlined in
Appendix C and Section 7.5.3 of the MSHCP.

Prior to issuance of a
grading permit
Submit documentation of
compliance
City of Calimesa
Planning Division
Cultural Resources
Cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of a
historical resource as
defined in Section
15064.5.

MM CR 1: Prior to grading, future implementing
development projects shall retain a qualified
archaeologist to conduct a project-specific cultural
resource assessment that shall include an
archaeological pedestrian survey with
documentation and evaluation of any structures 50
years of age.

Prior to issuance of a
grading permit
Submit a copy of a Cultural
Resources Assessment
prepared for Project site
City of Calimesa
Planning Division

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-9
Cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of an
archaeological
resource pursuant to
Section 15064.5.

MM CR 2 Archaeological Monitoring. Due to the
heightened cultural sensitivity of the proposed
project area, an archaeological monitor with at
least 3 years of regional experience in archaeology
shall be present for all ground-disturbing activities
that occur within the proposed project area (which
includes, but is not limited to, tree/shrub removal
and planting, clearing/grubbing, grading,
excavation, trenching, compaction, fence/gate
removal and installation, drainage and irrigation
removal and installation, hardscape installation
[benches, signage, boulders, walls, seat walls,
fountains, etc.], and archaeological work). A
sufficient number of archaeological monitors shall
be present each work day to ensure that
simultaneously occurring ground disturbing
activities receive thorough levels of monitoring
coverage. A Monitoring and Treatment Plan that is
reflective of the project mitigation (“Cultural
Resources” and “Tribal Cultural Resources”) shall
be completed by the archaeologist and submitted
to the Lead Agency for dissemination to the San
Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural
Resources Department (SMBMI) and the Agua
Caliente Tribal Historic Preservation Office. Once
all parties review and approve the plan, it shall be
adopted by the Lead Agency – the plan must be
adopted prior to permitting for the project. Any and
all findings will be subject to the protocol detailed
within the Monitoring and Treatment Plan.

Prior to issuance of a
grading permit
Submit a copy of the
Monitoring and Treatment
Plan.

City of Calimesa
Planning Division
MM CR 3 Tribal Monitoring. Due to the
heightened cultural sensitivity of the proposed
project area, at the discretion of the consulting
tribes, Tribal monitors shall be present for all
ground-disturbing activities that occur within the
During all grounddisturbing activitiesSubmit a copy of the Monitoring and Treatment
Plan.

City of Calimesa
Planning Division

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-10
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
proposed project area (which includes, but is not
limited to, tree/shrub removal and planting,
clearing/grubbing, grading, excavation, trenching,
compaction, fence/gate removal and installation,
drainage and irrigation removal and installation,
hardscape installation [benches, signage,
boulders, walls, seat walls, fountains, etc.], and
archaeological work). At the discretion of the
consulting tribes, a sufficient number of Tribal
monitors shall be present each work day to ensure
that simultaneously occurring ground disturbing
activities receive thorough levels of monitoring
coverage. A Monitoring and Treatment Plan that is
reflective of the project mitigation (“Cultural
Resources” and “Tribal Cultural Resources”) shall
be completed by the archaeologist, as detailed
within MM CR 2, and submitted to the Lead
Agency for dissemination to the San Manuel Band
of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department
(SMBMI) and the Agua Caliente Tribal Historic
Preservation Office . Once all parties review and
agree to the plan, it shall be adopted by the Lead
Agency – the plan must be adopted prior to
permitting for the project. Any and all findings will
be subject to the protocol detailed within the
Monitoring and Treatment Plan.

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-11
MM CR 4 Treatment of Cultural Resources. If a
pre-contact cultural resource is discovered during
archaeological presence/absence testing, the
discovery shall be properly recorded and then
reburied in situ. A research design shall be
developed by the archaeologist that shall include a
plan to evaluate the resource for significance under
CEQA criteria. Representatives from the San
Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural
Resources Department (SMBMI), Agua Caliente
Tribal Historic Preservation Office, the
archaeologist/applicant, and the Lead Agency shall
confer regarding the research design, as well as
any testing efforts needed to delineate the
resource boundary. Following the completion of
evaluation efforts, all parties shall confer regarding
the archaeological significance of the resource, its
potential as a Tribal Cultural Resource (TCR),
avoidance (or other appropriate treatment) of the
discovered resource, and the potential need for
construction monitoring during project
implementation. Should any significant resource
and/or TCR not be a candidate for avoidance or
preservation in place, and the removal of the
resource(s) is necessary to mitigate impacts, the
research design shall include a comprehensive
discussion of sampling strategies, resource
processing, analysis, and reporting
protocols/obligations. Removal of any cultural
resource(s) shall be conducted with the presence
of a Tribal monitor representing the Tribe, unless
otherwise decided by SMBMI and Agua Caliente
Tribal Historic Preservation Office. All plans for
analysis shall be reviewed and approved by the
applicant, Agua Caliente Tribal Historic
Preservation Office and SMBMI prior to
During grounddisturbing activities, if a
resource is discovered.

Submit records/reports of
resource findings
City of Calimesa
Planning Division

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-12
implementation, and all removed material shall be
temporarily curated on-site. It is the preference of
SMBMI that removed cultural material be reburied
as close to the original find location as possible.

However, should reburial within/near the original
find location during project implementation not be
feasible, then a reburial location for future reburial
shall be decided upon by SMBMI, Agua Caliente
Tribal Historic Preservation Office, the landowner,
and the Lead Agency, and all finds shall be
reburied within this location. Additionally, in this
case, reburial shall not occur until all grounddisturbing activities associated with the project have been completed, all monitoring has ceased,
all cataloguing and basic recordation of cultural
resources have been completed, and a final
monitoring report has been issued to Lead Agency,
CHRIS, Agua Caliente Tribal Historic Preservation
Office, and SMBMI. All reburials are subject to a
reburial agreement that shall be developed
between the landowner, Agua Caliente Tribal
Historic Preservation Office and SMBMI outlining
the determined reburial process/location, and shall
include measures and provisions to protect the
reburial area from any future impacts (vis a vis
project plans, conservation/preservation
easements, etc.).

Should it occur that avoidance, preservation in
place, and on-site reburial are not an option for
treatment, the landowner shall relinquish all
ownership and rights to this material and confer
with Agua Caliente Tribal Historic Preservation
Office and SMBMI to identify an American
Association of Museums (AAM)-accredited facility
within the County that can accession the materials
into their permanent collections and provide for the

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-13
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
proper care of these objects in accordance with
the 1993 CA Curation Guidelines. A curation
agreement with an appropriate qualified repository
shall be developed between the landowner and
museum that legally and physically transfers the
collections and associated records to the facility.

This agreement shall stipulate the payment of fees
necessary for permanent curation of the
collections and associated records and the
obligation of the Project developer/applicant to pay
for those fees.

All draft records/reports containing the significance
and treatment findings and data recovery results
shall be prepared by the archaeologist and
submitted to the Lead Agency and Agua Caliente
Tribal Historic Preservation Office, SMBMI for their
review and comment. After approval from all
parties, the final reports and site/isolate records
are to be submitted to the local CHRIS Information
Center, the Lead Agency, Agua Caliente Tribal
Historic Preservation Office, and SMBMI.

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-14
MM CR 5 Inadvertent Discoveries of Human
Remains/Funerary Objects. In the event that any
human remains are discovered within the project
area, ground disturbing activities shall be
suspended 100 feet around the resource(s) and an
Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) physical
demarcation/barrier constructed. The on-site
lead/foreman shall then immediately who shall
notify SMBMI, Agua Caliente Tribal Historic
Preservation Office, the applicant/developer, and
the Lead Agency. The Lead Agency and the
applicant/developer shall then immediately contact
the County Coroner regarding the discovery. If the
Coroner recognizes the human remains to be
those of a Native American, or has reason to
believe that they are those of a Native American,
the Coroner shall ensure that notification is
provided to the NAHC within twenty-four (24) hours
of the determination, as required by California
Health and Safety Code § 7050.5 (c). The NAHCidentified Most Likely Descendant (MLD), shall be allowed, under California Public Resources Code §
5097.98 (a), to (1) inspect the site of the discovery
and (2) make determinations as to how the human
remains and funerary objects shall be treated and
disposed of with appropriate dignity. The MLD,
Lead Agency, and landowner agree to discuss in
good faith what constitutes "appropriate dignity"
as that term is used in the applicable statutes. The
MLD shall complete its inspection and make
recommendations within forty-eight (48) hours of
the site visit, as required by California Public
Resources Code § 5097.98.

Reburial of human remains and/or funerary objects
(those artifacts associated with any human remains
or funerary rites) shall be accomplished in
During grounddisturbing activities, if a
resource is discovered.

Documentation of discovery
and disposition of human
remains
City of Calimesa
Planning Division

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-15
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
compliance with the California Public Resources
Code § 5097.98 (a) and (b). The MLD in
consultation with the landowner, shall make the
final discretionary determination regarding the
appropriate disposition and treatment of human
remains and funerary objects. All parties are aware
that the MLD may wish to rebury the human
remains and associated funerary objects on or
near the site of their discovery, in an area that shall not be subject to future subsurface disturbances.

The applicant/developer/landowner should
accommodate on-site reburial in a location
mutually agreed upon by the Parties.

It is understood by all Parties that unless otherwise
required by law, the site of any reburial of Native
American human remains or cultural artifacts shall
not be disclosed and shall not be governed by
public disclosure requirements of the California
Public Records Act. The Coroner, 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).

Energy
Result in potentially
significant
environmental impact
due to wasteful,
See MM AQ 2 through MM AQ 8, above and MM GHG 1 through MM GHG 4, below

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-16
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
inefficient, or
unnecessary
consumption of
energy resources,
during project
construction or
operation
Conflict with or
obstruct a state or
local plan for
renewable energy or
energy efficiency
See MM AQ 2 through MM AQ 8, above and MM GHG 1 through MM GHG 4, below Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Generate greenhouse
gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly,
that may have a
significant impact on
the environment
See MM AQ 2 through MM AQ 8, above
MM GHG 1: In order to reduce GHG impacts, the
City Building and Safety Department shall verify
before issuance of all residential building permits
that where appliances are installed by residential
project developers, Energy Star-rated appliances
(or other equivalent technology) for clothes
washers, dish washers, refrigerators, and fans shall
be installed in the residences.

Prior to issuance of
residential building
permits
Building Plans shall identify
Energy Star-rated
appliances in all floor plans
City of Calimesa
Building and Safety
Department
MM GHG 2: In order to reduce GHG impacts, the
City Building and Safety Department shall verify
before issuance of all residential building permits
Prior to issuance of
residential building
permits
Building Plans shall identify
high efficiency in-unit
fixtures in all floor plans
City of Calimesa
Building and Safety
Department

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-17
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
that all in-unit fixtures installed in residential and
nonresidential buildings will be high efficacy. High
efficacy lighting includes compact fluorescent
lamps, light emitting diodes (LED), and other light
bulbs that provide an energy efficiency of at least
40 lumens/watt for 15 watt or less fixtures, 50
lumens/watt for 15-40 watt fixtures, 60
lumens/watt for fixtures >40watt.

MM GHG 3: In order to reduce GHG impacts, prior
to approval of future development within the
RIPAOZ, each individual implementing project shall
evaluate installation of cool pavements in street
improvement plans, if approved by the California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and City
Engineering Department for roadway uses,
provided that road installation and maintenance
durability and costs are comparable to existing
approved roadway materials. Pavement installed
shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineering
Department prior to approval of all street
improvement plans.

Prior to approval of all
street improvement
plans
Submit a copy of report
showing cooling pavements
were evaluated
City of Calimesa
City Engineer
MM GHG 4: In order to reduce GHG impacts, prior
to approval of future development within the
RIPAOZ, each individual implementing project shall
include in design plans for City review technically
feasible (given expected future uses) and legally
feasible (given applicable ordinances and other
requirements) designs that include groundcovers
Prior to approval of
future individual
implementation
developments within
RIPAOZ
Submit design plans with
feasible design features
City of Calimesa
City Engineer

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-18
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
or other measures to reduce use of concrete and
asphalt.

Conflict with an
applicable plan, policy
or regulation adopted
for the purpose of
reducing the
emissions of
greenhouse gases
See MM AQ 2 through MM AQ 8 and MM GHG 1 through MM GHG4 above Noise
Generate substantial
temporary or
permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in
excess of standards
established in the
local general plan or
noise ordinance, or
applicable standards
of other agencies
MM NOI 1: Prior to approval of future
development within the RIPAOZ, each individual
implementing project shall prepare a noise study.

The noise study shall evaluate project-specific
temporary and permanent noise impacts to satisfy
the City’s General Plan Noise Polices N-8, N-11,
N-13, and N-16 and the Calimesa Municipal Code
noise standards in Section 8.15-Noise Abatement
and Control. Each analysis shall include a
determination documenting compliance with City
requirements and identify noise attenuation
features, if necessary, which may include but are
not limited to increased insulation, setbacks and/or
sound barriers. If noise levels cannot be reduced
within acceptable levels, then feasibility of
measures evaluated shall be disclosed and
Prior to approval of
future individual
implementation
developments within
RIPAOZ
Submit a copy of the Noise
study
City of Calimesa
Planning Division

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-19
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
subsequent environmental review shall be
required.

MM NOI 2: Prior to issuance of a grading permit,
future implementing development projects within
the RIPAOZ adjacent to developed/occupied
noise-sensitive land uses shall submit a
construction-related noise mitigation plan to the
City for review and approval to satisfy the City’s
General Plan Action N-31.1. The plan shall depict
the location of construction equipment and specify
how the noise from this equipment will be
mitigated during construction of this project,
through the use of such methods as:
 Temporary noise attenuation fences;
 Preferential location of equipment;
 Length of equipment use and idling time;
and
 Use of current noise suppression
technology and equipment
Enforcement shall be accomplished via field
inspections by applicant or third-party personnel
during construction activities to the satisfaction of
the City of Calimesa Building and Safety Division.

Prior to issuance of a
grading permit
Submit a copy of field
inspections
City of Calimesa
Building and Safety
Department
Generate excessive
groundborne vibration
See MM NOI 1 above

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-20
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
or groundbourne nose
levels
Tribal Cultural Resources
Would the Project
cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of a tribal
cultural resource,
defined in Public
Resources Code
Section 21074 as
either a site, feature,
place, cultural
landscape that is
geographically defined
in terms of the size
and scope of the
landscape, sacred
place, or object with
cultural value to a
California Native
American tribe, and
that is:
i.) Listed or
eligible for
listing in the
California
Register of
See MM CR 2 through MM CR 5 above

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-21
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
Historical
Resources, or
in a local
register of
historical
resources as
defined in
Public
Resource Code
section
5020.1(k)
ii.) 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
Resource Code
section 5024.1;
in applying the
criteria set forth
in subdivision
(c) of Public

City of Calimesa Section 4
Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone FEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FEIR 4-22
Table 4-A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact/Threshold Mitigation Measures
Implementation
Timing
Action Indicating
Compliance Monitoring Party
Resource Code
section 5024.1,
the lead agency
shall consider
the significance
of the resource
to a California
Native
American Tribe

Exhibit “C”
General Plan Amendment No. 22-01

1 ORDINANCE NO. 392

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 21-01, ADOPTING THE RESIDENTIAL INFILL PRIORITY AREA OVERLAY ZONE (“RIPAOZ”), AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE (TITLE 18 OF THE CALIMESA MUNICIPAL CODE) WHEREAS, in 2017, Governor Brown signed a 15-bill housing package aimed at addressing the state’s housing shortage and high housing costs. The package included the Building Homes and Jobs Act (SB 2), which established a funding source to increase the supply of affordable homes in California by collecting a $75 recording fee on real estate documents. These funds were made available to all local governments in California to help prepare, adopt, and implement plans that streamline housing approvals and accelerate housing production; and,
WHEREAS, the City was awarded a $160,000 grant by the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) SB 2 program to prepare a “Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone”, also referred to as the “RIPAOZ,” to up-zone certain residential properties identified by the City to allow higher density development including duplexes, townhomes, condos, and a limited amount of apartments by-right; and,
WHEREAS, the City was awarded a $65,000 supplementary grant by HCD Local Early Action Grants program, also referred to as the “LEAP” program, to assist in the preparation and adoption of planning documents and process improvements that accelerate housing production and facilitate compliance to implement the sixth cycle of the regional housing need assessment; and, WHEREAS, the City prepared the RIPAOZ to encourage infill development and allow for higher density residential development than the underlying zoning designation as established by Calimesa Municipal Code (CMC) Chapter 18.20. The RIPAOZ establishes areas where infill residential development is encouraged which maintains the character of existing neighborhood buildings and structures; to permit a flexible approach to providing affordable housing; to increase property values in residential neighborhoods; and to foster well-planned, compact developments keeping with the character of the existing neighborhood by a) Providing opportunities for the development of affordable housing, b) Promoting efficiency in the utilization of existing infrastructure and services, c) Facilitating integrated physical design, d) Promoting a high level of design quality, e) Facilitating development proposals responsive to current and future market conditions, and f) Providing safe vehicular circulation patterns for residents and safety/service providers; and,
WHEREAS, ZC 21-01 is considered a “Project” pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq. and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq. (collectively “CEQA”); and, WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report (SCH#2022030754) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program were prepared for the Project by the City of Calimesa (“City”), in accordance with CEQA to evaluate the development of the properties included in the RIPAOZ; and, WHEREAS, on March 28, 2022, the City’s on-call CEQA consultant distributed copies of the Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) on the City’s behalf to 536 State Agencies, Responsible Agencies, Native American Tribes, local agencies, surrounding property owners, and other interested parties. The City’s on-call CEQA consultant submitted a PDF of the NOP, Notice of Completion, and SCH Summary Form Attachment 11G

2 to the California Office of Planning and Research State Clearing House for posting, and the NOP was also posted on the City’s website. The NOP was available for public review for 30 days between March 29, 2022 and April 27, 2022; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 21083.9(a)(2) of the Public Resources Code and CEQA Guidelines Section 15082(c), the City held a public scoping meeting on April 7, 2022, where agencies, organizations, and members of the public received a brief presentation on the Project and had an opportunity to provide comments on the scope of the information and analysis to be included in the EIR; and,
WHEREAS, on March 28, 2023, the City’s on-call CEQA consultant distributed copies of the Notice of Availability of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (“NOA”) on the City’s behalf to 570 State Agencies, Responsible Agencies, Native American Tribes, local agencies, surrounding property owners, and other interested parties. The City’s on-call CEQA consultant submitted a PDF of the NOA, Notice of Completion, and SCH Summary Form to the California Office of Planning and Research State Clearing House for posting, and the NOA was also posted on the City’s website. The NOA was available for public review for 45 days between March 31, 2023 and May 15, 2023; and, WHEREAS, on August 18, 2023, the City gave public notice as required under Chapter 18.15.080 (Hearings and Appeals) of the City of Calimesa Municipal Code by advertising in the Yucaipa Calimesa News Mirror newspaper of the holding of a public hearing at a special meeting of the Planning Commission at which Environmental Assessment 22-05, General Plan Amendment 22-01, and Zone Change 21-01 were considered for a recommended action for the City Council; and, WHEREAS, on August 28, 2023, during a duly noticed public hearing at a special meeting, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 2023-09 recommending to the City Council the approval of Environmental Assessment 22-05, General Plan Amendment 22-01, and Zone Change 21-01, approving the RIPAOZ, and,
WHEREAS, on the September 18, 2023, the City Council held the duly noticed public hearing at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify in support of, or opposition to, the proposed ordinance, and at which time the City Council considered EA 22-05, GPA 22-01, and ZC 21-01; and, WHEREAS, City Council of the City of Calimesa desires to approve Zone Change 21-01, also known as ZC 21-01, adopting the RIPAOZ and amending various sections of the Zoning Code (Title 18 of the Calimesa Municipal Code); and,

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALIMESA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The above recitals are all true and correct.

Section 2. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information included in the General Plan, Zoning Code, and Staff Report for the Public Hearing and public testimony prior to taking action on the proposed ordinance, approving the Zone Change and related EIR, and adopting the MMRP.

Section 3. The City Council finds that the Zone Change is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and State housing goals, and would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.

3 Section 4. The RIPAOZ is hereby adopted and made a part of the Calimesa Municipal Code.

The location and boundaries of the RIPAOZ shall be as shown on the official zoning map of the City of Calimesa, California. This information is on file and available at the Community Development Department at Calimesa City Hall.

Section 5. Section 18.05.080 (Zone districts establish) of Chapter 18.05 (General Provisions) of Zoning, Land Use, and Development Regulations, Title 18, of the Calimesa Municipal Code, is hereby amended to add “Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone” as follows, with all other provisions in Section 18.05.080 to remain the same:

18.05.080 Zone districts established.

Symbol Zone Name Chapter
RIPAOZ Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone 18.20 Section 6. Section 18.20.020 (Residential zone districts) in Chapter 18.20 (Residential Zone Districts) of the Zoning, Land Use, and Development Regulations, Title 18, of the Calimesa Municipal Code, is hereby amended to add a new Subsection H as follows, with all other subsections to remain the same:

H. Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay (RIPAOZ) Zone. The purposed of this chapter is to establish the Residential Infill Priority Area Overlay Zone (RIPAOZ) to encourage residential infill development at a higher density than the underlying zoning designation established by Calimesa Municipal Code (CMC) Chapter 18.20. The RIPAOZ identifies areas where residential infill development is encouraged; permits a flexible approach to providing affordable housing; aims to increase the variety of housing options in existing residential neighborhoods; fosters well-planned, compact developments keeping with the character of the existing neighborhood, promotes efficiency in the utilization of existing infrastructure and services, facilitates integrated physical design, promotes a high level of design quality, facilitates development proposals responsive to current and future market conditions, and provides safe vehicular circulation patterns for residents and safety/service providers.

Section 7. Table 18.20.030 (Uses Permitted Within Residential Districts) of Chapter 18.20 (Residential Zone Districts) of the Zoning, Land Use, and Development Regulations, Title 18, of the Calimesa Municipal Code, is hereby amended to add two columns as follows, with all other sections, subsections, and notes of Table 18.20.030 to remain the same: